longing for the silence of god

My friend Robert Ivy has been silent on his blog as well as in the Pyromaniac comment gallery (since they are on hiatus). But that doesn't mean he hasn't spoken. In fact, he has been aggressively crossing "Swords" with John MacArthur in Pulpit Magazine - most recently in MacArthur's post, Prophecy and the Closed Canon (Part 3).

MacArthur is about 2000 years after his time. He longs for the inter-Testament period where we see the sad fulfillment of Psalm 74:9 upon Israel: "We do not see our signs; there is no longer any prophet, and there is none among us who knows how long."

Or perhaps he would like to take the Church back to the times of Eli, "... the word of the Lord was rare in those days; there was no frequent vision." - 1 Sam 3.1. In Amos 8.11; "'Behold, the days are coming,' declares the Lord God, 'when I will send a famine on the land— not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord.'" This was not a good thing.

He has locked into God not speaking in such a way that he wouldn't hear God it if He did speak. And worse, based on the decades of repeating the same argument, I don't think he hears other people either.

In his latest post at Pulpit Magazine, he continues to confuse the notion that one can prophecy without being equal to Scripture just as one can teach without being equal to Scripture. He continues to insist that any new revelation is as binding as Scripture. That's as ignorant as saying any teaching is a binding as Scripture. I'm not sure why he quotes in this post one of the greatest proof texts supporting the continuance of prophecy and how prophecy ultimately brings us back to Scripture and to God Himself - "New Testament believers are also urged to test the spirits and judge all supposed prophecies, shunning false prophets and heretics (1 John 4:1; 1 Cor. 14:29)."

In spite of his youthfulness, Ivy is more mature than I. Here is his excellent response to MacArthur.

It seems that John MacArthur is dealing with two separate issues here. The first is the tendency of charismatics to not study the Bible for all its worth and the second (surely related to it) is the relationship between prophecy and the canon of Scripture, and the apparent contradiction between the Canon being closed and inerrant revelation being open.

I lament with John MacArthur the tendency of charismatics to be doctrinally shallow and loose in their handling of the Word of God. The object of people like me in being a “Reformed Charismatic” or “Charismatic Calvinist” is to counteract this sloppiness and disregard for the Word of God, while still holding (what we believe is) a Biblical view of the charismatic gifts of the Spirit.

Which brings us to our second dilemma, if inerrant prophecy can still occur today, then doesn’t that pose a problem for the authority of Scripture? Short answer: no.

Scripture itself teaches that it is unique among all God’s revelation... It is not simply inerrant, authoritative prophecy to be interpreted by and understood in light of other prophecy of the same nature. The Bible is distinct in that it carries a specific story line and is a sufficient revelation of God’s will for all people everywhere at all times. To equate Scripture with all inerrant communication is a grave mistake for it is not, according to itself, merely a volume of every inerrant, infallible, authoritative word from God (John 21:25, with plenty more examples).

Scripture actually makes it clear that it is above inerrant prophecy. 1 Cor 14:37 says, “If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord.”

Those who think they are prophets of course include those who are actually prophets. And Paul tells these inspired prophets to “acknowledge that the things I am writing (a.k.a. Scripture)… are a command of the Lord.”

Scripture itself then is no mere prophecy - it is the command of the Lord for all prophets, clearly putting prophecy in its proper place, and even more powerfully, putting Scripture into its own exalted category.

This is further supported by the fact that nowhere in Scripture is the writing of Scripture talked about as a gift from the Lord or said to be an equivalent to prophecy. Of course certain prophecies are recorded, but even then, the author of Scripture had to have a different level of authority to include certain prophecies and drop others.

I hope that makes sense and clears up some of the cessationists’ problems with the charismatic position on modern-day revelation.

Thank you Robert.

Technorati Tags: charismata, Signs & Wonders, spiritual gifts