A Dream Leading to Jesus

One of the things that has come up quite frequently these days is the claim that Muslim's and others have had visions or dreams that led them to Jesus. Even John MacArthur was asked about this so-called phenomenon in a recent interview. Many other religions claim visions and dreams often. Are these visions legitimate? Are Muslim's and others really being led to Christ?

I want to tell you about a story of a man I met while doing evangelism last summer on the New Jersey boardwalk (also known as the Jersey shore). While I am notoriously bad at remembering names, and thus I cannot for the life of me remember this man's name, I will always remember the discussion I had with this man. I will seek to be as accurate as I can in recalling many of the details.

An Unintentional Encounter

Last year, I was out on the Jersey Shore boardwalk with some fellow brothers sharing the good news with those who haven't heard it before. We had traveled up and down the boardwalk for a few hours, and apparently some fireworks were getting ready to go off that night. It was close to Labor day weekend, and the boardwalk gets extremely packed as the summer is coming to a close.

As the fireworks were about to begin, a man asked my friend John a question. He asked, "Do you believe you can lose your salvation?" I was standing near John and overheard a bit, and right away John called me over to help answer this mans question. The man appeared to be a Muslim living in America (although I didn't ask specifically and it was kind of too dark outside to be sure). I wanted to explain to this man what I believe the Scriptures clearly teach on this issue, but before giving someone I have never met assurance of salvation, as a rule for evangelism, I always try to make sure the person is actually saved before discussing other issues in the Bible.

After some introductions and such, I asked him some questions in reference to his original quarry like "what do you mean by 'lose salvation'?" and "Why would it matter if you could or could not lose your salvation?". These questions weren't meant to answer his initial question (at least not immediately). However, these questions were meant to open the conversation up a bit so that I could ask him a more specific question, which went something like this:

You want to know about whether or not you can lose your salvation, but since we just met and don't know each other too well yet, do you mind if I ask how you got saved to begin with?

He had no problem answering the question and sharing his testimony, yet his response to the question was a bit disconcerting.

An Unexplainable "Salvation"

As the conversation continued, the man began telling me about how he became saved. He started telling a story about how he had lost a close family member (I believe it was his wife). He began drinking and other sorts, and he became depressed and lonely. One night, he had a dream. In this dream, he saw a billboard that had a message written on it. The message told him to go to a certain place the next day and wait (he never explained what the message actually said or where it told him to go). As the man was giving details of this dream, he began to explain how this dream was directly related to how he got saved. The man explained how he believed this dream was a revelation from God and that God wrote this message on this billboard. 

When he awoke from the dream, he followed what the message said to do and waited at the place it told him to go. Then, somehow, he met Jesus. At this point, the man was extremely vague on the details. He had no problem explaining the dream and everything prior, but after he followed the dreams message, he didn't have much else to say. 

I asked him some more questions to further understand how he came to saving faith in Jesus, but he didn't have anything further to add. He had a dream that gave him a message, and when he followed that message, he claimed he found Jesus. As I continued asking questions, I asked what the good news of Jesus is. He didn't know. I asked him who Jesus is. Again, he didn't know. He had assumed he was saved, yet he had no idea what salvation was or what Jesus had to do with salvation. He didn't really even know who Jesus was at all. In fact, the Jesus he began to tell me about had nothing to do with the Jesus of the Bible.

This man had no understanding of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

• He had never heard of the good news of how God became man (Phil. 2:5-11) and lived the perfect life that we could never live (1 John 3:5) because God demands perfection (1 Pet. 1:16; Matt. 5:48), as a just and holy judge (Ps. 7:11), and we are utterly sinful and imperfect (Jer. 13:23; Rom. 3:11-18, 23).

• He had never heard of how Jesus died the death that we deserve to die, so that God's justice and wrath that our sin deserves would be paid for by Him (Rom. 3:21-26, 5:6-10; 2 Cor. 5:21).

•  He had never heard that, in light of all this, God could now be merciful to us based on what Jesus had done on the cross (Ps. 85:10) because God's justice and wrath have been appeased and He can justify the ungodly since Jesus took our place (Prov. 17:15; 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Pet. 3:18).

• This man had never heard of the resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:3-8, 20; Mark 9:31; Acts 2:23-24, 32, 13:30, 17:30-31), which is an affirmation that the penalty for sin had been paid, and that God could now treat us as if we had lived Jesus perfect life because He treated Christ as if He had lived our sinful imperfect lives (2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 6:1-20).

• He had never head that if he did not turn from his sin and stop trusting in his own works to save himself, and instead trust the work of Jesus as the only sacrifice for his sin by faith alone, he would have to face the just punishment for his own sin (Ps. 96:13; Acts 17:30-31; Rom. 3:28; Gal. 2:16; 2 Thess. 1:7-9). 

• He had never heard that "if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation" (Rom. 10:9-10).

As we continued to talk, and I continued to ask about his salvation, it occurred to him that he had no idea who Jesus was at all and his supposed salvation was based on some experience he thought he had. At this point, I took the liberty of giving him a different perspective on his experience and then accurately explaining to him the good news of Jesus.

