tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post9005684433686146592..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: The Wily ContinualistPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger76125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-23055289401312910892008-09-08T04:42:00.000-07:002008-09-08T04:42:00.000-07:00Be advised, btw, that I am closing this thread aro...Be advised, btw, that I am closing this thread around lunchtime today.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-78881844239257046852008-09-07T20:15:00.000-07:002008-09-07T20:15:00.000-07:00Oh, I don't know. I think clowning is definitely a...Oh, I don't know. I think clowning is definitely a miraculous sign. And then there is the awesome soveriegnty of banning. Kinda like Peter's pronouncement upon Andy and Safire.Strong Towerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13834108238546908018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-53647540602782069342008-09-07T20:10:00.000-07:002008-09-07T20:10:00.000-07:00Pastor Michael --| I’d like to respectfully disagr...Pastor Michael --<BR/><BR/>| I’d like to respectfully disagree a teeny bit <BR/>| with your last statement, that Elijah, <BR/>| Isaiah, Micah, Peter and Paul were <BR/>| delivering for the first time the revealed <BR/>| will of God. Yes to Moses, Peter and Paul, <BR/>| because they were inaugurating covenants. <BR/>| Elijah and Isaiah, however, were calling <BR/>| the apostate people of their time back to <BR/>| faithfulness in the existing Mosaic <BR/>| covenant and invoking the prescriptions of <BR/>| Deuteronomy 25-28. Their authority to do <BR/>| so was attested to by the miraculous. (At <BR/>| least that’s the way I see it.)<BR/><BR/>They were delivering <I>Scripture</I>, Pastor Michael. Special Revelation. In a highly-technical sense, you are right about the covenantal referents. But Isaiah was delivering <I>what YHVH was saying</I> in the same way Moses was delivering <I>what YHVH was saying</I>.<BR/><BR/>That, specifically, is my point.<BR/><BR/>| Might the parallel for today then be signs <BR/>| and wonders attesting to the authenticity <BR/>| of a reformer in a time of great apostasy <BR/>| from the New Covenant? What might this <BR/>| look like? Why not Team Pyro calling <BR/>| down fire! <BR/>| <BR/>| Before you clown me, I’m not kidding or <BR/>| mocking here. I see you folks as voices <BR/>| calling people of the New Covenant to <BR/>| faithfulness to it. Now John the Baptist, <BR/>| who called for both faithfulness to the <BR/>| existing covenant and pointed to the new <BR/>| one coming, "did no miracle"; so you <BR/>| might not either. But if anyone would, it <BR/>| would be someone with a message like <BR/>| yours.<BR/><BR/>That's very, um flattering? I guess? I wouldn't go that far. In the best possible case, we're like Titus or Timothy -- men who will teach faithfully what has already been given. And we don't need a sign gift to do that.<BR/><BR/>Thanks, tho: that's quite a vote of confidence. And it would take an actual sign gift to clown you here at TP because Phil won't implement Haloscan. :-)FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-7774061215231334192008-09-07T19:43:00.000-07:002008-09-07T19:43:00.000-07:00Clint --| Frank, you side-stepped an | opportunity...Clint --<BR/><BR/>| Frank, you side-stepped an <BR/>| opportunity to give direct Scriptural <BR/>| references for the reason God has <BR/>| decided that Jesus would not be <BR/>| glorified by continued supernatural <BR/>| gift-giving of the Holy Spirit.<BR/><BR/>No: what I did was identify the failure of your demand for a proof text. You're demanding a proof text for my position. My position is that Scripture doesn't give a date for our planners for the end of signs and wonders: it tells us <I>the circumstances under which God does use signs and wonders</I>.<BR/><BR/>Your position merely wants signs and wonders to be the common sign of the presence of the church; mine says they are reserved for God's explicit and unique work. There's no dodge -- except in what you say below.<BR/><BR/>| So, you can honestly assert that you <BR/>| know the intentions of the Sovereign <BR/>| God...and they don't involve <BR/>| miraculous gifts anymore? (And <BR/>| you've determined this because it <BR/>| "makes sense"?)<BR/><BR/>No: what I can say with some certainty is that I know God is not giving any new special revelation, so I suppose that God is also not just showing off for the fan boys -- that we aren't to seek after signs like the Corinthians did, or the Pharisees did, but that we are to instead take it for granted that long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son.