Before We Get to Gifts
January 10th, 2007
(By Nathan Busenitz)
At the outset of a discussion like this, it is always important to state a few preliminary clarifications. With that in mind, here’s a list of eight things I believe are worth considering:
1. This is an important issue, but it is not a first-level doctrine.
I noted this Monday in the comments section, but want to make the point here again. The charismatic debate is not a first-level doctrinal issue. After all, it is possible to be charismatic, non-charismatic, or even undecided and still be a Christian. One’s position regarding the continuation or discontinuation of the sign gifts is not determinative of his or her standing before God.
Of course, this does not mean that this issue is not important. It is very important because it has significant implications for both one’s private devotional life and the corporate body life of the local assembly. But it is not a first-level doctrine, and it’s good to remember that when voicing our disagreements.
I should add that my series here at Pulpit is intentionally directed toward the conservative evangelical continuationist, the “Reformed Charismatic.” Extreme charismatic and pentecostal groups, which in many cases actually do violate first-level doctrines — and thus should be confronted with boldness and directness — are outside the scope of what I am hoping to accomplish here.
2. The point of 1 Corinthians 12–14 is love, and the purpose of the gifts is edification (1 Cor. 12:7).
It seems ironic that a passage in which Paul is emphasizing love for fellow Christians and unity within the body of Christ would itself become a primary point of division among believers. As Richard Gaffin writes: “Consider this disconcerting situation: Especially in recent decades the work of the one Spirit, given to unify the church (e.g., 1 Cor. 12; Eph. 4:3), has become the occasion (notice I did not say, the source!) of disunity and even divisions in the church” (Gaffin, Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views, 334).
To be sure, I am not asserting that we simply dismiss our differences as though they do not exist. But I am suggesting that, specifically with those who affirm the first-level doctrines of the gospel, we approach the issue in the spirit of Paul’s overarching instruction to the Corinthians. We go awry, I believe, if we interpret 1 Cor. 12-14 correctly (regarding the gifts) but subsequently miss Paul’s entire point in those chapters (regarding love).
3. It is possible to be confused about spiritual gifts.
The Corinthian situation highlights the fact that, even in apostolic times (when all agree the gifts were in operation), it was possible to be confused about the miraculous gifts. Our contemporary situation underscores this point, of course, since both positions (the continuationist view and the cessationist view) cannot be simultaneously correct.
As we noted yesterday, the Scriptures must be our authority in sorting through any such confusion. And we must be willing to reconsider our position (and the presuppositions that undergird our position) if the Scripture shows us areas in which our thinking needs to change.
4. Not every continuationist is the same.
In fact, there are over 20,000 distinct continuationist groups in the world — ranging from Pentecostal to Charismatic to Third Wave. Because of this vast spectrum, it is impossible to address the theological nuances of each group. The common link that these groups share is a belief in the continued operation of the miraculous sign gifts throughout the entire church age. This, then, will be the primary focus of our discussion, and is at the center of what I am calling the “charismatic question.”
As I noted earlier, my target audience is the “Reformed Charismatic,” though I hope my approach will be helpful for anyone thinking through issues related to the sign gifts.
5. Not every cessationist is the same.
According to Wikipedia (everyone’s favorite open-source encyclopedia), there are at least four types of cessationists: Concentric, Classical, Full, and Consistent. (Personally, I wish “Full” would be renamed “Complete” so we could have them all alliterated.) Our ministry here at Grace Church would generally fall into the Classical category.
6. We’re not talking about miracles, we’re talking about miraculous gifts.
This series is not concerned with whether or not miracles (in the general sense) still occur today. Many cessationists believe that they do. The question is, rather, are the miraculous gifts of the New Testament still in operation in the church today?
Sam Waldron expresses his cessationist position this way:
I am not denying by all this that there are miracles in the world today in the broader sense of supernatural occurrences and extraordinary providences. I am only saying that there are no miracles in the stricter sense [of] miracle-workers performing miraculous signs to attest the redemptive revelation they bring from God. Though God has never locked Himself out of His world and is still at liberty to do as He pleases, when He pleases, how He pleases, and where He pleases, He has made it clear that the progress of redemptive revelation attested by miraculous signs done by miracle-workers has been brought to conclusion in the revelation embodied in our New Testaments. (Waldron, To Be Continued?, 102)
7. I have been greatly blessed by some continuationists.
My list would not be complete without noting the profound positive impact that some continuationist authors and church leaders have had in my life. This would include men like Dr. John Piper, whose passion for the supremacy of God and the enjoyment of God has been infectious in my own heart; Dr. Wayne Grudem, whose Systematic Theology and other academic works have both instructed and inspired me; and C. J. Mahaney, whose humility and Christ-centeredness continues to convict me and to motivate me to greater godliness. I am deeply indebted to these men, as are many others. They are a treasure to the American church in the twenty-first century.
8. I love the Holy Spirit.
Though it should be an obvious characteristic of any true Christian, I feel the need, as a cessationist, to establish a simple point from the beginning: I love the Holy Spirit. I would never want to do anything to discredit His work, diminish His attributes, or downplay His ministry. Nor would I ever want to miss out on anything He is doing in the church today. And I know I’m not the only cessationist who feels this way.
Because we love the Holy Spirit we are thankful to God for the Spirit’s amazing and ongoing work in the body of Christ. His works of regenerating, indwelling, baptizing, sealing, assuring, illuminating, convicting, comforting, confirming, filling, and enabling are all indispensable aspects of His ministry.
Because we love the Holy Spirit we are motivated to study the Scriptures that He inspired to learn how to walk in a manner worthy, being characterized by His fruit. We long to be filled by Him (Eph. 5:18), which begins by being indwelt with His Word, which is the Word of Christ (Col. 3:16–17), and being equipped with His sword, which is the Word of God (Eph. 6:17).
Finally, it is because we love the Holy Spirit that we long to rightly represent Him, to understand and appreciate His purposes (as He has revealed them in His Word), and to align ourselves with what He is doing in this world. This more than anything else gives us reason to study the issue of charismatic gifts (cf. 1 Cor. 12:7-11). Our goal in this study has to be more than mere doctrinal correctness. Our motivation must be to gain a more accurate understanding of the Spirit’s work – such that we might better yield ourselves to Him in service to Christ for the glory of God.
Nat,
Sorry, my last post did not get in before your latest edition.
First, please explain what you mean by levels of doctrine. Does the Scripture make a distinction between truth, ruth, uth?
Second, there are more serious matters, as is indicated in the first, namely what is truth?
Take for instance Proverbs 11.15, is this a messianic prophecy or at least a type of Christ over against the self seeking. Is it contrasting the one who is a propitiation and the one who does not lay down his life for a friend? Or, maybe take the prodical son, it it the wanderer who at first says I will not but later does, or the elder who says I will but does not, and which one should we have the greatest compasion for?
Then, are you sure that the continuist and the cessationist points of view might not both be correct? Take for instance Calvin when discribing the officers of the Church. He created what he called the Doctors. In effect they were the prophets. He just gave them another name. Their function had changed and in reality they filled both roles of Apostle and Prophet. Not anything really like the two officers Christ gave, but none-the-less, his Doctors filled the roles of those whose jobs it was to study and minister the word. We see in Paul, even, the combining of offices in his address to Timothy in do the job of an evangelist. Martin-Lloyd Jones would say that even the office of evangelist ceased.
