The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum "Scripture plus" principle of authority

Tom,

You didn't answer my question! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/giggle.gif" alt="" /> I actually gave 3 possible sources of such "feelings". So, I'll ask you again, HOW does one know if a particular "feeling", "leading", "prompt", etc., is directly from God? And if one cannot be absolutely positive of the source, then can one legitimately claim that "God told me, xxxxxx!"? or "The Spirit led me to xxxxxx!"? If one is wanting to make such claims, then I would strongly suggest that if one is wrong, then this is nothing short of breaking the Third Commandment, the topic of which just so happens to be this week's study in the Westminster Shorter Catechism in the "Faith of Our Fathers" Forum. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

The same argument for speaking in tongues is used by those who practice and/or support that phenomena too. Since it is happening, they say, it MUST be from God, right? Otherwise, where else would the ability come from? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes2.gif" alt="" /> Gee, I can think of at least two other sources which have nothing to do with God.

In His Grace,

Pilgrim

I don't claim to have all the answers.
Having been a former Charismatic I know the danger of accepting a lot of their arguments. However, I don't want to be dogmatic about this matter.
Ministries such as George Muller depended on answers to prayer and it is recorded by George Muller himself. Some of those methods that he saw God's will done is his ministry were done as I told you in my last post.
From what I understand in the case of George Muller, if God didn't give him money to fund a certain kind of ministry, before that money was needed, he took it to mean that it wasn't God’s will that he move in that direction.
It was similar in the case of Hudson Taylor.

I guess my problem is that I don't see these kinds of answers to prayer and the like, to be against Sola Scriptura. Apparently I am not alone in that one either, many Reformed Christians both past and present believe the same way.

Tom

What does seeing answers to prayer have to do with someone claiming that God has spoken to them and given them specific directions to do such-and-such? etc. I certainly believe that God answers prayers, but always according to His will and not necessarily according to what we asked nor on the manner in which we think He should.

Obviously, you aren't wanting to answer the question(s) I asked of you, so I'll leave you to your own whims.

In His Grace,

Who?


God bless,

william

We can't know infallibly if a certain feeling came from God, or the Devil, or ourselves. But we can, and must, recognize the hand of the Sovereign Lord in all things.

For example, the man who changed lanes at the last minute is in no place to claim that that "feeling" incontrovertably came from God. But he can say, and undeniably so, that God didn't want him dead on the bridge that day, and used that "feeling" to accomplish this purpose, whether it came from the Holy Spirit's prompting (who, remember, does dwell in us), or the man himself, or whatever. So I think the important thing is that we trust the Lord with the outcomes, trusting in Him alone, rather then putting our trust in the means, or getting stuck on them.

That's my $0.02.

Henry,

I agree with your comments. However, the original issue of this thread was whether or not God "speaks" to us today apart from the Bible; i.e., can one trust in those "means" and be assured that they are of God? In that, I have and will continue to adamantly reject any such notion. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

In His Grace,

Pilgrim

I already answered your questions, probably not sufficiently to your liking, but...


Sometimes how God answers prayers (i.e. prompting people to give etc...) has to do with it.
I also agree with you that God's will is not necessarily according to what we asked nor in the manner we think He should. But I do not believe that that stops God when He is so inclined to prompt people in this manner.

Tom

I gave you a few names already. George Muller and Hudson Taylor. But I could add some other names such as John Knox.

Tom

I will go along with that. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/BigThumbUp.gif" alt="" />

Tom

Could you provide some quotes?........please?


God bless,

william

The information about Muller and Taylor, were out of biographies on their lives. I don't have them at the moment, so you may find them faster by looking for these biographies yourself.
I will try to find some information about Knox, but I do know that I have submitted some information on the Highway before.

Tom

I read the site you sent me. Where did John Knox ever claim such a gift?


God bless,

william

I have been abroad for a while and so I missed developments on this thread.

I believe the modern charismatic movement is not of God, even though there are true believers involved in it. We must also acknowledge that great Christians in the past have held the view that direct revelation continues, for example, Sandy Peden, Donald Cargill and numerous other Scots Worthies. On that note, we should also acknowledge that certain Covenanters in the past felt sanctioned by God to commit acts we would regard as seriously amiss, and also that their initiatives ultimately floundered; they lived by the sword, and they died by it; they would have been better listening to Jesus' warnings on that subject. Can it be that their guidance was, while ostensibly from God, actually received from another source? I am DEEPLY wary of anything that would distract us from exclusive reliance on the more sure Word of God.

The charismata of the New Testament are clearly stated to have the supreme role of assigning authority to the apostles and early Christian prophets in the wake of what was a unique revolution in Church history (i.e. the Advent of the Christ). Fresh "revolutions" since, most notably the first Reformation, were devoid of New Testament style miraculous healings, fresh additions to the canon, visions like Peter's, and so on. Yes, we have records of instances of intuitive revelations like those Cargill, Peden, et al received; but, as stated above, so far from being used of God to form a foundation to a subsequent rapid church-building endeavour, these revelations were associated with increasing declension as the conventicles faded away and the church became, if anything, increasingly apostate rather than stronger in the face of persecution, as attested to by the lamenting sermons preached at the close of that strange era in Scotland.

Nevertheless, I think we cannot deny that presentiment of future events does occur. Can it be that God allows this to happen in order to test our trust in the Scriptures, or even to enter into studies such as this? Certainly, even false prophets in the Bible were occasionally accurate in their predictions.

To close, I think that presentiment definitely does occur, but I am not convinced it can always been indetified as accurate until or unless the event comes to pass, and even at that, it may be coincidental. I also think we must always beware of a VERY subtle Adversary who can appear as an angel of light and who can deceive the very elect for a time. Therefore we must cling to the more sure Word and its promise that it alone is sufficient to perfect us unto every good work.

Whoever the people are you mentioned, can you offer evidence their revelations were directly from God?


God bless,

william

I cannot do that for the very reason I have no proof that they were. Consider Sandy Peden: http://www.newble.co.uk/hall/others/pedprophet.html

I also wonder how the murder of Bishop Sharp was justified in the minds of those who perpetrated it.

I can envisage the devil determining to do some evil event and then suggesting its occurence to the believer, since he clearly continues to speak to Christians through suggestion to this very day. I can also envisage people accepting such predictions and acting, a la Macbeth, to bring them to pass.

I am somewhat surprised to see how many Bible commentators took the view that "perfect" in 1 Corinthians 13 refers to the next life rather than the completion of canon, even Matthew Henry. Can anyone state the case for the view that the perfect state refers to the completion of canon, and most specifically, how this squares with Paul's comment that "now I know in part, but then I shall know even as also I am known", since Paul was dead by the time the canon was completed?

Friends, I am not trying to prove anything other than the truth here. I am trying to be objective, although I will admit my heart wants the cessationist position to be true.