In our community, we are continually asking, “What can we give to people?”. The answer is often that we can give them a level of community that will teach them a new and healthy way of life. When community is the answer to how we help people, the mandate is to build community and to emphasize dialogue about real life problems and the principles that are foundational to functional living. Such an emphasis is a huge step forward compared to the come to church on Sunday and then you are on your own. With people like myself that are way to damaged to make it on my own, the Sunday and Wednesday routine just doesn’t work. For the sick, authentic community is an absolute necessity to a sane life. BUT!!!, this emphasis on COMMUNITY IS NOT THE ANSWER to the “What can we give to people?” question.
Conversion to the Church or Entrance into the Kingdom
The above scenario where a new believer enters a Christian community that meets daily and studies the teachings of Jesus is a good thing, obviously, but I have no interest in converting people to Christianized social work. We must be very self-critical and precise in what are we really offering people. What we are offering people is LIFE IN THE KINGDOM THROUGH THE IMMEDIATE POWER AND PRESSENCE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT THROUGH FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST. The answer to the question, “What can we give to people?” must be THE HOLY SPIRIT on a daily basis. We must beware of converting people to the church.
The Real Problem with American Evangelicalism
If you are reading this article, I am assuming you are looking for more than the mainstream church has to offer. When the mainstream church honestly answer the question, “What can we give to people?”, the answer is that we can offer good programs and clear bible teaching. We may say, “We offer relationship with Jesus Christ”, but if the by relationship with Jesus Christ we mean the immediate power and presence of the Holy Spirit then the mainstream church cannot honestly testify that we offer people a life of relationship with Jesus Christ. The daily power of the Holy Spirit has not been my experience of the life of the normal church-goer. No what the church offers is programs and teaching. In other words, the church offers people church. The real problem with the church in America is that we convert people to church and not the kingdom. BUT if we in the home church, simple church, organic church simply convert people to daily, authentic church as opposed to weekly superficial church, we are merely re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titantic. The problem with the mainstream church, and I believe the mainstream church is on its death bed in America, is that church life does not necessitate authentic spirituality and does not model the life in the kingdom. Life in the kingdom is living daily filled with the power of presence of Jesus Christ through the daily imitation of Jesus Christ in community.
The Emphasis of the Church Growth and Mega Church Approach
The church growth approach taught pastors to make sure that all the processes were in place to assure that people have a positive experience in church. The program of the church needs to be excellent to attract a crowd. The speaker must be entertaining. The music must be excellent. The programs must be fast paced and offer relationship with nice people and the parking must be sufficient. If we do this well, people will be attracted to the church and this will expose the masses to the word of God and the gospel. In this approach, we are really converting people to church attendance. The program takes most of the pastors time. He is the director of a presentation. This approach has led to the total carnality and impotence of the church. This is not how Jesus Christ made disciples. Only true spirituality and the offer of the power and presence of Jesus Christ in our daily lives demands everything from the baptized. We have made the gospel palatable in order to baptize people into the church. Such an approach caters to second and third soil hearts. Such an approach is total folly and bears no fruit that remains. If your pastor is concerned for even one instant about the flow of the service, I contend this is completely wrong headed. Jesus sent seekers who were not totally repentant away. Jesus said things that were totally offensive in order to separate the second and third soil people from the good and pure hearts. Our goal should be like Jesus’. We should try to offend people with the demands of the cross and the kingdom life. Only the call to live in the power and presence of the Holy Spirit daily demands everything from us.
The Necessity of Community
Even when the mainstream church offers, the power of the Holy Spirit, the mainstream church cannot deliver. When a seeker comes into the church and we offer them the kingdom life through the immediate power and presence of Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit, we cannot deliver on this offer without daily community meetings. Jesus Christ couldn’t deliver the kingdom without walking daily with the disciples. Are we so anointed that we can deliver bread that magically nourishes people for a week at a time? It is impossible to live by faith in the immediate reality of the kingdom without daily corporate prayer and worship and contemplation of the apostle’s teachings. The corporate life models for the new believer what it means to pursue God in prayer and worship. We teach how to confess and repent in the presence of God.
