Someone named Cushie over at Pulpit-Pimps said this:
B&R – Just drp the “Reformed” tag then it be easier to understand some of your comments.
I immediately came to my own defense (and others also) on why I am Reformed. I thought about this all last night and came to the conclusion that maybe He is right! Maybe I should! Am I Reformed? Well maybe not enough. Are there things I affirm that were birthed from the Protestant Reformation movement? Every protestant denomination has to nod in agreement. But! Maybe Cushie is right. So let me tell you what I affirm and what I don’t. But I would rather drop the label than offend a brother when they say “he is not one of us”! So here we go.
1. I was a charismatic Pentecostal, swung always to the other side and became a cesassionist and now have swung back to the other side. So I believe ALL of the gifts are for the church today. In practice I don’t know what that looks like but all the gifts listed in Ephesians 4, Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12 are in full operation and should be allowed to build up and edify the body of Christ. This may be strike 1! LOL
2. I am a 5 point Calvinist in the extreme case. I fully convinced that this system of doctrine is true. Not 4 but 5. No way does one drop of blood get wasted (just in case)!
3. I affirm the 5 Solas though I believe they are taken far out their context. It is funny how people say the gifts have ceased and use church history as the foundation can’t prove their points bucolically. Unless an address can be found (1 Cor 13 is such a stretch that great scholars don’t agree on it) to tell me they cease I will have to scream: Sola Scriptura!
4. I beleive that the Canon of Scripture is closed! However I believe that God still speaks today outside of the scripture to deal with personal and corporate needs of the Church today. All 66 books are the bible; however not everything that God would ever say to us are contained in them.
5. Anyone coming with anything that is radically contrary to the 66 books should be marked and removed from the brethren (Joseph Smith, Wallace and others along that line). One thing that is clear over the course of biblical history the message hasn’t changed. If the nature of God, the nature of Christ, the nature of the Spirit, some doctrine that conflicts with the scriptures are proposed. Slap the dude put on your running shoes and get going. A wolf is in your midst.
6. I hold to what is termed New Covenant Theology. Meaning there were two (and only two, no dispensations, and I am not referring to the Covenant of Works/Grace either) covenants given. One on Mt. Sinai the other in Jesus! The first was a covenant of death, the latter a covenant of grace (2 Corinthians 3, Hebrews 8-9).
7. I thought I had an eschatological position, but truth is I don’t and I have given up. I have read some good works, listened to some good sermons and I came to 1 conclusion. Jesus is coming back. If that is to setup a literal 1000 year reign then cool if it is to judge the world and let it be consumed by fire (2 Thess 1) then fine. Whichever it is I know I am safe and upon death or second coming I will be with him. Though I outright deny a rapture, unless that rapture is to snatch us from His wrath (in other words I deny a tribulation whatsoever).
8. I believe in a pure consensus ecclesiology. I believe in a plurality of Elders with all Elders being equal. Not to mention that these elders are equal with the body (Matthew 23). I believe in elder oversight not elder rule (as we think of the term rule). I believe that everyone has an equal voice within the assembly. If we truly hold to James 4:1-3, and Philippians 2:1-11 much of what we do could be solved very quickly (I had to learn this by personal experience quite recently actually). I reject all notions and practice of a visionary! Whatsoever!
6. I believe in church discipline but believe it is sometimes used as a litmus test of true churches and real Christians. Where Jesus never said “they will know you are my disciples because of your discipline of one another”. I don’t think it went like that. Discipline should take quite a while and should be in extreme cases and should be a last step. It seems like we would rather discipline than fast for, pray for and come along side one another.
7. I believe in Believers Only Baptism. I believe that is to be done by submerging, not pouring or any other method (unless of course there are some physical limitations). I believe a person should be baptized immediately (the same day if possible) upon profession. We should never deny water to anyone who professes the Lord Jesus. The book of Acts makes it clear that every person who professed Christ was immediately baptized. I believe too often we have a huge waiting period (churches are too big or too busy both are whack) or we want to test the fruit (this is radically opposed to scripture) or we don’t emphasize the urgency of baptism and we focus so much on grace that we forget that Jesus commanded this. We don’t tell people to wait to leave their adulterous relationships we shouldn’t tell people to wait to be baptized.