I am not sure that you or I can categorize the word of God into such neat little dictums when it comes to the Holy Spirit’s working out of the devine plan. Inherent in the word of God is a wide and deep fluidity of meaning and application. I am not saying that it can mean just anything. But, in the case of cessationism, it is merely a matter of prejudice, not fact. I hold the door open to finality concerning these matters. If it could be unequivocably demonstrated that the gifts have ceased, then I would agree. Simply because they are not apparent in the form that we find them in Scripture does not mean that they have. It is impossible to equate tongues with the Canon, and it should not be, when that was not means, like a spiritual mass communications network of the time, by which the Word of God was spread. That there should be a necessity for the Holy Spirit to first speak in a foreign language, then interpret it is foolish thinking. The gifts are given for edification, not for convincing. The work of convincing is a work done in the heart by the Holy Spirit and as Scripture says, even if one was raised from the dead they would not believe. If perhaps we considered tongues as a means to communicate across language barriers by those who were already knowledgeable in the doctrines of the Faith, and it would, by that alone, be a wonderful work, then truly in that sense they are not out of place today if the need should arise for such a manifestation. Then the confirmation in the mouth of two or three witnesses would be appropriate by interpretation and would seemingly be almost routine. The abuse in Corinth followed no pattern of discernable good. Since the text tells us that it is the Spirit that operates these gifts, then it would also appear that those who were abusing them were not operating out of love, and therefore were not operating by the Spirit.
So, cessationist, yeah I am one. Continuist, yeah, that too. The operation ceased when it was no longer needed, and continues when it is. That is quite a different story with the Apostles where we have difinitive evidence that Paul was the last. The truth is that we have no difinitive proof that the sign gifts have ceased, nor do we have any means of verifying their operation today. By the same measure we have no one who preaches the truth, today, without error, either. But the truth when it is preached still has the same Holy Spirit working in the hearts of those who will believe to bring them to repentance. And that is quite a sign, don’t you think?
Inherent in the word of God is a wide and deep fluidity of meaning and application. I am not saying that it can mean just anything.
And so for the third time in as many articles, we come to the matter of a proper interpretation of Scripture. The seeming width and depth and “fluidity of meaning and interpretation” suddenly becomes much narrower and more defined when we properly take into account authorial intent by interpreting passages in their context and as literally as logically possible, which is the foundation of a solid exegesis and expository preaching.
But, in the case of cessationism, it is merely a matter of prejudice, not fact. The truth is that we have no difinitive proof that the sign gifts have ceased, nor do we have any means of verifying their operation today.
My goodness, if that’s the case we might as well all throw in the towel, toss away the text, and join the emergent movement! ;P
It is certainly not “the truth” but simply your opinion, and one not stated in Scripture. In fact, Scripture tells us we can know much with certainty if we are diligent to pursue a knowledge of the truth in the Word.
Keyword Search the NASB on BibleGateway for “ignorance” and study the results. Several of them have a contextual application to my comment. 2 Timothy 2:14-19 also comes to mind, though I lack the time to make the point with these passages as I would like.
We should not give up and be apathetic, let alone act in ignorance (which from my perspective would be those trying to perform [or mistaking other things for] sign gifts today, and from their perspective would be folks like me who affirm their cessation).
I’m certainly thankful for one thing regarding this topic as a whole: That whichever side may be walking further from the truth on this matter, be it the charismatics or the cessationists, God gives a greater grace and is patient with them. (James 4:5-6) We serve a faithful, immutable, loving God and we should never forget that. I’m sure when all is revealed in the end we will be awestruck by (among many other things) how gracious He was toward us when we acted foolishly. This relates to Nate’s point #8, in that it is important to note that cessationists certainly do not belittle or in any fashion intend to grieve the Holy Spirit. I am sure charismatics would affirm the same from their perspective – that their practice today of what they see as sign gifts is done out of love and pursuit of the Holy Spirit and not to make a mockery of or grieve Him.
The topic is broached out of love for Him and a desire to help all brothers – all of us – come to a better understanding of Him.
Nathan(Nate?), this topic(and articles posted the past few days) is very timely for me in many ways. When the Lord saved me, in short order He showed me that while His Word was now opened to me(as if blinders were actually removed), coming to the Bible has to involve presenting myself with ears to hear and preconceived notions peeled away. Who hasn’t sung about and been taught and maybe believed that there were specifically three kings with three gifts presented to a newborn Jesus? And who hasn’t heard or read that they were present with the shepherds at the manger? Seeing differently in personal study and because of teaching of John MacArthur and being brought under the teaching of a pastor in a local church that was being influenced by the inductive Bible study method and the exegesis style of John…well, it may have been something little to another but God has made it big to me.
Likewise, teaching needs to involve words circulating because of varied movements and denominations and those that claim Christianity(that are really mere religion rather than genuine faith) so the sheep aren’t “in the dark”, so to speak, while walking “in the Light” in this world. At the same time, teaching on aspects of the faith, such as justification, sanctification, and illumination, are oft left for men and women aged in years of believing(God graciously placed me with an older lady that invited me to a Women’s morning study where it was minimally mentioned…and where my age then stuck out like a sore thumb). The fellowship of believers where we used to live likely wouldn’t have taught about the Emerging Church, nor would they have touched on words such as cessationist, continuationist, or “concentric, classical, full, and consistent” cessationist. I’m glad God led me here.
Where to begin to share my gratitude for this place being on the web…and opened to those not pastors? Being encouraged to take pause and dig for truth of Truth rather than simply going with the flow blesses my heart. Jesus is Truth. The way He’s wired me to reason with Him, that means Truth as a person can only express truth. He simply wants us to take Him at His Word(while some work to undermine the Bible as tainted or human authored rather than human penned of Heavenly inspiration). He says it’s settled forever in Heaven and preserved. Keep pressing on in that vein pointing us to learn of Him.
Love because of Jesus,
Nate – I appreciate this series. I know I need to make it out to a shepherd’s conf some time! I do have a couple of questions that I am curious about on this issue.
Would you say that Martyn Lloyd-Jones has played a major or minor role in giving the theological underpinnings for a Reformed charismatic movement? Is he the grandfather here for many or most in the movement – or is it much bigger than that?
Also – Having read many of John Piper’s books – I have never encountered anything that sounded charismatic. I know he does not deny the label – but what is it that makes him charismatic? And – do you think that he downplays this particular area of his theology to appeal to a broader spectrum of readers?
I appreciate any thoughts
The posts continue to be excellent.
In a future post, you might build more on the quote you used, that is, “performing miraculous signs to attest the redemptive revelation they bring from God”. For the purpose intended here, this is sufficient. As you get into the “nitty-gritty”, it would be helpful if there was more clarity on the purpose of these gifts. Or at least discussion on the common options and then why you favor one or another.
very good points to make. I agree with you completely about Piper, Mahaney, & Grudem. It was a blessing to hear you speak of them this way.
I have visited Mahaney’s church, where Josh Harris is now the senior pastor, and it was quite an experience with God’s saints.
The Charismatic aspect is unmistakable during the singing of hymns and spiritual songs. But is was also incredibly orderly, and there is such a reverence for the Word of God. Genuine fruit of the Holy Spirit permeates throughout this body of believers.
This is a fine Reformed/Charismatic local church.
I personally would not be able to be a member, however I can certainly recommend this church.
