The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Sola Scriptura and Prophecy

Quite some time ago now, if memory does not fail me, in a discussion about Sola-Scriptura and the revelatory gifts such prophecy. I believe an article was provided that showed that to believe that gifts like prophecy are still in effect, is to logically not to believe in Sola-Scriptura.
I believe the argument used went something like if the gift of prophecy was still in effect it would logically mean that the prophetic words would be as authoritative as Scripture itself; seeing it came directly from God Himself.
I did a quick search for the article, but could not find it. Though I did find other articles on the cessation of the sign gifts.
I would appreciate reading the article again.
Comments are also welcome.
There are of course people that argue that the opposite it true. That the gift of prophecy does not have the same authority as Scripture and that to believe that these gifts have ceased, is to deny Sola-Scriptura; because Scripture clearly says that they will be in effect until the last days.
Tom

Not sure which article you are referring to. However, I have argued myriad times here that if someone claims, "God told me... God spoke to me and said, etc., etc., ad nauseam" then of necessity it is inspired, inerrant and infallible and thus wholly authoritative and unassailable. The canon of Scripture is closed and therefore no extra-biblical communication has come from God from the day the revelation of God came to His appointed servants who put to writing all that was given to them (2Ti 3:15-17; 2Pet 1:19-21; Rev 22:18-20).

Perhaps R. Fowler White's article could be helpful: Does God Speak Today Apart From the Bible?.

Those such as D rGrudem and DA Carson though would argue for the continuing of the gift of prophecy to the church, not as inspired Prophetic messages, but more like encouragement and exhortations form the Lord.

However, that begs the question. If these so called "encouragement and exhortations from the Lord", are "not as inspired Prophetic messages". How can they really be from the Lord?
The whole premise of any message from the Lord, not being as inspired as the Word of God, seems to say God can error.

Am I missing something?

Tom

They would see those as being exhortations and guidance from the Holy Spirit as He did in Acts in the local churches, but not to be seen as infallible utterances!

JesusFan
That does not answer my questions at all. If they are not "infallible utterances", how can they be truly be of the Holy Spirit? Does the Holy Spirit give fallible utterances? If so, would that not make the Holy Spirit fallible?

Tom

No, that would make the Holy Spirit... "another spirit", i.e., not God the Holy Spirit (2Cor 11:4; Titus 1:2; 1Jh 4:1).

So, taking that premise that "exhortations and guidance... are not necessarily infallible utterances", then theoretically, there is the real possibility that such "exhortations [an address or communication emphatically urging someone to do something] and/or guidance [advice or information aimed at resolving a problem or difficulty, especially as given by someone in authority] could be incorrect, wrong, false, untrue, etc. which surely fits the definition of "fallible". And that being the case, then not only would an individual or group of individuals be susceptible to the consequences of following incorrect, wrong, false, untrue, etc. information, but there would be a incontrovertible truth that such incorrect, wrong, false untrue, etc., "exhortations and guidance" originated from "another spirit" other than God. The prophets of the Bible NEVER spoke nor wrote anything that was incorrect, wrong, false, untrue, etc., i.e., fallible which was given to them directly from God... for that would be impossible, for no such nonsense CAN nor ever will come from God.

I do not believe in what they are teaching, but their reasoning was that in the local churches in Acts, the Spirit would be giving forth thru those gifted with prophesy messages that were to encourage and support them, while the scriptures were where to get doctrines from!

Again, they would separate the office of the prophet, as they would always speak from God in truth, from those having a gift of prophesy, which would do as they describe!

R. Fowler Wright more than sufficiently refutes any such idea which thinks that God continues to speak directly to Christians today here: Does God Speak Today Apart From the Bible?. And, my response stated above is enough in itself to refute that view. IF someone claims, "God told me..._________ (enter whatever)" then it MUST be 1) true and 2) authoritative. No one would be warranted in rejecting what that person said. Dr. R.C. Sproul had the classic answer to any such claim; I paraphrase his response, "Well, the Holy Spirit spoke to me last night and said everything you claim and said is nothing more than horse pucky!!" So, who could dare criticize the verity of what Sproul (the Holy Spirit) said?

I am in agreement with you here, as was just addressing what Dr Grudem and DA Carson held in regards to this area.

Exactly my point!

Tom