Some reasons why continuationism may be a dead philosophy.

[MoreCoffee]

In Charismatic and Pentecostal circles the predominant theology is a kind of holiness Arminianism with a good smattering of Word Of Faith mixed in but not a lot of Calvinism. And in continuationist circles Calvinism is the predominant theology. It seems that men like Wayne Grudem and John Piper (who are continuationists) represent a theology and a philosophy that is on the fringes of Charismatic and Pentecostal beliefs. So even though they accept continuation of spiritual gifts like those in First Corinthians chapters 12 and 14 they believe that there is something essentially different about prophecy as it described in Deuteronomy 18 and what happens in current Charismatic meetings. Their fringe status leads me to think that their views may be a dead branch of the mighty movement of Charismatic & Pentecostal religion.

Explanatory note: I am using the following terms to distinguish broad theological groups within the Charismatic/Pentecostal movement:

• Pentecostal or Classical Pentecostalism is a renewal movement within Protestant Christianity that places special emphasis on a direct personal experience of God through the baptism with the Holy Spirit. The term Pentecostal is derived from Pentecost, the Greek name for the Jewish Feast of Weeks. For Christians, this event commemorates the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the followers of Jesus Christ, as described in the second chapter of the Book of Acts.
• Charismatic to denote the international trend of historically mainstream congregations adopting beliefs and practices similar to Pentecostals. Fundamental to the movement is the use of spiritual gifts. Among Protestants, the movement began around 1960. Among Roman Catholics, it originated around 1967.
• Continuationist to denote people within the Charismatic movement who identify as Calvinistic in theology and who prefer not to be identified as Charismatic. This group is characterised by leaders such as John Piper and Wayne Grudem.

 

[tango]

In Charismatic and Pentecostal circles the predominant theology is a kind of holiness Arminianism with a good smattering of Word Of Faith mixed in but not a lot of Calvinism. And in continuationist circles Calvinism is the predominant theology. It seems that men like Wayne Grudem and John Piper (who are continuationists) represent a theology and a philosophy that is on the fringes of Charismatic and Pentecostal beliefs. So even though they accept continuation of spiritual gifts like those in First Corinthians chapters 12 and 14 they believe that there is something essentially different about prophecy as it described in Deuteronomy 18 and what happens in current Charismatic meetings. Their fringe status leads me to think that their views may be a dead branch of the mighty movement of Charismatic & Pentecostal religion.

Explanatory note: I am using the following terms to distinguish broad theological groups within the Charismatic/Pentecostal movement:

• Pentecostal or Classical Pentecostalism is a renewal movement within Protestant Christianity that places special emphasis on a direct personal experience of God through the baptism with the Holy Spirit. The term Pentecostal is derived from Pentecost, the Greek name for the Jewish Feast of Weeks. For Christians, this event commemorates the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the followers of Jesus Christ, as described in the second chapter of the Book of Acts.
• Charismatic to denote the international trend of historically mainstream congregations adopting beliefs and practices similar to Pentecostals. Fundamental to the movement is the use of spiritual gifts. Among Protestants, the movement began around 1960. Among Roman Catholics, it originated around 1967.
• Continuationist to denote people within the Charismatic movement who identify as Calvinistic in theology and who prefer not to be identified as Charismatic. This group is characterised by leaders such as John Piper and Wayne Grudem.

I think it's worth considering a difference between an Old Testament prophet and a person with a prophetic gifting.

Under the OT there were a small number of prophets who spoke for God, and therefore were to be obeyed. Because they carried such authority they were subjected to very strict tests, hence the call to execute them if they got it wrong.

In the new covenant someone with a prophetic gift doesn't (or shouldn't) claim the level of authority of an OT prophet. Where Paul wrote "let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge" (1Co 14:29) it seems to serve two purposes - firstly to make sure you don't have endless people clamoring to have their "prophetic word" heard, and secondly to make sure that a "prophetic word" is tested. The fact a prophetic word needs to be judged at all suggests that someone with a prophetic gifting may sometimes speak from an inspiration other than God, and the lack of any commandment to execute people for getting it wrong indicates that getting it wrong isn't a capital issue any more. It also ties in with what Paul wrote to the Thessalonians of "do not despite prophecies, test all things, hold fast what is true".

The trouble is when you get drivel like Bob Jones used to say about how God showed him the prophetic guns being loaded, and how he was putting in the blanks so that someone didn't have to be 100% accurate to be considered a prophet any more. Apparently firing these blanks scared the enemy. Never mind what it did to the lives of people who blindly followed the person claiming the same authority as an OT prophet.

Ultimately we have to choose one or the other. The people who seek the authority of the office of prophet in an Old Testament sense have to be willing to literally put their life on the line every time they utter "thus saith the Lord". Those who want to be regarded as having a prophetic gifting in the NT sense should expect that their words be tested. And then of course come the people who don't specifically draw attention to "their gifting" but every once in a while speak something sufficiently insightful and relevant that people wonder how they could possibly have known.

In general I'd be a little careful of wide-ranging terms like "Charismatic and Pentecostal circles", simply because it covers a huge range of beliefs and practices ranging from the sensible to the truly bizarre. In many ways it's much like referring to "right wingers" or "left wingers" as if people united by a single tag are identical in every other respect.

 

[visionary]

There are set forth in the Bible two very distinct and separate codes of laws. One of these was given by God directly to His people as He spoke it from Sinai and as He wrote it upon tables of stone with His own finger. The other was given through Moses. The first constituted the standard of morals, while the second dealt primarily with ceremonies connected with the service of God. The transgression of the moral law, or Ten Commandments, was sin. The second law, dealing with ceremonies, was given only because of the transgression of the first. The first was eternal, while the second was temporary in its application, extending only to the cross.