(Click picture to go back to Table of Contents)
Welcome
Enjoy... But remember
"Don't give in to winning the argument
and losing one of your eternal crowns..."
God bless you...
Enjoy... But remember
"Don't give in to winning the argument
and losing one of your eternal crowns..."
God bless you...
... until you BLUR? 
We need changed hearts, not miracles. (Wahshing)
Why many kept calling myJesus,a false healer,today? 
It's time to come back from "Experience" to Scriptures! (Christopher Yip)
All those queries and distortions were refuted long ago!Here's more. 
"Refuted"? You mean "rancour", don't you? (Christopher Yip)
I oblige You. (FrankieLee)
And I am STILL waiting ... (Christopher Yip)
Please be open and I assume you are reasonable.1. (FrankieLee)
But unfortunately, you are not. (Christopher Yip)
Superficial or deep,at a glance? (FrankieLee)
Frank and Chris, pls read, thankyou (Emmanuel)
Nope. (Christopher Yip)
Hi Chris, I have a question for people who cessationists (Royston Ong)
On Cessationism (Christopher Yip)
In so saying.... (Royston Ong)
Wrong way (Christopher Yip)
Please correct me if I have not yet figured it out (Royston Ong)
Response (Christopher Yip)
Save-by-grace gave good response. (FrankieLee)
From a cessationist named Frankie. (Christopher Yip)
Jack Deere knocked down too many fallacies. (FrankieLee)
|
For heavens' sake, Frank, Deere's "Surprised by the Power of the Holy Spirit" was published, to my recollection, in 1993 and Thomas Edgar's "Satisfied with the Promise of the Holy Spirit" was a REBUTTAL to Deere's book and was published in October 1996. Unless Deere is clairvoyant or prophetic and have eyes into the future, how could Deere have rebutted Edgar?!?
Obviously, YOU are the one who is unacquainted with their writings! So I downplay the significance of Deere's book by mere assertion? I have said this about you, Frank, and now you say it about me. Interesting BUT UNLIKE YOU, I am ACTUALLY GOING TO PUT YOUR ASSERTION TO R E S T. Two things: downplay significance and mere assertions. In the following which I have posted BEFORE, Edgar puts the significance of Deere's book in perspective and gives a summary critique of Deere's book. This is the opening chapter of Edgar's book. The rest are the detailed rebuttals. My advice: get two books for the price of one by simply getting Edgar's book. Edgar quotes so much of what is significant arguments from Deere's book that it is as good as having Deere's book in his. And note, while YOU MERELY ASSERT AND CONTINUE TO DO SO WITH PLATITUDES, I here present ACTUAL ARGUMENTS from Deere's book with a CRITIQUE. Get out from behind the trees, Frank! --------- Experience or Scripture? Thomas R. Edgar [Thomas R. Edgar. Satisfied by the Promise of the Spirit. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Resources, 1996. Chapter 1. ISBN 0-8254-2510-7. Biblical quotations are, in most cases, my own translation; otherwise they are from the King James Version of the Bible (KJV). In some instances, the KJV is modified for clarity.] -------------------------------------------- Christians often wonder, How can I live the Christian life to its fullest? Every person who believes in Jesus Christ has their sins forgiven and is immediately justified. The Holy Spirit indwells very believer immediately upon salvation. Every believer has access to God in prayer and has other believers available for fellowship, edification, and counsel. Every Christian has all of this immediately upon justification. Is my justification sufficient so that by faith, with the Scriptures and its promises to guide me and motivate me, I can live the Christian life as God intended? Can I be satisfied with that which God has provided for me in Christ? For many the answer is, No. A large number of Christians, called “charismatics,” say that we need more. What all believers received when they believed in Jesus Christ is not enough. Every believer needs more in the sense of supernatural evidence, including miracles, healings, exorcisms, and power. They look for personal, self-oriented miracles as evidence of God’s presence and power. The desire for these miracles is caused by a basic lack of satisfaction with a life of faith. This sense of lack is a consistent testimony from those who turn to the charismatic position. For example, John Wimber was not satisfied with the results of his ministry and sought more “power.” [Ken L. Sarles, “An Appraisal of the Signs and Wonders Movement,” Bibliotheca Sacra (January—March 1988): 59-60]. Jack Deere was not satisfied and longed for more “passion for God.” [Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993), 182-83]. For these believers the answer to their need is not found in Scripture but in the overt, visible evidence of God’s presence. This outlook regards the miracles of the New Testament as being valuable evidence for that time, but today more is needed. The idea that the New Testament age was unique and provided the historical and evidential foundation for the church is neglected. Instead, the stress among charismatics today is on experiences, experiences that serve mainly to confirm and strengthen the individual believer and to make one’s ministry effective. Such experiences primarily meet the individual believer’s personal needs. Accordingly, we must ask the question, Has God provided all that we need in Christ or is Christ’s work lacking? Is Christ’s work effectively limited to the area