An Unwarrented Conclusion

This man had concluded that he was saved because he knew the name Jesus and because he had some supposed strange encounter with Him. Yet it was apparent to both John and I that this man was not saved. His conclusion was that God had spoken to him, which led to his "salvation", but was his conclusion valid?

I explained briefly to the man what the Bible says about how and when God speaks. I explained to him that:

1) God, who created logic, is a logical God. While we do not understand everything about logic, we can say that God will not contradict Himself. This is an important aspect of studying the Bible. Not only will God not contradict Himself, He will not commit any other blatant logical fallacy. For example, God will not be arbitrary. Yes, God is sovereign and He can and will do whatever He pleases, but when God speaks, He will confirm that He is speaking so as to avoid being arbitrary.

2) This is important when we deal with signs, wonders, and miraculous gifts in the Bible. When God is giving new revelation that is to be obeyed, God will confirm that He is speaking by signs and wonders. We see this when Moses was to give Pharaoh a message. God confirmed this message by miracles that were witnessed and observable by many. These miracles were undeniable and obvious. We also see this in the ministry of Jesus. He was proclaiming the kingdom of God to the Jews, and to confirm the message, God testified by signs and wonders (John 6:36-37). Again, they were undeniable and obvious. The writer of Hebrews also says the same thing about the preaching of Apostles and miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 2:3-4).

3) Thus, because God is a logical God, if God were still speaking, it would be confirmed by signs, wonders, etc. 

After I briefly explained this to the man, I asked him if he had seen any of these signs and wonders? He mentioned some things he had heard or seen. I asked if these were undeniable miracles like in the Bible, and if so, why aren't they all over the news? Even in the Charismatic movement, we see "tongues" that aren't real languages like in the Bible; we see "healings" that aren't easily verifiable and undeniable like in the Bible, and other sorts that do not coincide with Scripture (this is not to deny that God does still do miracles, but they don't happen often, they are clear and undeniable, and God does them by Himself rather than through gifted men).

After we talked about this for a few minutes, he agreed that none of these so-called signs or wonders today were the same as in the Bible and that it made sense to him that God would not be speaking anymore. But what about his dream?

An Undeniable Dream

This man and I both agreed that he had a dream. That part was true. But was this dream from God or not? He recognized that this dream didn't really lead him to God, but rather, he began to see his dream as just the opposite: it took him away from God by making him think he was close to God. We did not even need to talk about the dreams mentioned in Scripture because it seemed obvious to him that if God gave him a dream, it would lead him to God, not away from God and His Word.

We were able to have a calm conversation about what his dream was, now that he was beginning to understand the Bible and salvation more. I asked about his dream and if he had seen any billboards that night before he went to sleep. I asked if he remembers thinking about the place or being at the place the dream told him to go to. Since he had been vague on the details earlier, I just kept asking questions. After asking numerous questions, he looked at me with a blank face and said, "I think my dream just came from my own imagination! The words on the board were the words I wanted there because I wanted to go to that place anyway!"

This kind of drew me back, but it was amazing how he realized that what he initially thought was a dream and revelation from God, he now understood that he had claimed something was from God when it was merely his own imagination. He seemed a bit convicted that he attributed something to God that wasn't from God, almost like he knew this was wrong (Jer. 23:16-40).

Once he came to this conclusion kind of on his own, he admitted that his dream and so-called message from God took him away from what God really wanted him to know. I then gave him a simple way to understand how Scripture is sufficient, and there is no need for God to speak to us further outside of Scripture. I told him that while the inspiration of Scripture is clear (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 3:20-21), Scripture is sufficient, and here's what the Word of God says about its own sufficiency:

• Do not add or take away from the Word (Deut. 4:2; Rev. 22:18-19) 
• Do not go beyond what is written (1 Cor. 4:6) 
• Scripture is convicting (Heb. 4:12) 
• Scripture is converting (Ps. 19:7-9) 
• Scripture is sure (Ps. 19:7-9; 119:86; Matt. 24:35; 1 Pet. 1:25) 
• Scripture is unified (Matt. 5:18; John 10:35) 
• Scripture is “more sure” than experience (2 Pet. 1:16-19) 
• Scripture is Truth (John 17:17; 1 John 2:4-5) 
• Scripture reveals God’s will for us (Rom. 12:2; 2 Cor. 7:10; 1 Thess. 4:3, 5:18; 1 Pet. 2:15) 
• Scripture is the means of our sanctification (John 17:17) 
• Scripture does not detract from the work of the Holy Spirit, but rather the Holy Spirit works in and through the Word to accomplish His will (Acts 10:44; Rom. 10:17; 1 Pet. 1:23)
• OT Scripture is the spoken Word of God (Heb. 1:1) 
• NT Scripture is the spoken Word of God, which has been revealed in these last days confirming that God has spoken and is finished speaking (Heb. 1:2) 
• Scripture alone is a “Lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path” (Ps. 119:105)

If you want to think through issues like dreams, impressions in your head, and the sufficiency of Scripture, I highly recommend you take a few moments and listen to this.

