Dreams -a providential preparation for evangelism?

[Pergamum]

Dreams and visions

I have talked to many new Christians (praise God for His Harvest) these past 3 months. These I talked to claim to have encountered someone whom they claim is Jesus through dreams and “visions”, after which they searched for all the info they could of this prophet in their own Scriptures (the Qrn) and then the Bible.

The usual scenario is this: They come from the background of another faith. They have a crisis of faith. They dream of a man in white that they identify as the Prophet Jesus. Then, when they awake, they are motivated to find out more about him. They eventually read the Bible or go to a church service where they have a dramatic conversion experience due to a quick reception of Jesus (i.e. a readiness to accept) and then they usually end up ready to serve Jesus very quickly and enthusiastically because they feel as if the Lord talked to them directly through this dream.

No kidding, fully 15-20% of converts in one region I have met attribute God’s providential sending them dreams as a major factor in their conversion. Their dreams did not save them, only faith in the Christ that they read of in the Word. But the dreams did influence them greatly.

How in the world do I process this?

In places where Christ is not named is it possible that God works through dreams and visions still?

 

[Pergamum]

What????!!!??

Pergy! You are crazy.....


...get off this board you hairytick!

 

[SRoper]

I've said this before, but if such dreams actually happened they would invalidate Paul's argument in Romans 10:13-15.

"For 'everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.' But how are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, 'How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!'"

 

[Covenant Joel]

I too have greatly wondered about this question. Many conversion accounts I have read of in "The Costly Call" (vols. 1 and 2) contain such stories. I suppose I am inherently uncomfortable with it, but it does seem to me that it is possible that God uses such things to pull people toward himself. Does that mean they are inspired dreams? I don't know about that, but somehow the preponderence of these things does leave me at the point where I am not willing to dismiss them as nothing.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Perhaps extraordinary providences?

 

[Puritan Sailor]

I'm speaking from pure speculation here. I gave up dreams with the charasmatic movement. But I don't want to limit God either by my Western mind so I'm open to consider more. I've heard of these stories too. My hunch (and it's only that at this point) is that not even the Koran can successfully mask the majesty of Christ. When these folks are brought to an end of their false religion, and realize they need something more which Islam can't provide, they long for this missing element, and in their spiritual distress they have these dreams, indicating their preperation and longing for something better. Perhaps their dream of the "prophet" is working within a cultural paradigm Islam has set for them with it's supreme prophet Mohammad as the final vehicle of revelation. In their inner longings and dreams, now disallusioned with Mohammad, they long for a better prophet with better promises. They are receptive to the gospel because God has graciously weaned them off of their dead idols. Again this is just my hunch. Missionaries on the field would probably be better informed whether I am right or not.

 

[Pergamum]

Of course these dreams are not revelation, or else we'd be writing them down and adding them to Scripture...

But, they seem to be providential happenings that affect these people greatly. Perhaps they are manufactured out of the dreamers psyche, realizing that their old religion was inadequate.

Me....when I want dreams, I just eat a little cheese before bed!

 

[toddpedlar]

I've said this before, but if such dreams actually happened they would invalidate Paul's argument in Romans 10:13-15.

"For 'everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.' But how are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, 'How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!'"

Careful, or you'll invalidate Paul's conversion.

I'm not judging one way or another Pergamum's examples... just saying that it is certainly possible for God to do this (not that we should expect he will).

 

[21st Century Calvinist]

Praise God that He is building His church throughout the world.
I have heard of similar accounts in what is probably a similar situation. I would not discount the method that God used to bring these people to Himself. Sure it's not the way that we are usually accustomed to, but the situation, I expect is pretty different from what most of us are familiar with.
God has an infinite variety of means, some of them indeed, extraordinary, that He uses to draw people to seek Him. However, we come to Him by only one way.
I am sure that there are reasons why God has used this method. Anyone have any idea why this particular method? Does the prevailing culture facilitate people toward having dreams?

 

[AV1611]

We need to differentiate between the ordinary and the extraordinary. The former continues and the latter has ceased. Dreams etc are not from God.