I once had a home churcher ask me sarcastically, “What we have to pray for it to be church?” My answer is “No, we have to pray passionately with true authentic repentance for it to be church!!”. Church is a group of people encountering God in spirit and truth. Church is not Christian potluck. In the book of Acts, the church met daily but they didn’t meet to have potluck. People are not afraid of potlucks. People were afraid to enter the early church and be double minded. God showed up at the meetings. People got healed at the meetings. The prayer and the teaching was 200 proof Holy Spirit. A new believer will not experience the life transformation that we call the kingdom without this type of community on a daily basis.
When we answer the “what can we give to people?”, we offer them a life in the power of God. In doing this, we must offer them to be immersed in the teachings of Jesus. We must offer them corporate meetings everyday BUT if we end with principles and community and do not lead people all the way into the presence of God and the power of the Holy Spirit, we still have merely converted them into the church. We do not baptize people into the Church, we baptize people into Christ. We are offering people a daily relationship with the living risen Jesus Christ. Jesus is alive. Jesus is powerful. Jesus delivers. Nothing short of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit will deliver those around us.
God Bless,
brad
Showing posts with label Holy Spirit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Holy Spirit. Show all posts
Friday, January 26, 2007
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Charismata – Impressions and Prophecy – Agreement on the Major Issue
In this post, I am going to review the main issue that a few bloggers are in agreement on, and, then, I am going to quote Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ historical survey of the experiences of the great preachers in support of this major point of agreement. So don’t miss the end that is the meat of this post…
The Major Issue: God, by the Holy Spirit, grants His children direct, conscious experiences of Himself. These relational experiences of God amount to impressions from the Holy Spirit and are good for the strengthening, comfort and edification of the believer.
Further, I contend that if we accept the availability of such impressions and their value from God that we are in essence accepting that God speaks today directly to the believer through the Holy Spirit.
The debate on Charismata – A Truly Humble Dialogue
This debate is giving me so much hope for the role of the blogoshere in positively effecting change and unity in the body of Christ. This discussion on the Charismata is developing nicely. There are numerous bloggers who, from my reading, are genuinely coming to a middle position where now the differences are fundamentally semantic
Three Bloggers of Note are Essentially Saying the Same thing.
David Wayne
David Wayne has a long post about impressions vs prophecy. David has a contention with Wayne Grudem’s definition of prophecy that prophecy “is a human report of something that God has brought spontaneously to mind”.
For our purposes, this is a matter of semantics. The point is that David accepts that God gives impressions and these impressions are valuable. Here is David’s conclusion of the matter.
When we call something "prophecy" that is really my own interpretation of some spontaneous impression we are giving a greater weight to that impression/interpretation than it can carry. The same applies when we use phrases like "God told me." Calling my own spontaneous (and subjective by the way) impressions prophecy escalates them in certainty and authority. There is a world of difference in the statements "I think God may be leading me," and "God told me." There is a world of difference in saying "I have an impression that I
ought to do so and so," and "I have received a word of prophecy." In both of those examples, the first statement identifies me as the speaker and the latter identifies God is the speaker. If I use the first kinds of statements there is no authority to them, they are not binding, it is up to me whether or not I act upon them, and there is no harm no foul if it turns out my impression was wrong (unless I act on it unwisely). If I use the second kind of statement there is a binding authority to them which I must act upon.
This position I agree with in practice (except David’s point about binding authority), but I contend that the difference between an impression and a prophecy, as David is articulating, is a matter of degree and a matter of presentation. Both experiences are in essence the same. If God is speaking to the believer and the believer is humble enough to “use the gift of prophecy according to the proportion of his faith” (Romans 12:6), then the wording of a slight impression might be stated humbly by saying, “Well, I think maybe God is saying….”. We moderate the level of faith we have in our prophecy by moderating our tone and wording. But the main issue is whether God speaks to us and give impressions directly to believers, and I answer ABSOLUTELY, YES.
John Shroeder
John at Blogotional posts a call for learning to maintain the good aspects of the charismatic experience with the Holy Spirit while boldly correcting the abuses. This is a much needed emphasis. Again, John is siding with God speaking and giving inspiration and impressions directly to believers but desires moderation. AMEN!!
Adrian Warnock
Arian is doing a great job as he moderates this debate. In this quote, he really nails the BIG point saying,
"The cessationist who concerns me is the one who does not believe that there is any sense in which we have a relational experience of God today.”