<BR/><BR/>Further, you have implied that I think it has to "make sense" when in fact I have <I>repudiated</I> the "prove it" retort <I>in this very thread</I>.<BR/><BR/>The fact is that <I>you</I> are the one who will only accept a <I>specific</I> proof of a specific type -- <I>you</I> are the one looking for enlightenment/western style "proof" for something.<BR/><BR/>My reasoning comes from the narrative of Scripture as it is presented, not from a syllogism or the need for an explicit command. In that, your next comment is utterly ridiculous:<BR/><BR/>| You're Western reasoning power is <BR/>| absolutely amazing--at the cost of <BR/>| Scriptural fortitude.<BR/><BR/>There's nothing "western" about admitting that God has a history. There's nothing "western" about admitting that God has always, if we believe Scripture, not acted capriciously or without <I>special revelation</I> to actually <I>reveal</I> the purpose of the miraculous.<BR/><BR/>What's "western" is the frankly-churlish demand that unless God explains something in so many words -- and with the words we would personally accept to understand it -- we won't give up a childish fascination with something that isn't happening anyway.<BR/><BR/>Go back and re-read my previous posts on this subject. I haven't denied that God is God, or that He will answer prayer: I deny that the signs of an apostle, a prophet, or Christ are present today -- nobody can command healing with a word and know for certain it will be done.<BR/><BR/>Have a nice day.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-14400983940777629722008-09-06T20:42:00.000-07:002008-09-06T20:42:00.000-07:00Frank, you side-stepped an opportunity to give dir...Frank, you side-stepped an opportunity to give direct Scriptural references for the reason God has decided that Jesus would not be glorified by continued supernatural gift-giving of the Holy Spirit. <BR/><BR/>So, you can honestly assert that you know the intentions of the Sovereign God...and they don't involve miraculous gifts anymore? (And you've determined this because it "makes sense"?)<BR/><BR/>You're Western reasoning power is absolutely amazing--at the cost of Scriptural fortitude.Clinthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08477284905281265844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-60401580661029453432008-09-04T16:28:00.000-07:002008-09-04T16:28:00.000-07:00Well, all of that is Old Testament typology. Rev ...Well, all of that is Old Testament typology. Rev 11 lists specific kinds of wonders which all typified God's wrath against sin, idolatry etc. It's simply a further representation of gospel truth being declared. It is the gospel that tears down false religions and spiritual forces. It's all based on Old Testament typology. <BR/><BR/>I really recommend Hedricksen's commentary on Revelation called More Than Conquerers to any one who really wants to at least understand a position other than the typical Dispensational one. Also, if you go to Kim Riddlebarger's blog he has a whole series on sermons on Revelation that are in PDF form that you can download for free and read as time permits.Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-16059399754809759892008-09-04T14:17:00.000-07:002008-09-04T14:17:00.000-07:00Chad VI agree concerning the canon being closed. D...Chad V<BR/><BR/>I agree concerning the canon being closed. Declaring old truth is sufficient. I’m not so sure, though, regarding the possibility of confirming signs and wonders accompanying said truth. I appreciate your approach to events in the Revelation 11 as described in your referenced blog article, but if the two witnesses indeed are representative of the church, what does the author mean by attributing to it (them) the power to perform acts reminiscent of Moses and Elijah? <BR/><BR/>At the very least I don’t think heavily strapped in continu-whatevers are wacko for thinking the canon speaks of such things. (And thanks to Frank for doggedly noting how very much the two restrained camps have in common.)Pastor Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04506888721434975233noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-51610332520874477152008-09-04T12:55:00.000-07:002008-09-04T12:55:00.000-07:00Jugulum, Chad V., et al...I wholeheartedly agree t...Jugulum, Chad V., et al...<BR/><BR/>I wholeheartedly agree that drawing doctrinal conclusions from implication is faulty and dangerous. That's certainly not my intention in looking at the passage in 2 Thessalonians. I'll try to state it again, but it will probably sound the same: Scripture warns that FALSE signs and wonders will appear in the last days...makes sense to me that GENUINE signs and wonders will be around as well. Otherwise, why are we not just warned to beware of ANY signs and wonders.