Do you hear "still small voices"?

chip, i think it’s hard to find commands from scripture for this for a few reasons. One, we know it happened in the OT, but then we relegate that to OT, pre-canon time. Although why we always do that, I’m not sure because they had plenty of the Bible back then, too.

then if we look to NT time, I think you can find examples of it, but then, we say, that was also pre-canon, and then with Paul, but that was also pre-canon and it was the transition in the church age/Spirit-with-us stage. So we tend to dismiss any examples from the Bible. Like Pauls experience being forbidden to go to those places (“They passed through the Phrygian and Galatian region, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia; and after they came to Mysia, they were trying to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them.” Acts 16)

There is also James 1—that we can ask God for wisdom and He will give it. It seems to be referencing subjective needs.

I think that saying that Scripture is all we need for life and godliness is one thing. But saying God will never communicate to you outside the words of Scripture is another statement. I think the Bible clearly says the first but not the second.

i think I will look through Revelation for a bit about this.

[Anne Sokol]

chip, i think it’s hard to find commands from scripture for this for a few reasons. One, we know it happened in the OT, but then we relegate that to OT, pre-canon time. Although why we always do that, I’m not sure because they had plenty of the Bible back then, too.

then if we look to NT time, I think you can find examples of it, but then, we say, that was also pre-canon, and then with Paul, but that was also pre-canon and it was the transition in the church age/Spirit-with-us stage. So we tend to dismiss any examples from the Bible. Like Pauls experience being forbidden to go to those places (“They passed through the Phrygian and Galatian region, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia; and after they came to Mysia, they were trying to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them.” Acts 16)

There is also James 1—that we can ask God for wisdom and He will give it. It seems to be referencing subjective needs.

I think that saying that Scripture is all we need for life and godliness is one thing. But saying God will never communicate to you outside the words of Scripture is another statement. I think the Bible clearly says the first but not the second.

i think I will look through Revelation for a bit about this.

*You will not find any examples of a feeling (peace or whatever) used as communication in scripture.

*James one is not a promise of communication.

*The rest of the supernatural communication you see in scripture is much more like your charismatic friends’ than yours. There were visions (pictures) and conversations (two-way speech) in almost all of them. In rare instances, like Paul’s restriction on travel, we are not told how the communication happened, only that it happened. You cannot appropriate that and claim something scripture doesn’t say.

Scripture simply doesn’t support this kind of communication. No examples. No instructions. No warnings. No expectations.

[Anne Sokol] I think that saying that Scripture is all we need for life and godliness is one thing. But saying God will never communicate to you outside the words of Scripture is another statement. I think the Bible clearly says the first but not the second.

This is a core problem. In the first sentence, you accept what scripture teaches about itself. In the second sentence, you want to promote something scripture never teaches. The second statement is implied in the first which renders the second inoperable. If the first statement is true, then no further communication is ever needed. If further communication is ever needed, then the first communication is not true. This is the heart of the doctrine of sufficiency of scripture which is the heart of sola scriptura.

[Anne Sokol] Chip, I don’t have much more to say really, i could try, but … I don’t think this is a topic you want to talk about.

1. I am not trying to promote anything. I think that would be an error. I am just saying that I am dissatisfied with the way this topic is dealt with in our circles and why I am dissatisfied. I am not trying to promote or teach anyone to have these types of experiences.

2. I feel like you don’t want to talk about it; that you simply want us all to accept your position. I don’t see that you are trying to approach this conversation in a reasoning way. Greg is at least trying by simply re-imagining/re-wording everything :)

2a. It does not matter what Scripture or verses I bring to this topic, you will dismiss them. For example, I’m not saying James 1 is a “promise of communication,” per se, but it is a promise to give wisdom. Where does it say that it will never involve communication?

2b. I am not interested in systematizing this type of thing; I don’t think the Bible does, it just gives examples of it. Systemizing and expecting and promoting are mistakes the charismatics make.

3. I stand by my statement; this is the key way I think fundies/evang do this topic a disservice: “I think that saying that Scripture is all we need for life and godliness is one thing. But saying God will never communicate to you outside the words of Scripture is another statement. I think the Bible clearly says the first but not the second.”

