Why I Am A Continuationist

[ARBITER01]

Notice that I said "if any parts", etc., which says that it is possible but not probable. However it still remains that most church prophecies drop out of memory five minutes after they are spoken.

Our church stays within the boundaries of scripture.

We will not allow a person to speak predictively unless GOD has proven that person to be a prophet/prophetess. So far, that number is 0 over the last 15 years or so that I've been there.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

If the prophesying is not predictive, why call it "prophesying?" Instead you call it "inspirational." Sowing seeds of confusion again. When in doubt, change the definition of prophesying to inspirational....always works.

Having your cake and eating it too.

Kicking the player instead of the ball is not productive and does not show due respect for other members on the thread. My purpose in starting this thread is to discuss and debate the issue, not to flame the member who gives his opinion. I enjoy debating with Arbiter1, and he often tries to put a new part in my hair (if I had any), but it is always with an attitude of respect and brotherly love. When we get to heaven, I am going to enjoy having fellowship with him and having a good laugh as we remember our discussions and debates on the forum. So, leave him alone and concentrate on the issues.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Our church stays within the boundaries of scripture.

We will not allow a person to speak predictively unless GOD has proven that person to be a prophet/prophetess. So far, that number is 0 over the last 15 years or so that I've been there.

Quite right. Shows a good leadership who keeps the manifestation of the gifts on the right track.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

Kicking the player instead of the ball is not productive and does not show due respect for other members on the thread. My purpose in starting this thread is to discuss and debate the issue, not to flame the member who gives his opinion. I enjoy debating with Arbiter1, and he often tries to put a new part in my hair (if I had any), but it is always with an attitude of respect and brotherly love.

Agreed.

 

[ARBITER01]

Quite right. Shows a good leadership who keeps the manifestation of the gifts on the right track.

Understanding the gifts of The Spirit is not easy. Operating them correctly in the church is even harder.

It's easy to misunderstand them, look at how many differing opinions there are in any thread about this.

For instance, the word "prophecy" has two different understandings in the bible, a generalized understanding and a more specific understanding. The generalized understanding would be more associated with the gift of prophesying, where The Holy Spirit is speaking about the generalized mighty works of GOD through a believer. The more specific understanding of the word prophecy would be associated with the revelation gift of the word of wisdom. That is the revelation gift that is associated with prediction/future.

Again, it's very easy for people to misunderstand the gifts. It's just as easy for them to misuse them also. Anyone can go to youtube and type in Christian prophecy and see just how misused the gift of prophesying can be. That's the one that everyone tries to use to make themselves out to be a prophet, and they are absolutely wrong.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Seems to me that sola scriptura, and I am told that sola scriptura is pivotal for Protestantism, is fundamentally at odds with contemporary revelation from God by means of any gifts.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

Seems to me that sola scriptura, and I am told that sola scriptura is pivotal for Protestantism, is fundamentally at odds with contemporary revelation from God by means of any gifts.

Let's not lump Lutheranism in with Protestantism as such. Lutherans are not cessessionists as we believe Jon Huss' prophecy of Luther is true. Both Lutherans and the Orthodox have liturgical services with the Eucharist at the center weekly and functions as a means of grace. Speaking in tongues is foreign historically and doesn't abode well for either the congregation.

I can see easily how prophesying does fit well with a non liturgical worship setting as the Eucharist is a monthly for quartering practice. And yes, for Baptist's and American Evangelicals sola Scriptura is at odds with contemporary revelation from God.

The problem my pastor has is not enough time in the week to do proper catechesis with the new believers and advance teaching with the older ones. 15 minutes for the sermon and 45 minutes for Sunday School. That's it. If speaking in tongues were added, this would take away from teaching time for the content of the Word of God.

 

[The Liturgist]

Let's not lump Lutheranism in with Protestantism as such. Lutherans are not cessessionists as we believe Jon Huss' prophecy of Luther is true. Both Lutherans and the Orthodox have liturgical services with the Eucharist at the center weekly and functions as a means of grace. Speaking in tongues is foreign historically and doesn't abode well for either the congregation.

I can see easily how prophesying does fit well with a non liturgical worship setting as the Eucharist is a monthly for quartering practice. And yes, for Baptist's and American Evangelicals sola Scriptura is at odds with contemporary revelation from God.