<BR/><BR/>IDK, but perhaps the stronger argument would be that there doesn't seem to be any Scriptural evidence that these kinds of gifts have been shut down completely.<BR/><BR/>And thank you, Frank, for taking my point. Quite an accomplishment, since I'm not sure I expressed myself clearly.The Blainemonsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13157965154638461280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-54213191797247716512008-09-04T10:43:00.000-07:002008-09-04T10:43:00.000-07:00Pastor Micahel Elijah and Isaiah gave new revelati...<B> Pastor Micahel </B><BR/>Elijah and Isaiah gave new revelation. They prophesied direct revelation from God. That;s why they're called prophets. Their is no more revelation. The canon is closed.Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-9814112369954109402008-09-04T09:36:00.000-07:002008-09-04T09:36:00.000-07:00Frank,I’d like to respectfully disagree a teeny bi...Frank,<BR/><BR/>I’d like to respectfully disagree a teeny bit with your last statement, that Elijah, Isaiah, Micah, Peter and Paul were delivering for the first time the revealed will of God. Yes to Moses, Peter and Paul, because they were inaugurating covenants. Elijah and Isaiah, however, were calling the apostate people of their time back to faithfulness in the existing Mosaic covenant and invoking the prescriptions of Deuteronomy 25-28. Their authority to do so was attested to by the miraculous. (At least that’s the way I see it.)<BR/><BR/>Might the parallel for today then be signs and wonders attesting to the authenticity of a reformer in a time of great apostasy from the New Covenant? What might this look like? Why not Team Pyro calling down fire! <BR/><BR/>Before you clown me, I’m not kidding or mocking here. I see you folks as voices calling people of the New Covenant to faithfulness to it. Now John the Baptist, who called for both faithfulness to the existing covenant and pointed to the new one coming, “did no miracle”; so you might not either. But if anyone would, it would be someone with a message like yours.Pastor Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04506888721434975233noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-64044078364473428302008-09-04T04:02:00.000-07:002008-09-04T04:02:00.000-07:00Clint said:[QUOTE]Who, from direct Scriptural refe...Clint said:<BR/><BR/>[QUOTE]<BR/>Who, from direct Scriptural references, can assert that God has sovereignly decided that miracles do not glorify the name of Jesus anymore?<BR/>[/QUOTE]<BR/><BR/>I dunno, Clint -- from direct Scripture references, can you prove that you personally are saved? I mean, are you mentioned by name?<BR/><BR/>Because I can <I>demand</I> that as a criteria for admitting you are saved. I think it just doesn't make that good criteria.<BR/><BR/>Instead, I think it is far more theologically-helpful to perceive the <I>use</I> of signs and wonders as a consistent work of God even from the time of Moses, and recognize that there's nobody today who's doing what Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, Micah, Peter and Paul were doing -- which is <I>delivering for the first time</I> the revealed will of God.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-25443039942298041802008-09-03T23:38:00.000-07:002008-09-03T23:38:00.000-07:00I recently posted on xenoglossalia at my site... i...I recently posted on xenoglossalia at my site... it was a quickie, but it summarizes my thinking on this subject since leaving charismaticism about 10 years ago. radongas(dot)blogspot(dot)comLockheedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05433104440503646253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-41506156375717410412008-09-03T19:22:00.000-07:002008-09-03T19:22:00.000-07:00[tongue-in-cheek]"Dr. Lloyd-Jones was far more cau...[tongue-in-cheek]<BR/>"Dr. Lloyd-Jones was far more cautious in practice than his various writings might indicate"<BR/><BR/>Maybe ML-J was an early "Charismatic with a seat belt on"... hmm sounds familiar, i just can't 'mark' the context(ualisation) where I've heard it before :)<BR/>[/tongue-in-cheek]<BR/><BR/>Al.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-82032539841836668942008-09-03T19:15:00.000-07:002008-09-03T19:15:00.000-07:00Clint,It's a little disingenuous to word your ques...Clint,<BR/><BR/>It's a little disingenuous to word your question the way you have.<BR/><BR/>Remember, the cessationist position is not that miracles have ceased. We are not anti-supernaturalists. We believe God heals and does wonders.