 

[cih1355]

Do they claim that they obtain new knowledge through their dreams or do they just get the desire to find out about Jesus through their dreams?

It was God's plan that they would have those kind of dreams, but those dreams are not inspired by God.

 

[bradofshaw]

What is the difference between an American atheist having a dream about Jesus and disregarding it as his imagination, and a Middle Eastern Muslim having a dream about Jesus and wanting to know more about his dream? The Muslim regards dreams seriously, while the Atheists explains away their significance. It doesn't appear that these people have no prior knowledge of Jesus. It doesn't have to be revelation, but why couldn't God use someone's faint knowledge of Jesus to spur them on to find out more about Him?

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

How do dreams of "Jesus" fit in with the second commandment?

WLC Question 109. What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?

Answer. The sins forbidden in the second commandment are,...the making any representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature whatsoever; [Deut 4:15-19; Acts 17:29; Rom 1:21-23,25] all worshipping of it, [Dan 3:18; Gal 4:8] or God in it or by it; [Exod 32:5]

 

[bradofshaw]

I'll give a parallel situation. Say an unbeliever in anytown USA picks up a copy of the Da Vinci Code. He decides he wants to know more about the historical Jesus. In God's providence, he asks the pastor of a Bible believing church who is able to direct him to good sources, and lead him to an understanding of Jesus. This man becomes a believer and credits The Da Vinci Code for being a root cause of his conversion. Now we would say that God doesn't usually work through the Da Vinci Code, and we wouldn't encourage unbelievers to read it in the hopes that He will work in a similar way. But we also wouldn't be totally skeptical of the story.

 

[VictorBravo]

How do dreams of "Jesus" fit in with the second commandment?

WLC Question 109. What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?

Answer. The sins forbidden in the second commandment are,...the making any representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature whatsoever; [Deut 4:15-19; Acts 17:29; Rom 1:21-23,25] all worshipping of it, [Dan 3:18; Gal 4:8] or God in it or by it; [Exod 32:5]

I think if the image pops up in a dream, it may be a result of seeing images when awake. So whoever made the images and encouraged the mental images have sinned. The dreamer may be suffering because of that sin, either his own or another's.

But God works on us through many ways. I don't discount dreams having an effect. My own personal experience with dreams convinces me that God can use them to his glory (one example: vivid dreams of a man dressed in a soiled white garment taking a credit card to save my soul kept me from becoming a Catholic when I was seriously interested). I think the thing to remember is that if someone comes to you saying he had a dream of Jesus, you must point him to the Word.

Dreams don't give us truth, but God can use them to shake us from our slumber, so to speak.

 

[Reformed Baptist]

I think those are real works of God. How else would a man in a Muslim nation (for we often hear of this things out of that region of the world) repent of Islam and believe on the Lord Jesus and bear fruit in it except it be the work of God.

If we cannot understand it or reconcile it to our own theology, let's not fight against it. Let's rejoice with these new Christians and see how their faith progresses.

How does one explain John Hus's prophecy? (I assume most a familiar with it).

As a new Christian I had both dream and visions before I was taught I wasn't allowed to have them. lol

RB

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

How do dreams of "Jesus" fit in with the second commandment?

WLC Question 109. What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?

Answer. The sins forbidden in the second commandment are,...the making any representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature whatsoever; [Deut 4:15-19; Acts 17:29; Rom 1:21-23,25] all worshipping of it, [Dan 3:18; Gal 4:8] or God in it or by it; [Exod 32:5]

I think if the image pops up in a dream, it may be a result of seeing images when awake. So whoever made the images and encouraged the mental images have sinned. The dreamer may be suffering because of that sin, either his own or another's.

But God works on us through many ways. I don't discount dreams having an effect. My own personal experience with dreams convinces me that God can use them to his glory (one example: vivid dreams of a man dressed in a soiled white garment taking a credit card to save my soul kept me from becoming a Catholic when I was seriously interested). I think the thing to remember is that if someone comes to you saying he had a dream of Jesus, you must point him to the Word.

Dreams don't give us truth, but God can use them to shake us from our slumber, so to speak.