An Unforgettable Moment

This encounter was a very interesting one, and one I will never forget. Once he recognized that his salvation was a farce, God is no longer speaking, that his dream was his own imagination, and that the Scriptures are sufficient, the only thing he wanted to know was what the Scriptures say about the Jesus in the Bible. Did I make an airtight case for the cessation of revelation? Not really. But it was enough to point him back to the Scriptures for an answer, especially with the short amount of time I actually had before the fireworks began. I was able to explain the gospel to him more and he confessed the sin he had been struggling with recently in his life. He appeared convicted and desired to know more. Yet, this was not the end of our conversation.

I eventually brought it back to his initial question and we talked about what the Bible says about whether a person can lose their salvation or not. He had so many questions, but he was so excited to learn more about the Bible. John and I ended up praying with him and inviting him out to church. While I never saw or heard from him again, this was an encounter I will never forget.

The Loud Voice of Church History Against Continuationism

One of the things we notice about church history is that the church has always declared extra-Biblical revelations and continued miraculous gifts of the Spirit as serious error and an attack against the sufficiency of Scripture. Many of these movements have even been denounced as heresy. Why has it taken so long for us to see a conference like Strange Fire? Why are reformed evangelicals embracing these teachings rather than excoriating them?

While we will be dealing with continuationism more over the next several days, I think a look at church history is helpful at this point. I also understand that saying the church has always been against these teachings is a bold statement, but I intend to show you exactly what I am referring to as we continue.

The Apostles

One of the interesting things we notice when we read the Scriptures is that these signs, wonders, and miraculous gifts of the Spirit ceased even before the end of the Apostolic age. Paul mentions these gifts in 1 Corinthians, which was written around 53 A.D. We also note that these gifts are thoroughly discussed at the beginning of the book of Acts. What is interesting to note is that none of the later books even mention these gifts. Even in the book of Acts we see less and less of these signs and gifts towards the end.

The reason for this is that the signs, wonders, and miraculous gifts were meant to confirm the the gospel of Jesus Christ (cf. Heb. 2:3-4). When we look at the later books of the New Testament, these gifts are never mentioned at all. It's as if it was assumed that the gifts were confirmatory and temporary only (more on this when we deal with the sufficiency of Scripture).

The Montonists

After the Apostolic Era, and the closing of the Canon of Scripture, the church held firmly to the sufficiency of Scripture. It was assumed early on that God was no longer giving revelation. Once the Inspired writings were recognized and canonized, the early church fathers defended the sufficiency of Scripture against all threats.

One of the early threats against the sufficiency of the Scriptures came from the Montonists. This was a movement led by Montonus (hence the name of the movement) who taught that the Holy Spirit was still giving revelations and miraculous gifts as in the Apostolic Era. Gregg Allison commented on this movement:

This movement encouraged an eager anticipation of the Lord's quick return by appealing to new revelations given by the Holy Spirit. The church responded to this emphasis on revelation outside the Bible by underscoring the closed canon of Scripture (Allison, Historical Theology, pp. 43).

In answering the Montonists, Eusebius spoke of "the doctrine of the New Testament, to which it is impossible that any thing should be added or diminished, by one who has resolved to live according to the gospel."

According to Berkhoff, Montonus appealed to the gospel narratives for support of his beliefs. Much of the movement actually held to orthodox theology. However, "the church followed a true instinct in rejecting it, especially because of the fanaticism it involved and its claim to a higher revelation than that contained in the New Testament" (Berkhoff, History of Christian Doctrines pp. 54-55).

The Roman Catholic Church

During the Middle Ages and leading up to the Reformation, the Catholic Church taught that the Scriptures weren't sufficient, but that tradition was also necessary. One of the other things that went along with this was the notion of continued private revelations.

The Catholic Church today distinguishes between public and private revelations (the public ceased in the 1800's, the private still continues). However, during the Middle Ages and pre-reformation, they held on to tradition and postapostolic revelations as normative. This culminated in the belief that the pope can speak ex cathedra. Luther and Calvin were fighting for the sufficiency of Scripture on multiple grounds against the Catholic Church.

For Luther, "A simple layman armed with Scripture is to be believed above a pope or a council without it. As for the pope's decree on indulgences, I say that neither the Church nor the pope can establish articles of faith. These must come from Scripture. For the sake of Scripture, we should reject pope and councils."

For Calvin, the "sufficiency of Scripture stood against the Roman Catholic view of apostolic tradition and other supplements to the Bible that were allegedly given to the Church by the Spirit" (Allison, pp 153):

"Whoever imagines that anything must be added to [the Apostles'] doctrine, as if it were imperfect and but half-finished, not only accuses the apostles of dishonesty, but blasphemes against the Spirit....Nothing can be added to them without doing grievous injury to the Holy Spirit" (John Calvin).

No extra-Biblical revelation, whether tradition or divine revelation, would not be acceptable. "For Calvin, a principal error of the Catholic Church was its preference for the Spirit of God over against the Word of God" (Allison). The Scriptures and the Scriptures alone were sufficient for the Reformers.

The Fanatics and Mystics

John Calvin had another group to deal with in his day touting continued revelations. This movement took their so-called revelations to the extreme by rejecting the written Word entirely. They emphasized the Spirit to such a degree that they felt the Scriptures were worthless. Calvin countered their arguments by explaining how the Spirit and the Word work together. The "Scripture is the school of the Holy Spirit", Calvin exclaimed.