<BR/><BR/>The question is not whether the specific gifts in question do not glorify Jesus anymore. The question is whether the Spirit gives those specific gifts anymore.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-31169473584149253622008-09-03T18:40:00.000-07:002008-09-03T18:40:00.000-07:00One thing I have never had one great answer to is ...One thing I have never had one great answer to is this:<BR/><BR/>Who, from direct Scriptural references, can assert that God has sovereignly decided that miracles do not glorify the name of Jesus anymore?Clinthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08477284905281265844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-34826312519001148872008-09-03T17:35:00.000-07:002008-09-03T17:35:00.000-07:00As pertains to the giving of wisdom. The "man bein...As pertains to the giving of wisdom. The "man being sure" thing I mean. I see no evidence that answered prayer demands absolutely not doubting.<BR/><BR/>Just to be clear... <BR/><BR/>Just to be clear, we are asking for wisdom to understand. Beside that, not isolating the admonition from "Every good and perfect gift comes down from the Father of Lights" seems to me to put prayer without doubt in the ball park.<BR/><BR/>My point was simply that God always answers prayer, perfectly. If he graces you with exactly what tomorrow will bring, then a prayer offered in that kind of faith is predictive. The other kind of prayers we offer in faith in the fact that God always will do what is right. But, a man who doubts that is unstable in all his ways. In either case, whether he knows the future or doesn't, if he doubts the goodness of God, why would he ask the Father for bread if he thinks he might get a stone?<BR/><BR/>I stand by what I said.<BR/><BR/>What is it that the sign signifies is a great question. Is it approval of the message, approval of the man, demonstration of the presence of God? Does it demonstrate prophetic truth signifying not what's happening, or what will, but rather what was spoken in the past by the Prophets, namely the the Gospel?Strong Towerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13834108238546908018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-87293835502810410652008-09-03T17:28:00.000-07:002008-09-03T17:28:00.000-07:00Frank,"The question is if the contemporary continu...Frank,<BR/><BR/>"The question is if the contemporary continualists would speak to the actual problems of people who abuse their views. Openly reject the excesses -- which includes, btw, rejecting what appear to be signs and wonders when those who proffer them are frauds."<BR/><BR/>I think that is a great point. There is far more responsibility on the part of "continualist" leaders (I thought it was continuationist...but 5 syllables is always better than 6), than on cessationist leaders. I have found that neither the cautious continualist (which I am one) nor the cautious cessationist have any real idea what the real thing looks/should look like. I come from a very charismatic bible school that has wallowed in Corinthian-like excess...so the real thing can get elusive.<BR/><BR/>1 Cor. 2:2,<BR/>ClintClinthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08477284905281265844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-8800353696060794382008-09-03T17:13:00.000-07:002008-09-03T17:13:00.000-07:00Rick Frueh,I don't always agree with you but o...Rick Frueh,<BR/><BR/>I don't always agree with you but on this thread man, your speakin' my language.<BR/><BR/>I fully agree, I myself am guilty of often overlooking the signs you've noted. I don't get that, I have 5 kids, most of whom have professed Christ, all of whom love their mom & I. I get to watch them grow and learn. Wonders all 5.<BR/><BR/>Your mention of Joni Tada...my word, if coming to love her paralysis because of what it has done to her relationship with God isn't a wonder, what is?<BR/><BR/>Thanks Rick.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1340861762833734172008-09-03T16:45:00.000-07:002008-09-03T16:45:00.000-07:00It's wonderful, Frank! I love it!Wish I could do t...It's wonderful, Frank! I love it!<BR/><BR/>Wish I could do that.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21016115077398403952008-09-03T16:08:00.000-07:002008-09-03T16:08:00.000-07:00(I just realized why. Ha ha Dan. But it's not th...(I just realized why. Ha ha Dan. But it's not that bad, Frank.)Susanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08289347868497438542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-66823317941655751222008-09-03T16:02:00.000-07:002008-09-03T16:02:00.000-07:00(Aside: Frank, why should we complain about the C...