Oh…for a thousand tongues to sing my great redeemers praise. Such affection only comes from what Adrian here calls “a relational experience of God”.
Here is the Major issue. This passion to share with all people the peace and power of a conscious relational experience with our great God is I think the height of Gospel preaching. This gift of the Holy Spirit to enable us to have a relational EXPERIENCE of God directly is life itself. It is this experience that empowers me to face the lions of everyday life. Not only that we believe God is with us because the scripture says so, but an assurance we possess because we are all wet with the experience of His love. This does not for a second mean that we do not stand on scripture or that we rely on experience alone, but that the filling of the Holy Spirit does lead us to a higher level of experience which strengthens our boldness and our assurance. This position was Lloyd-Jones’ conclusion and the conclusion of John Piper, Jonathan Edwards and a whole host of Reformed believers through the centuries.
A Historical Survey of “Relational Experience of God” from Lloyd-Jones’ commentary on Romans
Martyn Lloyd-Jones in his sermons on Romans spends 19 sermons expounding on his understanding of Romans 8:14-16
14For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, "Abba! Father!" 16The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God.
Lloyd-Jones’ position is that this ‘bearing witness” is a conscious experience and that this experience leads to a heightened sense of our assurance of salvation which leads to boldness and empowerment in ministry. This conscious contact with God Lloyd-Jones argues is the essence of being filled or baptized with the Holy Spirit. In my essay on discipleship, I argue that this “relational experience with God” is the power we need to guard our hearts from the self-centeredness and fear that is at the root of our sinful responses to life. It is through the maintenance of our conscious contact with God that we find power over pride and unbelief. This conscious contact with God is worth fighting for as it is these on-going, daily, affection transforming experiences that is the “seeing and savoring of God” that Piper is fighting for when he says “God is the Gospel”.
Before I list some of these experiences, I simply refer readers to this marvelous volume.
Lloyd-Jones lists numerous tests regarding how we know we are being led by the Holy Spirit. He states that this being led is not normally guidance which is how so many people take being led. But then he gives marvelous examples of actual guidance. So much of the pastoral care and precision needed to understand how to help people who are unbalanced by over reliance on guidance of the Holy Spirit, Lloyd-Jones deals with extensively. I take Lloyd-Jones thorough working of the subject as the best available for those of the Reformed-Continualist perspective.
Lloyd-Jones speaking of the experiential element of the work of the Holy Spirit says the following:
"Let me remind you of Thomas Goodwin, one of the great Puritans of three hundred years ago, states the matter. He used a remarkable illustration. He pictures a man walking along a road with his little boy, holding hands – father and son, son and father. The little boy knows that this man is his father and that his father loves him. But suddenly, the father stops, picks up the boy, lifts him up into his arms, embraces him and kisses him. Then he puts him down, and they continue walking. The boy is no more a son when he is being embraced than he was
before. The father’s action has not changed the relationship; it has not changed the status of the boy; but oh, the difference in the enjoyment.” (pg 280 – Banner of Truth)
This experience is worth fighting for and praying for our friends and loved one’s to experience. This is the pleasure of Piper’s Christian hedonism.
Biographies of The Reformers
From the Life of Robert Bruce – successor to john Knox (1554-1631)
"There was never such foul flesh that has gotten a more gracious, more sensible, more powerful, approbation of my ministry in Edinburgh, of my fidelity therein. His Spirit has testified with my spirit, not only by real joys, spiritual and elevated light, but by vocal speeches within me in the daylight, that I heard so sensibly with great effusion of tears…that I admire how He should bestow such gracious speeches upon so wretched a creature as I was.”Bruce goes on and on with a testimony of being totally overwhelmed with these sensible assurances.
George Whitefield speaks of his experience innumerable times in his journals. Speaking of the spirit of adoption as a sensible experience.
"Was filled with the Holy Ghost. Oh that all who deny the promise of the Father might thus receive it themselves! Oh, that all were partakers of my joy”. Exactly.
