THE PHILOSOPHY OF A CHRISTIAN MYSTIC

FORM

The use of form is a necessary starting point for mystical encounters: it gets the relationship going. However, holding on to one particular form/creed/set of beliefs and thereby opposing others, simply shows how attached one is to form.

Forms are:

Illusions

Projections of our concepts/forms/beliefs onto the Formless.

Even so, God manifests in form and gives forms in revelation. Therefore, form is not to be discarded, but we are required to see through it.

Form itself is:

Shadow

Hollow

Shallow

Partial

Inadequate

Forms given in revelation are to be respected, but:

Not to be rested in

Not to be considered final

This is because forms/images/concepts/beliefs contain

Limitations

Illusions

Examples of forms include: Source, Father, God, Creator, Root, Son, Wise, Person, Ground, Spirit, Judge, Trinity.

SPIRITUAL PROGRESS

Spiritual progress involves withdrawal from form, and thus the rejection of religious institutions may be the rejection of outmoded forms arising from sacred anger. The veils of form have to be pierced, since form veils or obscures God.

Veils include:

Material: money, comfort, pleasure (Outward)

Intellect and mind: Theology, philosophy, doctrine, and types of prayer. (Inward)

Type of life: busyness – too busy to be spiritual – this implies that spirituality is only for recluses.

Forms of God: Identifying God with a particular religion, music, liturgy e.t.c.

Spiritual progress is learning to be rather than to act.

DEPTH

Depth consists of two types:

God – The Divine Abyss, the Silent Desert, God beyond God.

Self – Ground, Citadel, Jerusalem, Bride.

There is an affinity between these because God made man in His own likeness.

DEPTH DYNAMICS

Transcendent

Eternal Now

Detachment

                                  Dynamic   Melting

Permanent Self                                  Multiplicity of selves – Disunity

Ground of the Soul                            (Roles and functions) – false identification

                                                          In time and space -Ignorance and illusion

Fount of action                                  Reaction

TRINITY

Godhead/Deity – Motionless/Attributeless

Expressor

S            Father – God as Transcendent Speaker – Originator/Creator

P                                                               Melting

I             Son – That which is spoken – Word/Creation/Form – Generated

R                                                   Expressed

I

T     –    The Unity of Father and Son – Oneness – Not two Gods.

This is God expressing God to God, One and undivided, melting out of and back into Divine Abyss. It is a relationship of Power/Energy which is held in Balance/Control.

MELTING

God speaks forth into contraction [Song of Simon]/Creation/ Form).

Ground of the Soul speaks forth/goes out/boils over/melts into personhood. It goes out yet remains within both creation and the person.

GOD AND GODHEAD

The Godhead is the Silent Desert, the Abyss of Transcendence and is above all Names and Forms. The Godhead does not create, is not a person and has no name. The Godhead is silent. When It utters Itself it becomes God; Father. God is Personal, utters Itself forth, expresses Itself, receives names such as Father, Son, Spirit. The utterance itself is Son. These two are totally One both in each other and the Godhead from which they emerge. This Oneness and Unity is itself a Person – the Holy Spirit.

GOD AND CREATION

Eckhart is not a Pantheist or Panentheist. In his system, there is the concept of ‘The Word’. As we have seen, the Godhead utters Itself – it becomes Father and the utterance is ‘Son’. This is the internal utterance of the Godhead, the silent utterance, the utterance within the Trinity. This utterance is Total and Absolute – the internal utterance is not different from God.

But there is also an external utterance of the Godhead, the utterance that is aloud, the utterance outside of the Trinity, and this is the creation of the universe or cosmos. This utterance is partial and imperfect – it is not the Word, but the echo of the Word.

Thus, the speaking forth of the Son (internal, Absolute) echoes and resounds in the creation of the universe (external, partial). Whether spoken or echoing, it is the same word. The Word is that which the universe and God have in common.

THE WORD, THE GROUND OF THE SOUL AND UNION

It is through the Word and only through the Word that we achieve unity with:

Ourselves

Other people

The environment

God

Ignorance of this causes illusion, fragmentation, division, tension, contradiction, fear, violence, e.t.c. Therefore we need to be rooted and grounded in the Word.

The Word’s echo (mirror, reflection) is the Universe and we are all part of the Universe: we are an echo of the Word. The Ground of the soul is an empty, inner space in which the Word can be spoken and echoed. The purpose of detachment, renunciation and letting go e.t.c. is to get in touch with the Ground of the Soul as echo chamber for the Word. When this happens we become rooted and grounded in the Word echoing in us, to the extent that we ‘become’ that Word:

We share in the relation of the Son to the Father

We are ‘sons’ in the Son

We are enlivened and unified by the Spirit

We are begotten by the Father – emerging from the Father and returning to the Father.

We share in the Transcendent Godhead, the ground of communion between the Three Persons.

This is true spirituality:

Living and dwelling in God

We live in Christ

Share in His relationship as sons

Through the Holy Spirit

The birth of the Son, the speaking of the Word in the Ground of the Soul arises from an attitude to ALL circumstances of life.

UNION AND PERCEPTION OF THE WORLD

In union:

We see God as God.

We see the world in God – as God sees it.

Instead of standing in the world looking for signs/proofs of God outside it

            we stand within God and it is the world which now appears outside.

When we stand in the world, God appears totally transcendent and ‘other’.

When we stand within God, the world appears ‘other’, but not transcendent – it appears as a pale and imperfect reflection of the truth in which we stand.

Therefore, Eckhart does not think in the normal way – approaching God from outside through the world, rather, he stands in God looking out.

PROOFS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

To approach God through the world is the approach taken by Aquinas – deduction of Designer and Planner. Eckhart argues that God proves the world – God is the Prime Datum, the Unquestionable Reality – everything else is merely derived and deduced.

HOW DOES THE WORLD LOOK TO GOD?

As we have seen, the universe is an echo of God’s Word, therefore the universe depends entirely upon God: No Voice = no echo.

There is another metaphor used by Eckhart: that of an image or reflection in a mirror. (See also Arabi). The universe is a reflection of God, which only exists as long as God (or the mirror) is present.

Eckhart emphasises the emptiness of the echo chamber,

                                  The nothingness that reflects God’s image.

To be able to echo or reflect means to be empty, to be without inherent character, Thus the universe and the Ground of the Soul are themselves inherently characterless and empty. God created the universe out of nothing and this nothingness is the source of its many imperfections:

I quarrel with another person because I am NOT him, my interests are NOT his. Fire burns my hand because fire is NOT my hand: if my hand were fire, it would not be burned.

All imperfections in the universe spring from this element of nothingness in all things, therefore, if you want to be free of suffering, get rid of the NOT. Ultimately, the reason why the universe is imperfect is because it is NOT God. If the universe were perfect, it would be God.

The universe appears solid, enduring and permanent. It is in fact fleeting, transient, and dependent upon the continued presence of God. In itself it is nothing, but this very emptiness makes it possible for the universe to reflect God. Therefore the universe IS and IS NOT. In itself it is emptiness, but in God it has being. God sees only His own reflection and hears only His own Word. Thus, when we are in Unity with God, we will see:

It’s beauty and splendour in it’s reflection of God.

The emptiness and nothingness on which it is based.

That only God is True and Real, without admixture of nothing.

Standing within the Word we understand and love the world/universe properly – as the Word’s echo. It gives a joyous sense of rhythm in things: in birth/death, light/dark, growth/decline, gain/loss, breathing in/breathing out. Within God these movements are simultaneous – God goes out from Himself yet always remains within. In the created universe these movements are successive. Therefore, when we are spiritually asleep/dead/ignorant, we are tied to the temporal world and prone to disillusionment and sorrow. If we stand in the Word, the meaningless flux comes together and makes sense – the underlying harmony of the universe makes sense – we hear the keynote on which it is all based.

SCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY, TECHNOLOGY, ART AND THEOLOGY

All these approaches and disciplines try to understand too much from the outside instead of within. This approach is not necessarily wrong and does lead to a kind of knowledge but not the True and Deepest knowledge because they miss the Foundation on which the whole edifice is based.

CHRIST: THE INCARNATE WORD

The human body is not just a tiresome burden imprisoning a radiant soul. Rather, the body has a central role to play – it gives us lessons and experiences only possible with a body.

Where then is God found? God is found:

In the Ground of the Soul – which mirrors the Divine Abyss

In the outflowing of relations and activity in the world – which mirrors God’s personhood and unity of the Trinity

In the flesh/body – in the Person of Jesus

Jesus is the centre of Eckhart’s spiritual way. In Him is the maximum tension of paradox. Other paradoxes include:

God goes out yet remains within

God is One yet Three

God is present in the universe yet distinct from it

The universe is everything yet nothing

The universe reveals God yet veils Him

The universe IS yet at the same time IS NOT

We are creatures yet have a divine spark and are predestined for union with God (Psalm 82:6)

Therefore, God comes to meet us, as man and God, at the heart of the paradox.

Questions about Jesus are questions about ourselves because Christ is the archetypal human being. (Islam: The Perfect Man). If we want to know what it is to be human, then Jesus is the supreme example and demonstration of humanity, of man achieving full potential. Therefore, our concepts of Jesus change, reflecting changing concepts of ourselves:

Too much focus on his Divinity means that we are unable to come to terms with the animal/physical part of our makeup.