Calvin taught that the true ministry of the Holy Spirit is seen in that He inspired the Scriptures, preserved the Scriptures, illumines us to understand the Scriptures, and gives Scripture its authority: "The same Spirit, therefore, who has spoken through the mouths of the prophets must penetrate into our hearts to persuade us that they faithfully proclaimed what had been divinely commanded" (John Calvin).

The Holy Spirit's ministry was so tied to the Word of God, that to deny the Word as the "fanatics" and "mystics" did, is tantamount to blaspheming the Spirit.

The same thing could be said of Luther in dealing with this group. Luther understood that one of the main ministries of the Spirit is to help us understand the Word:

"No one can correctly understand God or His Word unless he has received such understanding immediately from the Holy Spirit" (Luther).

For the fanatics who said that the Scriptures were unnecessary because we have the on-going ministry of the Spirit was actually to misunderstand the ministry of the Spirit and actually dishonor Him by rejecting His Word. Beyond this, we don't know much about these minority groups because they didn't write hardly anything down. Their so-called private revelations were sufficient to them, and so there isn't much information on them.

However, Calvin did not fail to call this group out in his institutes (see the chapter titled, "All the Principles of Piety Subverted by Fanatics, Who Substitute Revelations for Scripture"):

What an infatuation of the devil, therefore, to fancy that Scripture,, which conducts the sons of God to the final goal, is of transient and temporary use? Again, I should like those people to tell me whether they have imbibed any other spirit than that which Christ promised to his disciples. Though their madness is extreme, it will scarcely carry them the length of making this their boast. But what kind of Spirit did our Savior promise to send? One who should not speak of himself (John 16:13), but suggest and instill the truths which he himself had delivered through the word. Hence the office of the Spirit promised to us, is not to form new and unheard-of-revelations, or to coin a new form of doctrine, by which we may be led away from the received doctrine of the gospel, but to seal on our minds the very doctrine which the gospel recommends.

For Calvin, on-going private revelations detracted from the Word of God, and came from mad men who claimed they had the Spirit. Yet Calvin questioned whether they had the Spirit at all.

In like manner, when Paul says to the Thessalonians, "Quench not the Spirit," he does not carry them aloft to empty speculations apart from the word; he immediately adds, "Despise not prophesying" (1 Thess. 5:19, 20). By this, doubtless, he intimates that the light of the Spirit is quenched the moment prophesyings fall into contempt. How is this answered by those swelling enthusiasts, in whose idea only true illumination consists, in carelessly laying aside, and bidding adieu to the word of God, while, with no less confidence than folly, they fasten upon any dreaming notion which may have casually sprung in their minds? Surely a very different sobriety becomes the children of God. As they feel that without the Spirit of God they are utterly devoid of the light of truth, so they are not ignorant that the word is the instrument by which the illumination of the Spirit is dispensed. They know of no other Spirit than the one who dwelled and spoke in the apostles--the Spirit by whose oracles they are daily invited to the hearing of the word. 

 Once again, Calvin understood that to claim a higher, newer revelation than that of verified Scripture, was to claim folly which sprung the own imagination. Not only that, but to do so would be to quench the Spirit who works in and through the revealed revelation, rather than giving new revelations. Yet Calvin answered some of the possible objections thrown at him:

Since Satan transforms himself into an angel of light, what authority can the Spirit have with us if he be not ascertained by an infallible mark? And assuredly he is pointed out to us by the Lord with sufficient clearness; bu these miserable men err as if bent on their on destruction, while they seek the Spirit from themselves rather than from Him. But they say that it is insulting to subject the Spirit, to whom all things are to be subject, to the Scriptures: as if it were disgraceful to the Holy Spirit to maintain a perfect resemblance throughout, and be in all respects without variation consistent with himself. 

True, if he were subjected to a human, an angel, or to any foreign standard, it might be thought that he was rendered subordinate, or, if you will, brought into bondage, but so long as he is compared with himself, and considered to himself, how can it be said that he is thereby injured? 

To say that the Spirit works in and through the already revealed Scriptures is not to limit the Spirit, for He Himself is the author of Scriptures and has chosen to work in and through them. Calvin points out that without a firm and fixed foundation like the Scriptures, we have no way to combat Satan and error.

The Zwickau Prophets

During the time of reformation when Luther and Calvin argued that the Scriptures were sufficient, a man named Thomas Münzer objected to this idea. He taught that experience was more important than Scripture, and taught his followers to expect private revelations and dreams which were equal to (if not greater) than the Bible. Münzer would sometimes even mock the Bible, and claim the Spirit was better.

This was a small minority group around the same time as the fanatics ad mystics. This group may be the same group Calvin referred to in his institutes. Once again, though, there isn't much information beyond that. Münzer's teachings were rejected as the sufficiency of Scripture was already being defended by Calvin and Luther.

The Quakers

During the time right after the reformation, John Owen had to deal with the Quakers. Elizabeth Fletcher and Elizabeth Leavens were the main leaders of this movement at its beginning. These early leaders, who desired such a revival of the Spirit that they pranced around town half naked, for obvious reasons, was not well accepted and did not last long. However, a few years later, there were other leaders who taught similarly.