Jonathan Edwards
"Once, I rode out into the woods for my health, in 1737, having alighted from my horse in a retired place as my manner commonly has been, to walk for divine contemplation and prayer, I had a view that for me was extraordinary, of the glory of the Son of God as mediator between God and man, and His wonderful, great, full, pure and sweet grace and love, meek and gentle condescension. …The person of Christ appeared ineffably excellent, with an excellency great enough to swallow up all thought and conception, which continued, as near as I can judge, about an hour; which kept me the greater part of the time in a flood of tears, and weeping aloud….” (pg 346 – Banner of Truth)
The Major Issue: God, by the Holy Spirit, grants His children direct, conscious experiences of Himself. These relational experiences of God amount to impressions from the Holy Spirit and are good for the strengthening, comfort and edification of the believer.
Further, I contend that if we accept the availability of such impressions and their value from God that we are in essence accepting that God speaks today directly to the believer through the Holy Spirit.
The debate on Charismata – A Truly Humble Dialogue
This debate is giving me so much hope for the role of the blogoshere in positively effecting change and unity in the body of Christ. This discussion on the Charismata is developing nicely. There are numerous bloggers who, from my reading, are genuinely coming to a middle position where now the differences are fundamentally semantic
Three Bloggers of Note are Essentially Saying the Same thing.
David Wayne
David Wayne has a long post about impressions vs prophecy. David has a contention with Wayne Grudem’s definition of prophecy that prophecy “is a human report of something that God has brought spontaneously to mind”.
For our purposes, this is a matter of semantics. The point is that David accepts that God gives impressions and these impressions are valuable. Here is David’s conclusion of the matter.
When we call something "prophecy" that is really my own interpretation of some spontaneous impression we are giving a greater weight to that impression/interpretation than it can carry. The same applies when we use phrases like "God told me." Calling my own spontaneous (and subjective by the way) impressions prophecy escalates them in certainty and authority. There is a world of difference in the statements "I think God may be leading me," and "God told me." There is a world of difference in saying "I have an impression that I
ought to do so and so," and "I have received a word of prophecy." In both of those examples, the first statement identifies me as the speaker and the latter identifies God is the speaker. If I use the first kinds of statements there is no authority to them, they are not binding, it is up to me whether or not I act upon them, and there is no harm no foul if it turns out my impression was wrong (unless I act on it unwisely). If I use the second kind of statement there is a binding authority to them which I must act upon.
This position I agree with in practice (except David’s point about binding authority), but I contend that the difference between an impression and a prophecy, as David is articulating, is a matter of degree and a matter of presentation. Both experiences are in essence the same. If God is speaking to the believer and the believer is humble enough to “use the gift of prophecy according to the proportion of his faith” (Romans 12:6), then the wording of a slight impression might be stated humbly by saying, “Well, I think maybe God is saying….”. We moderate the level of faith we have in our prophecy by moderating our tone and wording. But the main issue is whether God speaks to us and give impressions directly to believers, and I answer ABSOLUTELY, YES.
John Shroeder
John at Blogotional posts a call for learning to maintain the good aspects of the charismatic experience with the Holy Spirit while boldly correcting the abuses. This is a much needed emphasis. Again, John is siding with God speaking and giving inspiration and impressions directly to believers but desires moderation. AMEN!!
Adrian Warnock
Arian is doing a great job as he moderates this debate. In this quote, he really nails the BIG point saying,
"The cessationist who concerns me is the one who does not believe that there is any sense in which we have a relational experience of God today.”
Oh…for a thousand tongues to sing my great redeemers praise. Such affection only comes from what Adrian here calls “a relational experience of God”.
Here is the Major issue. This passion to share with all people the peace and power of a conscious relational experience with our great God is I think the height of Gospel preaching. This gift of the Holy Spirit to enable us to have a relational EXPERIENCE of God directly is life itself. It is this experience that empowers me to face the lions of everyday life. Not only that we believe God is with us because the scripture says so, but an assurance we possess because we are all wet with the experience of His love. This does not for a second mean that we do not stand on scripture or that we rely on experience alone, but that the filling of the Holy Spirit does lead us to a higher level of experience which strengthens our boldness and our assurance. This position was Lloyd-Jones’ conclusion and the conclusion of John Piper, Jonathan Edwards and a whole host of Reformed believers through the centuries.
A Historical Survey of “Relational Experience of God” from Lloyd-Jones’ commentary on Romans
Martyn Lloyd-Jones in his sermons on Romans spends 19 sermons expounding on his understanding of Romans 8:14-16
14For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, "Abba! Father!" 16The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God.