Too much emphasis on his humanity means that we have lost sight of the transcendent.

A faulty concept of Jesus Christ is a faulty concept of ourselves and our failure to come to terms with paradox. How then does Eckhart see the paradox of Christ and what does this tell us of our own paradox?

Eckhart focuses on the Incarnation – the birth of God as man:

As a root mystery – light coming into darkness and nor overcome by it.

As a mystical concept – union of God and man in one:

Two thousand years ago at Nazareth. (Historical)

Here and now in the birth of God, or speaking of the Word in the Ground of the Soul. (Mystical)

These are two distinct aspects of one mystery, and Eckhart persistently and openly refuses to view the Incarnation solely from a historical perspective. Therefore Jesus Christ is one in whom God and man are made one and -

                  Man is a being capable of being one with God.

The mystery of the Incarnation is also the mystery of our deification.

HOW IS JESUS CHRIST MADE RELEVANT TODAY?

Christ is made relevant by not focussing exclusively on the historical event, even downplaying it – but:

Eckhart does not deny Jesus as an historical figure

Eckhart does not see man as essentially historical either.

We live in history, but our ultimate fulfilment and meaning is not to be found there, but in God, who is not historical and not contained in space and time. Therefore Eckhart does not support the idea of a merely mythological or symbolic Jesus, and neither does he support the idea of Jesus as a mere exemplar or spur to human aspirations.

Jesus Christ is seen as remote because he is seen as a merely external figure. But the only things that are truly relevant are those which touch our lives at the centre, those which are internal. Therefore Christ should be that which is most central and internal to us – a force within us – active within our mind or psyche.

Eckhart considers the descent of God into the Ground of the Soul as the real Incarnation. God sent His Son into the world. What is the world? It is the Ground of the Soul, where there is no distinctiveness or separation, the emptiness that is the same in me as anyone else. This emptiness – the Ground of the Soul – is that which unites us; we all have it in common: the universal human nature.

HUMAN NATURE

All of us have a Ground of the Soul, which is that which when we are detached from self and creatures, detached from identifications, and when we are humble open and receptive to God makes us creatures capable of union with God. Therefore we are most human when in the Soul’s Ground, where there is only a Nameless, Formless state of being, which is the same in us all.

This only seems alien, foreign and unattainable to us because we live in ignorance and illusion where our lives are lived on a sub-human level, focussed on the ouward. In Christ however, the potentialities of the human state are realised. Jesus is the supremely normal man. In Gethsemene, Jesus suffered in the outer man, but remained detached and united with God in the inner man.

In the Incarnation, God took on human nature, entering the Ground of the man, that ground which is common to us all. If we enter the Ground, we encounter the Son, we become the Son, and we share in the union with the Son, father and Spirit in the Divine Abyss. In Christ is enacted the central mystery of the union of God and man. Not only is there an outward and inward Incarnation, not only in Christ is there an inner and outer man, there is also, (since to see Christ is to see ourselves) an inner and outward individual – we each have an inner and outward man.

THE INNER AND OUTER MAN

The outward man consists of experiences of the Incarnation of Christ by recalling it:

Through the church

Through the sacraments

Through the Scriptures

Through the endeavour to live a virtuous life

The inner man experiences the Incarnation of Christ by

Detachment from external form

By detachment from conceptual form

By entry to the Ground of the Soul

Therefore Christ is seen as one with whom we are already united the moment we enter the Ground of the Soul. Therefore Christ is Real, at this moment uniting us with God.

Eckhart encourages us to approach the Father through the Son – to be focussed on Christ not as an historical figure, but as living, active force within us at this moment. The church, with Scriptures and Sacraments, prepare us for this. We do not get stuck in the external however. We do not get stuck at ‘following’ Christ, or ‘believing’ Christ. Rather, we become Christ and discover His and our essential paradox: we are creatures of mortal flesh destined for immortal life of spirit.

THE WAY AND THE GOAL

The goal is mystical, solely in the sense of an experience of God, but not merely an ecstatic ‘trip’ or momentary boost of bliss. Neither is it an ‘expansion of consciousness’ or unusual state of consciousness. Rather, it is an attitude in all states of consciousness. This attitude is one of:

Renunciation

Open, relaxed receptivity to the present moment – whatever it contains

Detached ‘letting go’, ‘depersonalisation’ [Assagioli] non-attachment [Zen]. A breaking through or piercing of consciousness to an inner core of stability and unity through all conscious states and circumstances.

Acceptance of all situations, good or bad, open to all, clinging to none.

In part, this may be a prayer or meditation experience, but is not limited to it. Eckhart would be a supporter of the Negative Way – being still, quiet, not trying to form pictures or words – a move to imageless stillness and a ‘cloud of unknowing’, silence, solitude. This attitude however may also occur when we are busy and active.

Eckhart’s approach is likened to the formula of ‘melting;’ mentioned earlier.

God is simultaneously going out and remaining within.

God is simultaneously transcendent and manifest in creation and trinity.

The world also goes out and remains within:

It is conceived in the Godhead in the Father as the Word

It is not different from God

But it is spoken forth, made manifest as the universe and perceived as something different from God.

Humans also go out and remain within:

They go out and occupy themselves with creatures, environment, images, works and forms.

Yet within are free from images and form in solitary union with One at the Ground of the Soul.

Therefore the approach is an attitude; it is not whether we are going to pray or weed the garden, it is how and why we do either of these things. The attitude is detachment (Eckhart) or non-attachment (Zen).

This non-attachment is an emulation of the Divine. Through emulation or likeness we begin to resemble that which we know. The more we resemble it, the more we know it, the more we are at one with it. Through detachment we enter the nameless depths of ourselves. Images, forms, projections and identifications which veil both our true nature and God’s are peeled away.

Detachment is not stoicism, unfeeling, impersonal, cold, aloof or indifferent to need. It is alert to the demands of the present moment. It is indifferent to forms of service to God – it does not matter what form our service takes.

END

Humanity creates God (Gospel of Philip). Human beings create the whole language of religious expression – in effect, humanity creates the Divine world.

The spiritual essence of the human being manifests the Divine life and Divine revelation. Therefore, exploring the psyche becomes an explicit religious quest. However, religious institutions may be a hindrance rather than a help to progress.

Ignorance is what separates us from God and involves us in suffering, therefore the Gnostic values knowledge, and especially self-knowledge – which is insight. Most people live in ignorance/darkness (in psychotherapy this is synonymous with unconsciousness). Unaware of their own selves, they have no ‘root’ or ‘grounded ness’. The result is terror, confusion, instability, doubt, division and being caught in illusions. Therefore they cannot achieve fulfillment. (Gospel of Truth).

Where can one find light/knowledge/wisdom? The psyche bears within itself the potential for liberation – an idea shared with psychotherapy. But pursuing gnosis is a solitary process and meets internal resistance. The Gnostics compare this resistance to sleep/drunkenness. The lamp/light of the body is the mind. (Dialogue of the Saviour). The mind is the guide and reason is the teacher.

The kingdom of God is inside you and outside of you.

The kingdom of God symbolizes a state of transformed consciousness (like the Golden City does in the Song of Simon).

The purpose of accepting an external religious or spiritual authority is to learn to overcome it. When one becomes spiritually mature, one no longer needs an external authority. 

Actual events are seen as secondary to their perceived meaning, therefore the Gnostic has a fascination with the non-literal significance of language. ‘Truth brought names into existence because it is not possible to teach truth without names….Truth comes in types and images.’ (Gospel of Philip). The Gnostic is therefore critical of literalism. Rather, religious language is a language of internal transformation.

Gnosticism has an inherent structure that is opposed to orthodoxy. It is not likely to recognise Bishop, Priest, Canon or Ritual as having ultimate authority.

Psychotherapy does not attribute real existence to figments of the imagination. Psychotherapy does not see itself as being equivalent to discovering the secrets of the universe. But Gnosticism sees the interior search for Self-knowledge as the key to understanding universal truths:

-         Who we are

-         Where we came from

-         Where we go

Therefore for Gnostics, whoever explores human experience simultaneously discovers Divine reality. Therefore Gnosticism is a spiritual/religious movement. ‘Each human being is a dwelling place – in him dwells an infinite power…the root of the universe’. (Simon Magus) But this power exists in a latent/veiled/unpotentialised condition in everyone.

How is that potential realized/actualized? Typical practices of disengagement/detachment and stilling the mind in meditation are advocated. This takes practice, and probably years of training and therefore appeals only to a few.

Gnostics have a mistrust of the body which is seen as a saboteur that inevitably engaged him in suffering. Gnostics have a similar mistrust of the blind forces that prevail in the universe – forces that constitute the body. Release or liberation is gained by realization of the truth about humanity’s place and destiny in the universe, the answers being found within. It is realising the Essential Self – the Divine within – it is identification with the Divine Being.

This is a solitary path: ‘Blessed are the solitary and the chosen, for you will find the kingdom, for you are from it, and to it you will return’ (Attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas). This solitude derives from insistence on the primacy of Immediate experience. What others say is only provisional until one finds one’s own path, where a person discovers their own immediate relationship with the Truth itself. To rely on others is to ignore the one living in your presence and to speak only of the dead. Only by immediate experience can one create the poems, myths, vision accounts and hymns so prized by Gnostics as proof of attainment of gnosis.