Good post to define your presuppostions as we enter into this discussion.
You mentioning Piper, Grudem and Mahaney is very appropriate as they all seem to me, for I do not know them personally, as very godly individuals and have caused me to study again the doctrine of the gifts.
Although I still am what I would consider a concentric cessationalist.
Thanks Nate for the series
I heard Dr. Piper address his view on this issue. He was in Romans 15 and when he turned to verse 19 “by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God,” he stated that he was “in the middle” of the conservative and the more extreme charismatic view. Piper is convinced that there just isn’t enough scriptural eveidence to back-up either side of the two camps. As Nate has said that Dr. Piper’s “passion for the supremacy of God and the enjoyment of God has been infectious in my own heart.” I agree. But, i wonder if Piper is right?
excellent post
I’m not educated in theology like many that visit this site, so please bear with me.
From what I understand, the sign gifts backed the claims of the Apostles and the early church, that Jesus was the messiah. God provided objective evidence to the Jews and then to the gentiles, so that, they would know for certain that this new religion (known as “The Way”) was truly from Him. As Christianity became established, the need for signs to establish it’s validity lessened and eventually were not needed at all. Because Christianity was proven to be from God, their writings were accepted as new revelation from God.
Therefore, the sign gifts are no longer needed, because they have fulfilled their purpose. Now the Holy Spirit works through the proclamation of the Gospel that has already been established.
What we have to work with today is so much better than what early church had. Unlike them, we do not need to establish a foundation. We can simply stand on the foundation that they laid and proclaim the good news and then the Holy Spirit does the rest of the work. God no-longer needs to perform signs & wonders. Now God penetrates the mind and verifies to the elect that the Jesus spoken of in the Scriptures is Lord & Savior.
This brings me to my main point: What is the purpose the sign gift movement today?
I was a member of a charismatic church for nearly ten years. I heard many prophecies and interpretations of tongues, but nothing was ever revealed that was life changing. If something biblical was proclaimed, I wondered why they didn’t just read it out of the Bible in the first place.
It’s clear that the early church did have something life changing to claim, the good news about Jesus Christ. Not only is there a lack of evidence that the charismatics sign gifts are real, unlike the early church, I can find no purpose for them.
What about the gift of healing that some claim to have? If they truly have a healing ministry, then why don’t they go from hospital to hospital healing all the sick and then tell them the Gospel. Didn’t Jesus go about healing every sickness and proclaiming the kingdom?
I think on the basis of God given common sense, the charismatic movement must be rejected. There is nothing that they have done since their their inception in 1906 that would cause any rational thinking person to believe that they possess any of the miracles gifts found in the Bible.
“I can find no purpose for them”
Surely God could purpose to gift one of His children with the divine gift of healing. His purpose would be to glorify His name. His purpose would be to proclaim His mighty power. His purpose would be to proclaim the truth of the gospel. His purpose would be to show compassion on the sick.
If all these things are equally evident, then surely God could possibly purpose to do this if He so desired.
I agree with you Radar, that God the Holy Spirit has not gifted the Church today as He did in the early years, but God surely can bestow any of His gifts He would so desire to.
Blessings to you.
Radar said: “The sign gifts are no longer needed, because they have fulfilled their purpose. Now the Holy Spirit works through the proclamation of the gospel that has already been established.”
I agree 100% with the second sentence, but I do not see any scriptural support for the first claim. It sounds somewhat reasonable to assume that the sign gifts may have ceased, but we don’t base our theology on reason but on the Word of God. If there is no definitive statement in scripture that the sign gifts have ceased then we must assume that they have not. Otherwise, our presuppositions are based on opinion rather than fact.
“What is the purpose of the sign gift movement today?”
I empathize with your past involvement with the charismatic movement and I understand your frustration with some of the things that are done in the movement. I wouldn’t, however, call the movement a “sign gift movement” because this statement does not encompass all of those who call themselves charismatic. Yes, we Reformed Charismatics do believe in and practice the sign gifts, but that is not the furthest extent to which we go in our practice. We embrace all the spiritual gifts described in the New Testament, not just the sign gifts. There are some nations and people groups in the world today, believe it or not, who have yet to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ. So, it would make sense, that in some of the cases in which missionaries visit these people that the Holy Spirit may manifest these gifts for the in order to substantiate the message.
I think this is a very important question and always worth a revisit or two.
I am also cessationist (but don’t know which of the 4 I am
), but have many charismatic and very Godly people in my life, still I know which side the tilt goes to.
A lot of the posts use 1 Corinthians 13 to support both sides of the coin, but I always hesitate to use that chapter since it’s meaning has been highly debated through pit the centuries. The best presentation I have read or heard is from S. Lewis Johnson in his pneumatology lecture series online at Believer’s Chapel (well for tongues anyway).
I currently am thinking about 2 questions in this debate:
1) The use of sign gifts in the Tribulation and the impact on Sola Scriptura.
2) The nature of sign gifts/miracles on the Mission field – Are they necessary? Are they just miracles not gifts? Do they even exist?
As a charismatic continuationist one thing I am concerned about is the preempting of an argument through the use of overly restrictive definitions to make the subject an easy target for attack and criticism.
For example:
Sam Waldron is quoted as writing:
I am not denying by all this that there are miracles in the world today in the broader sense of supernatural occurrences and extraordinary providences. I am only saying that there are no miracles in the stricter sense [of] miracle-workers performing miraculous signs to attest the redemptive revelation they bring from God.
Sam’s statement itself isn’t that bad. I actually agree with it to a large degree. But some wish to limit the purpose of the sign gifts to only attesting, verifying, or confirming Jesus identity (John 20:30,31; Acts 2:22) and the Apostles revelation (Mark 16:17-20; Heb. 2:3,4). Since Jesus is no longer physically present and most sensible Christians believe that the canon of the Scripture is closed and nothing else is being added to it, then to restrict the definition of the sign gifts to only these purposes makes for an easy argument that the sign gifts have ceased. If that’s all they were for then I would be a cessationist also.
The problem is that when Paul lists the nine Gifts of the Spirit (I prefer this term rather than the more restrictive sign gifts term) in I Cor. 12 he didn’t mention anything about confirming the identity of Jesus or the message of the apostles as a purpose for the gifts. What he did mention is that they were for the “common good” or “to profit withal” (I Cor. 12:7). He also states that these gifts were given to people who then are called members of the body and that there was a need for every one of these members of the body and their gift. Every part was necessary (I Cor. 12:14-22) and there should be honor, care, and rejoicing for each of them (I Cor. 12:23-26). I wouldn’t want to do without any part of my body, why should the church have to do without any of the members of it’s body? All of this has no reference to confirming Jesus identity or the apostles’ message. Shouldn’t we stick with the purposes mentioned by Paul?
If someone is sick would not the “gifts of healing” (1 Cor. 12:9) be beneficial. Why should the gifts of healing pass away until sickness itself passes away? When I laid my hand on a tumor and felt it go down under fingers was that for the purpose of verifying me to sit down and add some new revelation to the Bible? Of course not! It’s because the guy was sick and needed to be healed (Glory to God). The healing compassions of Jesus have not changed and his healing work is continued through his body the church. These benefits are the reasons that the gifts would still continue to exist and so I am in this sense a continuationist. If they were beneficial and necessary then, there is no reason they would not still be today.
Buy the way; I don’t believe that the gifts of the Spirit continued unabated all through the church age. I believe they are being gradually restored to the church in these last days.
