Do you hear "still small voices"?

I just don’t think, as you are doing, that we have to find a human-faculty explanation for everything that hints at supernatural.

Maybe. Well, I don’t think that we need to call supernatural what can easily be identified as a phenomena of human faculties… :D

Thanks for the conversation. I think this has gone about as far (if not farther) as could be profitable, at least for me. Or, so I have a hunch, anyway… ;)

Be well, and may God bless your service to Him on the other side of the world.

Here’s the difference:

James White would be the first person on the planet to tell you that his experience was of human origin. Yet he clearly does not say that; in fact he pretty clearly says the oppposite.

I have also had my share of human-origin experiences—hunches, bad feelings about something, and we even study “intuition” as midwifery students—it can be very helpful but you have to be able to discern it from other things.

So that is my issue with your constant re-construction of these experiences.

Fwiw, I don’t think stuff like this should be publcized—you can just laugh at that video J Ng linked to (and that was definitely a lightening bolt, J Ng, and I am compelled to tell you that God gave me a vision last night that you’re to send me $10,000!) . But when it’s someone you know well and know would not confuse this type of stuff … .

[Anne Sokol] But when it’s someone you know well and know would not confuse this type of stuff … .

I will be the first to say that I haven’t all the answers. And I don’t think the entire comforting, helping, interceding, guiding, etc, ministry of the Spirit is fully explained in the Bible.

I think that the Word of God is His main tool or force—eph. 6:17. I’m not trying to elevate “feelings.”

I do think that saying sola Scriptura means that God communicates to us only through the Bible-it’s an inaccurate response to charismatics—it’s not what sola scriptura means. Charismatics also believe in sola scriptura, do they not?

One guy puts it this way: “In the end, the doctrine of sola Scriptura means that the Bible is the final and only infallible source of divine revelation and is, therefore, the ultimate guide for the conscience of the Christian.”

I firmly believe that God through His Spirit mainly speaks to us through His Word and always in line with His Word.

There are examples throughout history and in the Bible of God through the Spirit communicating in various ways. But I don’t think we should ask for them or teach them or elevate them, as the charismatics tend to do. But I don’t think, by accepting the possibility of them, they are negations of sola Scriptura.

I certainly wish an evangelical or fundamentalist would do a better job of synthesizing all this in a way that is more in line with all of Scripture.

Anne,

I think one of the problems here is a disconnect on what sola acriptura means.

You wrote:

One guy puts it this way: “In the end, the doctrine of sola Scriptura means that the Bible is the final and only infallible source of divine revelation and is, therefore, the ultimate guide for the conscience of the Christian.

I firmly believe that God through His Spirit mainly speaks to us through His Word and always in line with His Word.

Notice your definition says only, but you change that to mainly. Among other things, sola scriptura says there is no other direct revelation available today outside of the cannon. Here are some other random definitions of sola scriptura.

Sola scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian.

Sola Scriptura is the teaching and belief that there is only one special revelation from God that man possesses today, the written Scriptures or the Bible, and that consequently the Scriptures are materially sufficient and are by their very nature as being inspired by God the ultimate authority for the Church.

Is the Bible the sole and infallible rule of faith for the Church? Or must we have other revelation from God? Do we need the Book of Mormon, or the writings of the Watchtower, or Mary Baker Eddy, or the so-called Apostolic unwritten traditions of Rome? Does the Bible teach its own sufficiency to function as the sole rule of faith for the Church?…The doctrine of sola scriptura, simply stated, is that the Scriptures and the Scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fide, the “rule of faith” for the Church. All that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture and in no other source. That which is not found in Scripture is not binding upon the Christian conscience. To be more specific, I provide the following definition: The Bible claims to be the sole and sufficient rule of faith for the Christian Church. The Scriptures are not in need of any supplement.

…‘sola scriptura,’ namely, the position that “Scripture [is] the sole source of revelation; that it [is] the final authoritative norm of doctrine and practice; that it [is] to be interpreted in and by the church, and that it [is] to be interpreted according to the regula fidei.”