Lloyd-Jones’ position is that this ‘bearing witness” is a conscious experience and that this experience leads to a heightened sense of our assurance of salvation which leads to boldness and empowerment in ministry. This conscious contact with God Lloyd-Jones argues is the essence of being filled or baptized with the Holy Spirit. In my essay on discipleship, I argue that this “relational experience with God” is the power we need to guard our hearts from the self-centeredness and fear that is at the root of our sinful responses to life. It is through the maintenance of our conscious contact with God that we find power over pride and unbelief. This conscious contact with God is worth fighting for as it is these on-going, daily, affection transforming experiences that is the “seeing and savoring of God” that Piper is fighting for when he says “God is the Gospel”.
Before I list some of these experiences, I simply refer readers to this marvelous volume.
Lloyd-Jones lists numerous tests regarding how we know we are being led by the Holy Spirit. He states that this being led is not normally guidance which is how so many people take being led. But then he gives marvelous examples of actual guidance. So much of the pastoral care and precision needed to understand how to help people who are unbalanced by over reliance on guidance of the Holy Spirit, Lloyd-Jones deals with extensively. I take Lloyd-Jones thorough working of the subject as the best available for those of the Reformed-Continualist perspective.
Lloyd-Jones speaking of the experiential element of the work of the Holy Spirit says the following:
"Let me remind you of Thomas Goodwin, one of the great Puritans of three hundred years ago, states the matter. He used a remarkable illustration. He pictures a man walking along a road with his little boy, holding hands – father and son, son and father. The little boy knows that this man is his father and that his father loves him. But suddenly, the father stops, picks up the boy, lifts him up into his arms, embraces him and kisses him. Then he puts him down, and they continue walking. The boy is no more a son when he is being embraced than he was
before. The father’s action has not changed the relationship; it has not changed the status of the boy; but oh, the difference in the enjoyment.” (pg 280 – Banner of Truth)
This experience is worth fighting for and praying for our friends and loved one’s to experience. This is the pleasure of Piper’s Christian hedonism.
Biographies of The Reformers
From the Life of Robert Bruce – successor to john Knox (1554-1631)
"There was never such foul flesh that has gotten a more gracious, more sensible, more powerful, approbation of my ministry in Edinburgh, of my fidelity therein. His Spirit has testified with my spirit, not only by real joys, spiritual and elevated light, but by vocal speeches within me in the daylight, that I heard so sensibly with great effusion of tears…that I admire how He should bestow such gracious speeches upon so wretched a creature as I was.”Bruce goes on and on with a testimony of being totally overwhelmed with these sensible assurances.
George Whitefield speaks of his experience innumerable times in his journals. Speaking of the spirit of adoption as a sensible experience.
"Was filled with the Holy Ghost. Oh that all who deny the promise of the Father might thus receive it themselves! Oh, that all were partakers of my joy”. Exactly.
Jonathan Edwards
"Once, I rode out into the woods for my health, in 1737, having alighted from my horse in a retired place as my manner commonly has been, to walk for divine contemplation and prayer, I had a view that for me was extraordinary, of the glory of the Son of God as mediator between God and man, and His wonderful, great, full, pure and sweet grace and love, meek and gentle condescension. …The person of Christ appeared ineffably excellent, with an excellency great enough to swallow up all thought and conception, which continued, as near as I can judge, about an hour; which kept me the greater part of the time in a flood of tears, and weeping aloud….” (pg 346 – Banner of Truth)
These are very conscious experiences by these great men. These are very strong impressions directly upon their souls. The experiences are filled with overwhelming emotion and “views” of God. Edwards knows how long the view lasted and explains later in the quote of how he responded with greater desire to serve God with all his being.
These experiences are direct communications by God to His people. These experiences, though not always to this degree, are to be common in the contemplative life of men who desire earnestly to prophecy. By this definition of prophecy I mean speaking of he truth regarding God and His ways with a passion that comes ONLY from such experiences of the Holy Spirit.
Though all of us can say God is great. Only the Edwards’ and those who are so filled can rise up from their experiences and speak with the urgency that is need to awaken the church.
Such glorious fillings and direct knowledge of God is what our people need. As we discuss the topics of the gifts of God’s spirit, it is these works of the Holy Spirit that we can all agree upon are the most vital to be able to communicate and propagate in our congregations.