Compared with this achievement of gnosis, all other achievements fall away. Thus, the many: the ignorant/unenlightened – believe that they will find fulfillment in family life, leisure, sexual relationships, business, politics, employment, power e.t.c. Gnostics reject this as an illusion and secondary to the solitary interior path.

By definition, Gnosticism, mysticism and Sufism all introduce the idea of an elite group within a group: spiritually enlightened Christians within the broader nominal Christian group, for example. The distinguishing quality for the elite group is the experience of gnosis. Initial forms which new believers declare and agree to at baptism may be superseded by this gnosis and give way to new forms experienced and received through the experience of God-Immediacy. Thus Gnostics practiced a second baptism, a ritual encouraging or celebrating a baptism in the spirit in gnosis. These new, immediately received insights became the source of authority for Gnostics – a direct challenge to the authority of Elders and bishops who may be seen as not belonging to the elite group despite being church leaders. For elders, pastors, bishops and other leaders, this group-within-a-group would often be seen as a potential for division and schism, and thus early Christian leaders such as Irenaeus emphasised and helped establish orthodoxy: one right belief, as a means of achieving unity in the faith. Those not subscribing to the orthodox position were branded as heretics, deceived and deceivers, led astray by evil spirits and Satan. It is the orthodox position that became prominent and Gnostic writings were systematically destroyed. The idea that unity consists in forms of belief is an error. Form, by definition, has boundary: it is ‘this not that’. Thus, this is an ice cream, that is not, or that is a banana and thus not this, which is an ice cream. The Divine however is ‘not this, not that’: the Divine cannot be restricted to any particular form. Therefore, True Unity does not consist in form, but in transcending form, in drawing so close to the transcendent that form falls away and useless and irrelevant. The error of Irenaeus and orthodoxy is in thinking that unity consists of acceptance of or submission to one form.

TRANSITIONS OF GOD-COMMUNION

COPYRIGHT PILGRIM SIMON (1992) All rights reserved.

PREFACE.

This study was initially concerned with whether the Old  Testament believers were indwelt by the Holy Spirit or whether this is a privilege of New Testament believers. It is not concerned about how the Holy Spirit influences us, where he dwells, or the manner of His influences. These subjects are dealt with by other authors in a variety of books. As such, this work in the main considers how God communicated with His people in the Old Testament, and notes changes and developments in the transition from the Old to the New Testaments. To understand the indwelling of the Spirit, it is necessary to look at God’s dealing with people throughout history both as to how he communicates with them and with regard to His covenants to them.

i) THE FIRST COVENANT.

Before the fall of Adam, God walked with man. That is. He walked abroad in the garden, habitually, and either His movements. His voice or both could be heard. Genesis 3 v 8. This is the only reference to God walking with man in such close communion and in such a free manner. A conditional covenant was made with man not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If he did, he would surely die. Genesis 2 v 16,17.

ii) FROM THE CURSE TO THE COVENANT WITH NOAH.

However, man disobeyed, and fell from favour. Genesis 3 v 6. He ate of the fruit and knew for the first time the knowledge of good and evil by experience, setting himself up as the arbiter of good and evil and in this sense he became like God. After the fall. God’s walk with man is always qualified. However, contact between God and man does not cease. The fall is not of such a nature that all communication between God and man ceases. After their sin. God pronounces the curse to Adam andEve, as indicated in Genesis 2 v 16,17, conversing with them, Adam and Eve knowing guilt and shame. Genesis 3 v 7-19. However, in the midst of the curse, a promise of a Deliverer is made. Genesis 3 v 15.

There is also conversation between God and Cain. It should be noted that this first recorded conversation after the fall and curse is between God and a person whose work is unaccepted, who does not find favour with God and who is disobedient. Genesis 4 v 1-16.

The initial phrase of God walking with man is now changed and rather, it is certain INDIVIDUALS that walk with God. It is the same word for walk as used in Genesis. Thus we find that Enoch walked with God, Genesis 5 v 22,24, and Noah walked with God, Genesis 6 v 9. Therefore, there is still a communication with God, and we find that God talks to Noah, Genesis 6 v 13, though we have just seen that this communication is by no means limited to Godly, righteous people. However, there is a division between those who are rebellious and those who seek to obey or walk with God, in an habitual way. We find Abel, Enoch and Noah named as finding favour, or walking with God, but also that there were others who appear to find favour, grouped under the phrase ‘sons of God’, in Genesis 6 v 2, perhaps in anticipation of heirs according to a promise yet to be made to Abraham. Abel, Enoch and Noah are all counted as having faith. Hebrews 11. However, we then find a change indicated: ‘Then said the Lord, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, because he is flesh, but his days shall be a hundred and twenty years.’. Genesis 6 v 3. Here, a judgement is promised, later elaborated in v 17, namely the flood. A hundred and twenty years will elapse from this promise to the flood itself.

Until this time, the Spirit of God appears to be striving with man, struggling, contending and making effort with him. Interestingly though, according to Wilson, (1) the more ancient versions use the word striving in the sense of remaining or dwelling. It appears that God is still very present, but also contending with man. But it will not always be so, says God, because man is flesh, a physical, fleshly being. Perhaps this is an indication of weakness of constitution of man compared to God. At the end of the hundred and twenty years, this dwelling and striving will cease, and judgement will come, and a new situation will arise. The implication is that after this judgement. God’s Spirit will not dwell and strive with man as He has been doing since the fall. That situation will cease. Indeed, after God’s dealings with Noah, we find that God ‘comes down’, or speaks through appearances, dreams and visions. There appears to be a distancing of God from man after the flood.

Thus, God talks to Noah, Genesis 6 v 13- 7 v 4. After the flood. God establishes another covenant with Noah, his descendants and all creatures that survive the flood, never again to destroy the earth by water, and gives the sign of the rainbow as a reminder. Thus, this is a covenant made with us, for we are descended from Noah. Genesis 9 v 8-17. This covenant is not an agreement between God and man, but an unconditional statement and promise made from God as to how things shall be.

iii) FROM THE NOAHIC COVENANT TO THE COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM.

The next intervention by God is the scattering of men and confusing of tongues at Babel, Genesis 11 v 5-9. This occurs about four generations after Noah’s sons, (Between 100 and 200 years after the flood. Genesis 11 v 10-19) Genesis 10 v 21-25. During this time, from the covenant to Babel, no mention is made of God striving, dwelling or talking to man. Then, God COMES DOWN, Genesis 11 v 5, to see the tower and to scatter men and confuse their language.

The phrase concerning the Lord ‘coming down’ is not limited to this period, but occurs again at the time of Moses and Aaron. Thus:

God came down to Moses, Exodus 3 v 8, and to Sinai to make a covenant with Israel, Exodus 19 v 11, Nehemiah 9 v 13. He came down to appoint overseers. Numbers 11 v 17,25, and in the in the pillar of cloud, Numbers 12 v 5, to Aaron and Miriam.

Then we move on to the next period. God’s dealings with Abraham.

iv) FROM THE COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM TO THE COVENANT AT SINAI.

The next intervention is God TALKING to Abraham, giving him instructions and making another covenant with him, to make of him a great nation. Genesis 12 v 2, God later appearing to, or being seen by Abraham, Genesis 12 v 7. God watched over events surrounding Abraham most particularly, sending plagues upon Pharaoh, Genesis 12 v 17, and elaborating to Abraham the promise. Genesis 13 v 14-17, speaking to Abraham in a vision, Genesis 15 v 1. In this way. God deals with Abraham and elaborates the covenant to make of him a great nation. God is still not striving with man by His Spirit, or walking with man. He is more remote, and choosing to intervene. Now God particularly deals with Abraham and his offspring, the future Israel, and those closely involved with them. Genesis 17 v 7,8. They are His chosen people and nation.

This promise has a dual aspect. First there is the material fulfillment in the birth of Isaac and the descendants who eventually make up the nation of Israel. Secondly, there is a spiritual aspect, as Scripture informs us that the offspring is Jesus Christ. Galatians 3 v 16. This dual aspect is something that will be present in all of God’s literal dealings with Israel, which contains types, shadows and illustrations of spiritual things. Hence the promised land is a type of heaven.

This dual aspect is something that is carried over to the prophets also, who make prophesies concerning the literal Israel, but which also are applicable to the spiritual Israel, the believers of the age from Pentecost to the Judgement.

Abraham, in a period of doubt, sins, and tries to fulfill the promise of a son himself having a child by a slave woman, Hagar, but Abraham’s wife, Sarah, later bears the promised child. These two women are allegories of two covenants. Galatians 4 v 21->. The slave woman is an allegory of the Sinai covenant to be given to Moses. A covenant of works and slavery. This is given because of transgressions, but it in no way nullifies the covenant of promise. The law will be given as a schoolmaster or custodian till the offspring, Jesus Christ, is come. The free woman is an allegory of the covenant of promise, receiving spiritual fulfillment in Christ, those who have faith in Him being the children of promise. As Ishmael, the son of the slave woman, persecutes Isaac, so the flesh persecutes those born of the Spirit. Here then is another aspect of God’s covenant. The covenant of bondage and the covenant of promise.