The problem my pastor has is not enough time in the week to do proper catechesis with the new believers and advance teaching with the older ones. 15 minutes for the sermon and 45 minutes for Sunday School. That's it. If speaking in tongues were added, this would take away from teaching time for the content of the Word of God.

Indeed, our Confessional Lutheran friends @ViaCrucis @MarkRohfrietsch and others (perhaps our friend @JM ) prefer to identify as Evangelical Catholics.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

prefer to identify as Evangelical Catholics.

For me it is "The Historic Western Evangelical Church" as Rome doesn't have the corner on the market for the word "historic." So the question would be raised, Where was Lutheranism before Luther? In the early church fathers especially Cyril of Alexandria.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Let's not lump Lutheranism in with Protestantism as such.

Let's not extend the word Protestant into territory that may be outside of its ambit. Specifically, I did not mention Lutherans. The identified conflict is between sola scriptura and contemporary revelation, the former limits significant doctrine and practise to that which is taught in the scriptures (66 books for Protestants) and the latter allows for additional revelation alleged to be given through spiritual gifts to people today. Thus, in theory, contemporary revelation could reveal the reality and accuracy of purgatory.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Seems to me that sola scriptura, and I am told that sola scriptura is pivotal for Protestantism, is fundamentally at odds with contemporary revelation from God by means of any gifts.

Seeing that there is no other recorded information about God and His plan of Salvation, including the death and resurrection of Christ, anywhere else except the written Scriptures. Without the Scriptures we would know nothing about the creation of the heavens and the earth, about the fall, the history of how Israel came into being, plus its subsequent history. We would have no idea of the life and work of Jesus, the birth of the Christian church, the revelations given to the Apostles in their letters, or the revelation given to John concerning future events.

Without the Bible, we wouldn't have any idea whether we are even saved or not, because we wouldn't know the criteria needed to become saved.

So if that is true, where else would information come from and how do we know it is true and accurate? How would we know the difference between truth and heresy? For instance - Mary's perpetual virginity, her being ascended to heaven, her being the queen of heaven and advisor to Jesus. If these didn't come from the written Scriptures, where did they come from and how do we know that they are true and not man-based heresy?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Seeing that there is no other recorded information about God and His plan of Salvation, including the death and resurrection of Christ, anywhere else except the written Scriptures.

That's not right.

Without the Scriptures we would know nothing about the creation of the heavens and the earth, about the fall, the history of how Israel came into being, plus its subsequent history. We would have no idea of the life and work of Jesus, the birth of the Christian church, the revelations given to the Apostles in their letters, or the revelation given to John concerning future events.

That too is not right.

Without the Bible, we wouldn't have any idea whether we are even saved or not, because we wouldn't know the criteria needed to become saved.

That also isn't right.

So if that is true, where else would information come from and how do we know it is true and accurate? How would we know the difference between truth and heresy? For instance - Mary's perpetual virginity, her being ascended to heaven, her being the queen of heaven and advisor to Jesus. If these didn't come from the written Scriptures, where did they come from and how do we know that they are true and not man-based heresy?

Well, since it is not right the conclusion is also not right.

The truth is that Christians existed before the scriptures were written. People were saved before there was a bible. God did reveal himself, his plans, and other things directly to prophets, priests, women, and men, kings too. Scripture, writing it down, came later.

And in addition to sacred scripture there is and has always been since the days of the apostles and in the ancient days of Israel verbal and enacted revelation from God that is not written in the scriptures. There is now and always has been revelation from God by means of creation. But sacred Scripture is unique, and it is authoritative. However, contemporary revelation is a loose cannon that has run amok. It ought not be trusted, nor be elevated above any other human opinions expressed by people, and it is not by any means to be counted as canonical revelation from God.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

However, contemporary revelation is a loose cannon that has run amok.

Amen.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

That's not right.

That too is not right.

That also isn't right.

Well, since it is not right the conclusion is also not right.

The truth is that Christians existed before the scriptures were written. People were saved before there was a bible. God did reveal himself, his plans, and other things directly to prophets, priests, women, and men, kings too. Scripture, writing it down, came later.