Scripture, however, is the only inspired and inherently infallible norm

Each of these bear some striking similarities with the definition you provided. Scripture is the (1)only source of (2)direct revelation available today. Sola scriptura leaves absolutely no room for further communication from God at this time.

do you call conviction of sin “direct revelation”? no. The result of direct revelation. The Holy Spirit does a lot of things in our hearts that are not “direct revelation.” I don’t consider what I’m talking to be in the sphere of “direct revelation” in the sense of canonical revelation. Do you think, assuming James White’s thing about using architecture to witness was from the Holy Spirit—do you call that direct revelation? Assuming it was from God that my friend heard “go to the pool,” do you think that was “direct revelation”? I really think you can’t classify God speaking the words of the Bible in the same place as God giving someone particular pushing to do a specific action (like give money or witness using architecture or faith surety that your son is saved). These seem to be different categories of communication.

OK, I want to give a little example from my current life, something Ive been mulling over for months and am still in a waiting place before God.

It’s about being missionaries and fundraising (aka support raising).

I struggle with this activity spiritually, and we’re planning a trip to the States soon, and “need to raise more support” (I hate those words). You see, everyone who looks at this issue from a Biblical perspective, I mean regarding those missionaries who have to raise their own support, they use Bible passages that say the laborer is worthy of his hire. So go raise your support.

I have no problem with being paid to do ministry work.

My problem comes in as the one who has to ask people for money. (I blogged about this.)

Because in the Bible, we don’t really see examples of asking (of people), especially missionary examples. I mean, we couch it in euphemistic terms, like “presenting your ministry,” and other phrases. But basically it is asking others for money and/or provision of financial and material needs. And we couple this with asking for spiritual support through prayer—it makes the whole endeavor seem a little more spiritually comfortable :) .

So, as someone who is supposed to regularly approach other Christians and ask them to supply my material needs … . well, I kind of have a Scriptural problem with doing that, even though I have done it and will probably do it again.

Because honestly, the “faith” missions people—those who literally do not allow their missionaries to ask of people, actually are more in accordance with the overwhelming bulk of Scripture on this whole topic. In the Bible, we’re repeatedly told to ask of God.

I don’t think asking of men is sinful, though. Like, i think we can be depending on God and asking of Him, then asking of men (weirdly). But as a person who is in this position of being expected to ask-of-men for pretty much the whole of my material existence, I really want to come to a place of peace with this Scripturally.

A couple months back, I “felt” or sensed God actually wanting me to get into this area so He could give me some answers. No, no voices or visions, or anything, just that this was His initiative at this point. So I sat down with Bible, pen, paper for hours over a period of days. I am still doing it. And He has shown me a lot of my sins, through my Scripture reading, He’s shown me the Bible’s emphasis on asking of God, so I’m praying more concertedly about His supply.

But I still don’t have clarity about how He wants me personally to approach the issue of fundraising after these clear-in-Scripture things have been dealt with. Does He want me to approach friends and ask them? Does He want me to approach my classmates,etc?

I don’t know. After my Bible study, I really don’t want to do “machine gun” style asking, where I just ask randomly and everywhere.

Does He want me to not ask of men? Like Taylor and Muller? I have asked this, but I dont think He’s leading my faith in that direction necessarily. He might.

anyway, Im just writing all that out to show you that this is one example in my life where I am expecting God to communicate something to me personally, be it through His Word (and always in accordance with it), through a person, through something.

Anne,

Ok, a lot here. I will tackle some of it before I have to go to work.

Conviction of sin is an application of the Word of God - still communication via the scriptures. That is how the Spirit communicates to believers today - via scripture.

Again the anecdotes (White, friend and the pool). I don’t assume they are communication from God. I assume they are not communication from God because that would run contrary to scripture.

You are trying again to divide communication from God into canonical and non-canonical. What is your basis for two levels of communication?

Regarding your fundraising: first, let me say I appreciate your spirit about fundraising and your desire to do right with it. About a decision, Friessen’s book deals with this exact type of scenario. I will nutshell it here, but I cannot do it justice in a short post. Bottom line is that God has given us a pattern since the perfection of the garden that we have great freedom within the moral boundaries God has outlined. Adam and Eve were given a couple of commands. Apart from breaking those commands, they were given freedom to do whatever they wanted without fear of sinning. That same pattern follows throughout scripture, even after the fall. Within the moral boundaries laid out by God, man is free, without fear of sinning, to do what he wants. That’s the nutshell version. Maybe others familiar with Friessen’s book can provide better clarity.

You did not interact at all with the meaning of sola scriptura. If those definitions are accurate, then this whole discussion moves outside the parameters of sola scriptura and undermines (contradicts) the doctrine of the sufficiency of scripture.