Despite Abraham’s lapse into sin, he believed God, and it was imputed to him as righteousness. Genesis 15 v 6, Romans 4, James 2 v 23. Here is the first Old Testament statement of justification by faith. Abraham believed God, his belief being evidenced by his works or obedience and it is counted as righteousness. Abraham’s righteousness is not of works. Abraham walked before God, Genesis 24 v 40, 48 v 15, and Isaac walked before God, Genesis 40 v 15.

The phrase ‘walking before’ or ‘walking with’ God is not limited to this period, as we find that Hezekiah walked before God. II Kings 20 v 3. He walked in truth, with a perfect heart, and did that which was good in God’s sight. Isaiah 38 v 3. It is here that we get some idea of the meaning of this phrase, in terms of living a life that maintains a pure conscience before God, in obedience to truth. It refers mainly then, to the man-ward side of submission to God.

The word ‘walk’ is not limited to believers or God, but is also used of Satan walking abroad to and fro upon the earth. Job 1 v 7, 2 v 2. Here is implied a similar freedom and liberty that God had in the garden of Eden. Satan moved around the earth with considerable freedom.

The other phrase that is used during this period is God or the Lord ‘being with’ someone. Here we find the God-ward side of blessing, assistance, gifts and prosperity to accomplish God’s purposes. Thus, when the Lord was with someone, it is not in the sense of the Spirit indwelling a person as in the New Testament sense. Thus,

God was with Abraham, Genesis 21 v 22, and God was with Isaac, Genesis 26 v 24,28, and God was with Jacob, Genesis 28 v 15. The Lord was with Joseph, Genesis 39 v 2,21,23. Again this phrase is not limited to this period, and so we also find that God was with Samuel, I Samuel 3 v 19, and God was with David, I Samuel 16 v 18, 18 v 14,28. God was also with Israel, Psalm 46 v 7,11. One of the Names of Christ is Immanuel, which being translated means. God with us, being in common with us, Matthew 1 v 23.

The covenant made with Abraham is re-established with Isaac, Genesis 26 v 23,24, and Jacob, an unusual incident being Jacob wrestling with God. Genesis 32 v 22-30. Here, Jacob’s name is changed to Israel.

Sometimes during this period. God dealt with men by sending angels. Thus, angels were sent to Lot and to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, Genesis 19 v 1, 13., and to Abraham, Genesis 22 v 11, 15. Angelic visits, and dreams and visions from God were not limited to godly people however, thus we find Pharaoh having dreams from God. Genesis 41 v 25. Other miraculous interventions in this period include Abraham’s wife, Sarah, being enabled to bear children, and Leah’s womb being opened.

So, after the flood, we find that God is not continually striving and abiding with mankind in the same way as He did before the flood. After the deluge. God makes a covenant not to destroy the earth by a flood again, comes down to destroy Babel, and then makes specific appearances to Abraham some of his descendants and those closely connected with them, having made a covenant with Abraham and his offspring to make a great nation of them and give them a promised land. This covenant has a material and a spiritual aspect, with the material aspect providing many types, figures and illustrations of spiritual truths. It also has a bondage/promise aspect. God dealt with people by sending angels, visions, dreams, and through appearances and conversation, and miraculous operations. Some people sought to obey God, others rebelled. At this time. God was with certain people only, and that to accomplish specific purposes, especially the establishment of His covenant with Abraham and his offspring. The material aspect of this covenant begins to come to fruition most particularly with Moses and the Exodus. God COMES DOWN to Moses, and SPEAKS to him through a burning bush that is not consumed. Exodus 3 v 8. Moses is given a commission to take Israel out of Egypt and is empowered to carry out the commission. Exodus 3 v 1-7 v 13.

An interesting reference is in Exodus 4 v 24, where the Lord meets Moses and seeks to kill him because his son has not been circumcised according to the covenant. This is a difficult passage for a number of reasons. We are concerned with HOW God met Moses. Most refer to God visiting Moses via an angel or spirit, but there seems no warrant for this in the text. Here might be one of the few references post flood, of God meeting directly with a person. In Genesis 32 v 24,25, God wrestled with Jacob in the form of a man, and it may be that this is how God met Moses. As the Israelites leave Egypt, the Lord appears in a new way, going before them in a pillar of cloud by day, and a pillar of fire by night. Exodus 13 v 21, 14 v 24.

v) FROM THE COVENANT AT SINAI TO THE COVENANT AT MOAB.

After their crossing of the Red Sea, God elaborates the covenant with the Israelites. Moses went to the mountain where God had come down to speak with him. Exodus 19 v 5,6. He declares that they will be a possession of God, a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. This covenant however is conditional upon their obeying God’s voice and keeping the commandments. Thus, the Lord COMES DOWN on Sinai to TALK to Moses. Exodus 19 v 18-20. The people saw that God talked to Moses from heaven. Exodus 20 v 22, and agreed to the covenant. Exodus 24 v 7. God now instructs Moses to tell the Israelites to build a sanctuary or Tabernacle, THAT HE MAY DWELL IN THEIR MIDST. Exodus 25 v 8. From this time there appear to be two ways in which God was present with His chosen people, Israel. Firstly, He abided with them accepting sacrifices and worship initially in the Tabernacle, and then in the Temple which replaced it in Solomon’s time. Secondly, He visited specific people at certain times to give them power to accomplish His purposes, as He had done since the flood.

i) God’s dwelling among Israel.

The Spirit abided among, or in the midst of Israel. Haggai 2 v 5. God walked among them, Leviticus 26 v 12, He walked among their camp. Deuteronomy 23 v 14. This is the same word, walk as used earlier. This walking of God was promised when Israelites came out of Egypt. Exodus 29 v 45,46. and it was done by use of the Tabernacle, Exodus 25 v 8, God walked in the tabernacle, or tent, II Samuel 7 v 6,7, I Chronicles 17 v 5,6, which was eventually replaced by Solomon’s temple. II Chronicles 7 v 2,3., II Chronicles 5 v 13, I Kings 8 v 10, 11)

The tabernacle and temple were filled with the Shekinah glory, the cloud of glory. This is the cloudy pillar that guided Israel during their coming out of Egypt, and now it fills the Tabernacle and later the Temple, then it appears at the transfiguration, (Matthew 17 v 5), then the ascension, (Acts 1 v ) and finally the second coming. (Acts 1 v 11, Luke 21 v 27) The second temple, rebuilt after the captivity is not recorded as being filled in this way. It appears to have been built circa 515 B.C., and was destroyed A.D.70. It is here in the tabernacle and temple that God meets the children of Israel, dwells among them, and causes them to know that he is the Lord their God, Exodus 29 v 42-46, not forsaking them. I Kings 6 v 13.

ii) Specific enduements with power.

The most common phrase referring to old testament persons and the Spirit of God is that the Spirit ‘came upon’ them. The Hebrew words used have two meanings: either, to prosper, come successfully, or, to clothe, wear, put on, or be appareled. These phrases usually refer to persons performing outstanding deeds or being unusually well prepared for leadership or to accomplish God’s purposes.

Examples are:-

To prosper, to come successfully: Samson, Judges 13 v 25, 14 v 6, 19., To kill a lion barehanded. Lehi, Judges 15 v 14, to break his bonds and kill many of his enemies. Saul, I Samuel 10 v 10, 11 v 6, to prophesy. David, I Samuel 16 v 13, from that day forward. To clothe: Gideon, Judges 6 v 34, to assemble various people before the fleece incident. Zechariah, II Chronicles 24 v 20, to prophesy. Amasai, I Chronicles 12 v 18.

Other phrases of this type are to be found as follows:-

Balaam, Numbers 24 v 2, to give a discourse. Azariah, II Chronicles 15 v 1, To prophesy. Jahaziel, II Chronicles 20 v 14, to prophesy. Isaiah, Isaiah 59 v 21, 61 v 1, to prophesy, and as a type of Christ and the Church. Othniel, Judges 3 v 10, to deliver Israel. Jephtah, Judges 11 v 29, to move. It is in this sense that the David urges for the Spirit not to be taken away. Psalm 51 v 11, and to be upheld vl2. Micah is full of power, by the Spirit of the Lord. Micah 3 v 8. The phrase regarding a spirit ‘coming upon’ someone is not limited to the Spirit of God, but is used also of an evil spirit sent by God upon Saul, I Samuel 18 v 10.

There are five people of whom the Spirit appears to be described as being IN.:-

Joseph, Genesis 41 v 38, on interpreting Pharaoh’s dreams. But this is Pharaoh’s view. It is a quote of what Pharaoh’s estimation of the situation was, rather than an authoritative statement from God’s viewpoint.

Daniel, Daniel 4 v 8, 9,18, 5 v 11,14. ‘The spirit of the gods is in him.’ Again an observation and view of Nebuchadnezzar regarding Daniel’s ability to interpret dreams, and not a statement made from God’s viewpoint. The phrase, ‘spirit of the gods’ uses a small ‘g’, because it is a word that simply means object of worship, and is used in reference to false gods as well as the true God.

Ezekiel, Ezekiel 2 v 2, but this is in a vision and symbolic. Also in Ezekiel 36 v 27, 37 v 14, in a promise of God gathering to Himself the spiritual Israel.