8. I believe in the Lords Table and believe it should be done around a feast. I think a thimble and a oyster cracker may be insufficient. Not sin but definitely insufficient.
9. I believe what the bible labels sin is sin, what the bible doesn’t label sin isn’t sin and what your conscience (not someone elses) calls sin is sin to you (not others).
10. I affirm the Apostles Creed in its fullness.
11. I more closely affiliate with the 1644 London Baptist Confession.
12. I also believe in one work of the Spirit. Meaning I don’t adhere to a second baptism subsequent to salvation. Or in other terms the Baptism of the Holy Ghost subsequent to conversion. I believe 1 Corinthians 12 makes this clear.
13. I also belive that Regeneration proceeds Faith which proceeds Justifcation (if that means anything at all). So I don’t belive someone gets born again (really born from above) but that they are made born again by the Spirit as He will blow. However these are so simultaneous that it doesn’t matter anyway. We are saved by Grace through Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and His atoning work on the cross and subsequent ressurection which shows that His sacrfice was acceptable to the Father proving He is the promised Messiah and conquering death. As Colossians states “He is the firstfruit”!
12. Finally I am leaning more towards participatory, small, open (1 Cor 14) gatherings. Not the more traditional setting.
So am I Reformed? You tell me!
Brother Lionel,
If I may, I think the answer is you are being reformed. Just as I have the same thoughts you have on this subject. It is not finished and won’t be finished until Christ comes back then the reform will be finished.
God Bless you and I love your site. Steve
I understand that the question of whether or not you are “reformed” is important in some circles. To me, the most important question is, “Are you a brother in Christ?” By your profession, and according to everything I’ve read from you points to an answer of “Yes!” If God accepted you in Christ, then I want to accept you as well.
-Alan
Sowen,
Thanks a buch brother. I appreciate the kind words and the constant encouragment.
Alan,
As always your wisdom and insight stretches me beyond comfort. Your post on the Lords Supper is amazing indeed. Not to mention your post on John Perkins work. My next purchase will be both Beyond Charity and The Reformers and their stepchildren.
If I may add something (regarding Brother Allan’s thoughts, which I CONCUR!!),
Where in the Bible are the labels seen as necessary, to begin with? In no way am I knocking the label—as I’m Reformed Myself (Reformed Charismatic——-4½-point Calvinist would be a better description, as there’re still some things, even after years of growing up around Reformed Theology in Highschool,that don’t click/seem consistent—specifically scriptures showing where on some things there may indeed be possibilities/decisions God has left up to us and given us options on to choose).
However, does anyone here fell that the labels have indeed become something akin to a hinderance to edifying brethren? For I’ve heard many elsewhere (in person and online) say that Reformed is the very ESSENCE of Biblical Christianity—and if you’re not in that camp, you don’t qualify as someone worth listening to. But for all of the brothers who came before the concept of “Reformed” theology came into view and for those existing when Reformed” theology came into view but never joined the camp, where they any less “brethren” or did they do less for the Kingdom?
One the issue of the essence of Christianity and how we’re to consider ourselves, here are some things which I consider to be noteworthy:
But some of them became obstinate; they refused to believe and publicly maligned the Way. So Paul left them. He took the disciples with him and had discussions daily in the lecture hall of Tyrannus.
Acts 19:8-10 (in Context) Acts 19 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 19:23
[ The Riot in Ephesus ] About that time there arose a great disturbance about the Way.
Acts 19:22-24 (in Context) Acts 19 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 11:26
and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch.
Acts 11:25-27 (in Context) Acts 11 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 22:4
I persecuted the followers of this Way to their death, arresting both men and women and throwing them into prison,
Acts 22:3-5 (in Context) Acts 22 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 24:14
However, I admit that I worship the God of our fathers as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that agrees with the Law and that is written in the Prophets,
Acts 24:13-15 (in Context) Acts 24 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 24:22
Then Felix, who was well acquainted with the Way, adjourned the proceedings. “When Lysias the commander comes,” he said, “I will decide your case.”
Acts 24:21-23 (in Context) Acts 24 (Whole Chapter)
Apart from those following after Christ carrying the label of “THE WAY”, prior to that it was even more simplified: You either were or you weren’t A DISCIPLE—-which is what all were know by ((Luke 10:25-37, Matthew 25:31-40)? and that they’re also faithful to this (James 1:27).