Yours in Christ,
Riley
Radar: I think you’re pretty much right on point there with your sentiments, however, the matter is more to educate others about proper interpretation and to fortify such a position with Scripture, else it be void of edification and instructional benefit.
donsands: Surely God could purpose to gift one of His children with the divine gift of healing.
As far as God being able to do such things, yes certainly He is capable in a technical sense, but God is more than simply omnipotent. He has many other attributes, and it is by looking at the sum of what He has shown us of Himself that we can see aspects such as His consistency and orderliness. To act in such a way as you posit would be at odds with His interaction with the world as He has revealed it and as is evidenced since the establishment of the Church and the cesation of new revelation.
Rather, were He to choose to miraculously heal someone today (as He certainly has/can/does), His nature would be (and is, if I may speak so plainly) to do it Himself and not through a third party. We see such miracles throughout the history of the persecuted church for example at the martyrdom of notable saints as well as the miraculous protection provided missionaries and other Christians in dangerous environs.
The interesting thing to note is that such miraculous works by God have clear and consistent Biblical precedent unlike the very unbiblical manifestations of another spirit demonstrated in things like speaking in charismatic tongues or Toronto Blessing style ‘outpourings’. Those claim to be related to the sign gifts – something that was not a consistent work of God throughout Scripture but a specific empowering work He performed to establish the Church.
Once we take passages out of their context, we also lose sight of how they fit into the full scope of Scripture as a whole, and thus we lose the ability to check how our interpretation lines up with God’s revealed attributes and demonstrated behavior.
To clarify one part a bit:
“The interesting thing to note is that such miraculous works by God have clear and consistent Biblical precedent unlike the very unbiblical manifestations of another spirit…”
Would read better:
The interesting thing to note is that such miraculous works [done directly] by God have clear and consistent Biblical precedent [throughout both Testaments] unlike the very unbiblical manifestations of another spirit demonstrated in things like [faith healing frauds by supposed healers] or Toronto Blessing style ‘outpourings’, [which] claim to be related to the sign gifts – something that was not a consistent work of God throughout Scripture but a specific empowering work He performed to establish the Church.
Wake,
So the Lord can not heal someone through a third party, because of the end of revelation, and the establishment of the Church?
I don’t see where that inhibits God, so that he can not heal this way. To gift someone would not reopen revelation, nor hinder the establishment of His Church.
I may be not seeing something here.
Could you expound a little on that? Thanks.
@ Riley Brown:
Here are a couple of quick verses which I believe, as you say “stick to the purposes of Paul” and differentiate the gifts (yet still be for edifying the Body of course:
1) Difference in degree or quality of gifts as pertaining to validating the Apostles’ ministry
2 Corin 12:12 “The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles.”
(You’ve already quoted Heb 2 so I let that be)
Of the gifts you mention, not all of them are used as signs of a true apostle ie to validate their ministry.
2) The temporality of the offices/gifts:
The office of Apostleship is temporary and yet it is nowhere stated in Scripture as such. Therefore to draw a conclusion that just b/c it doesn’t say they will cease won’t work; The Bible also never does say that all of the gifts will continue equally. (or worse come and go with the passage of time ie 1906)
3) For certain gifts it is specifically and explicitly stated that there purpose are for signs:
Tongues: 1 Corin 14: 22 “So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers;…
Prophesy: (same verse)…but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.”
Wonders: 2 Corin 12:12 and Heb 2:4
Miracles: 2 Corin 12:12 and Heb 2:4
John said:
1) Difference in degree or quality of gifts as pertaining to validating the Apostles’ ministry
2 Corin 12:12 “The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles.”
Riley:
Yes, I’m familiar with this scripture also concerning sign gifts.
John said:
2) The temporality of the offices/gifts:
The office of Apostleship is temporary and yet it is nowhere stated in Scripture as such. Therefore to draw a conclusion that just b/c it doesn’t say they will cease won’t work;…
Riley:
I’m not sure what your point is here. If I don’t have a specific scripture that says the gifts have not ceased it’s just as true that you also have no scripture to prove that they were temporary.
John said:
3) For certain gifts it is specifically and explicitly stated that there purpose are for signs:
Tongues: 1 Corin 14: 22 “So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers;…
Riley:
That’s true also, but it’s just as true that it specifically and explicitly states in the primary definition portion of Paul’s discussion in Ch. 14 that speaking in (unknown) tongues is to God and not to man (v2), it’s first stated purpose is to edify (build up) the believer (v4 – compare Jude 20), and that with the addition of the interpretation it will also edify the church just like prophecy will(v5).
It is on the basis of these primary definitions that Paul then makes 3 arguments.
1 Every voice or tongue (though not understood) has a meaning and edification of others requires that it be understood (v6-12)
2 Therefore interpretation is required in church to obtain this edification (v13-20)
(Tongues as a sign is stuck in here between arguments 2 and 3 as minor or secondary point.)
3 The singular usage is required to avoid confusion of unbelievers and allow for edification (v21-26)
This is an extremely well organized portion of scripture(v1-28) in which everything says what it means and means what it says just like it’s supposed to. Paul’s arguments are so logically presented that his conclusions are unavoidable – speak 1 at a time, no more than 3 (same amount as (equal to) prophecy v29), 1 interprets, otherwise pray silently to God
The primary purpose of praying in unknown tongues to God is for personal edification, with the interpretation it can also edify the church, with Paul’s decent and orderly regulations in can even function as a sign to the unbeliever even though this is not its primary function. On the day of Pentecost, speaking in tongues did function directly as a sign to the unbelieving Jews because the language was understood by the hearers. This, however, was a one time, non-repeated phenomenon. No where else in the Bible does it say that anyone understood what was spoken in tongues. The norm for speaking in tongues, as Paul states, is that it is not understood. This is why Paul insisted on the interpretation in church so that the speaker, the believers, and the non-believers could all be edified.
Yours in Christ,
Riley
Nate – Thank you very much for this series.
Jerry Morningstar
“Would you say that Martyn Lloyd-Jones has played a major or minor role in giving the theological underpinnings for a Reformed charismatic movement? Is he the grandfather here for many or most in the movement – or is it much bigger than that?
Also – Having read many of John Piper’s books – I have never encountered anything that sounded charismatic. I know he does not deny the label – but what is it that makes him charismatic? And – do you think that he downplays this particular area of his theology to appeal to a broader spectrum of readers? ”
infact i find Dr.Pipers messages are richly helpful for my spiritual growth as the teachings of john macarthur
Infact i too have read about these comments and concerned about these.
Would you please shed light on these?
Elia – you might want to listen/read Piper’s series found here. Some of it is not relevant but you can weed through that.
http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Sermons/BySeries/36/
Hey Riley,
Thanks for the reply.
I think I was trying to establish a Biblical precedence for temporality, gifts for Apostolic validity, and specificity of gifts – many people (looks like not you) question all of these things.
As for you exegesis on tongues I simply cannot agree with your 1 Corinth 14:2 and I believe you’ve made a common misinterpretation.
“For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries.”
This is not a commendation, yet many people use it as such. The Apostle here is condemning the use of tongues in that stance, basically “If you speak in a language that no one understands, only God does” not “Speaking in tongues is speaking to God.”
Don’t believe me? Go look at that chapter,especially that section and you’ll see there are no commendations for tongues – all negatives, including that one.