(Aside: Frank, why should we complain about the Coyote at all? As a child I rather liked Looney Tunes, even more than Disney toons.)Susanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08289347868497438542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-53282611573300155602008-09-03T15:27:00.000-07:002008-09-03T15:27:00.000-07:00Pastor Michael I don't believe Rev 11:1-3 teaches...<B> Pastor Michael </B><BR/><BR/> I don't believe Rev 11:1-3 teaches the continuation of signs and I'm not a preterist in the sense that I believe that all of what's in the book of Revelation has already happened. I'm an amillenialist and I already gave an amillenial view of what Rev 11 says in the string on the previous post in this series so I won't repeat it all here. <BR/><BR/> Nevertheless, if we look at the Revelation from the futurist perspective all that we can concluded from Rev 11:1-3 is that there will be <B> two specific </B> people who will be granted the power to perform miracles. That's it, just two. You could not conclude that they are available to the church in general. So no matter how you view the Revelation to John it cannot support the idea that the church in general will continue to perform signs and wonders until the return of Christ.Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-51721582079429095352008-09-03T14:52:00.000-07:002008-09-03T14:52:00.000-07:00There are no more blinded eyes being opened by the...There are no more blinded eyes being opened by the gift of the Spirit through a believer. There could be but there are none that pass Biblical muster. However there are some wonders.<BR/><BR/>Joni Erickson Tada is a wonder. Elizabeth Eliott is a wonder.<BR/><BR/>On John and Charles Wesley's first missionary trips to America they were in the company of approximately 50 Moravians on the ship. Wesley was very impressed by their humility and servanthood. During the last week of the 3 month journey, everyone was holding a worship service in the ship's hull. There was a great storm and everyone but the Moravians seemed nervous.<BR/><BR/>As they sang the last of the closing hymns, a loud and horrible crash was heard on the deck. Everyone began to yell and the women and children began to scream and weep. Several men made their way to the deck and came back reporting the main mast has broken and crashed upon the ship's deck.<BR/><BR/>John Wesley notes in his journal that the Moravians never moved and continued to sing God's praises as if nothing had happened. After they closed the service with a season of prayer, Wesley went to the leader and asked why no one, even the women and children, had shown any fear. The Moravian leader told Wesley that all of them had committed their lives to Christ and they were His to do with as He pleased. They were not afraid. Wesley's life was drmatically changed by this event.<BR/><BR/>That, my friends, is a genuine wonder.Rick Fruehhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05879848568892457571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-81722815796415203542008-09-03T14:28:00.000-07:002008-09-03T14:28:00.000-07:00Matt. 10:1 is closely followed by Matt. 10:5, in w...Matt. 10:1 is closely followed by Matt. 10:5, in which Jesus tells his disciples, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."<BR/><BR/>If the continualist wants to use Matt. 10:1-8 as his authority to heal the sick and raise the dead, then I guess he is only going to concentrate on applying such miraculous deeds to Jews.Mike Westfallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06944727980772754938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-36437236366743273162008-09-03T14:07:00.000-07:002008-09-03T14:07:00.000-07:00I think the "prove it" retort smacks of modernist ...I think the "prove it" retort smacks of modernist assumptions and anti-supernaturalistic biases.<BR/><BR/>We DO NOT deny that God can and does do the miraculous. He saves spiritually-dead men. After that, healing cancer is a -little- thing.<BR/><BR/>I think a better retort <I>which puts the same problem in biblical perspective</I> is "<I>why</I> did God do that miracle?" In the Bible, we can see <I>why</I> God does the miraculous -- He doesn't do things in a corner and He doesn't do miracles like random firecrackers. God does the miraculous for <I>revealed purposes</I>.<BR/><BR/>If we can't see the <I>revealed purpose</I> of a miracle, I think there's a clearer reason why we should hold it in a light of scepticism: it's a <I>pointless</I> sign.<BR/><BR/>Think about the implications of a sign without a thing signified.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.com