Matthew 10:42
And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward.”
Matthew 10:41-42 (in Context) Matthew 10
Luke 14:26
“If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.
Luke 14:25-27 (in Context) Luke 14 (Whole Chapter)
John 13:35
By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”
John 13:34-36 (in Context) John 13 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 6:7
So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith.
Acts 6:6-8 (in Context) Acts 6 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 9:1
Quote:
[ Saul's Conversion ] Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples. He went to the high priest
Acts 9:1-3 (in Context) Acts 9 (Whole Chapter)
Acts 9:36
In Joppa there was a disciple named Tabitha (which, when translated, is Dorcas ), who was always doing good and helping the poor.
Acts 9:35-37 (in Context) Acts 9 (Whole Chapter)
The more I think about it, things would probably be alot more simplified if this is what we went by, rather than all of the titles/labels….AND IN the persecuted churches around the world dying for the name of Christ Jesus, buddy, when they’re doing this, it really does help to keep it real….and level out the arguments that come up when people say “You’re not REFORMED—-” since the reality is whether or not you’re seeking to follow Christ, regardless of labels.
That’s part of the reason why I no longer like claiming what paticular denomination/LINE OF THOUGHT I’m apart of or choosing since I think it tends to box people in. Moreover, with demoninations/lines of thought I’ve been in many and seen GOOD/BAD—and enough to know that I can never be 100% anything since I don’t agree 100% with ANYONE/GROUP.
Was raised Charismatic/in WOF, Non-Denominational, then Apostolic/Prophetic and Vineyard, then in Reformed, then exposed to Baptist/Evangelical, then Emerging/Missional, etc……..and from there, the list includes issues within the camps that I may not agree with—things/views most commonly raised by those within the HOUSE CHURCH MOVEMENT and Kats for “ORGANIC CHURCH” like Frank Viola from Pagan Christianity (i.e. no buildings, steeples, domineering teachers/elders, etc). The list could go on, BUT COULD ANY ONE LABEL TRULY DEFINE FULLY WHAT YOU ARE OR WILL REMAIN FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE?
Basically, can Reformed Theology truly be held up as something to be offended by if someone claims “You don’t fit the Label”?
For IMHO, it’d seem that in order to be offended, one would have to also believe that REFORMED theology has the market on ALL SCRIPTURAL TRUTH/INSIGHT available or that’s impacting the saints—-and that any of the issues that seem unadressed within Reformed Theological circles, somehow they’ve adressed them equally and fairly (from Spiritual Gifts/Pursuing them, to tackling Poverty/the Urban Poor and aiding them politicallly for the Kingdom, to issues such as Prayer & Fasting/Mission Field, etc). And if anyone’s willing to discuss that, it’d be very interesting to see.
Though I said earlier I’d be “Reformed Charismatic”, a better description of myself, though, would probably be a Reforming/THINKING Charismatic—as I’m for correct doctrine, and for the most part, I think I have a pretty good grasp on some points, but in other areas I am “Semper Reformanda” (or always reforming/open-minded and willing to change if I see truth—-Proverbs 18:15). Joshua Harris said it best here—The Truth: Rediscovering Humble Orthodoxy –
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8757484191110169438&q=humble+orthodoxy&ei=f1plSKigG432rQKX8OihBA
which is the basic tenet of what Jesus said–
Luke 10:27
He answered: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’ ; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ ”
Luke 10:26-28 (in Context) Luke 10
Loving Truth/Knowledge (exercising your mind) yet PASSIONATELY LOVING HIS PRESCENSE—that, and this: James 1:27/James 1:26-27. Simple….
