One of the last things both of us discussed during our lunch a few weeks ago was concerning the hearing of the voice of God. Generally speaking, your point was that a wrong prophetic word is obviously not the voice of God, my point was that a wrong interpretation of Scripture is not the voice of God either.
I expanded further on my point by saying that at least what we’re practicing as New Testament prophecy is not assumed to be on equal authority with Scripture but is assumed to be imperfect and in need of weighing (I Corinthians 13:9; 14:29).
However, the level of certainty and confidence in which the cessationist interpretation of scripture and it’s subsequent applications were aggressively communicated at the conference, gave little to no indication that this was something that needed to be weighed carefully, but that should be taken to be self-evidently correct…God’s final voice on the matter.
Considering the degree of confidence that you guys have maintained in your interpretations and the extent you’ve taken your conclusions concerning those who differ, what do you think the implications and consequences for you and the Macarthur camp are biblically, if you are wrong?
Frank Answers:
This question rejects one my premises for this discussion -- which is the assumption that the Bible teaches a continuation of Apostolic gifts. It is also a manifestation of an implied problem of secret error in the Cessationist camp. I point that out simply for the reader to keep score -- because I think it keeps pointing to the real weakness of Continualism: the abandonment of the Biblical virtue of wisdom. Continualism relies on the idea that there's usually a secret explanation for things which they require to support their beliefs, rather than clear and discernible reasons.
However, if the Cessationist is hypothetically wrong and the Apostolic gifts continue, I think the consequences (as the Bible spells them out) are zero. The reason for this is simple: we're not rejecting anything the Bible says is non-negotiable. We're not rejecting the miracles of Jesus. We're not rejecting the miracles in Acts. We're not rejecting the miracle of Scripture. We're not rejecting the miracle of regeneration. We're not rejecting the synergistic work of a reborn soul working with the Holy Spirit in Sanctification.
What we are rejecting, frankly, are weak imitations. We are rejecting fortunate synchronicity as a substitute of God taking personal action in the world today. We are rejecting occurrences of intuition, coincidence and/or providence as somehow analogous to "Get up and Walk" command healing, "be silent" silencing of demons, actual raising of the dead to life, and prophecies that the Lord actually said with words.
I think you are missing the substantial challenge of my concession in giving up Carson's exposition of 1 Cor 12-14 as the final word of continuationism: if Carson is right, we should be looking for men with the authority of the Apostles. That is: they have been personally sent by the person Jesus of Nazareth, and their word on His behalf always accomplishes its goal. The historical fact of the Apostles' work is that their miracles would turn a city on its head. The Greeks thought these men were gods by the power they demonstrated. Let's be honest: there's not anything in your experience which would produce that reaction in someone else.
Produce those men, and you will have me completely sunk -- and repentant.
Until then, I think we are pretty safe.
