tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post8801354678132939943..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: "Reformed" "continuationists" and Gutless GracersPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger184125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-13012407069211172432011-08-30T07:27:17.646-07:002011-08-30T07:27:17.646-07:00I count 2 SRLsI count 2 SRLsMelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12623318488973342836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-59027497013303097962011-08-28T10:33:59.757-07:002011-08-28T10:33:59.757-07:00Thanks, David.
The author was me, and the Poythre...Thanks, David.<br /><br />The author was me, and <a href="http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2010/07/vern-poythress-and-modern-sorta-gifts.html" rel="nofollow">the Poythress series starts here</a>, and I did refer to it somewhere in these recent posts... but I forget where. So maybe it's worth another mention.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-31316106989630884432011-08-28T10:30:10.881-07:002011-08-28T10:30:10.881-07:00I come late to every party it seems and I admitted...I come late to every party it seems and I admittedly stopped reading after about 30 comments. <br />Did you refer anyone here to the Pyro interaction with Poythress on this? I'm not sure if you wrote the series or if it was Frank or Phil. I'm normally a Poythress fan but his attempted defense of some sort of continuationism was well refuted here. And oh btw some of these charismatics do claim that their healers are out their raising the dead. I remember someone getting indignant with me on my old blog for not taking into consideration the irrefutable evidence of all the raisings from the dead and such. I don't know - still haven't seen the evidence, you figure if people were being raised from the dead the news would make a bigger splash than some faceless commenter bloviating on an obscure blog. <br />Sorry, just had to find an excuse to use some form of the word bloviate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-12643618673619162382011-08-26T13:01:29.388-07:002011-08-26T13:01:29.388-07:00OK, so Doug Wilson is not a witness. Or you are a ...OK, so Doug Wilson is not a witness. Or you are a superior expert BOTH on the experience of Doug Wilson, AND of the apostle Peter.<br /><br />Which is pretty silly. And irrelevant.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-87775965672742436772011-08-26T12:59:11.203-07:002011-08-26T12:59:11.203-07:00DJP,
you have ignored what I said - he merely giv...DJP,<br /><br />you have ignored what I said - he merely gives the experience a different label. <br /><br />That does not change the fact that it was an accurate supernatural insight into the woman's sin like Peter's with Ananias and Sapphira.<br /><br /><i>Apart from the label</i>, there is no qualitative difference in the experience.Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06242793531954844979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-54787124220506184572011-08-26T12:24:11.299-07:002011-08-26T12:24:11.299-07:00Yeah, see, that's the thing with selective rea...Yeah, see, that's the thing with selective reading, line "continuationists" <i>without exception</i> do with the Bible.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.dougwils.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8857:eleven-theses-on-private-spirits&catid=155:private-spirits" rel="nofollow">Wilson's very next words</a>:<br /><br /><i> I believe that I knew that because the world is a weird place, and I believe the world is a weird place because Jesus is the Lord of it. So in that sense, sure, He gave me that knowledge, the same indirect way He gave me bacon for breakfast this morning. I thank Him for both. But I would never say “Jesus told me, that’s how I knew” – I would say, after the fact, that I believe the Lord “had led me,” or had “put it in my heart.” I would actively seek to avoid any language that could be construed as a claim to an inside revelatory track. Why? Because I don’t have one.</i><br /><br />So, hunh, turns out I was right.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-3795104641926052672011-08-26T12:18:42.066-07:002011-08-26T12:18:42.066-07:00DJP,
Doug Wilson, a cessationist, has gone on rec...DJP,<br /><br />Doug Wilson, a cessationist, has gone on record as saying the following:<br /><br /><i>I was once in a counselling session with a woman who was being recruited by a really bad cult. She had been impervious to everything I had shown or told her about that group. I was stumped. But one morning I was reading in 2 Peter, and read the phrase “with eyes full of adultery . . . they seduce the unstable” and I knew that the husband of the couple that was recruiting her was sleeping with her as a recruiting technique. I had no evidence that would hold up in any kind of just courtroom, but I did have enough to ask her about it. When I did, she dissolved into tears. That was it, and she repented.</i><br /><br />There is no qualitative difference between the nature of what happened to Doug Wilson and what happened to Peter in his supernatural insight into the sin of Ananias and Sapphira. He only gives the experience a different label.<br /><br />For more documentation of supernatural insight like this you might like to read social anthropologist Dr David Lewis' investigation of a John Wimber conference titled "Healing: Fiction, Fantasy or Fact?", particularly the detailed analysis of a particular 'word of knowledge' on pp132-135. There are also other places to go if you wish.Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06242793531954844979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-70772946764731709602011-08-26T06:24:45.120-07:002011-08-26T06:24:45.120-07:00No, Doug Wilson would not say that what I describe...No, Doug Wilson would not say that what I describe happened to him, or (A) he wrote very badly (very unlikely) or (B) I read him very wrong (conceivable, but still unlikely).<br /><br />The NT contains no record that I can think of of <i>believers</i> finding such revelatory activity broadly incredible. So find me the specific record of an inerrant, morally binding verbal prophetic relation accepted by the Biblically-faithful Christian church. I will thank you for the education. In fact, all Christians will, because no such incident will have been known for <2000 years, prior to your documentation.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-30747392686906060332011-08-26T06:17:50.626-07:002011-08-26T06:17:50.626-07:00Every honest objective observer admits that nothin...<i>Every honest objective observer admits that nothing of the caliber of dominical/apostolic revelatory and attesting activity is taking place today. Nothing of that caliber has taken place since the first century. This is a simple, incontrovertible fact. </i><br /><br />If by this you mean no accurate prophecy has taken place like in Acts where Peter supernaturally knows Ananias/Sapphira's sin, then most continuationists would deny your statement. <br /><br />In fact even some cessationists would deny your statement (e.g Doug Wilson's example that happened to him).Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06242793531954844979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-39239298100477361062011-08-25T20:00:03.371-07:002011-08-25T20:00:03.371-07:00Bingo! I've mulled over the whole "Reform...Bingo! I've mulled over the whole "Reformed" charismatic (aka: Charismatic Calvinist) thing since I first heard of it over 6 yrs. ago--I think you did a great job of pin-pointing the common line of thinking and attempts to defend it. The practice of redefining and down-grading is key.Conniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16388126339087271102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-73500896376142092142011-08-25T19:00:30.608-07:002011-08-25T19:00:30.608-07:00Hello obm,
I am glad that someone out there is...Hello obm,<br /><br /> I am glad that someone out there is also asking "WHY?". I have studyed both positons and I have friends that "speak in tounges" and frinds that don't. It is a very interesting topic. This is the conclusion that I have drawn thus far. What I have observed is with many, "speaking in tongues" is a "proof of salvation", that can be pointed too and embraced without ever showing any other spiritual fruit or growth. They generally refer to it as "the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues". Only those that are saved have recieved the Holy Ghost.<br /><br /> I see the same thing with many conservative denominations who use their recitation of the "sinner's prayer" as a "proof of salvation" that they can also point to without ever showing any spiritual life change or fruits of salvation.<br /><br /> When you attack the "speaking in tongues" doctrine, I believe it is percieved by those that practice that doctrine as an attack on their "proof of salvation", not their spiritual gifts. Just as if you told someone that they might not have been truly sincere when they said their "sinner's prayer" and they may not be truly born again. The fights on.<br /><br /> Salavation is considered an "act of faith" in both camps, and they will tenaciously defend an attack on their "faith in their salvation" much more than a attack on their spiritual gifts. This is just my observation. I have friends in both groups.<br /><br />Hope this helps<br /><br />In His Service,<br /><br />F WhittenburgF Whittenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01604292281555282318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-62045192960520246612011-08-24T23:17:18.565-07:002011-08-24T23:17:18.565-07:00The theory is all-important and must be preserved....<i>The theory is all-important and must be preserved. The theory suggests there should be evidence, and must be a standard of proof. There is no evidence. But see #1, above. Solution: redefine "evidence," lower "standard of proof." </i><br /><br />Classic! No wonder the wisdom of man is foolishness to God.<br /><br />What bugs me most about the clamor over "the gifts" existing today -aside from straight up ignoring Scripture, redefining terms, etc,- is the focus on elevating the least impressive things the Holy Spirit does (or did), while dismissing or ignoring the more impressive which He does continue to do today: convicting, sanctifying, and saving. <br /><br />Seriously, which would be harder for an all powerful God - healing a disease or saving a soul? Seems to me, the second is the much more impressive miracle - since He's dealing with a rebellous creature with free will, not just an object that obeys His command. <br /><br />It's like someone walking into a fine jewelry store, and drooling over glass beads while treating the diamonds as worthless. At some point one has to ask: "Why"?one busy momhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18087795055010641099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-19856367825550386612011-08-24T15:32:07.696-07:002011-08-24T15:32:07.696-07:00With that, nothing (depending on what you mean).