They taught that each person has an "individualized inner light", and that the Spirit moves us "by the secret inspiration of his Spirit in our hearts" in worship. They also taught of baptism "by the Spirit and fire" and rejected any other practice of baptism. They taught that revelation and dreams were to be expected.

As Beeke and Jones point out in A Puritan Theology,

Numerous individuals, many of them raised in a Puritan environment with its emphasis on radical depravity and the need for the sovereign, converting work of the Spirit, had begun seeking for a work of God to bring peace to their souls in the midst of the massive upheaval of the times (the turmoil of the English Civil War 1642-1651). Some of these so-called Seekers longed for a restoration of the charismatic vitality and simplicity they believed to be characteristic of the apostolic church. As J.F. McGregor points out, they regarded the sign of a true church of Christ to be 'its possession of the grace given to the apostles and demonstrated through miracles.' Since none of the Puritan congregations claimed to be in possession of such charismatic or extraordinary gifts, the Seekers felt that they had to withdraw from those churches and wait for what they hoped would be a new divine dispensation. For many Seekers, that divine dispensation appeared with the advent of the Quakers and their message (A Puritan Theology, pg. 431).

John Owen flatly rejected the teaching of the Quakers because it denied the inspiration and sufficiency of Scripture. He declared that the Scriptures are "sufficient with respect to the end of the revelation itself...sufficient into the end for which it is designed—that is, sufficient to generate, cherish, increase, and preserve faith, and love, and reverence, with holy obedience, in them, in such a way and manner as will assuredly bring them unto the end of all supernatural revelation in the enjoyment of God" (John Owen).

Owen was an avid defender of the sufficiency of Scripture and he flatly rejected any continuing revelation. Once again, Owen denounced further revelations:

"The Scriptures are the settled, ordinary [as opposed to extraordinary], perfect [it cannot be improved upon], an unshakable rule for divine worship and human obedience, in such a fashion that leaves no room for any other, and no scope for any new revelations whereby man may be better instructed in the knowledge of God and our required duty.”

No further revelations for Owen; rather, the Scriptures are sufficient. For more on Owen and the Quakers, Beeke has eleven and a half pages on the subject in A Puritan Theology, and Steve Lawson's message on Owen and the Quakers from Strange Fire conference was superb.

Schleiermacher and Liberalism

Although there is a hundred years or so between the Quakers in England (1600's) and Friedrich Schleiermacher in Germany (1763-1834), much of what he believed and taught was quite similar.

He emphasized the subjective experience of the believer over against the Scriptures or anything else: "No external authority, whether it be Scripture, church, or historic creed statement, takes precedence over the immediate experience of believers" (Schleiermacher).

While he did not seem to emphasize the Spirit or teach the continuation of revelation, he believed that each believer was the true revelation. When a true believer was illuminated by the Spirit when reading the Scriptures, they were inspired as opposed to the Scriptures themselves. Schleiermacher denied all of the core doctrines of the Christian faith in order to cling to his emphasis on experience instead of Scripture. This laid the foundation for many to emphasize experience and downplay the Scripture over the next hundred years.

In dealing with the Liberalism of Schleiermacher and others, J Gresham Machen wrote in the late 1800's against the emphasis on experience and their disregard for Biblical truth: "The real authority, for Liberalism, can only be 'the Christian consciousness'  or 'Christian experience.'"

He asked how this authority for the Christian could be established. Not "by a majority vote in the organized church", Machen asserted. Perhaps it could be established by "individual experience." But "this is no authority, as each mans experience is different from another." For the Liberals, personal experience was the arbiter of truth, rather than the sufficient Word of God.

It is no wonder, then, that liberalism is totally different from Christianity, for the foundation is different. Christianity is founded upon the Bible. It bases upon the Bible both its thinking and its life. Liberalism on the other hand is founded upon the shifting emotions of sinful men (Machen, Christianity and Liberalism, pg. 78-79).

For Machen, Liberalisms emphasis on experience over against Scripture was a denial of its authority and sufficiency.

The Modern Charismatic Movement

We have seen that the church has always recognized the Scriptures as being sufficient, which excludes any notion of further revelation. This not only contradicts the Pentecostal movement, but also the Charismatic and the reformed Continuationists. We cannot hold to the sufficiency of Scripture if we believe in continued revelation. The true ministry of the Spirit is to work in conjunction with the written Word. The true church has always recognized this, and this is why the church has always rejected on-going revelation.

To be a Continuationist is to open up Pandora's box to the Montonists and the Fanatics and the Quakers of our day. For the most part, the only ones who believed in continued revelation and miraculous gifts after the Apostolic age were groups and movements like the ones we just surveyed. While much more could be said on each of these groups (and others), the overwhelming voice of church history that revelation has ended, the gifts of the Spirit ceased with the end of the Apostolic Era, the Scriptures are sufficient, and that the ministry of the Spirit is to work with the written Word is simply staggering.

Strange Fire

I am glad that the Strange Fire conference has taken place, and I look forward to reading the book Strange Fire by Dr. John MacArthur. It is sad that it took so long for the church to recognize and denounce this fanaticism. However, at least someone took the time to stand up for the truth. May the Spirit be honored and glorified as we point everything back to His Word, and more specifically, to the Incarnate Word revealed in the Inscripturated Word. And I hope those who are Continuationists will look honestly at the arguments against continuationism and not respond emotionally, or flippantly. But rather examine all things by the Scriptures.