of salvation, and now the Spirit must provide ongoing evidence for the believer’s spiritual life? Only Scripture can provide answers to these questions. Background [Truncated for brevity. This is the part I previously posted to someone asking about "Third Wave"] The basic difference between those in the signs and wonders camp and the traditional evangelical groups concerns the issue of the miraculous gifts. The controversy concerns cessationist versus noncessationist (i.e., charismatic) viewpoints on the availability of the gifts today. The entire charismatic movement has become established on the basis of its claim that the experiences of charismatics today are the same experiences and the same gifts as evidenced by the apostles and the early church, particularly as described in the book of Acts. [McGee, xiv-xv]. This claim garnered them credence and acceptance in the church at large. Admittedly, the charismatic movement includes a large number of persons from different theological perspectives. As Lederle states, “The largest contingent charismatic theologians comes from the Roman Catholic Church,” and “Roman Catholic scholars have led the way.”[Lederle, xix, 37]. While Lederle regards “Spirit baptism” as the central experience for charismatics [Ibid., 37], this is not the main issue between traditional evangeIicals and evangelicals who are charismatic. For them the issue is cessationism or noncessationism. [Incidentally, I would like to hear from "saved-by-grace" how the above definition misrepresent the charismatic / non-cessationist's view] The Charismatic Movement: Experience-Oriented Christianity Due to his background and training, Jack Deere has become one of the main apologists within the evangelical camp for the “signs and wonders” movement and thus, in effect, for the entire charismatic movement. He has recently published a second book, which according to pre-publication advertising also promotes these concepts [Deere, Surprised]. Since Deere originally began from the noncharismatic or cessationist perspective (he graduated from and taught at Dallas Theological Seminary, a leading seminary in the cessationist camp), his testimony is seemingly a strong argument for the charismatic, “signs and wonders” view. The fact that he was a former Dallas Seminary professor is stressed on the cover and title page of his first book, as well as in the advertising. Since this school emphasises the study of the biblical text, we would expect to see some new, particularly biblical, arguments in Deere’s work. In actuality, he gives no new arguments but generally appeals to those commonly used. Although he does emphasise the idea of a category of gifts that are not on the same qualitative level as those of the apostles, a seemingly new idea, such a notion is actually implied in much charismatic thinking and has been previously expressed by other writers [See, e.g., Wayne Grudem, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today (Westchester, Ill.: Crossway, 1988), 109-12]. This is the keystone to his entire argument. Several scholars and others have stated that Deere’s book must be read and must receive a response from cessationists, which suggests that his book is significant in presenting the charismatic perspective. Deere’s arguments and perspective will give us a fairly accurate idea of the arguments commonly used by charismatics as well as the latest charismatics thinking on this issue. What Deere’s basic arguments are will be presented and discussed before we discuss specific scriptural evidence. Experience is Central Without question Deere’s main argument is the same basic argument used by other charismatics, whether scholars or laypersons. The argument is that personal experience (which I interpret to be from the Holy Spirit) validates the charismatic’s position and invalidates any argument against it. This is not only my analysis of Deere’s argument but that of others who critique it as well. For example, Mitchell, in a book review generally friendly to Deere, analyses Deere’s book with the following statements: … and his personal experiences punctuate each chapter. Indeed, there is almost a sense in which the book affirms that the power of the Spirit is real primarily because Deere experienced and saw it. He comes perilously close to using experience as a form of expanded translation of the biblical text. [Kurt Mitchell, “Dispensing with Scofield,” Christianity Today 10 Jan. 1994, 57] Mitchell concludes with the statement that Deere “unfortunately leaves the reader with the impression that it is the religious experience itself that validates what he argues.” [Ibid.] Mitchell may not realise that this is exactly what most charismatics, including Deere, are arguing. [Lederle, 37. Also, consider George Mallone’s statement, “What we were seeing in our own experience suggested that these gifts were available today,” in his Those Controversial Gifts (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1983), 11] The description of Deere’s second book indicates that this is the same basic argument that he uses for prophecies, dreams, visions, and other revelations. Deere’s book is highly touted because it presents the primary argument of all charismatic argumentation, whether by those academically trained or by laypersons with no theological training. It is the argument based on personal experience, namely, “It happened to me”. For many charismatics it is