There’s a lively discussion going on over at Christ and Covenant on prophecy and tongues.
I’ve commented that I'd quite like to be a cessationist. It seems more conservative (and therefore sound) and less crazy charismaniac to me.
I'm confused about how we fit together the sufficiency of scripture and continuation of prophecy (if there be any). Do we say to people "live according to the Bible and you can be sure you'll live a life according to God's will for you" or do we say "part of living according to the Bible is to listen out for the voice of God telling you his will for your life in a way that you couldn't have worked out with precision or confidence by thinking about the Bible and circumstances"? It seems to me like a question that matters.
I guess unless we think 2 Tim is the last bit of the Bible to be written and 3:16f needs to be read especially in the light of that, the sufficiency of Scripture (for the recipients of 2 Timothy) certainly does not rule out God giving extra additional (Scriptural) revelation later on that could not have been inferred from the previously given but then sufficient Scriptural revelation?
* * *
Though it wouldn't prove anything conclusively, of course, it would be interesting to know the history of tongues and prophesy (with footnotes!).
In his work on John Owen on spiritual gifts, Packer comments that:
"Seventeenth-century England did not, to my knowledge, produce anyone who claimed the gift of tongues, and though claimants to prophetic and healing powers were not unknown, particularly in the wild days of the forties and fifties, the signs of 'enthusiasm' (fanatical delusion) and mental unbalance were all too evident." (Among God's Giants, p290)
For John Owen "gifts which in their own nature exceed the whole power of all our faculties" [tongues, prophecy, healing powers] belong to "that dispensation of the Spirit [which] is long since ceased, and where it is now pretended unto by any, it may justly be suspected as an enthusiastical delusion" (Owen, Works, IV:518)
If New Testament gifts of prophecy, healing-powers and tongues are for today it is weird (though I grant not impossible) that they went away for so long in so many places and that so many otherwise fairly biblical Christians fail to receive them today.
Posts
11 comments:
It may be weird but it wouldn't be entirely without precedent. The prophetic ministry in Israel's history came in waves and was focussed in particular places. Similarly the appearance of miracles (not to mention signs and wonders) seems to be clustered.
And I certainly wouldn't expect all bible-believing Christians to have them - different gifts to different members of the body.
I posted a long comment on Daniel's latest post which has disappeared into the ether. Spooky, huh?
My main point was that the reports of these things from the persecuted church strike me as having some basis in fact. And that it would make sense for Christians in those kind of situations, much more nearly reflecting the NT era in some ways, would be given these kind of gifts.
I do think that some of what goes on under the heading of 'charismatic gifts' in the UK is nonsense, and much has completely missed Paul's call for orderliness and appropriateness in 1 Cor 14. But that's no argument either way.
I'm surprised that you 'want' to be cessationist, Marc? Are you one or not? If not, then learn contentment. If so, just be one!
Ros,
But weren't they waves / clusters connected with events with salvation-historical importance / confirming canonical revelation?
No, I wouldn't expect all bible-believing Christians to have them either but don't you think it is strange to have so many congregations without these gifts?
I guess I can see your persecuted church point. People often say something similar about pioneer missionary contexts, don't they?
I guess my wanna-be cessationism is a way of saying I haven't really thought out this and probably can't give you any texts etc.!
Hmm. Which salvation-historical event did the ministry of Elijah and Elisha confirm?
Is it strange for congregations not to have these gifts? Maybe. But that may be where the 'we have the bible' argument comes in. Not as a strict cessationist argument but as a 'we are in a more privileged position in so many ways that certain gifts are less necessary for the building of our churches' kind of argument?
It's interesting that most of the congregations mentioned in the NT don't seem to have all these gifts either.
Yes, good point re NT congregations. I remember a very funny illustration from Vaughan along the lines of imagine what would happen if we dug up a letter about problems with the bussoons in the Laodicea orchestra, we might suddenly think we'd been grossly overlooking bussoon playing, which was obviously so important to Paul etc. Much of our info on tongues and prophesy comes because of probelems over them at Corith, not nec. 'cos they were central to NT Xianity.
Do you think he meant bassoons?
One thing that has always interested me in the Acts story was the relationship of Paul to prophets. In Acts 21:11 Paul receives a prophecy from the daughters of Agabus about the future of his life. Yet he determines that he must continue against their prophetic words. The prophecy of Paul's imprisonment turns out to be valid but not more important that apostolic discernment. Might we infer from this that when and where prophecy takes place amongst Godd's people, it ought not to have precedent over apostolic teaching?
I'm sure you're right, Cyberpastor, that prophesy must never take precidence over the apostle's teaching, and in fairness to them I'm not aware of any charismatics who'd deny that.
I think if we're to understand spiritual gifts properly, we need to understand what the Old Testament says about the New Covenant age. Despite what you suggest in your post, the Old Testament is clear that in the New Covenant, we will have a clearer understanding of God's will. Of course, that's not the same thing as saying that the charismatics are right! If you're interested, you can read more in my recent post on the subject.
Ros,
I'd be inclined to say that Elijah and Elisha are very significant in salvation history. It is they themselves that are significant rather than any other event at the time in terms of God providing revelation about himself.
It's not that I think that Elijah or Elisha are unimportant. But they're not quite on the same level as the Exodus, the Incarnation or Pentecost and yet their ministries were filled with signs and wonders. So we don't have to posit another epoch-changing event in salvation history in order to entertain the notion of signs and wonders
Ros,
I'm not so sure. Who is it with Jesus and Moses at the transfiguration. Isn't it more likely that we are meant to take this along with the miracles and the new testament comparisions and conclude that Elijah and Elisha are significant in redemptive history.
I wonder if the point is that Elijah/Elisha represent the sustained prophetic voice against God's people. In that respect their message needs sign authentication and if their message is authenticated then so is the message of Isaiah, Jeremiah etc.
What do you think?
Post a Comment