More interesting verses are:

Bezalel, Exodus 31 v 3, 35 v 31, ‘Filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of craftsmanship’. Here is a man filled with the Spirit of God according to God Himself. However, we are told that this is for the specific purpose of equipping the man for a specific task of building the Tabernacle and Ark. This is akin to gifts of the Spirit rather than the indwelling of the Spirit in the believer as Comforter and Advocate. In the A.V., a small ‘s’ is used for spirit, but it seems more correct to use a large ‘S’. This is God’s Spirit.

Moses, and from him, Joshua, and Elders chosen to alleviate the burden of leadership that Moses faced. Numbers 11 v 16,17,. Here, the spirit which is upon Moses is put upon his successors when appointed by God to be Israel’s leaders. Here, the emphasis appears to be more on strength of character and devotedness to truth and fairness, rather than the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Those leadership qualities which Moses had were to be given by God to his successors. A similar phrase is used in II Kings 2 v 15…’The spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha.’.

It may be a mistake to place too much emphasis on the difference between the words ‘upon’ and ‘in’, as if one is an external work only, as E.H. Andrews points out in ‘The promise of the Spirit’, p. 45,52. If God gives a man ability, such as intelligence, He must be working IN him. However, as we have seen. God can do this to unbelievers as well as believers. Just because God communicates to a person, even in an extraordinary way, or gives them extraordinary, even miraculous powers, it does not mean that they are in favour with God, or walk with Him, as in the case of Saul and Balaam. These visitations of power may be brief, or continue during a person’s life. They were free gifts to accomplish God’s purposes.

Thus we find that. God becomes present with His people in two ways, by the fiery, cloudy pillar in the tabernacle, and by equipping certain individuals with abilities such as wisdom, understanding, the power to interpret dreams, prophesy, or have visions.

God gives very particular instructions as to how the tabernacle is to be built, the items that go in it, and the nature of the sacrifices and servants in it, and, the law is given as a custodian, tutor or instructor, regulating the Jews because of sin until Christ, THE Teacher, comes. Galatians 3 v 24,25.

Then God renews His covenant concerning the promised land, and reveals some of His glory to Moses, Exodus 33 v 1-23. When the tabernacle was built, the glory of the Lord filled it, so that Moses could not enter, and the cloud rested on the tabernacle and the Lord’s glory filled it. If the cloud moved, the people followed it, but if it stayed on the tabernacle, the people camped. By night, fire was on it, and it was seen by all the house of Israel, throughout all their journeys. Exodus 40 v 34 -38, Numbers 9 v 15-23, Numbers 10 v 35. A census was taken by Moses of those who came out of Egypt, as God instructed him to do from the Tabernacle, Numbers 1 v 1,2. He speaks to Moses from above the mercy-seat. Numbers 7 v 89. Here, the twelve tribes of Israel are numbered. Numbers 1 v 17- 54.

During this time, the Lord comes down in the cloud to empower the seventy Elders to support Moses, Numbers 11 v 25, and comes down to Moses Aaron and Miriam, turning Miriam leprous for criticising Moses. Numbers 12 v 4-16. Then the cloud is removed from the tent.

Here again, another distinction is made between the ways in which God deals with Israel. God speaks to prophets in dreams and visions, but with Moses mouth to mouth and face to face, such that he beholds the form of the Lord. Numbers 12 v 6-8.

The spies are sent out from Israel for forty days to spy out the land Numbers 13, and, worried by the reports they bring, Israel murmurs and complains, deciding to return to Egypt. Joshua and Caleb plead with them to follow the Lord, and Israel is about to stone them when the glory of the Lord is seen again at the Tabernacle. Numbers 14 v 1-10.

God declares that none who have seen the extraordinary signs that He has done or seen His glory shall see the promised land, Numbers 14 v 22,23, except Caleb and Joshua, v24, 30. Israel is made to wander in the wilderness for 40 years, a year for each day that the spies were out. Numbers 14 v 32-34. It is declared that the Lord is not among them. Numbers 14 v 42.

More rebellions against Moses’ authority follow. Numbers 16 v 1-12, and rebels are judged by God who kills some by opening up the earth Numbers 16 v 31-34, and others by fire from heaven. Numbers 16 v 35. Aaron and Moses are accused of killing God’s people. Numbers 16 v 41, and the cloud appears again and God threatens to destroy Israel.  Numbers 16 v 45. 14,000 are killed by a plague from God before it is stopped by Moses making atonement for the people.

Aaron is chosen by God as being approved as a leader through a miraculous sign of his rod blossoming in the tabernacle whilst the other rods of the heads of Israel do not. This rod is replaced in the tabernacle as a sign for rebels, lest coming near the tabernacle, they die. Numbers 17 v 1-10. The people complain that they will perish if they come near the Tabernacle, so the tribe of Levi is chosen by God to be priests, doing service in the sanctuary, and all duties within the veil. Anyone else entering shall be put to death. Numbers 18 v 1-7. Again, as Israel murmurs of it’s lot in the wilderness, the glory of the Lord appears to Moses and Aaron at the Tabernacle. Numbers 20 v 1-9. Towards the end of their wanderings, Aaron dies. Numbers 20 v 22-29, some battles against enemies are fought, Numbers 20,21. and Israel arrives at Moab.

Thus, it appears that God does not always remain in the Tabernacle, but uses it as a meeting place, (it is sometimes called the tent of meeting) whereby He comes down at certain times to speak with Moses, Aaron, and sometimes Israel as a group. Certainly, in their initial wanderings, the presence of the Lord over the tabernacle is clearly seen by all at night and in the day. To other individuals, he spoke in dreams and visions.

vi) FROM THE COVENANT AT MOAB TO THE COVENANT WITH DAVID.

At Moab, God elaborates the covenant with the Israelites further, to that made at Sinai. Deuteronomy 29 v 1. This covenant covered the entrance of Israel into the promised land, and has with it certain conditions. These include:

a) Obedience to God’s commands as a condition of blessing. Deuteronomy 28 v 1.

b) Chastisement for disobedience, 28 v 15…

c) Dispersion if apostacy takes place. 28 v 63…

d) Regathering if they repent, 30 v I…

e) Repossession of the land, 30 v 5..

f) Judgement of Israel’s enemies, 30 v 7…

g) Future prosperity, 30 v 9…

Again this covenant has immediate material/bondage and also future spiritual/promise aspects.

The covenant is soon broken by the people who do not drive out the inhabitants and their false gods as instructed by God. God becomes angry with them and makes the inhabitants their enemies. Judges 2 v 1-20. God raises up Judges, but Israel does not listen, and at the death of each Judge, Israel becomes worse in its sin. As promised. God sends various chastisements upon Israel, the ark of the covenant is captured by the Philistines, and Ichabod is born, Ichabod meaning ‘without glory’. However God sends all manner of trouble to the Philistines, and they return the Ark.

The people however demand a king, and in doing so, reject God as their King. I Samuel 8 v 1-10. Saul is chosen by God, but because of his sin, Saul is rejected by God. I Samuel 15.

Again, God speaks in dreams and visions, but once this channel of communication is removed, Saul seeks desperate measures to know God’s will and seeks out a woman with a familiar spirit who foretells his death. I Samuel 18.

David replaces Saul as King and God, by speaking to David, elaborates yet further on the covenant made with Abraham. II Samuel 7 v 4-17. Four elements make up this elaboration, which is part conditional, part unconditional. Disobedience would result in punishment, but even if there was disobedience, the covenant would not be abolished.

The four elements are:

i) The promise of a dynasty.

ii) The promise of a kingdom to rule over, with land and

people.

iii) The promise of regal authority.

iv) The promise that this house, ruling over this kingdom,

             would endure forever.

Again, the covenant has an immediate material and future spiritual aspect.

The fulfillment of this covenant was announced to Christ’s mother, Luke 1 v 3…It’s spiritual fulfillment is referred to in Acts 2 v 25, for after the resurrection, Christ was exalted to supreme rule over the kingdom of God.

vii) FROM THE DAVIDIC COVENANT TO CHRIST.

Israel enters a glorious period, and David’s son, Solomon, becomes king on David’s death, and builds the temple, which is filled with the glory of God as before explained. The Davidic covenant is renewed with Solomon I Kings 9 v 4-9. Again it is conditional, with Israel being cut off from the promised land if they are disobedient to God.

Solomon himself breaks God’s covenant, being led astray by some of his wives to worship false gods. God warns Solomon that He will tear part of the kingdom from his son. I Kings 11 v 8-13. God raises enemies against Solomon who dies after ruling for forty years. As predicted by God, ten tribes revolt against Solomon’s son, and none follow the house of David but the tribe of Judah. However, Solomon’s son, Rehoboam, is forbidden by God to fight Israel. I Kings 12 v 1-25.

During this period, the two territories, Israel in the north, and Judah centred around Jerusalem, have their own kings, nearly all of whom do evil in the sight of God. The two territories are in a state of constant tension or war with each other. I Kings 14 v 21-16 v 28. Eventually, because of their continued disobedience to the covenant. God allows the Assyrians to overrun Israel. Foreigners are put into their land, and foreign gods are introduced alongside the true God. II Kings 17 v 1-41.