Posted by Phil Johnson: I can’t believe I haven’t posted this before. It’s the best concise definition I’ve ever seen, and it comes from The Doctrine of the Word of God (A Theology of Lordship Volume 4), page 220.

“Scripture contains all the divine words needed for any aspect of human life.”

And from Spurgeon: “Like the seraph’s sword at Eden’s gate, [scripture] turns every way. You cannot be in a condition which the Word of God has not provided for; it has as many faces and eyes as Providence itself.”

Youngblood offers these key principles for biblical decision-making and guidance:

(1) We do not need to know God’s sovereign will and how He is providentially bringing it about before we make a decision (Deut. 29:29).

(2) The Holy Spirit’s role is to convict, teach and conform us—all through the vehicle of the Word of God (John 16:8; 17:17).

(3) God only guides or leads His people today:
(a) By providence (which we know after the fact)—Prov. 16:9; 21:1
(b) By Scripture (which we can know before we act)—Ps. 73:24; 119:9-11; Prov. 3:1-8.

(4) God is a gracious God who has provided everything we need in order to do what He wants us to do (2 Peter 1:3; 2 Tim. 3:15-16).

(5) God holds us fully responsible to search out and follow His moral will (God’s written Word) in all of life (2 Tim. 2:15).

(6) If we make a decision based on biblical commands and principles alone, we can fully trust that we are pleasing God in our decision, and fully trust that He will providentially (by circumstances outside of our control) change our choice if it is not within His sovereign will (Ps. 119:30; Prov. 16:9).

(7) To rightly interpret and apply the Word of God we must use a prayerful, literal, historical, contextual, and grammatical method of studying it (2 Tim. 2:15; 2 Peter 1:20).

(8) No one is ever outside of God’s sovereign plan (Lam. 3:37-38; Rom. 8:28-29; Eph. 1:11).

(9) Every believer needs pastoral oversight and the body of Christ to help him stay true to God’s Word (Prov. 18:1-2; Heb. 13:17).

— from Kirk Youngblood, Free to Be Wise: A Guide to Biblical Decision Making

God has given us His Word to guide us, filled with commands, prohibitions, exhortations, principles, etc.

We are responsible to study the Word and apply it to every aspect of our lives.

The illumination of the Spirit in our hearts and mind helps us to both understand and apply the Word. (The Spirit’s guidance is always through the Bible).

God has given us the responsibility and freedom to choose within the parameters of scripturally informed wisdom to make a decision.

Therefore, when faced with a specific decision, we are to gather information about the options, examine them in light of Scripture, pray to God for wisdom, seek counsel from godly men/women, etc. and make a decision.

And then, trust God to providentially guide our steps through His sovereignty.

On the other hand, if you really, really believe in the fact and implications of the sufficiency of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:15-17); and if you believe that the Word of God gives you all the direction God expects you to follow, and is how the Holy Spirit talks to you (cf. Proverbs 6:20-23; Hebrews 3:7f.); and if you believe that it is your God-given responsibility to think through and make responsible decisions in areas not directly ruled on by Scripture (Proverbs 16:1, 9; 19:21) — then you’re in an entirely different position. You have to learn to think, decide, and act like a grown-up (Hebrews 5:11-14). It’s hard, and it’s hard work. It’s painful. I don’t really like it all that much; if there was an “out,” I’d be the first to bolt for it. But it’s what God calls us to do.

How do I know?

God told me.

He told me in all the Scriptures laid out above, and many others beside. He told me in every Biblical command addressed to me as a Christian, and by the fact that He put those commands in Scripture instead of confining the New Testament to one sentence: “Everything else you need to know, God will tell you directly.” Everything that leads me to that conclusion is publicly available to every Christian; I claim no private, secret knowledge. It’s all on the table, laid out as the common possession (and responsiblity) of every child of God.

And because God doesn’t tell me (or you) anything that He doesn’t also tell every other Christian (Hebrews 1:1-2; 2:1-4), He told you, too.

OK, my basis for canonical/non-canonical communication from God:

The revelation of creation is also binding—romans 1.

There were lots of prophesies happening, in Corinth, for example, and they are not “canon-status” communications from God, but that there were prophecies from God is not questioned in the Bible. I think God revealed himself before abraham, too, (king/priest of Salem), but we don’t know what it was.

here’s a site that talks about what sola Scriptura does not mean, and I checked their belief statement, and they seem like a sound source, and I would like to talk about this particular point:

Sola Scriptura does not mean that the Scriptures are an exhaustive source for us to know how to live our lives each day.