Here is just an example touching upon what I am talking about, Hudson Taylor’s mother:

Little did he [Taylor] know what was going on at that very time in the heart of his mother, who was on a visit seventy or eighty miles away. That very afternoon she went to her room with an intense yearning for the conversion of her son, turned the key in the door and resolved not to leave the spot until her prayers were answered. Hour after hour she continued pleading, until at length she arose with glad assurance that the object of her prayers had already been accomplished.
…
Several days later he told his sister of his new-found joy in Christ and secured her promise not to speak of it to anyone. When the mother returned a fortnight later, he met her at the door and told her he had a piece of good news for her. Writing many years later, Hudson Taylor said: “I can almost feel that dear mother’s arms around my neck, as she pressed me to her bosom and said, ‘I know, my boy. I have been rejoicing for a fortnight in the glad tidings you have to tell me.’ ‘Has Amelia broken her promise?’ I asked in surprise. ‘She said she would tell no one.’ My dear mother assured me that it was not from any human source that she had learned the tidings and went on to tell the incident mentioned above.”

Anne,

I did get the chance to hear James White, as well as Phil Johnson’s response. I thought Phil’s response was not dismissive of White’s experience. If I had to paraphrase, I would say that White had what we might call, under “normal” circumstances, a “hunch.” God ended up using the “hunch” for His purposes (what those are, we can’t be certain from the anecdote- we don’t know that the man was converted, only that a good opportunity for witnessing resulted).

God is active in everything, though, as Phil noted. I think they did a good job at pointing that out in the ensuing conversation. God was as active in your experience that led you to marrying your husband, as He was in my initial clumsy, sarcastic comments I made to my wife in our earliest days. He formed each my children according to His plans and purposes- including the one with only one functioning kidney and the one who is 90% blind in one eye due to septo-optic dysplasia… But at the same time, I see that formation as consistent with the normal function of the created order. I wouldn’t describe White’s experience as a vision or anything supernatural, and I wouldn’t encourage people to seek out those kind of experiences as a time where they are more aware of God’s working than other, more mundane happenings.

[Anne Sokol]

Here is just an example touching upon what I am talking about, Hudson Taylor’s mother:

Little did he [Taylor] know … My dear mother assured me that it was not from any human source that she had learned the tidings and went on to tell the incident mentioned above.”

But that’s precisely the kind of theology-by-anecdote we’re trying to address.

What does it do to countless examples of saints who’ve experienced otherwise?

Or worse, the experience of martyrs who’ve seen their expectations defeated while tied to the stake?

Can we really separate those listed before Hebrews 11:35a from those listed thereafter?

Or do they belong to that one cloud of witnesses?

Unless we have a systematic view of theology, we risk creating a Word-of-knowledge/Word-of-faith/revelational haves vs have-nots dichotomy.

Greg, Phil doesn’t dismiss it or say it is not an act of God. He said it was the work of God, a remarkable providence.

i certainly agree that these things shouldnt be sought out, but we do observe them from trustworthy sources at times, You have a lot of faith in the faculties of man :)

J Ng, Again, I don’t have a way to systematize it. I really dont know that it should be. And I am fully aware of the off-kilter expressions of the charismatics. But I dont think the way we fundies/evangelicals deal with this is accurate, is pretty much all I can say right now, and is what I’m saying.

In my observation it has nothing to do with one’s maturity or even being some type of experience to desire. it just happens to some people we know and are even reputable, and we are not honest, imo.

every example— Biblical examples, those of mature Christians—is rationalized and excused away. Is there another way?

Anne,

I don’t think I have rationalized or explained away anything. I have repeatedly gone to the scriptures to deal directly with what they teach. You have admitted that you can’t really find what you are describing in the scriptures and have turned instead to stories. This also is at the heart of sola scriptura and the sufficiency of scripture. We have one, single trustworthy guide which you agree claims that it is “all we need for life and godliness.” If that is so, and what you are describing is even an occasional part of the godly life, we should be able to identify it in scripture.

You have a lot of faith in the faculties of man :)

Not at all. I recognize that they can be used of God for His purposes, just as they can be corrupted by man for idolatrous ones.

I’m not sure, by the way, from your post, if you read my reaction right. I said Phil was not dismissive. I would agree with Phil’s assessment of a “remarkable providence.” I think that’s just a fancier way of saying God accomplished His purpose through James White’s hunch. :D

[Anne Sokol]

In my observation it has nothing to do with one’s maturity or even being some type of experience to desire. it just happens to some people we know and are even reputable, and we are not honest, imo.

every example— Biblical examples, those of mature Christians—is rationalized and excused away. Is there another way?

Thanks, Anne. I think we just have different ways of approaching the same phenomena, whether they’re experienced by Charismatics or reputable and “mature Christians.”