Can the same be said of dreams in which seventh commandment violations are represented? It seems to me that if it is a sin to make a mental representation while awake that violates the second or seventh commandment, for example, such representations even while in an unconscious dreaming state reflect the sinfulness of the heart, and are in fact culpable, not commendable, because they reveal the corruptions of our heart.

Perhaps one who vainly imagines a false image of Christ may be lead by God to the true Christ, as revealed in the word; in so doing, I trust that God's Word and Spirit will convict him of the truth that we are not to make mental representations of Christ, and while he may struggle with it, he will, by God's grace, not condone it.

 

[VictorBravo]

How do dreams of "Jesus" fit in with the second commandment?

I think if the image pops up in a dream, it may be a result of seeing images when awake. So whoever made the images and encouraged the mental images have sinned. The dreamer may be suffering because of that sin, either his own or another's.

But God works on us through many ways. I don't discount dreams having an effect. My own personal experience with dreams convinces me that God can use them to his glory (one example: vivid dreams of a man dressed in a soiled white garment taking a credit card to save my soul kept me from becoming a Catholic when I was seriously interested). I think the thing to remember is that if someone comes to you saying he had a dream of Jesus, you must point him to the Word.

Dreams don't give us truth, but God can use them to shake us from our slumber, so to speak.

Can the same be said of dreams in which seventh commandment violations are represented? It seems to me that if it is a sin to make a mental representation while awake that violates the second or seventh commandment, for example, such representations even while in an unconscious dreaming state reflect the sinfulness of the heart, and are in fact culpable, not commendable, because they reveal the corruptions of our heart.

Perhaps one who vainly imagines a false image of Christ may be lead by God to the true Christ, as revealed in the word; in so doing, I trust that God's Word and Spirit (which the Scriptures teach no longer will convict him of the truth that we are not to make mental representations of Christ, and while he may struggle with it, he will, by God's grace, not condone it.

I think you are right. Dreams often reflect our desperate sinfullness. At least mine sometimes do. I think this is a reason why it is so important to make a covenant with our eyes, because those images linger and come up when we are least able to suppress them.

 

[bradofshaw]

I agree that it is wrong to mold our conception of God (Father, Son, or Holy Spirit) into a visual image in our mind which we think of as real. But I would expect that every Christian has some vague associations of Jesus with a concrete image of person-hood which one might innocently conjure up in a subconscious dream state.

 

[Amazing Grace]

How do dreams of "Jesus" fit in with the second commandment?

WLC Question 109. What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?

Answer. The sins forbidden in the second commandment are,...the making any representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature whatsoever; [Deut 4:15-19; Acts 17:29; Rom 1:21-23,25] all worshipping of it, [Dan 3:18; Gal 4:8] or God in it or by it; [Exod 32:5]

Does the phrase, 'inwardly in our mind' equal dreams or vision? Can we differ between bad dreams and good dreams? I am not following the reasoning underneath this Q109. And when you said the following:

I trust that God's Word and Spirit will convict him of the truth that we are not to make mental representations of Christ,

Do you mean picturing him with long flowing dark hair and blue eyes?

There is a tremendous use of dreasm/visions that are 100% positive in the Holy Writ. WHich to me says they are not sinful in and of themselves. Not needing repentance of. But, here is the famous but, In the writ God ALWAYS confirmed the vision/ dream with reality.

Acts 2:17
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

Acts 9;10:10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.

Acts 10;17 Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,

Acts 22;17 And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance;

Rev 1;10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet


Dreams would be considered the same as prophecy. If they come true, they are real and 100% not sinful. If they dont, then they are false...


The OP is specifically spakign about dreams and evangelism. Dreams/visions cannot be narrowly defined as while sleeping. Promtings of the Spirit to evangelize would fit this.

WHen Carey 'thought' of evangelizing the heathen noone was sent to tell him. The Holy Spirit spoke to his inner mind...

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

I think you are right. Dreams often reflect our desperate sinfullness. At least mine sometimes do. I think this is a reason why it is so important to make a covenant with our eyes, because those images linger and come up when we are least able to suppress them.