Also,
1 Corinthians 13 explicitly says Love is not self-seeking/self-edification. He denounces this strongly! So why would he than turn around and say that tongues is for SELF edification? He doesn’t, but shows all the negative aspects of it by comparing it to prophecy.
don: I apologize for somewhat crossing two concepts into one post.
Let’s look back at what was said:
——
donsands: Surely God could purpose to gift one of His children with the divine gift of healing.
Wake: As far as God being able to do such things, yes certainly He is capable in a technical sense, but God is more than simply omnipotent.
——
So clearly I never said anything inhibited God.
What was said is that we know there there is more to God than simply omnipotence, and thus the concept of a whimsical, inconsistent God does not line up with the God of the Bible who is very consistent and purposeful.
We can see in Scripture two ways in which God works to bring about the miraculous:
*-God acting Himself to the recipient: [list of Scripture references goes here and would include a vast list of examples from Old and New Testaments]
God has always acted on behalf of man (miracles being a part of that category).
*-God acting by directly empowering a man to heal the recipient: [list of references, almost exclusively found in the book of Acts and the early church goes here]
God specifically acted by empowering the first believers to get the church authenticated and established (sign gifts are a notable part of this category).
The point I was making is that it would be more logical for God to act via direct miracles today than via sign-gifting a third party to perform the miracle. Miracles can and are still being done by God today yet that fact does not in any way support a claim that sign gifts could still be functioning. They are two distinctly different things – one is God acting directly to the recipient, one is God acting through a person to the recipient.
Hopefully that helps clarify my previous post a bit.
Nate,
I appreciate that you are attempting to be open to the common ground of “love”.
It seems to me that human beings are always subject to error since we must filter all knowledge through our finite, carnal minds. Yes, we should study the Word to be approved by God, but also remember that even when we “think” we know the truth, we may be in error or committing spiritual pride or religious superiority.
Over the years, I have been to almost every type of church and have read and studied the bible and many doctrines, creeds, and religious literature including college courses. I was amazed at how each theory and ideation can get you thinking one way and than change your thinking 180 degrees to think another way. It becomes sinking sand; Blown away with every wind of doctrine or ideation and resulting in no peace or humility.
Wars have been fought throughout the years over Christian and religious ideation and thought. I am not so sure it is God’s sovereign will for us to go to war over such debates and arguments. Even Luther’s thought and ideations caused war. And when God’s son came to earth introducing new thought to the Jews and the gentiles, He was subject to crucifixion. And His followers, the new believers, were persecuted and martyred. The Roman Catholic Church produced wars over thought and ideations as well. Ireland fought for two hundred plus years between Catholics and Protestants, and they both believe in Jesus Christ. In Africa and all over the world, there is war against the Christians and Jews. There is war between the Muslims and the Jews and Christians everywhere. Is this what Christ taught?
I don’t believe in a universal, one world belief system because that would mean we are coming to an end of the world as Jesus Christ prophesized, but I do believe that we should walk the love walk as Jesus taught despite what others believe. He taught about the Samaritan man hurting and dying at the roadside and questioned who would be the one willing to love and care for the person no matter what his ethnicity, beliefs, or life position. And I recall from the story that the intelligent, “godly” man walked around him and didn’t bother to help the dying man because he was consumed with his belief system.
Jesus taught about crossing over all barriers to love. Love was his prime message. He spoke of how the world would continue in wars and rumors of wars until he returns because mankind has such a hard time loving. We are too wrapped up in our way of doing things…our thoughts…our answers…our belief systems…our intelligence…our upbringing.
I don’t think we could ever know everything there is to know about God and His ways. “My ways are higher than your ways, and my thoughts are higher than your thoughts”. I think if we fall to error, I would want to fall on the side of “love”. Man is too complicated and God more so. We will never know the exact way to think or behave even if we studied the Word day in and day out until we die. Countless scholars have delved into this attempt to understand it all and have always come up lacking or resulted in more questions than they had before.
My greatest example of love was Mother Theresa (outside of Jesus). She didn’t place her mind on all the intellectual Christian thought contortions. She set her mind to love and give and care. She crossed the barriers. She left a rich environment to serve the poorest humanity. She did it when everyone (including the Catholic Church) was telling her “no”. She spread love. …tongues, prophecies, knowledge will all pass away, but the greatest which will remain is charity (love)…
In conclusion, my eyes have been opened several years ago to the “spirit of error” in the recent faith movement and TV evangelists. Money does seem to be their motivator, and I envision Jesus turning over the moneychanger tables with rebuke. These leaders need our prayers that their eyes will be opened once again to the first love of Christ which I assume was their original motivation.
Let’s continue to pray and intercede for all in error that the truth will set them free…free to love Christ and free to “serve” others with love, so more will be released from the grip of darkness after being pointed to the author of love, God(the Word)Himself…
Dear Sandi,
I appreciate the spirit of your post above. If I had to select the core sentiment that resonates for me, it is in this sentence:
“I think if we fall to error, I would want to fall on the side of ‘love’.” I’ve lived by that for many decades.
You expressed a great deal more, but this seems to be your core conviction.
Around here there almost no appreciation for Christ’s commandment to love. The examples I will give you now were never addressed, critiqued or called into question by anyone that I know of. This is the mood here.
One person wrote, “Beware of those who always place too much emphasis on LOVE with lots of HUGS and KISSES.”
Another person wrote, “About LOVE: It is true that without it, we are not complete Christians. However, the meaning of the word is thrown around so casually and carelessly that it’s so distorted it’s almost meaningless. Love everybody, hate nothing, goes the Love Mantra as though Christ EVER said that. Group hug anybody? How ’bout some warm fuzzies to take the frost off? Sin? NO PROBLEM. We’ve got the cure! Hang around us and we’ll just wink at it. No meanness or judging from us, nosirreee. We love everybody (well almost).”
Another person wrote, “’Love’ in Evangelical circles usually means being polite and non-confrontational…. Biblical love is obedience to God (I John 5:2-3), not gushy-goo. Only godly men can love in a godly way. The sham love of effeminacy and cowardice has no place in the real faith.”
Note the words “polite,” “gushy-goo,” “godly men,” “effeminacy,” and “cowardice.” There is a rhetorical weighting here totally AGAINST agape and phileo.
In these threads, the only endorsement of “love” occurs when it is expressed in the “loving” confrontation of error. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a positive use of the word “love” except in the context of confrontation and rebuke.
One person wrote, “Studying someones error is good, when done in love, and when one is compelled to read, study, and search the Holy Word of God, in order to contend for the faith.”
So, contentiousness and love become equivalent.
Another wrote, “How do you know it’s not OUT OF LOVE that hard issues must be confronted in the body?”
Another wrote, “I say love pushes us to declare to the blind man, ‘you are about to step off a cliff.’ Love is more than an external showing with smiles and hugs.”
Warfare, combat, confrontation, battle–this is the exclusive metaphor for the Christian life here. The Scripture has other metaphors for the Christian life, but they aren’t valued much around here. The other metaphors get all twisted around so that they all become equal to “the battle for truth” and “contending for the faith.”
Sandi, thank you for your heartfelt post. I’m sorry if I have detracted from the irenic and accepting tone you introduced here. I guess all this emphasis on loving confrontation has rubbed off on me.