Think about how many things the Bible does not tell us. It does not tell us any particulars about where to work, whom to marry, what to eat, how often to shower, how many elders to have, or how, exactly, to conduct a Sunday morning service. It gives us general principles and then extends lots of freedom for the wisdom in each of us to work out the details.

The Scriptures equip us spiritually for every spiritual service (2 Tim. 3:17). There is no knowledge deposit or missing database which contains essential information about how to have a right relationship with God. In this, Scripture is completely sufficient for every spiritual task.

In the end, the doctrine of sola Scriptura means that the Bible is the final and only infallible source of divine revelation and is, therefore, the ultimate guide for the conscience of the Christian.

So, if God, through the Spirit, moves a man to witness using architecture it does not seem to me to be under the source of “divine revelation,” by that I mean canon-level communication from God I’m not sure why it is to you.

Like fundraising. i do not feel myself free to do whatever I want (as long as it’s not anti-scripture, like committing robbery). In what particular way God wishes to lead me in this endeavor—am I sinning by asking Him to lead me in accordance to His particular will for my life? Were Taylor and Muller and others sinning by asking God to move in particular on the lives of others in specific, not-defined-in-Scripture ways to move people to give to them and what exact amount?

Am I free to marry whomever I please as long as he is just a Christian? can God not give me the conviction that I am not to marry someone who is not a missionary? Can He do that or not? You are saying not.

I think your view has a lot of holes, too.

What about matters of conscience, where a person has to look at his range of personally-faith-level-acceptable options and ask God what to do? Is the answer entirely human in origin? I think you would be hard-pressed to follow that out to its conclusions.

When we pray, what is happening? Are any motions or leadings or insights entirely human in origin?

I think we have to come to acceptable lines of reasoning here. I really disagree with what the charismatics and others have done to the ministry of the Holy Spirit. But I don’t see that totally writing off the possibility of his ministry into our lives alongside the Bible is entirely forbidden.

we’re kind of getting into a lot of areas here, and it’s kind of messy. Another question I have for you is if you believe that God can have and communicate to a person a specific will, within the range of Bible-allowed options.

Sorry. Diving back in.

Am I free to marry whomever I please as long as he is just a Christian? can God not give me the conviction that I am not to marry someone who is not a missionary? Can He do that or not? You are saying not.

If such a communique were given by God, to disobey would be sin, would it not? Do you go that far?

It would seem to me, then, that in the marriage scenario, or the fundraising one you mention, you are getting matters of personal commandments, that to disobey=sin. How is that not revelation? God is giving new instructions beyond the parameters of His Word, if you follow your position to its logical end.

Again, if you follow the inclinations, and see God’s blessing, there is no problem at all in thanking God for His supply and direction through the ordering of natural events. God can use a sense of determination in regards to a marriage partner, sure- and in one sense, you could say that God “gives” that impulse if it is within the parameters of Scripture (such as the partner with a common ministry goal). At the same time, my wife as a girl prayed for a husband who would be a missionary, and together they would farm and run an orphanage, among other things. Did she disobey God’s direction when she accepted my proposal? How would you even begin to counsel someone who approached you with that kind of a question?

Well, I know how I would. I would point someone struggling there to determine if the potential husband was a believer, does he demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit, does he care for others, is he a good steward…? Do you share compatible goals- can you follow where he leads? Can you give yourself to him in the way God wants a wife to? I mean, there might be a few more specific considerations, but nowhere would I see any sound Scriptural reason to say to someone- “Ah! Be careful! God did give you that impression when you were 12…”

[Anne Sokol]

we’re kind of getting into a lot of areas here, and it’s kind of messy. Another question I have for you is if you believe that God can have and communicate to a person a specific will, within the range of Bible-allowed options.

God’s sovereign will is eternal and specific, but God never tells us we can or should know it before hand as part of our decision making process. We learn God’s specific, sovereign will by looking to see what happened. So, no, I don’t believe God can communicate direct revelation, specific or general, because teaches there is no direct revelation right now outside of scripture. I do not think God can/will violate what He has already said.

Anne,

From your definition of sola scriptura:

“In the end, the doctrine of sola Scriptura means that the Bible is the final and only infallible source of divine revelation and is, therefore, the ultimate guide for the conscience of the Christian.”

There’s that pesky “only” again.