God Bless,
brad
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Now Concerning Spiritual Gifts - Prophecy and King Saul
The topic of Spiritual gifts has been hotly debated by serious an in-depth thinkers for many decades now. Therefore, to give a proper treatment to the subject and to develop a proper and balanced view would take a book. I would like to simply offer a few posts to, as is my normal method, supply balance.
If you would like to do further study on the subject Rob Wilkerson at Miscellanies on the Gospel has the post of the week on the subject. Rob has complied a massive list of links to other reformed and continualist writers. Adrian and John agree Rob has done quite a service to the discussion at his blog.
Saul and Prophecy in the Body of Christ
In 1 Samuel 10:5-11, the story picks up with Samuel speaking to Saul:
5"... you will come to the hill of God where the Philistine garrison is; and it shall be as soon as you have come there to the city, that you will meet a group of prophets coming down from the high place with harp, tambourine, flute, and a lyre before them, and they will be prophesying.
6"Then the Spirit of the LORD will come upon you mightily, and you shall prophesy with them and be changed into another man.
7"It shall be when these signs come to you, do for yourself what the occasion requires, for God is with you.
8"And you shall go down before me to Gilgal; and behold, I will come down to you to offer burnt offerings and sacrifice peace offerings You shall wait seven days until I come to you and show you what you should do."
9Then it happened when he turned his back to leave Samuel, God changed his heart; and all those signs came about on that day.
10 When they came to the hill there, behold, a group of prophets met him; and the Spirit of God came upon him mightily, so that he prophesied among them.
11It came about, when all who knew him previously saw that he prophesied now with the prophets, that the people said to one another, "What has happened to the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?"
The first thing to notice is the construction of the phrase "the Spirit will come upon you mightily and you will prophesy". This construction is similar if not exactly the same as in Acts 2. Peter says quoting Joel 2, "the Spirit shall be poured out on all flesh....(and Peter adds) and they shall prophesy". The experience that the 120 in the upper room had is the same as Saul and at his anointing for his ministry. The changing that took place was not with respect to holiness and sanctification (as the Wesley thought) but with respect to boldness and courage. This courage seems to be the exact transformation that happened to the apostles and Peter on Pentecost.
What type of Prophecy is this?
Now here is a great lesson from this passage. First, Saul's prophecies are not canonical utterances. I doubt that Saul was foretelling anything in this instance of prophecy. Instead it is far more natural to read that Saul was "speaking of the mighty deeds of God" (Acts 2:11). Furthermore, this prophesying did not make Saul a prophet. Saul's fearlessness was very temporary and his love of God was indeed temporary. When the New Testament is speaking of prophesying in the body by the people, the New Testament is referring to this experience of the Spirit falling mightily on an individual or a group and the people speaking boldly the mighty deeds of God. This wider definition of the nature of prophecy answers the cessationist dilemma regarding all prophecy being canonical and infallible. The cessationist narrow definition of prophecy simply is not supported by scripture regardless of how logical such a position seems. This opens the discussion to how a person grows in a gifting and how we need to disciple in people in spiritual gifts. This will be the topic of my post tomorrow.
New Testament and Old Testament Prophecy Actually the Same
The above discussion regarding the “type” of prophecy this is can actually leads to confusion. Saul prophesied when the Spirit came upon him and it was likely extremely rare in his life. But, if Saul's calling was as a prophet, like David, this experience and skill would have matured. The difference between the prophecy of Isaiah and Saul is not one of being categorically different but is absolutely different in terms of value, weight, and maturity of the gifting.
The example of David on the other hand shows that the spiritual maturity and calling of the individual relates to the maturity and value of the gift.
The Bible and New Testament Prophecy
If maturity of gifts could lead to a more valuable and increasingly edifying ministry of prophecy, then could a prophet like Isaiah be revealed in the current dispensation of the church age? The answer to this is "NO!!!". Why? Because Isaiah was prophesying a new dispensation and Hebrews clearly declares that Christ has ushered in the final word. For this reason, this age we are in is called "the last days". I have dealt with this topic thoroughly in my critic of the Kansas City prophetic movement which I believe is heretical from a doctrinal perspective.