Dear Sandi,
It’s true that we need to love, but what does that Love look like? I think part of it is to fight error and be an accurate handler of truth is it not? As 1 Tim 4:16 says
Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you.
Truth leads to salvation!
What do you make of these verses:
Matthew 10:34
“Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
35″For I came to SET A MAN AGAINST HIS FATHER, AND A DAUGHTER AGAINST HER MOTHER, AND A DAUGHTER-IN-LAW AGAINST HER MOTHER-IN-LAW;
And about Mother Theresa, now I don’t know if she was saved or not, all I do know is that if you don’t believe in that it is by faith alone than you are not a true believer in Christ. She has said some rather disturbing things regarding her true beliefs so here’s two scenarios:
1) She had a false understanding of Catholicism and thus truly depended on Christ alone and is in heaven now.
2) She understood, accepted, and believed Catholicisms works based legalism, worked her whole life trying to buy her way into heaven and now she is in eternal punishment for she fell short.
I unfortunately think #2 b/c of her supreme dedication to the Roman Catholic Church and so I warn you not to hold someone in such high esteem who may or may not have had true faith and make people try to buy their way into heaven with works.
Link:
http://www.scionofzion.com/teresa.htm
The following is from an interview with a Catholic nun, “Sister” Ann, who worked in Kathmandu, Nepal, with “Mother” Teresa’s organization Missionaries of Charity. The interview was conducted 11/23/84 at the Pashupati Temple.
Q: Do you believe if they die believing in Shiva or in Ram [Hindu gods] they will go to heaven?
A: Yes, that is their faith. My own faith will lead me to God, … So if they have believed in their god very strongly, if they have faith, surely they will be saved.
Q: Today it does not seem that the Catholic Church is trying to convert anymore. I know that John Paul II is saying now that those of other religions are saved. You do not believe they are lost anyway, right?
A: No, they are not lost. They are saved according to their faith, you know. If they believe whatever they believe, that is their salvation.
Whyte Stone,
Thank you so much for understanding the mood that I was trying to convey.
As I mature in life and Christ, I have found that I must kneel at the cross with humble adoration for my Savior who laid down His life for such a sinner as me. How can I ever judge or condemn any other person for their misbehavior or sin when without Christ’s grace and salvation, I would be destined to hell, guilty as charged? He is my eternal Savior saved by His grace alone and without any of my works or knowledge or doing.
This is what possesses me to want to love Him and to love others. When my Savior can love me so much to give His life, how can I not do what He commands? And He commands me to love. He commands me to forgive others…even my enemies which is very difficult to do. He commands me to be a servant. And He commands me to humble myself. I guess when one is “forgiven much, one loves much”. And I feel I have been forgiven much. Haven’t we all been forgiven much when we were enemies of the cross before we received our salvation?
We were so unclean and yet God loved us so much to save us from ourselves. How can we ever think that we know it all or know more than God to judge others for what they believe or what they do? Yes, we must witness with our love and sow God’s truth when the opportunity arises lovingly because we found the most precious love in this world—our Savior’s love and forgiveness for our wretched sins.
I would love to get to the place where I could be like Steven when his accusers and enemies of the cross were stoning him to death, he cried out to our Father God, “forgive them” as Christ did on the cross. That action was a seed sown in Paul’s heart (Saul at the time) as he stood there seeing this witness of Christ’s servant forgiving his killers. What an example of love. I find this utterly amazing!
Isn’t love the most powerful weapon there is in life? Isn’t God love? Didn’t Christ spend His life teaching others how to love? This is our commandment: love God and love others as yourself.
Yes, I do believe you need to teach others truth and to guide them and keep them from error when appropriate. But we must always remember that we too were enemies of the cross. And so we must be humble when we attempt to teach others and always go in the Spirit of Christ which was love.
Remember, Jesus was accused of being with sinners and heathen by the religious thinkers. Jesus told the most religious that they were white washed tombs because they stood in judgment of others rather than examining their own life. They were filled with spiritual pride and superiority. These poor souls were so blinded by their religious ideations that they didn’t know how to love. So sad!
This is why I say, if I think we fall to error, I would want to fall on the side of “love”. If I am walking in love to God and others as a humble servant, I may not fall on the side of error of filling my mind with knowledge and missing the mark by not loving and being as a Pharisee.
John,
You may be correct in saying the examples about Mother Theresa; I don’t know. As I said, I don’t think she concerned herself over the intellectual Christian thought contortions. Her ministry focus was caring, giving, and loving the hurt, diseased, rejected and dying. She walked in love. If she made those statements, she “might” have made them out of error in wanting to not condemn or judge others. I can not question her heart; I leave that to almighty God.
I do agree that it is important to know the truth and to teach people in love when they are ready to receive it. I allow God to be God though, and He will judge the hearts since I am just a mere sinner saved by grace alone and not worthy to judge or condemn anyone for their beliefs or life experiences.
I have fallen short many times and am humble for my inabilities to walk worthy of my calling at all times, and anyone that can not admit this struggle is venturing on spiritual pride. Even Paul struggled with carnality and exclaimed, “O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!” (Romans 7:24-25)
As far as pulling out a scripture or two to base your whole premise on fighting for the kingdom, I might be a little cautious. Yes, there will be struggles and suffering when you are a Christian. Many of the struggles will be because you are walking in love. Since the world knows darkness and selfishness, love is not something that it understands. When you walk in love and have to forgive someone over and over again, or love someone that rudely cuts in front of you on the freeway, or love someone that offends you or talks badly about you, and countless examples of evil or darkness that come against you, then I would say it is not peaceful, but a struggle. It is a struggle to love and to allow Christ to be seen in you.
Yes, families will be against one another because it is difficult to walk in love when a family member is not a Christian. Sometimes it is difficult to walk in love even when a family member is a Christian and carnal. You expect more of them. But our walk with Christ is ever growing, and we will have to continue allowing the Word to transform our minds to have the mind of Christ, so we can walk in His love toward others.
We have to remember where we came from. We too were the enemies of Christ at one time. Only by His grace and love and dying on the cross for our wretched sins can we ever lift our faces up to see the face of God. We are guilty without our Savior.
I think this scripture says much: Luke 6:42 (The Message)
41-42 “It’s easy to see a smudge on your neighbor’s face and be oblivious to the ugly sneer on your own. Do you have the nerve to say, ‘Let me wash your face for you,’ when your own face is distorted by contempt? It’s this I-know-better-than-you mentality again, playing a holier-than-thou part instead of just living your own part. Wipe that ugly sneer off your own face and you might be fit to offer a washcloth to your neighbor.
We always must check our motivation before we minister to others. We must always remember it is Christ that does the work, not our own knowledge or our own effort. We must empty ourselves of “ourselves” (which isn’t easy by the way) and allow Christ’s love to bring the sheep into the kingdom. After all, we all need His love and forgiveness.
I pray that you understand the spirit in which I convey this message…
Whyte Stonne,
Sorry I forgot the “n” in your last name earlier. It was an over sight on my part.
Dear Sandi,
Don’t worry about the spelling. It’s only a “handle.” Although it’s a very meaningful handle for me. (Revelation 2:17)
I wish people had more appreciation for the diversity of gifts and ministries in the Body of Christ. The main thing I’m thinking of now is how the gentleness and kindness of love moves people toward repentence and salvation.