As regards Judah, they also have a series of kings not finding favour with God, and continue in disobedience. Within five years, Shishak, king of Egypt, defeats Judah, looting and damaging the temple. I Kings 14 v 21-29. Further kings not finding favour reign over Judah, and the fall of Jerusalem is predicted, though there is brief respite with king Josiah, who finds favour with God. II Kings 22. The Temple is repaired, and a return to God, but Josiah is replaced by other evil kings. God’s anger is kindled and he promises to remove Judah as He did with Israel. II Kings 22 v 26,27.Not long after, Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon is sent by God to overrun Jerusalem as a punishment for Judah’s sins, and especially those of king Manasseh. II Kings 24 v 1-5. Then, Jehoachim reigns, but does evil in the sight of God, II Kings 24 v 8…and Nebuchadnezzar besieges Jerusalem, and many are taken captive to Babylon. Zedekiah is installed as king, and he rebels against Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar lays siege again, and Jerusalem and the Temple are destroyed and Judah taken into exile for seventy years. II Kings 25 v 21, though restoration is prophesied.

It is during the period of the two kingdoms that prophets like Elijah and Isaiah appear. Here is another way in which God speaks to the people. These are men given the word of God by inspiration and who declare it faithfully.

The Persian empire overthrows Babylon, and under an edict of King Cyrus of Persia, a remnant of about forty thousand return to their land. Led by Zerubbabel and Joshua. Ezra prays for forgiveness of God for the disobedience of the exiles, and the people repent. Ezra 10. The foundation of the temple is laid, though work is held up for fifteen years due to opposition and hostility of neighbouring peoples. Ezra 4. The preaching of Haggai and Zechariah results in work being resumed Ezra 5. After the temple and Jerusalem is rebuilt, the temple is consecrated, Levites are appointed, Nehemiah 7, the Law read, Nehemiah 8, and the covenant renewed by the people. Nehemiah 10 v 29-39. Zerubbabel, Joshua and the people are told to take courage, because God says through Haggai, ‘I am WITH YOU, ACCORDING TO THE PROMISE I MADE WHEN YOU CAME OUT OF EGYPT. MY SPIRIT ABIDES AMONG YOU. Haggai 2 v 4,5. (Exodus 29 v 45,46.) How? By being with certain teachers and leaders, by the law and via the temple and its ceremonies.

There seems no evidence that God’s Spirit indwells His people at this time. His dealings are through visions, dreams, prophets and priests. He is present in his empowering of certain individuals to accomplish certain tasks or purposes. Prophecy is then made by Haggai with regard to the superior glory of Israel in a little while. During the exile and this later period, intimation is made that there will be a new covenant, not like the one made with Abraham and elaborated through and with the patriarchs, because the people did not obey, and therefore the Lord gave no heed to them. Hebrews 8 v 9, Jeremiah 31 v 31-34. This new covenant will be different, because the law will not be on tables of stone, but written on the hearts of the house of Israel. The covenant with the house of Israel is that the Deliverer shall come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob, and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins. Jeremiah 31 v 31-34, Isaiah 27 v 9, 59 v 20,21, Romans 11 v 26,27, Zechariah 8 v 7,8. All Israel shall be saved. Romans 11 v 26. For this covenant is made with the spiritual Israel, the old and new testament believer. It is an unconditional covenant, in that once someone is covered by this covenant it cannot be annulled. Romans 8 v 31-39. Thus, as the prophets speak, their words too have an immediate material aspect and a future spiritual aspect. Sometimes it is difficult to separate the two, or to understand exact meanings however. The prophets also gave the promise was made that the Spirit was to be given in a different, fuller, more extensive way, Joel 2 v 28, that is, on all flesh, Jews and Gentiles, the spiritual Israel. All that has so far been shown in types, figures and allegories is about to be fulfilled. Ceremonies shall be superceded by reality, after a period of about four hundred years silence.

viii) THE PERIOD OF CHRIST’S LIFE ON EARTH.

The Spirit had not come when Christ was alive. John 15 v 26. Furthermore, Christ declared that the Spirit would not come unless Christ went away, John 16 v 7, in fact, not until Christ was glorified. John 7 v 39. ‘Those who believed WERE TO RECEIVE.’ the Spirit, but had not yet done so. During Christ’s physical presence, the Holy Spirit dwelt with the disciples: He abided, remained, continued, was present and tarried with them, quite possibly in the Person of Christ Himself, because it was promised of Christ that the Spirit shall rest on Him, Isaiah 11 v 2, and be upon Him. Isaiah 42 v 1. Or, the Spirit abided with them in the same sense as in the Old Testament. But in the future, the Spirit would not abide WITH the disciples, but would be IN them. John 14 v 17.

We find that Christ was filled with the Spirit, the Spirit indwelling Him as He did the tabernacle and temple, and also that Christ was endued with power from the Spirit at His baptism. The Spirit was not measured out to Christ, as if He only had a limited capacity, but rather was freely poured out. John 3 v 34. Christ was filled with the Holy Spirit from His mother’s womb, Luke 1 v 15. This phrase is used to indicate that Christ had a holy, pure and godly character. It is used of disciples in Acts, such as Stephen and Philip in this way. But the Holy Spirit descended upon Christ in bodily form as a dove at His baptism. This forms the inauguration of Christ’s ministry. At His baptism, the skies, heavens, or air, were rent, torn or opened up to Him. This phrase occurs elsewhere.

Jesus says to Nathaniel that he would see heaven open and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man, John 1 v 51. Also, Stephen, at his martyrdom, saw heaven opened and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God, Acts 7 v 56. So too Peter, on falling into a trance, saw heaven opened and spiritual things in the form of a vision. Acts 10 v 11. Similarly, a door was opened in heaven to enable John to see the revelation of things that must happen hereafter, Revelation 4 v 1. Immediately afterwards. He was led by the Spirit to the wilderness to be tempted, Luke 4 v 1, and He then enters a Synagogue and speaks of Himself as the fulfillment of Isaiah 61 v 1-2. The Spirit of the Lord is upon Christ…why? because the Spirit had anointed, lotioned, refreshed Christ to preach the Gospel to the poor, to heal the broken hearted, to preach deliverance to captives, recover sight to the blind, to set at liberty those that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord. Luke 4 v 18,19. In other words, in addition to the abiding of the Spirit, He received power to accomplish God’s purposes.

Christ began to give the Spirit, (or the earnest, according to Matthew Henry,) to the disciples, after His resurrection, John 20 v 22, by breathing on them and saying ‘Receive, take actively, the Holy Spirit.’ cf John 7 v 39. Without the Spirit, the disciples would be comfortless. John 14 v 18. Christ was now leaving, therefore they receive the earnest of the promise, a sort of token, something they did not have before, but not the same, or at least to the same degree as at Pentecost. The complete fulfillment of the promise of the Spirit was given at Pentecost, Acts 2 v 2-4, as promised by Joel, Joel 2 v 28, Acts 2 v 17, 18. It is here that the Spirit is initially poured out, later being poured out on the Gentiles as well. The Spirit was sent by the Father, John 14 v 26, and Christ. John 15 v 26, John 16 v 7, and at the giving of the Spirit, assurance and the indwelling of the Godhead was given. John 14 v 20. Christ is in the new testament believer by the Spirit.

ix) THE NEW COVENANT.

Pentecost brings in the gospel age, the age of the New Covenant, to last from Pentecost to Judgement. The Spirit is the Spirit of truth, and a witness bearer. John 15 v 26, John 16 v 13. He glorifies Christ, John 16 v 14.

The Spirit convinces the world of:

a) Sin, because they do not believe.

b) Righteousness, because Christ goes to the Father.

c) Judgement, because the ruler of this world is judged. John 16 v 8. This is part of the general, external work of the Spirit.

Those that believe on Christ receive the Spirit. John 7 v 39. Christ’s physical body is described as a temple, shrine, sanctuary or dwelling place, John 2 v 21, Matthew 26 v 61, Mark 14 v 58, of the Holy Spirit, as is the physical body of individual believers under the New Covenant. I Corinthians 3 v 16, 6 v 19, II Corinthians 6 v 16. The human body is also described as a tabernacle or tent, II Corinthians 5 v 1,4, I Peter 1 v 13,14. Christ also refers to the temple at Jerusalem as ‘My Father’s house’. Luke 2 v 49, John 2 v 16. Thus, the Old Testament Tabernacle and Temple are types foreshadowing the New Testament reality of the indwelling of the Spirit. The Tabernacle and Temple also serve as types of Heaven, Acts 7 v 48,49, Hebrews 8 v 2, 9 v 11,24, which is described as the more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands. The Temple is also a type of the Church, Ephesians 2 v 21, I Corinthians 3 v 16, I Peter 2 v 4-10. In short, the Tabernacle and Temple are symbols of anywhere where God dwells and meets with man. Ultimately, all this converges in Christ in heaven with glorified saints, where it is said, ‘Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.’. Revelation 21 v 3. It is in the temple that the antichrist, the son of destruction, the Wicked, shall sit setting himself up as God. II Thessalonians 2 v 4. The Spirit cannot be received or taken by the world because it does not see him or know him. John 14 v 17. But, He is given by measure, (implied), John 3 v 34, to those that ask for Him. Luke 11 v 13, Romans 12 v 3, Ephesians 5 v 18.