How do dreams of "Jesus" fit in with the second commandment?

WLC Question 109. What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?

Answer. The sins forbidden in the second commandment are,...the making any representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature whatsoever; [Deut 4:15-19; Acts 17:29; Rom 1:21-23,25] all worshipping of it, [Dan 3:18; Gal 4:8] or God in it or by it; [Exod 32:5]

Does the phrase, 'inwardly in our mind' equal dreams or vision? Can we differ between bad dreams and good dreams? I am not following the reasoning underneath this Q109. And when you said the following:

I trust that God's Word and Spirit will convict him of the truth that we are not to make mental representations of Christ,

Do you mean picturing him with long flowing dark hair and blue eyes?

There is a tremendous use of dreasm/visions that are 100% positive in the Holy Writ. WHich to me says they are not sinful in and of themselves. Not needing repentance of. But, here is the famous but, In the writ God ALWAYS confirmed the vision/ dream with reality.

Acts 2:17
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

Acts 9;10:10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.

Acts 10;17 Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,

Acts 22;17 And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance;

Rev 1;10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet


Dreams would be considered the same as prophecy. If they come true, they are real and 100% not sinful. If they dont, then they are false...


The OP is specifically spakign about dreams and evangelism. Dreams/visions cannot be narrowly defined as while sleeping. Promtings of the Spirit to evangelize would fit this.

WHen Carey 'thought' of evangelizing the heathen noone was sent to tell him. The Holy Spirit spoke to his inner mind...

The OP said:

They dream of a man in white that they identify as the Prophet Jesus.

That sounds like a mental, visual representation of Jesus, which the second commandment prohibits. It also sounds like it's happening while the person is either asleep or in some other sort of "state of mind." I cannot see how being in some sort of semi-conscious state excuses this violation of the second commandment.

Fisher's Catechism 51.11:

Is it lawful to form any inward representation of God, or of Christ, upon our fancy, bearing a resemblance to any creature whatever?

A. By no means; because this is the very inlet to gross outward idolatry: for, when once the Heathens "became vain in their imaginations, they presently changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things," Rom. 1:21, 23.

The former ways of God's revealing himself did include dreams and visions, but with the advent and ascension of Christ, and the closing of the canon of Scripture, such methods of revelation have ceased (Heb. 1.1-2; Rev. 22.18-19).

Robert Shaw says concerning WCF 1.6:

The perfection of the Scriptures is to be maintained in opposition to those enthusiasts who pretend to new revelations of the Spirit, and in opposition to the Church of Rome, which "receives traditions with the same veneration that they do the Scriptures." No new revelations are to be added to the oracles of God, for Christ and his apostles have foretold the rise of false prophets, and warned us not to give heed to their pretended revelations.–Matt. xxiv. 11, 24. The Apostle Paul denounces a curse upon all who preach any other gospel than that which is contained in the Scriptures.–Gal. i. 8, 9. The uncertainty of private revelations furnishes another argument against them. Such is the deceitfulness of the heart, that men are apt to mistake their own fancies and imaginations for revelations of the Spirit, and such is the subtlety of Satan, that he sometimes transforms himself into an angel of light. Private revelations, therefore, must be very uncertain to ourselves, and much more so to others. And it may be observed, that none plead for the authority of private revelations but such as, by the contrariety of their opinions and practices to the Scriptures, manifest themselves to be led by a spirit of delusion.

And Alexander Smith Paterson says (A concise system of theology: on the basis of the shorter catechism, p. 93):

1. He reveals the will of God to his people by his Word. From the beginning of the world to his incarnation, he manifested himself by voices, by visions, by dreams, and by appearances of various kinds, which were all suited to the state in which his Church then was upon earth; but now, the Volume of Inspiration being completed, he reveals himself by the preaching of the Word, which has continued since his incarnation, and will continue till the end of the world, the only way by which his will is made known for our salvation.

 

[BJClark]

I guess, I don't have a problem with believing it could be true..

As even the Moslems believe Jesus lived--so they have had SOME knowledge of him in their lives and teachings..