If any writer of Greek Scripture was concerned about reaching people with the Gospel, it was Paul. Look what he wrote to Christians who judged and condemned people:
“Do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness leads you toward repentence?” (Rom. 2:4 NIV)
Kindness. Tolerance. Patience. These lead Christians (!) to repentence.
“Tolerance? How did that awful word get into the Bible?” No, God “tolerates” an awful lot from ALL of us, we who should know better, we who have the Scriptures and who know that Christ’s first commandment is to love.
Kindness, tolerance and patience leads WHO to repentence? Christians, Christians who condemn.
There’s a debate going on in another thread about what are called “sign gifts.” The so-called “sign gifts” were to confirm the gospel message the early Christians brought.
“Love” is also a confiring sign of the gospel message, taken from John’s gospel.
“All men will know that you are my disciples if you love one another.” (13:35) People will know that we are a true follower of Christ–disciples–if we LOVE one another.
If Christians are concerned about being a CREDIBLE witness so people will accept their testimony, then they will look to their love for other Christians, especially the ones they consider enemies.
“All men will know that you are my disciples if you love one another.”
“A new commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.” (13:34)
Some people would twist this around, people who apparently prefer adversarial confrontations to the kindness, tolerance and patience. Paul talks about in Romans 2. Around here, people seem to argue that correction, rebuke, and “contending for the faith” are the epitome of love.
James warns us big time.
“Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him, speaks against the law and judges it. There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you–who are you to judge your neighbor?” (James 4:11-12)
No doubt people will quote Jude 3 in response, as though Jude 3 refute such an emphasis on love. “I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.”
What they don’t acknowledge is that this emphasis on love, Christ’s new commandment, IS THE CORE OF THAT FAITH we contend for! (forgive the “yelling” caps, but this is important)
When you contend for the faith, you are contending for all those gushy-goo, mealy-mouth COMMANDS OF GOD to love one another, to lay down your lives for one another, to serve one another with forgiveness, compassion, gentleness, kindness, tolerance, and love.
As though self-sacrifice, compassion, gentleness, kindness, tolerance, forgiveness and love — weren’t “manly.”
The Great Commission in Matthew 28 includes making disciples and “teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” (28:20) And that new commandment in particular, “Love one another.”
That faith delivered to the saints? Love is the core of that faith, love is at the core of what the “everything I have commanded you,” all that gushy-goo, mealy mouth talk of love, of holy kisses, forgiving one another, not judging one another–and all that other mush.
So Sandi, when I insist on the centrality of love, on learning to minister the new covenant of the Spirit, on NOT using the Scripture as a weapon to be used “on” other believers–
I AM contending for the faith once and for all delivered to the saints (Jude 2).
I have never said that “bringing correction” is wrong. Hardly–bringing correction is COMMANDED (see II Timothy 3:16).
And what I am writing now IS a word of correction for some here–a modification, an encouragement to give various Scripture passages more weight than they seem to give now.
We need to be open to letting the Scripture give us course adjustments when we are not on the proper heading.
Sandi, I like the spirit of your posts more than mine, I must confess. Yours seem more directed to the heart, mine more to the mind. Yours feel more refreshing to me. Thanks.
Whyte Stonne,
How beautiful!!!!!!
Bravo, I couldn’t have said it better! I am in total agreement with you! My point exactly!
Exclamation, exclamation, exclamation!!!!!! I absolutely love the scriptures that you utilized to get your point across.
Love is the “core and key” and basis for everything there is about Christ. It is our firm foundation. God is love! We as human beings are so lacking when it comes to love. Even when we are Christians, we want to “bite and devour” one another with our thinking and ideations as if we are so smart. That is why on my first post I wrote that so many wars have been fought and will still occur because we miss the point totally that we are to walk in love and lay down our life for love. Isn’t that what Christ did? And look at the impact that it made.
I agree that we should “contend for the faith”, but we must contend “always” with the spirit of love and humiliation because “where is boasting, it is in Christ” not in anything we think or say or do or possess. All glory goes to our Father God, our Savior, and His Holy Spirit which is love.
I have learned as I mature in Christ that I must love and forgive all people even murderers, child molesters, rapist, and worse. I use to think they all deserve to die! Then, I started seeing my own mote in my eye. Who am I to condemn or judge anyone? I am not God! I don’t know the path that these criminals have walked to get to the place that they could be so vile and evil. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that what they did can be dismissed and unpunished. No, they must stand accountable to their crime.
To get to my point, I will give the example that when I struggle with my eating because my family loved to eat and many of them are obese (which I am not obese, but constantly battle wrong eating), and I find it difficult to buffet my own body, how can I judge someone who grew up in a home that saw that alcoholism is a family value or child abuse was the norm or both parents smoked or worse; how difficult it must be for them to release those behaviors! Yes, only with the love of Christ and His work on the cross and His Spirit of love can we be free of such behaviors and thinking.
And just when you think you have victory, you find your self doing something outside of the moral constructs of Christianity (like overeating), and must repent and forget those behaviors that are behind you, and press forward to the high calling of Christ. That is why we must forgive others and our selves, seventy times seven. We must die to ourselves daily which is a struggle and a constant battle! Truly, we are wretched, and who can deliver us from this body of death…only our blessed Christ, and we must give him “All” the glory (Romans 7:24-25). There is no boasting in humanity! None!
So where is contending in the faith? In Christ! In His love. In the love of the Father who He continually pointed to and gave glory to. He didn’t even point to himself. He pointed and gave glory to His Father. And so must we.
Where is correcting? After we take the mote out of our own eye, we must humble ourselves and submit to the cross and lovingly forgive others and help them see that there is love in this world, and it is only in Christ, who is ever present in us. Let us let His love correct us and others through His example and His loving Spirit. Let us humbly correct error in the church and in others through the Spirit of His love.
I like this song (which is still appropriate today) with a tweak on words:
What the world needs now
is Christ (love), sweet Christ (love)
it’s the only thing
that there’s just too little of
What the world needs now
is Christ (love), sweet Christ (love),
no not just for some
but for everyone.
Lord, we don’t need
another mountain,
there are mountains
and hillsides enough to climb
There are oceans
and rivers enough to cross,
enough to last
’til the end of time.
Repeat Chorus
Lord, we don’t need
another meadow
there are cornfields
and wheat fields enough to grow
There are sunbeams
and moonbeams enough to shine
oh listen, lord,
if you want to know.
Repeat Chorus
No, not just for some,
oh, but just for everyone.”
Let us all Praise Him and give Him all the Glory for His self-sacrificing work and love on the cross!!!!!!!!!
O.K. John,
I had time to look at your website reference on Mother Teresa. I don’t know this website to know if I can give it complete credit.
Here is another website:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa
I humbly stand corrected. I see that in any venture which public notoriety takes a person (even Jesus Christ); there always will be controversy and criticism. It seems that Mother Teresa had her share. And gee, she is human, subject to much error.
I still must say I can not question her heart; I leave that to Almighty God, just as I can not question or judge her critics. Only God knows the heart, and I leave all final judgment to Him.