God's Word To A Continuationist

The other day we looked at how the Spirit works through the written Word of God. Today I want to examine how seriously God takes anyone who claims to speak for Him.

First, we must begin with some definitions and explanations, then we will look at how seriously it is to claim to speak for God, and finally we will end with some final thoughts.

Definitions and such

Starting off with some basic (but not highly technical) definitions is necessary, so that we all understand each other. I know there are many different perspectives on these issues, but this should suffice for now.

What are we saying?

For anyone who has not been around this blog very long, or is new in the discussion of theology,   cessationism is the belief that God is no longer giving revelation and that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased after the Apostolic age. Cessationists teach that God no longer gives miraculous Spiritual gifts to men. They teach that the Word of God is sufficient, and that is where the true ministry of the Holy Spirit is seen.  The Spirit is no longer giving revelation that we should add to our Bibles, but rather His ministry is helping us understand and teach the revelation He has already revealed.

What aren't we saying?

Yet, it must be noted that Cessationists are not saying that the Holy Spirit is not still active. We are not saying that God cannot intervene and do miraculous things (He can and often does). We are not saying that the Word of God is better than the ministry of the Holy Spirit (see yesterdays post on the relationship between the Word and the Spirit). We are also not basing the entire cessationist argument on passages like 1 Corinthians 13 (here's a fairly good interpretation of this passage that may be of help). These are some of the few things Cessationists are not saying. Nathan Busenitzs' article on "what cessationism is not" is also quite helpful.

What are they saying?

On the other hand, continuationism is the belief that God is still giving revelation and that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit are still active (with different variations here and there). Sometimes they will teach that God is still giving revelation mixed with human error. If we took this belief in continued revelation and miraculous gifts to its extreme, you would find it giving way to the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement and their fire tunnels, barking and laughing in the spirit, etc.

The seriousness of claiming to speak for God

While we will not be looking at whether the miraculous gifts of the Spirit are still operating today, we will be examining what Scripture says about the seriousness of claiming to speak for God. Claiming that God is still speaking and giving revelation is a subject that God takes very seriously. 

God's Word to a false prophet

In Jeremiah 23, God explicitly condemned the false prophets who were claiming to speak for God, even though God had not spoken anything to them. Kyle Yates commented on these false prophets saying that, "They were professionals who claimed to speak with divine authority but were actually giving utterance to lies and deceit. Jeremiah hurls three charges against them. He says they were actually immoral, that they did not know God, and that they had no message for the people." God's wrath and anger burned against those who falsely claimed to speak in His name:

“I have heard what the prophets have said who prophesy falsely in My name, saying, ‘I had a dream, I had a dream!’ How long? Is there anything in the hearts of the prophets who prophesy falsehood, even these prophets of the deception of their own heart, who intend to make My people forget My name by their dreams which they relate to one another, just as their fathers forgot My name because of Baal?" (Jer. 23:25-27).

When these false prophets were claiming new revelation that was not from or confirmed by God. Rather than pointing to the true and living God, they pointed away from God and caused the Israelites to forget the True and Living God.

Notice that the actions of these false prophets were actions that took people away from worshiping God. Simply by claiming that "God told me" is a serious crime that has at its core the intentions of detracting the worship do to the true God.

God's sure Word

These false prophets also took the focus away from the more sure Word of God (cf. 2 Pet. 1:19), which would have helped the people of Israel rather than lead them astray:

"The prophet who has a dream may relate his dream, but let him who has My word speak My word in truth. What does straw have in common with grain?” declares the Lord. “Is not My word like fire?” declares the Lord, “and like a hammer which shatters a rock?" (Jer. 23:28-29).

God's word is sure and fixed. Anyone who detracts from the Word and claims to speak falsely in His name will have God as their enemy.

We must note that when God speaks, His words are like a fire and a hammer. When God speaks, what He intends to communicate will be undeniably clear and known to all. If we claim that God is subjectively speaking to us, we must have hard evidence to prove it. His words are clear, powerful, and authoritative.

God's anger kindled

These false prophets in Israel were promising peace, even though God had said judgement was inevitable. They were speaking without a divine commission and blatantly lying to the people of Israel claiming they had a dream from God when God didn't give them any dreams:

Therefore behold, I am against the prophets,” declares the Lord, “who steal My words from each other. Behold, I am against the prophets,” declares the Lord, “who use their tongues and declare, ‘The Lord declares.’ Behold, I am against those who have prophesied false dreams,” declares the Lord, “and related them and led My people astray by their falsehoods and reckless boasting; yet I did not send them or command them, nor do they furnish this people the slightest benefit,” declares the Lord. (Jer. 23:30-32).

This portion of Scripture is so clear that it barely needs any explanation. The modern day Charismatic should read these words and be able to grasp the seriousness of claiming to speak for God. These "new revelations" drew God's people away from the true revelation; His written Word. Not only this, but if you claim that God has spoken to you or given you a dream when He has not done so, you better be prepared for the wrath and anger of the Lord.