And in addition to sacred scripture there is and has always been since the days of the apostles and in the ancient days of Israel verbal and enacted revelation from God that is not written in the scriptures. There is now and always has been revelation from God by means of creation. But sacred Scripture is unique, and it is authoritative. However, contemporary revelation is a loose cannon that has run amok. It ought not be trusted, nor be elevated above any other human opinions expressed by people, and it is not by any means to be counted as canonical revelation from God.

Nothing was known about the nature and character of God until it was revealed to Moses, who was instructed to write it all down. So the Torah was the guiding document for Israel, and the writings of the Prophets came after. Jesus said that if one didn't believe Moses and the Prophets, even if someone rose from the dead, one wouldn't believe. The only substantive information we have about the birth, life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus is written in the Four Gospels. Paul used Moses and the Prophets as the validation for his preaching of the Gospel to the Jews and pagans.

It is quite true that the New Apostolic Reformation, plus the word faith signs and wonders movement has spawn individuals running around with "new" revelation that God has supposed to have told them. As a result the neo-Charismatic movement is riddled with all sorts of weird and whacky doctrines that are little more than the fables Paul talked about to Timothy when he said that many will not endure sound doctrine but will go after fables. There have been hundreds of predictive prophecies all the way back from the early 1970s about what God is going to do in the church and the world, and none of them have ever come to pass. Why is that? Because God never inspired them in the first place!

 

[ARBITER01]

Let's not extend the word Protestant into territory that may be outside of its ambit. Specifically, I did not mention Lutherans. The identified conflict is between sola scriptura and contemporary revelation, the former limits significant doctrine and practice to that which is taught in the scriptures (66 books for Protestants) and the latter allows for additional revelation alleged to be given through spiritual gifts to people today. Thus, in theory, contemporary revelation could reveal the reality and accuracy of purgatory.

Interesting.

Predictive revelation has really been the realm of prophets and prophetesses in our bible. In the last 30 or so years, I've never run into an actual prophet/prophetess yet in the circles of Christians I frequent in. There's been a whole heap of people making claims over the years about others possibly being such, but in reality no, I've not seen one yet, and my standard is said person operating in power instead of just words.

It is not beyond GOD to raise one up, it's just rare in my opinion. Could said prophet/prophetess be used to write scripture, give further revelation on things to come? I say yes, if GOD so wanted to do that. There is nothing in the current scriptures that says He couldn't. But I don't know if He has a need to do so.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Nothing was known about the nature and character of God until it was revealed to Moses

That is not true; Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob knew the LORD, he revealed himself to them. Noah knew him. Adam and Eve knew him.

The only substantive information we have about the birth, life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus is written in the Four Gospels.

That is not true. The letters of the apostles reveal a number of things about the Lord Jesus. The Didache, letters and writings from the first century also speak of the lord Jesus. And, despite Protestant objections, Apostolic Tradition tells Christians a great deal about the Lord Jesus.

But what you said about contemporary movements claiming to have Apostles, Prophets, Seers, Healers, and any number of other gifted individuals in their communities is likely true. There are people claiming to be authors of inspired epistles, I know, I read a collection of such epistles from a former Baptist in Australia whose little community of a few hundred (or less) is in the Sydney area; Hurstville to be precise, a 'church' called The Church of the Living God.*

* [woops, I was reading the web page for another church of the same name, not the one in Hurstville] disregard previous note.

 

[ARBITER01]

If the prophesying is not predictive, why call it "prophesying?" Instead you call it "inspirational."

I want to try and answer this because it is important.

Act 21:8 And on the morrow, we |that were of Paul's company| departed, and came unto Caesarea: and entering into the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, we abode with him.
Act 21:9 Now this man had four virgin daughters, who prophesied.

Act 21:10 And as we tarried there some days, there came down from Judea a certain prophet, named Agabus.
Act 21:11 And coming to us, and taking Paul's belt, he bound his own feet and hands, and said, Thus saith the Holy Spirit, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this belt, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.
Act 21:12 And when we heard these things, both we and they of that place besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.

Why didn't GOD use the 4 virgin daughters who prophesied to predict the coming events to Paul? Because their gift was the simple gift of prophesying that was not a revelation gift, whereas Agabus had the office of a prophet, and GOD utilized a revelation gift (the word of wisdom) to "reveal" the coming events.

That is the best example in our bibles of how there are differences in prophesying and prophecy, although the terms get thrown around somewhat loosely in our bibles.