And in that they had a dream that made them think they should investigate this Jesus further..
is not out of God's ability..

 

[Preach]

Are we accountable to God 24/7? I carefully consider what I watch and read (especially before bedtime) as these images and thoughts have a way of penetrating into our dreams.

I want to honor God in my dreams and have made a habitual commitment to do so.

Do you think that you are accountable to God for your dreams?

Do we get to "punch out" with our time card when we go to sleep and "punch in" upon our awakening?

Legitimate open question for discussion: Are we accountable to God even when we dream?

If not, what would that mean for the kind of Dreams Adam (pre-fall) could of had, or our Lord incarnate?

 

[Amazing Grace]

I think you are right. Dreams often reflect our desperate sinfullness. At least mine sometimes do. I think this is a reason why it is so important to make a covenant with our eyes, because those images linger and come up when we are least able to suppress them.

Does the phrase, 'inwardly in our mind' equal dreams or vision? Can we differ between bad dreams and good dreams? I am not following the reasoning underneath this Q109. And when you said the following:

I trust that God's Word and Spirit will convict him of the truth that we are not to make mental representations of Christ,

Do you mean picturing him with long flowing dark hair and blue eyes?

There is a tremendous use of dreasm/visions that are 100% positive in the Holy Writ. WHich to me says they are not sinful in and of themselves. Not needing repentance of. But, here is the famous but, In the writ God ALWAYS confirmed the vision/ dream with reality.

Acts 2:17
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

Acts 9;10:10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.

Acts 10;17 Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,

Acts 22;17 And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance;

Rev 1;10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet


Dreams would be considered the same as prophecy. If they come true, they are real and 100% not sinful. If they dont, then they are false...


The OP is specifically spakign about dreams and evangelism. Dreams/visions cannot be narrowly defined as while sleeping. Promtings of the Spirit to evangelize would fit this.

WHen Carey 'thought' of evangelizing the heathen noone was sent to tell him. The Holy Spirit spoke to his inner mind...

The OP said:



That sounds like a mental, visual representation of Jesus, which the second commandment prohibits. It also sounds like it's happening while the person is either asleep or in some other sort of "state of mind." I cannot see how being in some sort of semi-conscious state excuses this violation of the second commandment.

Fisher's Catechism 51.11:



The former ways of God's revealing himself did include dreams and visions, but with the advent and ascension of Christ, and the closing of the canon of Scripture, such methods of revelation have ceased (Heb. 1.1-2; Rev. 22.18-19).

Robert Shaw says concerning WCF 1.6:

The perfection of the Scriptures is to be maintained in opposition to those enthusiasts who pretend to new revelations of the Spirit, and in opposition to the Church of Rome, which "receives traditions with the same veneration that they do the Scriptures." No new revelations are to be added to the oracles of God, for Christ and his apostles have foretold the rise of false prophets, and warned us not to give heed to their pretended revelations.–Matt. xxiv. 11, 24. The Apostle Paul denounces a curse upon all who preach any other gospel than that which is contained in the Scriptures.–Gal. i. 8, 9. The uncertainty of private revelations furnishes another argument against them. Such is the deceitfulness of the heart, that men are apt to mistake their own fancies and imaginations for revelations of the Spirit, and such is the subtlety of Satan, that he sometimes transforms himself into an angel of light. Private revelations, therefore, must be very uncertain to ourselves, and much more so to others. And it may be observed, that none plead for the authority of private revelations but such as, by the contrariety of their opinions and practices to the Scriptures, manifest themselves to be led by a spirit of delusion.

And Alexander Smith Paterson says (A concise system of theology: on the basis of the shorter catechism, p. 93):

1. He reveals the will of God to his people by his Word. From the beginning of the world to his incarnation, he manifested himself by voices, by visions, by dreams, and by appearances of various kinds, which were all suited to the state in which his Church then was upon earth; but now, the Volume of Inspiration being completed, he reveals himself by the preaching of the Word, which has continued since his incarnation, and will continue till the end of the world, the only way by which his will is made known for our salvation.