Being in a myriad of camps, from Reformed to Charismatic, WOF, Baptist, Non-Denominational, Conservative or Evangelical Revivalist, and seeing how no one seems to have it right 100%, I’d tend to try/not pick sides. As Lionel once said in another post from back in the day, “For the most part I think I am right—-but others do not and they, as I do, believe themselves to be correct. I think these things can be debated, but as I always say ‘the end goal is edification’ Things that I said three years ago, I wouldn’t dare say today. Positions that I held to as stone have become like sand between my fingers. Things I would debate with great passion, are now the same truths I embrace with like passion. ”
Bottom line is whether or not you’re a DISCIPLE/FOLLOWER OF CHRIST (as those within the persecuted churches around the world focus on—–which came before the term “CHRISTIAN” and all the other denominational titles we use (Acts 11:25-27 (in Context) Acts 11 )
If anyone’s interested,
There was an article on this I studied awhile back on the issue which seemed to incorporate the positive aspects of LIVING BEYOND (i.e. seeking truth but at the same time acknowledging that no one systematic theology has it downpack or the whole story:
http://theresurgence.com/john_armstrong_2007_true_evangelical_theology
From Mark Driscoll’s site— with Driscoll being pretty interesting seeing that he’s an Emerging Reformer (As well as MISSIONAL)—WHICH Is also what folks like C.J Mahanney/Joshua Harris are–and is more akin to what I’d be in many ways as well–and part of that mentality is what I carry with me whenever I interact with people….\
The bible is not a systematic theology textbook and there is a reason for that. Christianity is about knowing Christ, not knowing theology. While we should defend good doctrine, I think Augustine said it very well: “Whoever thinks he understands divine scripture or any part of it, but whose interpretation does not build up the twofold love of God and neighbor, has not really understood it. Whoever has drawn from scripture an interpretation that does fortify this love, but who is later proven not to have found the meaning intended by the author of the passage, is deceived to be sure, but not in a harmful way, and he is guilty of no untruth at all.”
Lionel, You are a great “man of Gawd.” Not only are you like many of us reforming, but we are striving to be Biblical. Not only are we striving to be Biblical but walk as Christ who is the Great Reformer. Think about this, our Lord brought a reformation in doctrine and practice that the religious folk hated Him for. What was the result? A purchasing of many through His precious blood. So that mindset of reformed providentially rose in 1517 and we should continue that way until we recover the Christianity set out in Scripture.
Phillip
Much Love Phillip. Hey I am going to be in Little Rock in August I will let you know when I get more detail. Lets grab a bite and sharpen one another friend! Though you may be doing the sharpening. LOL!
Lionel, I had someone ask me the other day if I considered myself to be “one of those reformed types”. The response I came up with was that I would change the ed on the end of the word to ing because ed sounds like something that is over with and ing sounds like something that is still happening.
True indeed Mark, true indeed!
Lionel, I had a opportunity to caught a little of the literary sword play over on PP. I must say you held your ground and the question was smelling salt for you I see.
No matter where we go we will hold tight to our perceptions until they are smashed. With that being said I believe that your stance on reformation is firm as well as legit. I am new to the Reformed Doctrine( about 1 solid year) and when I first heard it I actually thought it was pagan. So I am not the fore most athority by no means but I tend to hold to the same beliefs as you.
Truth be told not all Calvinist believe that the same things about the 5 points as others. If you check out desireing God in their explanation of the TULIP, they make a reference to “What we believe about he the TULIP.” So our understanding of what reformation means is really of no importance in the big scheme of things. The Word of God is the ultimate guide everything else is just good descriptive names.
I remember hearing a conversation of Micheal Eric Dyson and Cornel West talking about the use of the word n—-r. Though they differed on the use of the word one thing they came to realize was that they both had a love for people especially those in the black community.
just my thoughts
Hey Brian,
Welcome to the Reformed Tradition. It started back in 04 for me and has been reforming me every since then. Thanks for the kind words friend. At the end of the day who knows where I might hold the line! I will tell you this though. I will never deviate from Monergism, 1 Corinthians 15, Romans 3:21-27, and Ephesians 2:8-9. Outside of that who knows.
1. I can come to any other conclusion than that of God saves as He wills and since everyone ain’t saved then somehow this election thing is for real
2. 1 Corinthians 15 is the Gospel
3. Romans 3 and Justification is foundational to whatever else you lear in scripture
4. Ephesians 2, gives God all the glory!
Lionel-
I hear you.
When I think “Reformed” I think of Catholic priests like Luther and Calvin getting saved and leaving the Catholic Church, Infant Baptism, Presbyterian Church Government, Covenant Theology, Reformed Baptist Legalism etc. etc.
That you definately are not!
I wrote a piece entitled “Do I consider myself a protestant?” over at my blog if you are interested.
BTW. I am not what is anachronistically termed Charismatic, or Pentecostal-but I am not a cessationist either!