We don’t have to deny the experiences of others. It’s just how we interpret those claims/testimonies that divide. I mean, people “see Jesus” in every age, most notably ex-Muslims of recent history who’re apparently leaving that religion by the droves without needing to hear the gospel message. And, of course, there’s George Mueller and his kind already mentioned—I could include Chinese evangelist Dr John Sung as well, whose services were purported to have been accompanied by a great white cross in the sky, healings, and conversions/revivals galore. Some have testified he even raised the dead on occasion—and he was anything but Charismatic, being a hardline Fundamentalist who reacted against his run-in with Harry Emerson Fosdick in his student days.

I guess some of use are more hesitant in assigning such phenomena—wonderful ones, too, it seems—to the Lord. Perhaps He did them; but perhaps not.

And if He did, it only shows He’s not boxed; He’s sovereign. But what implication for our lives? Basically none. Sola scriptura—He still wants us to walk by faith and not by sight, to focus on His Word and not on phenomena. Nor to exclude those who don’t have that experience—is one’s life as a quiet deaf-blind Christian (as one of my friends is) any less precious or blessed than a D.L. Moody’s or John Sung’s?

If we’re able to answer those questions, we have a system of theology—only maybe more implicit than explicit.

though, that James White would call it a hunch, He pretty clearly says it was not an idea coming out of him.

Cliff, i don’t think it has to be a part of a godly life.

Takes Paul and the Acts 16 example; you say I am “appropriating” this to “claim” the scriptures saying something it doens’t say. In what way am I doing that? You asked for examples, and I’m saying, here’s an example. You know as much about it as I do. Can you “appropriate” it and claim that it says nothing like I am trying to say?

James 1 says we can ask God for wisdom and He will give it. It doesn’t explain or limit how God will do this, does it? So I’m saying, maybe things that I and others have experienced simply fall under this category, if you are insisting on explaining it by a verse.

in Acts 10:19-20, for example, we see the Spirit directly speaking to Peter. Note, I am not saying we should expect or demand this. I am just saying, here’s an example of it happening.

And in Acts 20:23, the Spirit communicates to Paul about Jerusalem.

do i think it should be expected? systematically taught? no way. Just read your Bibles, people. read your Bibles. But I am just saying, that I dont have a theological conflict with believing God can communicate sometimes in these ways.

[J Ng]

I guess some of use are more hesitant in assigning such phenomena—wonderful ones, too, it seems—to the Lord. Perhaps He did them; but perhaps not.

And if He did, it only shows He’s not boxed; He’s sovereign. But what implication for our lives? Basically none. Sola scriptura—He still wants us to walk by faith and not by sight, to focus on His Word and not on phenomena. Nor to exclude those who don’t have that experience—is one’s life as a quiet deaf-blind Christian (as one of my friends is) any less precious or blessed than a D.L. Moody’s or John Sung’s?

If we’re able to answer those questions, we have a system of theology—only maybe more implicit than explicit.

Was it plain vanilla providential, or was there a message for me from on high—but I just came across this video without looking for it:

There’s an “IFRAME” above which doesn’t show in my browser. So here’s the direct link to said video.

i don’t think though, that James White would call it a hunch, He pretty clearly says it was not an idea coming out of him.

Okay. At the same time, he does call it a distinct impression. Webster’s defines that as “an often indistinct or imprecise notion or remembrance.” In other words, there’s that sense of not knowing where that thought came from. I’m not saying God can’t use those moments- but I am saying that having a moment like that doesn’t necessarily mean God was the first-person active agent, any more than He is the one Who directly led me to take the church here five years ago. He used His people here, and they had to make decisions, extend a call, and so on… Whatever else he is saying, it took the scenario to play out more to get more of a sense that it was something he would attribute to God. It wasn’t precise. This wasn’t Abraham getting up and going to points unknown because God had commanded it. It was an impression… a hunch.

The Bible says that God communicates to us, for example, though His creation (Psalm 19 a prominent example of this). At the same time, we don’t usually come back from a night out gazing at the stars and say God was showed me His artwork tonight. I mean, He did, but not just you. He was working through nature, through the created order.

Like Chip has been saying so well, there is no reason to conclude that God would be communicating with anyone in a direct fashion as you attribute. Yes, you can argue that God gives wisdom. God supplies our needs, too- but even in your example of Mueller cited, He does so through natural agents. Money or food never appeared spontaneously out of thin air, or in his pockets when it wasn’t there just a second before, or on the table when everyone had their back turned for a split second. God used people and natural processes. Why is it doubting God, in your reasoning, if someone says God can use intuition, even though He isn’t the primary agent?

[Greg Linscott]

Why is it doubting God, in your reasoning, if someone says God can use intuition, even though He isn’t the primary agent?