their only argument. In his book Deere relates that he graduated from Dallas Theological Seminary where he also taught for ten years. He also pastored a noncharismatic Bible church in Fort Worth, Texas, or seven years. Originally he believed that that God did not give the miraculous gifts today and taught this idea dogmatically. He says that he believed this because that is what he was taught and because everyone in his circles accepted it as true. He makes it clear that although he was a professor and “loved to teach and preach the Word of God,” he never made any attempt to verify the cessationist position from the Bible. [Deere, 13-19]. However, when a man named John White told him that he had actually seen miracles from God and described two of them, Deere’s thinking began to change on the basis of these testimony. After seeing a few unusual incidents he became convinced they were miracles from God. He then studied the Scripture from this perspective to see if the Bible allowed for this. Deere states that after intensive study of Scripture he came to the conclusion that the Bible did not support a cessationist view but rather the noncessationist, charismatic view. Now he teaches that anyone who will believe in the gifts and seek them will also have the same experience. He insists that the only reason anyone is a cessationist is because they have not had this experience. [Ibid., 55.] While this is an argument from experience as it occurred in the life of one man, it is the same basic argument used by charismatics worldwide: “It happened to me!” Is Scripture a Servant to Experience? The place of Scripture as an authority or control also reveals the experience-centered nature of charismatic thinking. The issue seems to be whether our experience is interpreted and controlled by Scripture, or whether Scripture is interpreted in the light of our experience. Although Deere declares that his position was based on “a patient and intense study of the Scriptures,” his own testimony shows the opposite. On the basis of one telephone conversation with John White, Deere reports, I was convinced that he was telling me the truth. I was convinced that God had healed the two people he talked about. But I was also still convinced that God was not giving the gifts of the Spirit any longer and that there must be another explanation for the healings. [Ibid., 20] Notice that Deere was convinced that God had healed two people through John White’s ministry. The fact that Deere was still not convinced regarding the validity of miraculous gifts is inconsequential since on the basis of such general experiences. He makes no consistent distinction between such occurrences and gifts. [This is not to say that Deere does not claim to make this distinction. His arguments reveal that he does not do so. Charismatics commonly tend to view all allegedly supernatural events as evidence for gifts. For an example of this, see Ronald A. Kydd, Charismatic Gifts in the Early Church (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1984), who seemingly regards any mention of the Spirit by early church figures as a reference to gifts.] Nor do most charismatics. Deere was convinced of the reality of his present position before he studied Scripture. He was convinced that these were miracles from God through a man, John White. Thus, his study was not so much to see if Scripture implied or promoted his position but if it allowed for or could be reconciled with that about which he was already convinced. From the beginning, experience rather than Scripture controlled his thinking. The place of Scripture in his thinking is disclosed in his statement that “I had also begun to believe that God could speak apart from the Scriptures, though never in contradiction to the Scriptures.” [Deere, 23] Notice that he believes, as do most charismatics, that the Scripture is only one source of information; miraculous experiences, especially prophecies, visions, dreams, and words of knowledge also demonstrate the voice of God. The only control is that they must not contradict Scripture. This sounds reasonable. However, contradiction is a relative term. For many charismatics, contradiction is a very flexible idea. A revelation of the meaning of “not contradict” is indicated by Deere’s approval of John White’s argument that the frequent failure of healings in charismatic circles is not “contradictory” to the biblical evidence. This is so, White argues, because the Bible does not say that the apostles did not fail in some of their healings; therefore the apostle could have failed, and this fact was simply not recorded in the Bible [Ibid., 18-29]. Thus the failure of charismatic healers today is not regarded as contradictory to Scripture. In other words the “miraculous experiences” and “revelations” of the charismatics do not in their thinking contradicts Scripture unless there is an explicit statement that they cannot be true. When we analyse charismatic interpretation of what appear to be explicit statements of Scripture contradictory to their view and their interaction with those biblical passages supporting cessationism, we realize that even explicitly contradictory statements can be interpreted with unlikely interpretation or simply ignored. [See the discussion of various passages throughout this book]. Scripture has only token control and is at the mercy of charismatic experience. The centrality of experience rather