I agree there are no new revelations, but scripture speaks of revelations of God very narrowly. I am defining revelation as God inspired truth. But scripture allows for a distinction between that and illumination of the Spirit. No new turths will be discovered to be added to the sacred texts, but the Holy Spirit still speaks to the heart of His people all the time. Convicting, prompting. etc etc.

Looking at your 3 examples, they all say that God communication through dreams ended at the incarnation. You include His ascension and the close of the Sacred Scriptures. But what about the scriptures that I provided from acts that happenned AFTER His ascension?


If by dreams one means a new truth that must be added to teh sacred texts, I agree with everything you posted. If by dreams one means some sort of prompting of the Holy Spirit to move in a certain direction of their life, I agree with that too.Nothing more can be added beyond Christ. Dreams which possesses truth is either inspired interpretation or illumination but not revelation! God still sends dreams to people they are not intended to add to the dogma of the Church but as a means of encouragement, warning or edification.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

I agree there are no new revelations, but scripture speaks of revelations of God very narrowly. I am defining revelation as God inspired truth. But scripture allows for a distinction between that and illumination of the Spirit. No new turths will be discovered to be added to the sacred texts, but the Holy Spirit still speaks to the heart of His people all the time. Convicting, prompting. etc etc.

Looking at your 3 examples, they all say that God communication through dreams ended at the incarnation. You include His ascension and the close of the Sacred Scriptures. But what about the scriptures that I provided from acts that happenned AFTER His ascension?


If by dreams one means a new truth that must be added to teh sacred texts, I agree with everything you posted. If by dreams one means some sort of prompting of the Holy Spirit to move in a certain direction of their life, I agree with that too.Nothing more can be added beyond Christ. Dreams which possesses truth is either inspired interpretation or illumination but not revelation! God still sends dreams to people they are not intended to add to the dogma of the Church but as a means of encouragement, warning or edification.

Revelation is the means or manifestation by which God makes known himself to men. If Jesus does appear in a dream, that is in fact a (miraculous) revelation of himself. Since the close of the canon, written revelation is the only (special) means by which Christ reveals himself. The miracles have ceased. General revelation of God (ie., creation which reflects the goodness of the Creator) of course continues.

None of the examples you gave of such miraculous revelations occurred after the close of the canon. The Word of God (revelation of Christ) has been given to the church, and private appearances of Christ to select individuals is totally out of accord with this principle (sola Scriptura) that all previous modes of revelation have been superseded by the Word for the edification of the church. It is the Word of God employed by the Spirit by which men today are drawn to Christ, the Word.

There is no Biblical proof that God still reveals himself through dreams (dreams intended to encourage, warn or edify -- all functions of Scripture), and quite to the contrary, abundant Scriptural teaching to warn us against angels of light and our own fanciful imaginations, and against adding to the revelation of God or condoning avenues to God which he has not ordained and blessed. Inward visual representations of Christ, so far from being sent by God since the close of the canon, appear to me to be a reflection of the corrupt human nature expressing itself in our minds as we sleep.

Ashbel Green (Lectures on the Shorter Catechism, Vol. 2, pp. 82-83) says:

When any one affirms that he has a supernatural communication to make, we justly demand of him the evidence of this. And let it be remembered, that this is the doctrine of Scripture; and the test to which, as I have heretofore intimated, all who profess to have received revelations ought, in all cases, to be brought. If what they profess to teach were a mere matter of reason, we might judge of it by reason; or if a reliance were placed on argument, we would listen to the argument. But here is a communication to be made, of which reason is not, abstractly, the competent judge; and which demands regard, not from argument, but from divine authority. Show us, then, the authority by which your demand is sanctioned. This can be done only by working an undeniable miracle. If this be done, but not otherwise, we submit to the demand. We submit, because we cannot believe that He alone who can control and change the laws of nature, would do it to confirm a falsehood; and by doing so, to impose in the most grievous manner, on his rational creatures. Miracles, therefore, are essential to a revelation for the good of mankind at large; and when really wrought, they give it a divine sanction.