Continualist not Charismatic
I personal am not a charismatic but a continualist. I do not believe the current practices and doctrine of the Pentecostalism or charismatics is helpful. I have seen incredibly harmful practices and doctrinal positions in these groups. For further details on this subject please see my critic of the "KC Prophets".
God Bless,
brad
If you would like to do further study on the subject Rob Wilkerson at Miscellanies on the Gospel has the post of the week on the subject. Rob has complied a massive list of links to other reformed and continualist writers. Adrian and John agree Rob has done quite a service to the discussion at his blog.
Saul and Prophecy in the Body of Christ
In 1 Samuel 10:5-11, the story picks up with Samuel speaking to Saul:
5"... you will come to the hill of God where the Philistine garrison is; and it shall be as soon as you have come there to the city, that you will meet a group of prophets coming down from the high place with harp, tambourine, flute, and a lyre before them, and they will be prophesying.
6"Then the Spirit of the LORD will come upon you mightily, and you shall prophesy with them and be changed into another man.
7"It shall be when these signs come to you, do for yourself what the occasion requires, for God is with you.
8"And you shall go down before me to Gilgal; and behold, I will come down to you to offer burnt offerings and sacrifice peace offerings You shall wait seven days until I come to you and show you what you should do."
9Then it happened when he turned his back to leave Samuel, God changed his heart; and all those signs came about on that day.
10 When they came to the hill there, behold, a group of prophets met him; and the Spirit of God came upon him mightily, so that he prophesied among them.
11It came about, when all who knew him previously saw that he prophesied now with the prophets, that the people said to one another, "What has happened to the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?"
The first thing to notice is the construction of the phrase "the Spirit will come upon you mightily and you will prophesy". This construction is similar if not exactly the same as in Acts 2. Peter says quoting Joel 2, "the Spirit shall be poured out on all flesh....(and Peter adds) and they shall prophesy". The experience that the 120 in the upper room had is the same as Saul and at his anointing for his ministry. The changing that took place was not with respect to holiness and sanctification (as the Wesley thought) but with respect to boldness and courage. This courage seems to be the exact transformation that happened to the apostles and Peter on Pentecost.
What type of Prophecy is this?
Now here is a great lesson from this passage. First, Saul's prophecies are not canonical utterances. I doubt that Saul was foretelling anything in this instance of prophecy. Instead it is far more natural to read that Saul was "speaking of the mighty deeds of God" (Acts 2:11). Furthermore, this prophesying did not make Saul a prophet. Saul's fearlessness was very temporary and his love of God was indeed temporary. When the New Testament is speaking of prophesying in the body by the people, the New Testament is referring to this experience of the Spirit falling mightily on an individual or a group and the people speaking boldly the mighty deeds of God. This wider definition of the nature of prophecy answers the cessationist dilemma regarding all prophecy being canonical and infallible. The cessationist narrow definition of prophecy simply is not supported by scripture regardless of how logical such a position seems. This opens the discussion to how a person grows in a gifting and how we need to disciple in people in spiritual gifts. This will be the topic of my post tomorrow.
New Testament and Old Testament Prophecy Actually the Same
The above discussion regarding the “type” of prophecy this is can actually leads to confusion. Saul prophesied when the Spirit came upon him and it was likely extremely rare in his life. But, if Saul's calling was as a prophet, like David, this experience and skill would have matured. The difference between the prophecy of Isaiah and Saul is not one of being categorically different but is absolutely different in terms of value, weight, and maturity of the gifting.
The example of David on the other hand shows that the spiritual maturity and calling of the individual relates to the maturity and value of the gift.
The Bible and New Testament Prophecy
If maturity of gifts could lead to a more valuable and increasingly edifying ministry of prophecy, then could a prophet like Isaiah be revealed in the current dispensation of the church age? The answer to this is "NO!!!". Why? Because Isaiah was prophesying a new dispensation and Hebrews clearly declares that Christ has ushered in the final word. For this reason, this age we are in is called "the last days". I have dealt with this topic thoroughly in my critic of the Kansas City prophetic movement which I believe is heretical from a doctrinal perspective.
Continualist not Charismatic
I personal am not a charismatic but a continualist. I do not believe the current practices and doctrine of the Pentecostalism or charismatics is helpful. I have seen incredibly harmful practices and doctrinal positions in these groups. For further details on this subject please see my critic of the "KC Prophets".
God Bless,
brad
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)