...With that, nothing (depending on what you mean).<br /><br />This: "I class myself as a continualist"...<br /><br />...and suggesting it has anything to do with CHS...<br /><br />everything I said.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-70560235262446331252011-08-24T14:36:27.337-07:002011-08-24T14:36:27.337-07:00Dan, I dont think you are being fair here at all –...Dan, I dont think you are being fair here at all – many have paid a very high price to embrace the doctrines of grace, some pastors losing long standing friendships, relationships with family members and sometimes even churches, simply because they came to embrace reformed theology… it would be a great pity if they are then thrown under the bus by others in the reformed camp because they have sometimes followed a subjective impression as something they believed was given to them by the Lord. <br /><br />My point in quoting Spurgeon was simply to then ask, “would these reformed people really want to throw Spurgeon out too?” I believe exactly as he did. The word alone is to be trusted. Subjective impressions can often deceive. Yet there are times when God has given direction in unusual and even dramatic ways, (as evidenced by Spurgeon ministry). <br /><br />What am I missing Dan? What am I failing to see or read in the article?John Frederickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12126963581035512896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-74005839197619977952011-08-24T14:21:44.553-07:002011-08-24T14:21:44.553-07:00All that proves is you've neither read the pos...All that proves is you've neither read the post thoughtfully nor the comments, and you don't really understand Spurgeon but instead see him as a convenient excuse for pursuing something without a shred of Biblical warrant rather than contenting yourself with His Word alone.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-58941700905748813132011-08-24T14:13:57.440-07:002011-08-24T14:13:57.440-07:00Spurgeon believed (and acted) as I do then. Spurge...Spurgeon believed (and acted) as I do then. Spurgeon said: "I have been the subject of such impressions, myself, and have seen very singular results. But to live by impressions is oftentimes to live the life of a fool and even to fall into downright rebellion against the revealed Word of God. Not your impressions, but that which is in this Bible must always guide you."<br /><br />He acknowledges having experienced impressions, yet affirms we should never consider them to be setting for us any kind of foundation, precedent, principle, or pattern upon which to build. That role belongs to the Word alone. <br /><br />I agree completely.<br /><br />I believe the canon is closed. I also believe that God does indeed lead and guide His people, sometimes even in unusual and very supernatural ways, but always, always, always in accordance with the word of God. I class myself as a continualist and can't quite see how Spurgeon could be otherwise. It all depends on how we define the terms, but all the evidence shows that Spurgeon was no strict or rigid cessationist as you are Dan.John Frederickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12126963581035512896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-92193012218091582732011-08-24T11:28:36.216-07:002011-08-24T11:28:36.216-07:00TC...I'm swamped today, so thank you for posti...TC...I'm swamped today, so thank you for posting that link. Appreciate it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-67626715388247829282011-08-24T11:01:34.198-07:002011-08-24T11:01:34.198-07:00For JF (and anyone else who has yet to discover Go...For JF (and anyone else who has yet to discover Google - and trust me, it's a wondrous tool!)<br /><br />http://phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/2005/11/spurgeon-on-private-prophecies-and-new.html<br /><br />It's a start, anyhow.Tom Chantryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02485908616177111150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-12347231316565150222011-08-24T09:39:31.689-07:002011-08-24T09:39:31.689-07:00I have not read everything you have ever said or w...I have not read everything you have ever said or written so I missed the fifteen responses Dan. Is that your only response now?John Frederickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12126963581035512896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-91120742891027602992011-08-24T08:45:13.830-07:002011-08-24T08:45:13.830-07:00I'd believe that CHS story if an angel of ligh...I'd believe that CHS story if an angel of light appeared to me and said.....oh wait, nevermind. <br /><br />I'll just stick to what God has told me in the Bible.APMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09981769512480371230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-26620117188870447482011-08-24T08:35:20.361-07:002011-08-24T08:35:20.361-07:00Wow, no one's every brought up CHS stories lik...Wow, no one's every brought up CHS stories like that before, let alone respond to them fifteen times.<br /><br />< buries head in hands >DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-56181305290691821612011-08-24T08:30:09.033-07:002011-08-24T08:30:09.033-07:00concerning a well-known Baptist preacher in the 19...concerning a well-known Baptist preacher in the 19th Century:<br /><br />“While preaching in the hall, on one occasion, I deliberately pointed to a man in the midst of the crowd, and said, ‘There is a man sitting there, who is a shoemaker; he keeps his shop open on Sundays, it was open last Sabbath morning, he took ninepence, and there was fourpence profit out of it; his soul is sold to Satan for fourpence!’ A city missionary, when going his rounds, met with this man, and seeing that he was reading one of my sermons, he asked the question, ‘Do you know Mr. Spurgeon?’ ‘Yes,’ replied the man, ‘I have every reason to know him, I have been to hear him; and, under his preaching, by God’s grace I have become a new creature in Christ Jesus. Shall I tell you how it happened? I went to the Music Hall, and took my seat in the middle of the place; Mr. Spurgeon looked at me as if he knew me, and in his sermon he pointed to me, and told the congregation that I was a shoemaker, and that I kept my shop open on Sundays; and I did, sir. I should not have minded that; but he also said that I took ninepence the Sunday before, and that there was fourpence profit out of it. I did take ninepence that day, and fourpence was just the profit; but how he should know that, I could not tell. Then it struck me that it was God who had spoken to my soul though him, so I shut up my shop the next Sunday. At first, I was afraid to go again to hear him, lest he should tell the people more about me; but afterwards I went, and the Lord met with me, and saved my soul.’”<br /><br />“I could tell as many as a dozen similar cases in which I pointed at somebody in the hall without having the slightest knowledge of the person, or any idea that what I said was right, except that I believed I was moved by the Spirit to say it; and so striking has been my description, that the persons have gone away, and said to their friends, ‘Come, see a man that told me all things that ever I did; beyond a doubt, he must have been sent of God to my soul, or else he could not have described me so exactly.’ And not only so, but I have known many instances in which the thoughts of men have been revealed from the pulpit. I have sometimes seen persons nudge their neighbours with their elbow, because they had got a smart hit, and they have been heard to say, when they were going out, ‘The preacher told us just what we said to one another when we went in at the door’” (The Autobiography of Charles H. Spurgeon, [Curts & Jennings, 1899], Vol. II, pp. 226-227).John Frederickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12126963581035512896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-25519379049996604962011-08-24T05:05:09.231-07:002011-08-24T05:05:09.231-07:00Reposting from the previous combox because it is r...Reposting from the previous combox because it is relevant to this discussion as well. Tom Chantry already hit on the Ephesians 2:20 reference listed here.<br /><br />I offer the following three portions of Scripture to see if any of the coninuationist camp will look at their precious 1 Corinthians references in light of them...then tell me what they think the implications are...I'm sure I'll start hearing crickets.<br /><br />"God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world." (Hebrews 1:1-2)<br /><br />"After it was at first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will." (Hebrews 2:3b-4)<br /><br />"So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone" (Ephesians 2:19-20)<br /><br />Emphasis (for obvious reason, I hope) is mine for all of these.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13987985549747283669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-86523113386298546922011-08-24T04:39:06.811-07:002011-08-24T04:39:06.811-07:00Add to that putting his fingers in his ears and si...Add to that putting his fingers in his ears and singing la la la, reporting "Crickets!", and repeating <i>exactly what has just been refuted</i> as if no one had spoken.<br /><br />I've seen this pattern, many times. The next usual steps are the repeated assertion that no one has answered him, and the demand that others do his research for him and find his answers in the meta for him, on threat of further reports of "crickets."DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-77218463532487058152011-08-24T04:33:47.390-07:002011-08-24T04:33:47.390-07:00Was all prophecy that was given in the first-centu...<i>Was all prophecy that was given in the first-century church given by the apostles for the foundation of the church? No. Therefore, we can conclude from Scripture that while prophecy was used for the foundation of the church, it was not and consequently is not necessarily limited to that function. Again, prophecy was used for the edification and building up of the church in general, just like the other gifts were used.</i><br /><br />Tom, you have a remarkable talent here. you pose questions, give unsupported and absolute answers to them ("No.") OK then, that's our answer, I suppose? Scripture says that the Apostles, together with Christ and the Prophets, constitute the foundation of the church (that's in Ephesians 2:20, by the way), but we know that the in fact, they were not just a foundation. How do we know? Because Tom said so at 8:50 PM on August 23! Along the way, you have defined "prophecy" in a manner which you cannot find in either the Old or New Testament. <br /><br /><b>But</b> - (and I cannot possibly end this statement with sufficient exclamation points, so I will not even try) - you are worried that <b>we</b> are too wedded to our presuppositions. <br /><br />Tom, in the realm of theology, the person who is too wedded to his presuppositions is the one who can't define terms biblically lest his his pet theories vanish into mist.Tom Chantryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02485908616177111150noreply@blogger.com