A final thought

Yes, I am well aware that the book of Jeremiah was written well before even the New Testament, and there was still more revelation to come. However, this passage should be clear enough to show that when God speaks, everyone whom He is speaking to will know it and He will confirm it (cf. Heb. 2:3-4). I know I have said it many times already, but just so that we understand it, claiming to speak for God is a very serious crime if He has not spoken:

For you will no longer remember the oracle of the Lord, because every man’s own word will become the oracle, and you have perverted the words of the living God, the Lord of hosts, our God (Jer. 23:36).

Anyone who speaks falsely for God will actually be cut off from access to the true Word of God. You will not remember it; you will not know it; you will not honor it; rather, you will only twist and pervert it.

Therefore behold, I will surely forget you and cast you away from My presence, along with the city which I gave you and your fathers. I will put an everlasting reproach on you and an everlasting humiliation which will not be (Jer. 23:39-40).

This is God's clear warning to anyone who claims to prophesy or speak in His name if He has not done so.

God's Word to a continuationist

For the Continuationist who claims that God is giving revelation today through a voice in your head, divine assignments, dreams, pornographic visions, or that He is speaking subjectively or through words mixed with error, Jeremiah 23 gives a stern warning. I would much rather hold to the sufficiency of Scripture than claim God is still speaking if He is not; for there will be everlasting reproach and humiliation for those who claim false revelations.

Early on in Jeremiah 23, after God initially rebukes the false prophets and warns them (Jer. 23:16-20a), and right before God says He did not send these prophets, but they prophesied anyway (Jer. 23:21), there is a phrase that I believe was initially applicable to Israel during this time of judgment, but had a critical application for our day. God's Word says that "In the last days you will clearly understand it" (Jer. 23:20b). The New Testament tells us that we are in the last days right now (cf. Heb. 1:2; 2 Tim. 3:1-5). 

In these last days there will be false prophets who claim to speak for God, who do false signs and wonders no doubt, and who lead God's people away from His Word. In these last days, do we not understand this? I think our Continuationist friends need to think seriously about whether they want to come dangerously close to offending God, or whether they would rather cling to the sufficiency of the Scriptures as the Psalmist did:

"So I will keep Your law continually, forever and ever. And I will walk at liberty, for I seek Your precepts. I will also speak of Your testimonies before kings and shall not be ashamed. I shall delight in Your commandments, which I love. And I shall lift up my hands to Your commandments, which I love; And I will meditate on Your statutes" (Psalm 119:44-48).

May we hold fast to the Word of God; keep the Word of God; seek the Word of God; speak of and delight in the Word of God; love and meditate on the Word of God, which is more sure than any supposed private revelation. Blessed is the man who...delights is in the law of the Lord (Ps. 1:1-6).

Is There A Relationship Between The Word and The Spirit?

While I haven't been blogging for very long, and it has been a while since I have been able to sit down and write something, I think I may shift back into writing in order to help organize my thoughts, as well as to help anyone who is interested in growing more in Christ or learning about the Christian faith in the process.

Strange Fire

One of the motivations to come back to the blog world came from the Strange Fire conference, which was recently at Dr. John MacArthur's church. If you missed the conference, you can catch all the sessions on YouTube. Without mentioning them all, Session 1, Session 4, and Session 6 were absolutely top-notch.

In Session 7 at the Strange Fire Conference, Steve Lawson put forth one of the best sermons I have ever heard on the inspiration and sufficiency of Scripture. Session 3 by Steve Lawson dealt with Calvin's view that the Spirit and the Scriptures are one and the same. He explained how the Scriptures are sufficient, and the ministry of the Spirit is tied to the centrality of the Word.

One of the arguments I have heard many times against cessationism (the belief that the Scriptures are sufficient and God is no longer giving further revelation that we should be adding to our Bibles) is that cessationists have elevated the Bible above God and have hindered the work of the Spirit in doing so, the continuationists would say. Usually you will here the phrase, "Father, Son, and Holy Bible." This is a similar argument to Mark Driscoll's "Don't elevate doctrine above the Holy Spirit" argument, which has been dealt with by Eric Davis at The Cripplegate. However, I wish to develop this a bit further.

I want to examine this arguments a bit further since the subject has been brought up for discussion again by the recent Strange Fire Conference. Thus, we should begin with several questions: What is the relationship between the Word and the Spirit? Are the Scriptures one and the same with the Spirit? Is it possible to elevate the Word above God Himself? Is worshiping the Bible instead of worshiping God a potential danger? These are the questions I hope to address Biblically and draw out the implications thoroughly.

What is the relationship between the Word and the Spirit?

In order to answer this question, we must deal with the subject of Pneumatology (the study of the work of the Holy Spirit). 

1) Inspiration

In 2 Peter 1:21, Peter tells us that "no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." Much more could be said about the Inspiration of Scripture (I will simply point you back to session 3 by Steve Lawson), but for now we need to see that the writing of Scripture was the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Every word in the Bible were the exact words that God wanted written down and preserved for us. 

In the New Testament, we also see the writer of Hebrews refer to the Old Testament as the revelation of the Holy Spirit when he writes "Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says, 'Today....'" (Heb. 3:7), and then he quotes Psalm 95:7-11. The Old Testament was inspired and written by the Holy Spirit.