than Scripture is obvious also in the fact that the charismatics come from almost every branch of the Christian spectrum, including many whose doctrine is not even evangelical. Hollenweger describes the worldwide Pentecostal movement as “a movement whose main characteristic is not verbal agreement but correspondence of sentiments” [WalterJ. Hollenweger, The Pentecostals (Minneapolis: Augsburg,1972), xviii]. This experience-oriented thinking is revealed in Kydd’s highly regarded charismatic analysis of church history. He states in his preface that he tried very hard to compensate for his prejudices. [Kydd, ix]. Kydd discusses evidence of spiritual gifts from “heresy and superstition” and refers to the Gnostics, a group about which Scripture issues warnings to Christians. Yet, due to their possible interest in prophecies, healings, and signs, Kydd believes that there are hints of a deep spirituality within these groups. [Ibid., 49]. From the remainder of his discussion it seems clear that Kydd would not see any such hints in the normal or traditional church, since they apparently did not promote these items. Experience-Oriented View Regarding Cessationism Deer asserts that the only real basis for the cessationists’ position is their lack of experience. He states rather dogmatically, “There is one basic reason why Bible-believing Christians do not believe in the miraculous gifts of the Spirit today. It is simply this: They have not seen them.” [Deere, 55]. He repeats, Christians do not disbelieve in the miraculous gifts of the Spirit because the Scriptures teach these gifts have passed away. Rather they disbelieve in the miraculous gifts of the Spirit because they have not experienced them. [Ibid.] According to this, the sole reason one is a charismatic or a cessationist is whether one has had the experience. Deere refuses to acknowledge even the possibility that one could experience these miracles and on the basis of Scripture still remain a cessationist. The evidence of the miracles is so overwhelming in his mind and the minds of other charismatics that no matter what someone believes the Scriptures say, they assert that if that person has the experience they will change their thinking and reinterpret Scripture in light of the experience. Despite numerous protestations to the contrary, Deere realises that his position is based solely on experience. Otherwise he could not argue that solely on the basis of experience every believer will become charismatic and solely on the lack of experience people are cessationists. Rejection of Cessationism Not Based on Scripture Some charismatics, in contradiction to others, claim that their position is not experience-oriented but rather Scripturally supported. Despite his previous statements, Deere states this very explicitly when he insists, “This shift in my thinking was not the result of an experience with any sort of supernatural phenomena. It was the result of a patient and intense study of the Scriptures.” [Ibid., 23]. As White describes it, As for the relevance of Bible study in his pilgrimage from cessationism to noncessationism, Deere rarely misses an opportunity to remind his readers of the open-mindedness, patience and/or intensity with which he has studied the Bible’s statements on the Spirit’s work. [R. Fowler White, “For the Sparrow in the Hurricane: A Review of Jack Deere’s Surprised by the Power of the Spirit,” (Paper delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Eastern Region, Philadelphia, 1994), 7.] Deere insists that the initial change in his thinking was the result of a careful, thorough study of Scripture. Further he maintains that he holds his present position on that same scriptural basis. Do the facts bear this out? As late as 1990 Deere apparently admitted that he had not studied 1 Corinthians 13:10, Ephesians 2:20, or Hebrews 2:3-4, some of the most crucial passages in the debate. [Ibid., 8.] This refutes his claim that his position is a result of careful study of Scripture. I agree completely with White’s analysis, that Deere’s discussion of key texts bearing on the duration of the gifts … have a decidedly perfunctory and well worn quality about them. … But if we ask him for the necessary details on the texts that ostensibly create the most obvious or serious problems for him … he asks us to wait for his next book or else buries his ever-so-brief discussion of these texts in appendices and footnotes. [Ibid.] The evidence gives the definite impression that Deere’s position results not from the study of Scripture but rather from his experience. Thus we see that despite the fact that he is a theologian trained in the Scriptures, Deere’s primary argument both for his change in thinking as well as his present position is the argument of personal experience. Lederle made it very clear that this is the foundation for the charismatic perspective when he said, “The charismatic renewal movement is unashamedly experiential in its nature. It is this ‘experience’ of Spirit-Baptism that usually takes people by surprise.” [Lederle, 37]. Since experience is the primary argument of charismatics, it was necessary to demonstrate the centrality of it to the charismatic perspective. For many it is their only argument. In addition, it determines the approach of their theologians and laypersons to Scripture and their response to cessationist arguments. ------------ Christopher
|
to:
Back to Antioch's Home Page