WCF 1.1 articulates the classic distinction between general and special revelation (the latter of which includes dreams, but which have ceased):

1. Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence, do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable;a yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of his will, which is necessary unto salvation;b therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his Church;c and afterwards, for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing;d which maketh the holy Scripture to be most necessary;e those former ways of God's revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.f

a. Psa 19:1-3; Rom 1:19-20; 1:32 with 2:1; 2:14-15. • b. 1 Cor 1:21; 2:13-14. • c. Heb 1:1. • d. Prov 22:19-21; Isa 8:19-20; Mat 4:4, 7, 10; Luke 1:3-4; Rom 15:4. • e. 2 Tim 3:15; 2 Pet 1:19. • f. Heb 1:1-2.

 

[Amazing Grace]

None of the examples you gave of such miraculous revelations occurred after the close of the canon. The Word of God (revelation of Christ) has been given to the church, and private appearances of Christ to select individuals is totally out of accord with this principle (sola Scriptura) that all previous modes of revelation have been superseded by the Word for the edification of the church. It is the Word of God employed by the Spirit by which men today are drawn to Christ, the Word. [/qoute]

AS I mentioned above, the examples you gave did not mention the close of the canon, you did in your first statement. Perhaps this had to be added to secure a negative light on dreams/visions since they occured after the incarnation and ascension. This is how I take it. I assume you are using the date of John's Revelation as the close of the canon right?

There is no Biblical proof that God still reveals himself through dreams (dreams intended to encourage, warn or edify -- all functions of Scripture), and quite to the contrary, abundant Scriptural teaching to warn us against angels of light and our own fanciful imaginations, and against adding to the revelation of God or condoning avenues to God which he has not ordained and blessed. Inward visual representations of Christ, so far from being sent by God since the close of the canon, appear to me to be a reflection of the corrupt human nature expressing itself in our minds as we sleep.

I agree Andrew. But again you are confusing A dream or prompting of the HS to evangelize in an area with adding to the Sacred Writ. I said this was wrong. For instance, if someone comes along and says,"I have a word from God, the worlld is ending in 2010, ala Millerites et al, and it does not come true, we know it was a lying Spirit. I stated correctly the following:

Nothing more can be added beyond Christ. Dreams which possesses truth is either inspired interpretation or illumination but not revelation! God still sends dreams to people they are not intended to add to the dogma of the Church but as a means of encouragement, warning or edification.

Dreams in the bible have an overwhelming occurance of positive, nothing negative is spoken about them. We must test EVERYTHING. This includes dreams/visions. Therefore I see no sin in it

 

[Pergamum]

Only on the PB could a Muslim dreaming of Jesus and then desiring to hear and believe be not a matter of rejoicing but be considered sin!

I ask you guys, when you read the GOspels about Jesus writing in the dirt, don't your minds picture someone - even if he is a faceless entity or a shadwoy form - writing in the dirt in your mind's eye? Or does being reformed mean stifling one's imagination? Even those faceless entities and shadowy forms are sin by your definition.

HOw can you NOT think about Jesus when reading the GOspels and imagining His acts?

It is like Tolstoy, when he was younger. He was initiated into a club. The only prerequisite: They had to stand in a corner for 30 minutes and NOT think about a white bear.

Trying to read the Bible and NOT picture Jesus is the same sort of impossible task.





Also,


These people have these dreams, probably conjured up from their own minds, and then afterwards go and seek after info. It happens and is happening to at least 15-20% of those that come to faith. You can scoff or say it is all a lie, but you would be accusing quite a lot of people.


Also, every dream about God or Jesus is not a "revelation" from God. THerefore it does not conflict with any closed canon. God allows dreams in his providence. ANd God seems to be using these providences.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

AS I mentioned above, the examples you gave did not mention the close of the canon, you did in your first statement. Perhaps this had to be added to secure a negative light on dreams/visions since they occured after the incarnation and ascension. This is how I take it. I assume you are using the date of John's Revelation as the close of the canon right?