Yes, we can discern the Spirit of Truth verses the spirit of error with His Spirit and His Word. But judgment, I leave to God. I thank God that He does not judge me for my sins or errors, and that His love on the cross wipes away as far as the east is from the west all my shortcomings and sins. What love!!! What an unspeakable gift!!! And this gift is not just for me, but for all those who seek Him in a repentant, humbled way. I was not present to hear the words or heart of Mother Teresa on her death bed. But God knows…
I like to look at the thief on the cross. He didn’t walk a walk of Christ. He didn’t get water baptized. He didn’t take communion. He didn’t speak in tongues or have supernatural gifts or healings. He didn’t study the Word or have a biblical or Torah education. He didn’t preach the Word to correct or save others. He didn’t convert anyone. He just recognized as he was receiving his punishment for his crime that Jesus was the pure and holy Messiah, the Christ, the Savior, and God. For this, he was rewarded passage into the heavenly kingdom—paradise with Jesus by his side. Wow!
“My thoughts are not your thoughts, and my ways are not your ways!”…says Almighty God…
Dear Sandi,
It sounds to me like you have “the gift of mercy.” When someone pleads for mercy, they are asking that they not receive the just penalty for their actions. They may deserve to die, but the judge withholds the penalty. The gift of mercy? You don’t insist on anyone receiving the just penalty for their sin. “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.”
Jesus told the disciples, “If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven. If you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.” (John 20:21) God has given us the authority to forgive sins. I could only wish that we had the *heart* to forgive sins as well. Jesus lived and died to forgive sins. We seem to live to bind people’s sins to their souls.
In union with the Father, Jesus forgave those who were crucifying him. “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” The Roman soldiers and the rest—they hadn’t repented. But Jesus acted on his heart of forgiveness. Same with Stephen in Acts. “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.”
Sandi, you are blessed to have been given both the authority (exousia) and the heart to forgive sin and error. And you willingly extend that mercy and forgiveness both to “sinners,” and to those who would not forgive sin and error.
I was reminded of this passage when you discussed humble correction: “Sisters and brothers, if one of you is caught in any sin, the more spiritual among you should correct the offender in a spirit of gentleness—remembering that you may be tempted yourselves.” (Gal 6:1 INT)
You wrote: “Just when you think you have victory, you find your self doing something outside of the moral constructs of Christianity (like overeating), and must repent and forget those behaviors that are behind you, and press forward to the high calling of Christ.”
I found something very helpful when dealing with besetting sin. In Romans, Paul over and over tells us that we are no longer under the law, that we no longer measure ourselves by the law.
We experience feelings of guilt and condemnation when we measure ourselves against the written code. Paul had several key things to say about the written code.
1) The “Law brings wrath.” (Romans 4:15a)
2) “Where there is no law there is no transgression.” (Romans 4:15b)
3) “Sin is not taken into account when there is no law.” (Romans 5:13b)
4) “Apart from the law, sin is dead.” (Romans 7:8b)
You wrote: “we are wretched, and who can deliver us from this body of death…only our blessed Christ, and we must give him “All” the glory (Romans 7:24-25). How does God deliver us from this body of sin and death? He delivers us by canceling our relationship with the Law.
Why is God’s wrath appeased? Because the “Law brings wrath,” and God nailed the written code to the cross.
How does God deliver us from transgression? By removing the Law from our lives. “Where there is no law there is no transgression.”
Why doesn’t God take our sin into account anymore? Because “sin is not taken into account when there is no law.”
Why are we dead to sin? Because “apart from the law, sin is dead.”
The forgiveness of sins and the cancellation of the Law (the written code) are intimately connected. In Colossians Paul writes: “He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.” (2:13-14)
This helped me to break the cycle of sin-condemnation-worthlessness-sin-condemnation-worthlessness-sin-condemnation-worthlessness in my life.
Take care.
Whyte Stonne,
Thank you for your assessment of the “gift of mercy”. If this is the case, I give God all the glory for it is His gift and His Spirit and nothing of my own doing. It is Christ in me…
I agree with your explanation of forgiveness; however, I must expound on it a little. Yes, we have power to forgive, and we are commanded to forgive. But if we don’t forgive, I think it hurts us more than them. I am reminded of the parable of the unmerciful servant.
Matthew 18:21-35 (New International Version): The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant
21Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?”
22Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.
23″Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him. 25Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt. 26″The servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ 27The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go. 28″But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded. 29″His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.’ 30″But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened. 32″Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ 34In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.
35″This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart.”
We are commanded to forgive because we are commanded to love. If we don’t forgive, we have forgotten Christ’s work and love on the cross for our own sins and redemption. Remember, before our salvation, we were enemies of God. Who are we to not forgive others when we were enemies of the cross and only became adopted sons because our Savior laid down His life for us?
Forgive us our debts… “As” we forgive our debtors…
Yes, through the blood of Christ, He nailed the written code—the law on the cross, if we walk in His Spirit of love and His Word, we have no condemnation. However, our battle is with the flesh, our carnality. If we walk in the Spirit, then there is no condemnation. If we slip and walk in our flesh or carnal mind, then we must repent and return to His blessed forgiveness and love and return to walking in the Spirit.
Here are some scriptures:
Romans 8:1 (New King James Version)
Free from Indwelling Sin
1 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.
1 Timothy 3:6 (New King James Version)
6 not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil.
1 John 1:8-10(New International Version)
8If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.
Psalm 103:12 (New King James Version)
12 As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.
I wrote in an earlier post, “Just when you think you have victory, you find your self doing something outside of the moral constructs of Christianity (like overeating), and must repent, and forget those behaviors that are behind you, and press forward to the high calling of Christ.”
What I meant was that I return to Christ’s loving forgiveness when I fall into carnal ways; therefore, I can forget those things and put them behind me and press on into the high calling of Christ and His Spirit and love. As far as the east is from the west, my sin is wiped out. I have no condemnation when I walk in Christ and His love. When I fall into my unrenewed thinking or into my flesh or carnality or my own ways again which is sin, then I must repent and return to the Spirit of Christ. I must examine myself and my motives to represent Christ and not my self. It is Christ who gets all the praise for forgiving me and returning me to His love—His cross.
Thank you for your insight. God forbid that I fall into sin-condemnation-worthlessness-sin cycle. I know it does happen and am glad when I remember the Word which renews my mind to the cross and His forgiveness. He restores my soul.
Hey Sandi,
I appreciate you sharing from the heart.
I think it is God’s will that we recover quickly when we stumble in sin, and not wallow in the experience of guilt and condemnation. “When he stumbles, he will not be utterly cast down, for the Lord upholdeth him with his hand” (Psalm 37:24).
What happens when we don’t make a quick recovery is that we are useless to God to love the people around us. We become preoccupied with how we’ve failed (as though that should come as a surprise!). Sometimes I think our excessive grief is caused by pride. Or, we feel we have to prove something, and a stumble shatters our sense of self-worth.
When we share that “cup of cool water” with someone, it doesn’t really matter if we have just had a second piece of pie, or just looked a little too long at a lady’s calf. God doesn’t love us less if we have stumbled. The person who thirsts doesn’t care if we have just stumbled. God is concerned that we are a channel of his love and care.
Stumbling in sin often means we don’t have our eyes fixed on living in the moment, loving God and his children. If we wallow in our sin, guilt, and condemnation, then we are effectively side-lined from being able to love.
Since “sinless perfection” is a practical impossibility (although the Wesleyans do have a legitimate means of explaining otherwise), we shouldn’t be surprised and paralyzed when we stumble. We need to make a quick recovery.
There are many Scripture truths whose effect is to make this quick recovery possible.
Thanks again.
Whyte Stonne,
I agree with what you are saying. Great insight! The quicker we recover from our sin, the more effective we are in and for Christ.
Thanks.