While I would agree that in the broad sense, Paul was both a Calvinist and a Charismatic, is he to be held up as paradigmatic for the universal church in all ages? The issue is, of course, Cessationism. There were many things which were valid for the O.T. saints which were not so for the saints of the N.T., e.g., the civil and ceremonial laws . . . would you not agree? Likewise, what were valid ways of communication of God to the church in the N.T. have since ceased due to their being fulfilled, i.e., the purpose of such communication was completed. Obviously, you are going to disagree. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

The caveat to those who insist that God continues to communicate in a revelatory manner today is "fallible inspiration". This in itself is a major hurdle and one which no one, IMHO, has ever been able to successfully overcome. Again, you will probably disagree.

In regard to this, you also mentioned that "the only system that qualifies {Calvinism + ecstatic gifts}" is Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology. However, Dr. Richard Gaffin and others have soundly refuted Grudem's claims in books, articles, etc. One such book is Gaffin's own Perspectives on Pentecost. I would recommend it to your reading. R. Fowler Wright wrote an article comparing the two views of Grudem and Gaffin which you can read here: Gaffin and Grudem on Ephesians 2:20.

For a more comprehensive list of articles defending biblical "soft" Cessationism, please consult this section on The Highway: The Charismatic Movement.

Given the purpose of this forum, it is strongly suggested that if you wish to debate/discuss the topic of "Cessationism", you do so in the Theology Forum. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]