Sunday, November 06, 2005
Big Debate Brewing - It's As Old As The Church
In this corner we have Phil Johnson (Pyromaniac) and Tim Challies (blogging under his own name) and in the other corner we have Adrian Warnock challenging Phil here and Tim here. What are we debating, why the charismata, the gifting of the Holy Spirit.
I understand that there are important, very important issues surrounding the gifts, but I for the life of me do not understand cessasionism. It seems to me that cessasionism is completely antithetical to scripture. Why would Paul spend so much writing on how to manage the charismata in I Corintians 12-14 if he knew the phenomena was going to die with him and the other apostles? Clearly Paul is instructing for the future.
There is another thing I do not fully understand in this present debate. Both Phil and Tim are discussing the gift of prophecy as "future-telling." This is not at all how I understand this particular gift. Unger's Bible Dictionary says this:
Now having said these things, I have also said on numerous occassions on this blog that playing with the charismata is playing "with fire." (Yes, that's a Pentacost pun!) The false exhibition of the gifts, like those discussed in the preceding paragraph, is evil -- I have no other word for it. I have seen lives ruined, or ended and other great mischief done in the proported exercise of the gifts. There are many that I am convinced God will ban to the nether regions for eternity based on their malpractice regarding the charismata. But that is no reason to discard the concept.
There is one other point I need to make here. Those of us inclined to calvinism are not likely to ever be granted the more spectacular gifts -- Not because of our theologiical bent, but because the gifting that makes us Calvinists is somewhat antithetical to those other gifts. But the fact that I do not have a prayer language does not remove the possibility from existence.
I am not happy with this debate. To my mind it evades the central issue. It's not if the gifts exist, but rather developing, using the great attributes of us hyper-rationalistic Calvinist types, good teaching about the gifts and their exercise. For it is only down that path that the church can tap all the power available to it without the great mischeif potential inherent in the practices.
I understand that there are important, very important issues surrounding the gifts, but I for the life of me do not understand cessasionism. It seems to me that cessasionism is completely antithetical to scripture. Why would Paul spend so much writing on how to manage the charismata in I Corintians 12-14 if he knew the phenomena was going to die with him and the other apostles? Clearly Paul is instructing for the future.
There is another thing I do not fully understand in this present debate. Both Phil and Tim are discussing the gift of prophecy as "future-telling." This is not at all how I understand this particular gift. Unger's Bible Dictionary says this:
The Nature of Prophecy. The predictive element was a frequent part of the content of the prophet's message. But this is not the only element. The prophets frequently appeared in the role of social and political reformers, stirring preachers of righteousness and religious revivalists in addition to being predictors of judgment or blessing, as the occasion demanded. The prophet's message was ever religious and spiritual, announcing the will of God to men and calling for complete obedience. Often the prophetic element shone out in the prophet's preaching and writing. This element cannot be dispensed with as some modern critics would think. Neither can the opposite extreme of regarding the prophet's message as solely predictive be defended as tenable. Prophetic prognostication was not mere foretelling to appeal to idle curiosity nor even to maintain the integrity of the prophet, although that was occasionally the case (cf.The Oral Roberts, Benny Hinn et.al. "prophecies" that Tim and Phil assert don't rise to the level of prophecy in the true biblical sense, they are manipulative utterances designed to motivate a gullible audience.). The genius of prophecy was rather a prediction of the future arising from the conditions of the present and was inseparably connected with the profoundly religious and spiritual message the prophet was called to proclaim to his own generation.
Now having said these things, I have also said on numerous occassions on this blog that playing with the charismata is playing "with fire." (Yes, that's a Pentacost pun!) The false exhibition of the gifts, like those discussed in the preceding paragraph, is evil -- I have no other word for it. I have seen lives ruined, or ended and other great mischief done in the proported exercise of the gifts. There are many that I am convinced God will ban to the nether regions for eternity based on their malpractice regarding the charismata. But that is no reason to discard the concept.
There is one other point I need to make here. Those of us inclined to calvinism are not likely to ever be granted the more spectacular gifts -- Not because of our theologiical bent, but because the gifting that makes us Calvinists is somewhat antithetical to those other gifts. But the fact that I do not have a prayer language does not remove the possibility from existence.
I am not happy with this debate. To my mind it evades the central issue. It's not if the gifts exist, but rather developing, using the great attributes of us hyper-rationalistic Calvinist types, good teaching about the gifts and their exercise. For it is only down that path that the church can tap all the power available to it without the great mischeif potential inherent in the practices.