Hi B&R. Didn’t realize the discussion had such an impact on you. If it helps, I wouldn’t worry about whether you are “Reformed” or not. I consider myself reformed, but I am also a Baptist – no infant baptism. I consider myself reformed, but I am also dispensationalist.
The bottom line is: are you good with the five solas?
But aside from that, it seems you have not necessarily done a stellar job of what you mean by God communicating with us. If God chides you for being unkind to someone, is that God talking to you? As our discussion moved forward, I got the distinct impression that your “God communicates” was not the same as a “prophet” saying “Thus says the Lord…”
God surely “tells” us stuff. I visited a Kingdom Hall once to verify what I was reading in books. It was verified. And I got the distinct impression that God really doesn’t want me to visit any more Kingdom Halls.
A second time, I was in the kitchen washing dishes while my wife was going over some stuff in the Bible with my kids when I got the distinct impression that she was doing that which I was responsible for. No voice in my head. No prophet at the door saying “Thus says the Lord slacker. Bible study is YOUR job!”
He certainly communicates. And he communicates about things that aren’t explicitly in the Bible [none of the books deal with Melvin Jones and what he should be doing. None of them deal with visiting Kingdom Halls.].
So again – I suspect we were speaking past each other.
But more than that, remember that “Reformed” is just a short-hand label Christians use to decide who they want to associate with. In the long run, it doesn’t mean very much.
Melvin
Hey Melvin,
1. I wasn’t that “impactful” Melvin. It was a response to many different things that have been floating around the blogosphere.
2. I have made myself as clear as possible. Just as you see the “supernatural” element of all the gifts so is prophecy. Now you are taking what I have said out of context. Prophecy is Supernatural just like all the gifts. Every gift is given outside of the persons own ability (though it is taught much differently today). The gifts are juiced up talents. It is something outside of ones own ability to muster. I belive the gift of prophecy is such. Nowhere does the bible say “hey everything that is to be said to the body can be found in the scriptures”. If so I am going to ask you as I ask IC please show us in scripture where the bible says this. Up for the task?
Lionel,
Good on you mate! You are Reformed, but not Deformed as some who claim the nomenclature.
I’m afraid I’m still not quite clear on what you mean when you use the term “prophecy.”
I certainly agree with the idea that all of the gifts are from the spirit and supernatural in nature. But not all are particularly spectacular. After all, such “mundane” things as exhorting is a gift; as are serving, giving, and hospitality.
So again, I really need to understand what you mean by prophecy. Then perhaps I can address your request for demonstrating that everything we need in in Scripture. Your definition of “everything” should even be clarified.
I still suspect we are talking past each other, though.
Melvin
Okay Melvin I will try to spell this out as clear as possible some I am going to ask some questions and answer some.
1. There are many prophtets in the Old Testament. Did ever prophet write scripture? To be a prophet you must have made at least one prophecy. Thus ever prophecy that every prophet made was not annotated and then canonized. Now if they were really a prophet then what they prophesied must had been from God or they would not have been prophets (other than the prophtets who were not from God Baalam and others). Thus if God says something to a prophet and the prophet says it then it is infalliable.
2. What do I mean by prophecy? Only what scripture says. Which is:
a. Prophecy is used to tell God’s people something that is going to happen in the future that can only be known by God.
b. Prophecy can glorify God once a former prophecy has been fulfilled (Luke 2)
c. Prophecy can be very specific as in the case with Agabus and Paul or Agubus with the Church in Jersualme with the famine
d. Prophecy can somehow examine the hearts of the unbelievers and bring them to repentance.
3. Women can propechy, men can prophecy, people can become prophets against their will (Jeremeiah, Jonah). A prophet can hold a permanent office or God can use them to give a prophecy then they can go back to what they were doing before the Lord called them (Daniel and many other minor prophets).
I will also add that I never used the word spectacular. I only used the word supernatural. The gift of giving is supernatural but may lack the luster and glitter of healing. However for God to give the faith to a person to give until they have nothing and find joy in that is supernatural (it goes against the natural). So all of the gifts are supernatural and if these gifts are really from the Holy Spirit then they are “infalliable” I guess.
So what I mean by prophecy is what the scripture means by prophecy. I don’t read anything into it that isn’t there and I don’t take anything from it that is there. Prophecy can be a simple exhortation from God’s word or it can be personal exposing the heart of a non-believer or it can be corporate and foretell something that is going to happen. If it is from the Holy Spirit then it is supernatural and can’t be conjured up by human effort.