I agree Andrew. But again you are confusing A dream or prompting of the HS to evangelize in an area with adding to the Sacred Writ. I said this was wrong. For instance, if someone comes along and says,"I have a word from God, the worlld is ending in 2010, ala Millerites et al, and it does not come true, we know it was a lying Spirit. I stated correctly the following:

Nothing more can be added beyond Christ. Dreams which possesses truth is either inspired interpretation or illumination but not revelation! God still sends dreams to people they are not intended to add to the dogma of the Church but as a means of encouragement, warning or edification.

Dreams in the bible have an overwhelming occurance of positive, nothing negative is spoken about them. We must test EVERYTHING. This includes dreams/visions. Therefore I see no sin in it

I am not "confusing" or conflating anything with respect to dreams. An appearance of Christ in a dream is either 1) a miraculous revelation of God apart from the revelation of his word, or 2) a sinful mental representation of the second Person of the Godhead. I deny the former can occur today and I believe the latter is what is happening in the situation under discussion.

The examples you gave all occurred as part of the apostolic ministry of Christ. There is no contradiction between the authorities I cited and the point I was trying to make which is that miracles such as dreams and visions took place prior to the appearance of Christ and during the confirmation of the apostolic ministry until the close of the canon, which I would take to be the end of the Revelation (around 90 AD, in my opinion).

The first example you gave, however, is not the promise of new dreams and visions but the fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel at Pentecost.

Contrary to your assertion that dreams are never expressed with a negative light in Scripture, see Deuteronmy 13.1-5. All things indeed should be tested (1 Thess. 5.21). John teaches us not to believe all spirits (1 John 4.1) and we are warned of false prophets and the wiles of the angel of light. The dreams of Jesus described here seem to me to fail the test of 1) cessation of miracles and former means of God's revelation apart from Scripture (WCF 1.1), and 2) the second commandment.

As far as their role in the salvation of infidels and heathen, to the extent that God uses their sins or delusions to lead them to himself, praise God for his abundant mercies. Most if not all sinners don't realize how sinful they are when converted or even what sins yet remain in them at the very time they are, by God's grace, seeking after him. Even our (initial and ongoing) repentance is much to be repented of.

To caution against dreams of Jesus is not to diminish the salvation of anyone who does so and earnestly seeks after him; it is to hold the light of God's word up to the private experiences of some and show that their experiences do not justify condoning what Scriptures teaches against: 1) continuing special revelation apart from God's Word and 2) making inward mental representations of Christ, which is forbidden. I rejoice when sinners turn to the Lord even if the means by which they do so (e.g., Paul speaks of those who preach Christ in pretense, envy or strife, Phil. 1.15-18) involve sin. Let the word of God be the means of our salvation and the measure of our experience.

 

[LockTheDeadbolt]

Wow, In my humble opinion the only cessationism that's really pertinent to the original discussion would be the cessation of a missionary witness in the Muslim world (though I guess it never really got going, so it's hard to say that it "ceased" in any meaningful way).

Anyway, some of the folks who have experienced such "dreams-leading-to-conversions" have put together a DVD about the phenomenon. I think Netflix has it for rent. You can check it out at: From Dreams to Reality

The dream conversion phenomenon, again In my humble opinion, ought to lead us to praise the sovereign and omnipotent God who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist, while also leading us to repent of our failings in fulfilling the responsibilities given us in the Great Commission.

 

[kvanlaan]

Only on the PB could a Muslim dreaming of Jesus and then desiring to hear and believe be not a matter of rejoicing but be considered sin!

When they come to you with their stories, better tell them to repent of their conversions! The Lord may likewise use a Billy Graham/Finney-esque revival to truly save a man while it is not a Scripturally sound means of harvesting the crops.

God brought a number of Egyptians out of spiritual bondage through the ten plagues. Though they were converted by these means, plagues are by no means a Scriptural evangelistic tool.

I think we're driving ourselves up the wall here with classifications and assignations of what happened. Perhaps we should go one step back and say that perhaps the Holy Spirit caused a vision of not necessarily Christ but an angel, to lead them to seek Him. How could the Spirit cause a vision of something which is condemned by Scripture? These converts saw something. Are we then to question the sincerety of the conversion because we are saying that this may have been an emotional event and nothing more?