Just as Christ is described as a Comforter so the Spirit is described as another comforter. John 14 v 26. Comforter means one called alongside, an encourager, a helper or advocate. Believers receive the Spirit that they might see, know and understand the things freely given to us of God. I Corinthians 2 v 11,12. The Holy Spirit teaches believers, I Corinthians 2 v 13, searching and revealing to them the deep things of God. I Corinthians 2 v 13, 10. Believers can obey the Spirit, Acts 13 v 2,3, Who may forbid certain things. Acts 16 v 6, but believers can also lie to the Spirit and grieve Him. Acts 5 v 3, Ephesians 4 v 30. The Holy Spirit sanctifies, or sets apart believers, II Corinthians 3 v 18, producing in them the fruit of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, goodness, gentleness, faith, meekness, and temperance. Galatians 5 v 16-23, helping believers in their weakness. Romans 8 v 26. These works of the Spirit are unique to the believer. They are applications of saving grace and its privileges to the heart and mind of the believer, especially through correct application of the Scriptures.

The indwelling of the Holy Spirit appears to be a privilege, earnest and guarantee for believers under the New Covenant only. Old Testament believers were saved by believing God, and it was counted or reckoned to them as righteousness, Romans 4 v 3, but there appears no reference to indicate that they were indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Abraham believed God and it was counted as righteousness. Circumcision was a seal that followed faith. Romans 4 v 9-12. Similarly, David blesses the man whom God pronounces as righteous apart from works. Romans 4 v 6-8, Psalm 32 v 1,2.

Why was Abraham’s faith counted as righteousness? Because against hope he believed that he would be the father of many nations, because he did not weaken when he considered his aged body or Sarah’s barren womb, because there was no distrust in God or His promise, but rather, he grew in faith, giving God the glory, fully convinced that God was able to do as He had promised. Romans 4.

There is no way that these early believers could believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as we understand Him, unless they were given extra revelation not recorded. They believed God in what He had told them, believed that their transgressions could be forgiven, and their belief was counted as righteousness. They accepted His law, sought to follow it with sincerity of heart, recognised their inadequacy to keep it, and sought to follow the sacrifices given as an offering for sin, trusting that God would forgive them. This obedience was a sign of their faith. Not all Jews so readily believed or were as devout. But, for those who were, their faith was counted as righteousness. We in the New Covenant also believe, having much more defined information. Jesus Christ has been revealed to us through the Scriptures and in history, and we believe in Him that was raised from the dead, Jesus Christ, and similarly that belief will be reckoned as righteousness. Romans 4.

In the Old testament, the prophets did not always understand the full significance of what they said and wrote under inspiration. They spoke most particularly to people of their own time. (I Peter 1 v 10-12) Revelation gradually increased via the Law and prophets, thus Job had a hope in God, knowing that his Redeemer lived, and that he would be with Him in the flesh, even though he may die. But the details, of Christ, the method of redemption and the gospel, he did not know. But his faith was counted as righteousness.(Job 19 v 25) All the heroes and believers of the Old Testament died in faith. They did not receive the things promised, they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. (Hebrews 11 v 13). The whole list of the heroes of faith in Hebrews 11 bears testimony to this truth…Justification by faith. The evidence of which is works. Faith without works is dead. Abraham’s faith was evidenced by his going to the promised land, and being prepared to offer up his only son. Noah’s faith was evidenced by his building the ark. Moses by choosing ill treatment with the Israelites rather than the pleasures and ease of the palace, e.t.c..

So, I would argue that the indwelling of the Spirit as Advocate and Comforter is unique to the children of promise of the New Covenant. The world cannot receive Him in this way. Neither was He given in this way until the introduction of the new covenant,

However, the Holy Spirit is in the world, working in ways common to believers and unbelievers. There is a dual aspect to His work. He may indwell believers as Comforter and Advocate, and, as in the Old Testament, the Spirit of God may equip a person with certain knowledge or abilities, yet not indwell them as Comforter or Advocate.

Spiritual gifts fall into this category. There are many gifts from God to both believers and unbelievers, and each person will be called to give an account of how they conducted themselves and used their gifts on the day of Judgement. God may providentially intervene by dream or vision e.t.c. in the life of both believers and unbelievers in order to accomplish His purposes.

How does this affect the doctrine of regeneration? Jesus declared to Nicodemus that a man must be born again if he is to see the kingdom of God, and that a man in born by the Spirit. He rebuked Nicodemus declaring to him, ‘are you a ruler of Israel and do not know this?’.

Intimations that God would circumcise the hearts of His people, (Deuteronomy 10 v 16, 30 v 6) and that He required truth, wisdom and cleansing in the innermost parts (Psalm 51 v 6,10) and that God would give His people a heart of flesh instead of stone, (Ezekiel 11 v 19), were already indicated in the Old Testament, and Nicodemus, as a teacher of Israel, should have known this, hence the rebuke.

But it does not appear that the indwelling of the Spirit is a necessary part or consequence of this work on God’s part. I acknowledge that man is dead in sin in his own nature, and is totally unwilling and unable to turn to God in his own strength. Such a turning requires the person to be quickened by the Holy Spirit, to be awakened to sin, and the need of repentance and the reality of Divine truth. They need the enabling of the Holy Spirit to turn from sin to God, to be born from above. They have been born of the flesh, but they need to be born from above by the Holy Spirit, else they shall never see the kingdom of God. But I also argue that this does not require the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. God may work on our minds and hearts without indwelling us, and He did so in the Old Testament times. But now, in the new covenant, there is this privilege of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, because Christ has been, and left us again to be at the right hand of God the Father, but he has not left us comfortless. The Spirit could not come until Christ had been to earth and returned to the Father. I would argue, therefore that the indwelling of the Spirit occurs at regeneration, but is not necessary to it, as is indicated by the Old Testament believer. Rather, it is a privilege of the New Testament believer.

REFERENCES.

1) Wilson, W. ‘Old testament word studies’ Macdonald.

2) Edwards, E.H. ‘The promise of the Spirit’ Evangelical Press.

FOOTNOTE

The phenomenon of God withdrawing from the sort of close communion outlined in the early chapters of Genesis to seemingly becoming more distant is by no means limited to Christianity. The above study is from a perspective of Neo-Calvinism, but for a wider  perspective of the same phenomenon, Julian Jayne’s book ‘The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind’ (Penguin) is essential reading. Despite the obscure title, this is a readable and influential study on the theme of transitions of God communion.

PREFACE.

I began this study in 1975 when the charismatic movement was gaining strength, and the local church to which I belonged was itself enjoying a degree of blessing, though it was never by any stretch of the imagination charismatic, or Pentecostal.  Rather it was a conservative, Reformed Evangelical church. It was about this time that I first came across accounts of revivals, and was deeply moved by them. Here, there appeared to extraordinary events, supernatural, miraculous events, yet my church, and many like it, believed that such gifts and influences were not for today, that they had ceased long ago, shortly after the establishment of the New Testament Church. I remember asking for a doctrinal explanation of just what these events during the revivals were, and if it was that gifts had indeed ceased, but no one in my own church, or others or even at the various ministers conferences, could give me a satisfactory answer from Scripture.  Of course at this time there was a reaction against the excesses of the Charismatic movement by Reformed Evangelical churches, and what books and studies did appear from this quarter I found to be woefully biased and unbalanced. 

So I embarked on a study of gifts for myself, to answer my own questions. The initial premise of this study was worked out in the following few years, with much debate, Scripture searching and prayer. Many changes in my own life and experience have occurred since then, but the premise I feel has held fast, and the dissatisfaction with many reformed evangelical explanations concerning gifts has also remained. So I offer this study into the maelstrom of debate and hope that it’s influence may be helpful. I have called it an introduction, because though it’s scope is in many respects wide, there are many facets that could be taken deeper. But I have sought to offer a broad sweep of a study, and tried to remain fairly close to my subject, and not get bogged down in relevant, though complicated side issues.

This study is mainly for Reformed Evangelical Christians. It is not aimed at Charismatics, or Pentecostals, though they may find it of interest. It is aimed rather at the Bible believing Christian who believes that gifts have ceased. Thus, most of the references to authors in this study are to writers from that tradition: the Puritans, Calvinists and Reformers. I have quoted from these since they are respected writers to those of the Reformed Evangelical tradition. I am not, unfortunately a New Testament Greek scholar. Inevitably, I have had to refer to certain Greek words, and inevitably, those who are experts disagree on some issues. Again, I have referred to standard reference works, and am unfortunately, in this area, at their mercy.

My thanks and gratitude to all those who have put up with my endless debates and questions, and who have offered answers and points of view.

                                              Pilgrim Simon

                                              February 1992

Scripture references taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION. Copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Anglicisation copyright 1979, 1984, 1989. Used by permission of Hodder & Stoughton Limited. Other quotes are taken from the King James Authorised version.