In other words, one of the many ministries of the Spirit was the giving of Scripture.

2) Ministry Through The Word

Another thing we must understand is that the Spirit enlightens and saves people through the preaching of the Word. We see this in the book of Acts. Peter was preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the Scriptures say that "while Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message" (Acts 10:44). It couldn't be more clear than that. Yet we can make some further theological conclusions.

The Scriptures tell us that, "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the Word of Christ", and "He brought us forth by the word of truth" (Rom. 10:17; James 1:18). True saving faith comes from hearing the Word of God. Even when we look at being born again, we see that we "have been born again...through the living enduring word of God" (1 Pet. 1:23).

Yet, when we look at the ministry of the Holy Spirit in regeneration, He is the one who causes us to be born again: "The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit" (John 3:8). We are dead in our trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1), and in order to have spiritual life in Christ, we must be born of the Spirit (John 3:6). In other words, before we can understand the word that was written by the Spirit, we must be born again by the Spirit through the word of God.

3) Illumination

The last ministry of the Holy Spirit we must look at is illumination by which He helps us to understand the
inspired Word. Because these are the very words of God, and God's thoughts are not our thoughts, nor are His ways our ways (Isa. 55:8-9), we need help to understand the spiritual meaning of these words. 

As the Psalmist writes, "Give me understanding, that I may learn Your commandments", and "Give me understanding that I may observe Your Law and keep it with all my heart" (Ps. 119:73, 34). This emphasizes why we need to spend time in prayer before we read the Word. We must be enlightened to the truth in order to understand and apply it to our lives (cf. 1 Cor. 2:10-16).

Summing Up

In case you got a little lost, I'll summarize: The Holy Spirit inspired the Scriptures, writing every word God intended to be written, so that we can say they are the very words of God. Also, the Holy Spirit is the one who causes us to be born again and gives the ability to understand spiritual things. Finally, He is the one who helps us to understand His Word and apply it to our lives. He is the one who gives us spiritual life and He is the one who enables us to understand His Word. 

In other words, one of the primary ministries of the Holy Spirit is working in conjunction with the written Word.

Are the Scriptures one and the same with the Spirit?

Now that we have covered these aspects of Pneumatology, these questions should be much easier to answer.

The short answer is that if one of the primary ministries of the Spirit is to work in and through the Word of God, we cannot separate the two. The Holy Spirit wrote the Word; uses the Word to save men, and helps those He saves to understand that Word. Both the Spirit and the Word work together in perfect concurrence with one another.

Is it possible to elevate the Word above God Himself?

This question is absolutely fundamental when we consider the continuationist argument that we have elevated the Scriptures above God Himself because the argument is basically a non sequitur (The conclusion they have reached does not follow from the premises) once we understand the true ministry of the Holy Spirit.

If they believe the Holy Spirit is still giving revelation, and the cessationist says the Scriptures declare their sufficiency and the cessation of revelation, they cannot say that we have elevated the Scriptures above the Holy Spirit because the Holy Spirit is the one who wrote the very revelation we are appealing to.

To argue that we have elevated the Scriptures above God actually just shows that many continuationists simply don't understand the Word of God or the ministry of the Holy Spirit. However, if they are arguing that we are worshiping the Bible instead of God Himself, that could be a valid argument (if it were true). Yet, it would not pertain to the discussion of cessation and continuationism necessarily. Which brings us to our final question.

Is worshiping the Bible instead of worshiping God a potential danger?

While the continuationist cannot Biblically hold to a belief that we have elevated the Bible too high defensibly, I think there might be some validity in arguing that there is a danger in worshiping the Bible instead of worshiping the God who wrote it. However, this argument must only be considered after we have explained to our continuationist friends that we do not agree that the Spirit is still giving revelation because the Spirit has shown that the Scriptures are sufficient.

In thinking through this subject, I am reminded of a passage in John 5 where Jesus told the religious hypocrites of His day that "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about me" (John 5:39). 

The danger is that if we only study the Scriptures, read the Scriptures, memorize the Scripture, and yet we miss the whole point of the Scriptures, we are not worshiping the true God, but rather we are worshiping our knowledge and our self. We must come to the Scriptures in order to see Christ and know Christ. The Scriptures testify to Christ (cf. Luke 24:27).

We should note that another aspect of the Spirit's ministry is to point to Christ, rather than Himself. The Spirit of truth "will testify about me", Jesus said (John 15:26). The Holy Spirit is not a failed Ed McMahon. Rather, the whole of Scripture is meant to point to Christ.

Summing Up All Things In Christ

The relationship between the Word and the Spirit is that both are from God, and both point to Christ. The inscripturated Word comes from the Spirit and points to the Incarnate Word.

When we study Scripture, we must understand that the Spirit is the one who wrote the Scriptures, saves men through the Scriptures, helps us to understand the Scriptures, and points to the Christ in the Scriptures. The whole point of studying Scripture, then, is to know Jesus Christ who lived, died, and rose again on our behalf, so that we might be rescued from our sin and reconciled to the Almighty God of Scripture. All things are summed up in Christ (Eph. 1:10).

While much more could be said, it seems fitting to end on this point.

"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures" (1 Cor. 15:3-4).