Now,...... why do I call that gift of prophesying an inspirational gift?,...... because of the aftereffects of it when used in the corporate assembly by The Holy Spirit. The same thing happens when The Holy Spirit operates the gift of tongues and the interpretation of tongues together in a service, there is an aftereffect of inspiration from The Holy Spirit that can last for days depending on how many messages were given.

The gift of prophesying is part of the original 7 gifts that were available to priests, prophets, and kings in the OT, and it was the very one that was utilized the most by prophets for it's inspiration,...

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

That is not true; Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob knew the LORD, he revealed himself to them. Noah knew him. Adam and Eve knew him.

That is not true. The letters of the apostles reveal a number of things about the Lord Jesus. The Didache, letters and writings from the first century also speak of the lord Jesus. And, despite Protestant objections, Apostolic Tradition tells Christians a great deal about the Lord Jesus.

But what you said about contemporary movements claiming to have Apostles, Prophets, Seers, Healers, and any number of other gifted individuals in their communities is likely true. There are people claiming to be authors of inspired epistles, I know, I read a collection of such epistles from a former Baptist in Australia whose little community of a few hundred (or less) is in the Sydney area; Hurstville to be precise, a 'church' called The Church of the Living God.*

* [woops, I was reading the web page for another church of the same name, not the one in Hurstville] disregard previous note.

So there is only one of two possible alternatives. The God and Jesus of the Bible, and a God and Jesus dreamed up out of the imagination. How do we know if we are following the right one?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

So there is only one of two possible alternatives. The God and Jesus of the Bible, and a God and Jesus dreamed up out of the imagination. How do we know if we are following the right one?

One could start by avoiding the groups with inspired apostles and so forth, they seem least likely to know the truth.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

One could start by avoiding the groups with inspired apostles and so forth, they seem least likely to know the truth.

The Apostle John warned: "Believe not every spirit but test the spirits whether they are of God because many false prophets have gone out into the world." In view of this, we need to apply the test to every group that professes to teach "the truth". The best test is whether they preach the true Gospel of Christ or not. Paul said in Galatians: "if any one, even an angel comes preaching another gospel, let him be accursed". But what is the Gospel? Paul made that clear in 1 Corinthians 15:
"Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. 3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures"

Any group that does not make their foundation the gospel that Paul preached to the Corinthians as set out in the passage, is the one that has departed from sound doctrine and gone after fables.

There are Pentecostal groups that deny the Trinity, and yet in all other respects they are exactly the same as those Pentecostal groups that do hold to the Trinity, but only those who do hold to the Trinity are truly Christian. Those who don't are pseudo-christian cults. The deception is that on the outward appearance they appear exactly the same as all other Pentecostals.

There are other groups that tell us that they have new revelation from God that makes them superior than more traditional groups. These are the ones who teach that we can be gods, that we must be more than just being like Jesus, rather we must become Jesus, that healing is absolutely guaranteed, and if a person is declared healed they are to ignore their symptoms (Christian Science teaching), also teaching that we can have Apostles today just like the Apostles of Christ, who are able to perform the same signs and wonders that the 1st Century ones did. Also they have exchanged the gospel preached by Paul, with a modern 'gospel' based on experiences. Christ dying on the Cross for our sins and rising from the dead is not taught, but that Jesus is our friend who will give us everything we want if we name and claim it.

Because this group have departed from sound doctrine and put their faith in experiences, all sorts of weird and wonderful manifestations happen in their services, like receiving the "occult touch" that makes people fall down, "slain in the spirit", roll around the floor, bark like dogs, violently nod their heads from side to side, run around like crazy people, uncontrolled laughter, loud babbling in gibberish, repeated pagan mantras like "send down the oil" repeated continually for up to an hour. Groups like this need to be avoided like the plague, because they have a strong element of New Age occult, Hinduism, New Thought (involving hypnotism, Buddhism and paranormal experiences), and Christian Science. The deception about these groups is that they are to all appearances the same as the Pentecostalism of the early 20th Century and the original Charismatic revival of the 1960s involving Dennis Bennett. But the original Pentecostals and Charismatics had the gospel involving Jesus dying on the Cross for our sins and rising from the dead as the primary focus of their preaching, and the signs and wonders happened through the sovereignty of God as He through His own choice honoured their preaching and soul winning for the Lord.