Okay. So if someone stands up in church and says
Are we to assume that God spoke through this person as one moved by the Holy Spirit?
The person who stood up and spoke didn’t say anything outrageous or unreasonable. He didn’t tell them to do anything the Bible forbids. The Bible doesn’t tell us what to name a church organization. It doesn’t tell us to be or not be a part of a denomination. It doesn’t demand that the person speaking hold any kind of office.
I’m asking you this because despite what I believe are your good faith efforts to explain what you mean, I’m still just not getting it. Your answer to this, I believe, will at least let me start filling in the areas I don’t understand.
Please be patient with me.
I believe anything contrary to the metanarritve of scripture should be avoided like McCain at a NAACP banquet!
But nothing I wrote is contrary to the narrative of Scripture.
So why shouldn’t I assume it is from God, spoken by a man moved by the Holy Spirit?
Melvin
I didn’t say that it was. Where did you assume I did. You have the burden of proof to hermenuetically prove that Scripture is complete for everything the body will need and that the gift of Prophecy is nonexsistent.
I point out that nothing I wrote is contrary because in your previous comment you state:
I believe anything contrary to the metanarritve of scripture should be avoided like McCain at a NAACP banquet!
My assumption in reading this statement, was that you believed the “prophecy” to contain statements that are contrary to the metanarrative of scripture. Otherwise, why would you bring it up?
So as not to make assumptions, do you think the “prophecy” I presented contradicts the metanarratives of Scripture? As a second part of the question, if it doesn’t contradict the metanarratives of Scripture, why should I not take it as that spoken by a man moved by the Holy Spirit?
No that wasn’t my assumption Melvin. I think we are talking past one another. If a man who is “proven and tested” to be a prophet or at least have the gift of prophecy was to say something that was not contrary to the metanarritve of scripture (or scripture in general) then I would affirm what he has spoken. It really depends. We all have the Spirit and that is why Paul says the “prophets are subject” he also says “test all prophecies”. So I don’t believe someone walks in and says “hey I am a prophet now believe me” is biblical.
The problem is I think you guys seem to say that all of scripture was just “accepted” as it was written. If we read Jeremiah, Isaiah and other such texts we see that even as they are writing and speaking many didn’t believe them to be true prophets. It is only in hindsight are they recognized as such. If the North and the South never went into slavery they would have been deemed false prophets. To make it even clearer we see no one believed them because they went into slavery.
So to answer your question. If someone you know to be an upright man/woman came with such a prophecy that you have used as an example and the church examines it and their spirit agrees with him then my answer is yes. Trust him.
Melvin,
Is there evidence that you truly would accept as proof that the gift of prophecy still exist? Scripture does say that certain things will cease and others will pass away. But the conditions, on which this ceasing and passing away is to occur, have not been met. Or have they? Has the perfect come? Or have we all attained to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ?
John Piper told a story in which he was given a sermon. He made a statement like, “Even if God wants you to start a bible study on the 36th floor of your building, then do it!”. After the sermon a lady came up to him and told him that she was planning on starting a bible study on the 36th floor of her building and she felt as though the message was encouragement just for her. And Piper felt as though it was a “gift of prophecy” given to him in that moment for that reason. Not that he was now a prophet or personally possessed the gift but that it was given to him for use at that moment. Now it is so easy to dismiss this as coincidence or to assume that the lady just wanted to interject herself into the sermon for personal reasons. But why not accept it as Piper described it?
What would it take for us to not only believe inspite of tradition but to also return to a trust in the Holy Spirit that we will not be led astray?
Your example begins to illustrate what you mean by prophecy. Again, I’m not sure we disagree with each other. But I will maintain that you are not being particularly clear in what you mean – and don’t mean.
It’s not a matter of tradition versus trust. It’s more a matter of being clear about what you mean. And so far, you are only just now starting to clarify what you mean.
Melvin
Usher: Are you reformed Deak?
Deacon: Not if it means I have to change!
Usher: Haha – kind of hard to find the right label these days, huh Deak?
Deacon: I guess you could say that – simpler for a buzzard than those humans – they’re always fussin’ with titles, labels and positioning
Usher: Only positioning I’m into is beatin’ you to the roadkill