A BIBLICAL WORLD VIEW

This study is concerned with spiritual gifts: extraordinary qualities, abilities and people portrayed in a view of the world commonly categorised as Christianity. Christianity is in fact far too general a term for the approach that the first part of this study takes. The advent of Biblical Criticism and Christian Liberalism, together with the many facets and divisions within world wide Christianity mean that Christianity has many shades, hues and colours, which cannot possibly be represented in this study. Rather, the views in the first part of this study are nearer to    that of the Christian fundamentalist. My definition of Christian fundamentalism is any group or individual who regard the Bible as inerrant, infallible and inspired by God. This is in contradistinction to ‘liberal’ theologians and those who advocate an approach of Biblical or textual criticism, emphasising contradictions, errors, multiple authors of one book or letter and so on. As such, the first part of this study is seeking to describe a coherent Biblical view of spiritual gifts, making the assumptions that the canon of Scripture as we know it is inspired by God, or God breathed, and as such is essentially a unified whole and a suitable authority for spiritual matters. Whether such a view is correct or not will be examined at the end of this first part of the study.  But even the term Christian fundamentalist covers a moderately wide range of groups, such as Christadelphians, Calvinists, and Arminians. As we shall see, even if the Scriptures are God given and without error, they require interpretation, and thus a number of fundamentalist Protestant groups have arisen during and since the reformation. I want to further narrow the focus by saying that within Christian fundamentalism, this study is mainly interested in those groups within the protestant tradition known as   conservative   evangelicals.   These   groups   are evangelical in the sense that they believe that salvation is to be found in Christ alone. They argue that there is no other way whereby a person may be saved but through the substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ. They are conservative in that they seek to conserve or preserve a theological tradition of Biblical interpretation going back, as they see it, right back to the Apostles, though they particularly refer to the reformation and the puritans.  This is still a wide group embracing groups such as Calvinists and Arminians, Baptists, Pentecostals, Dispensationalists and so on. I am going to look at the subject of spiritual gifts initially on the conservative fundamentalists own terms: that is, drawing teaching, conclusions and principles from the Bible, regarding it as a harmonious whole, unified despite it’s many writers by the inspiring influence of the Holy Spirit. This   view will   be mainly Calvinist, since I think that this is most consistent with this approach to Scripture. More narrowly still, it will reflect the views of British Calvinists. However, in saying that, I am aware that this study also departs from mainstream Calvinist thinking. This study is not a statement of modern day British Conservative Evangelical thought. For example, British conservative evangelicals tend to consider that spiritual gifts ceased at or near the time of the Apostles, and bring various Scripture verses and passages to support their view. That is not the conclusion reached by the first part of this study. So I say again, though this first part of the study looks at the subject of spiritual gifts from a Biblical perspective, and a largely Calvinist one, it does not necessarily reflect modern Calvinist views, especially with regard to spiritual gifts, but rather, a view which I consider to be consistently faithful to a variety of Scripture texts. Many of the writers quoted will be of a Calvinist persuasion, and are often used to support views portrayed in this study, which may be at variance with the modern Calvinists view. In part two of the study, I shall step out of this Calvinist framework for further discussion and analysis.

First of all, I want to look at the general underlying views that many Calvinists draw from Scripture and which go towards making up their worldview. For the Christian fundamentalist, Scripture declares that in the beginning, as the culmination of His creation activities. God created a single, mature, adult male, called Adam, who was created as a living soul, that is, a living, breathing being. (1). From Adam, a woman was made, as a suitable help and companion for him. Thus the human race was immediately created in Adam, but is now propagated from him by natural generation, yet with God’s oversight and provision. God therefore mediately creates all persons since Adam. (2). For some fundamentalists, who cannot evade scientific theories on the origins of man, early verses in Genesis may be regarded as figurative, thus evading such problems of reconciliation between Scripture and science, or Scripture may be regarded as literal but containing gaps in the time narrative. Calvinists generally frown on such ideas in the creation story, maintaining a literal six 24hr. days creation period occurring somewhere between 5000-10,000 B.C.

The phrases used in Scripture to describe various aspects of man are:-

          a) Soul

          b) Spirit.

          c) Heart.

          d) Mind.

          e) Body

          f)  Flesh.

          g) Emotions.

          h) Conscience.

          i)  Will

The word ‘Soul’ refers to breath, and means a breathing being. It sometimes refers to animals as well as man. (3). Thus a dead soul is in an Inanimate, non-breathing state. (4). The word may also describe the essential, whole person, the personality, including reasoning, emotions, desires and aversions. (5). The word is applied in this way to God. (6). It is in this sense that it is used in a similar way to ‘self, to distinguish a person from a thing, or another person, or give a person emphatic prominence. For the fundamentalist, this word usually refers to the non-material aspect of man’s nature…his real core self, which is immortal and which at death returns to God. Such a complex idea is not actually supported in Scripture, where it simply means breath or breathing being.

Sometimes the word  ‘soul’ is used interchangeably with ‘spirit’, which means breath of air or wind, or breath of mouth. (7). Like ‘soul’, it is applied to animals. (8). The word ‘spirit’ is also used to describe an inner disposition, purpose or attitude, good or bad, covering both thinking and emotions. Thus we find a spirit of courage, (9), of pride,  (10), of jealousy, (11), of foulness, (12), of understanding.  (13). The word ‘spirit’ may also refer to beings which are good or bad, which have no material or physical body, such as angels or God. (14).

‘Heart’ sometimes refers to the physical organ, and sometimes to the centre and Inward part of a person, especially with emphasis on desires and emotions, though in the Old Testament it also includes reasoning and thinking. (15). Thus it may refer to our inward motives.

‘Mind’ describes those processes whereby the person perceives, understands, reasons, comprehends and thinks. It refers to the intellect. (16). Notice that these terms are very much abstract concepts: Mind does not equal the brain. It is more expansive than that, and here is a fundamental difference between the Bible and some psychology theories. As we shall see, Scripture emphasises that man’s rational capacity for thought and reason distinguishes him somewhat from animals, which are portrayed as instinctive, unreasoning beasts.

The ‘body’ refers to the whole material structure of man, skin, bones, e.t.c., which has various members or limbs, such as hands or feet. (17).

Another word used for the body is ‘flesh’, which may refer to the substance of the body, be it animal or human, (18), the human body specifically, (19), the totality of all that is essential to manhood, (20), the human nature of Christ, (21), the complete person, (22), the sinful nature, (23), or the natural attainments in man, (24).  It is in the flesh that one distinction between man and animals is seen. They are not of the same kind of flesh. (25).  Here too is an important difference between the Biblical approach and a number of psychology theories, which assume an evolutionary link between man and the animals.  Even so, the Bible declares that the origin of the bodies of men and animals is the earth. (Genesis 2 v 19, Psalm 139 v 15).

‘Emotions’ refers to the likes and dislikes, passions and dispositions for or against certain matters that a person has. Thus a person has love, joy, hatred, anger, e.t.c. This, as we have seen, is sometimes referred to as a person’s spirit. Thus we may have a spirit of jealousy. (26)

The ‘conscience’ is a witness bearer, but is affected by sin: a principle or tendency to disobedience against God and His standards; and is also shaped by parents, teachers, governors, society, experiences, rewards and cognitive strategies. It may be weak, or be ignored and defiled. Thus the conscience may convict of guilt when it should not, or not convict when it should. Calvinists would argue that the Holy Spirit enabling the mind to rightly perceive Scriptural truth, and the objective morality it contains chiefly corrects it. Thus the Christian is called to maintain a good conscience. (27)

The ‘will’ refers to those processes whereby a person chooses. By repeatedly choosing to act in a given moral direction, the emotions may become settled in either good or evil. A person is accountable for all voluntary exercises of the will, for voluntary emotions and acts, for the intellectual views, which they hold and the choices made whereby those views are formed in the past and maintained now. Thus, at the end of the age, everyone will have to render an account before God who will be their final Judge. (28)

All these processes and facets in an individual interrelate, such that one influences the other. Thus a person is a unified, complex, interrelated whole, and is distinct in nature from animals.  In the same way, an individual has a two-way relationship with the environment and other people, which produces   complex mutual   Interactions, restrictions   and influences. As can be seen, these terms are used in a very general sense. There is no word in the original Hebrew for mind’ for example. In individual texts the same word carries different meanings, and it is impossible to draw out from Scripture a detailed Christian psychology model of man for example. The terms and their usage do not permit such precise definitions.

THE FALL OF ADAM FROM RIGHTEOUSNESS AND ITS EFFECTS.

Scripture appears to declare that Adam and Eve were created in the image of God.  By this I understand that they had a personality, and could know themselves as related to the world and God, and determine their actions in view of moral ends. They were also created with a finite reflection of God’s moral characteristics, having an original righteousness. They had a leaning and inclination to do those things that were right in God’s sight. They were the final and most noble part of a literal six-day creation period, the chief of God’s creatures, made to have dominion over all other animals. (29)

Scripture suggests that when Adam and Eve disobeyed God, God as a curse introduced death, and their conditional immortality was lost. It appears that the body was originally conditionally immortal through access to the fruit of the Tree of Life.  Following the fall into sin, access to this Tree was denied. Most Christians hold to the idea of each person having, as their essential self, an incorporeal element to their nature, their soul, which is immortal, and which returns to God at the death of the body, which as a result of the fall into sin is subject to death.  This is not a view, which is necessarily supported by Scripture however. Either way, the body is subject to death and the descendants of Adam and Eve were then born in Adam’s likeness, after their predisposition to righteousness was lost. Thus it is that all mankind has sinned and that every member of the human race, without exception, possesses a nature fallen from its original condition, and which is now a source of sin and is itself sin. Sin underlies their consciousness, and the human nature cannot be changed into a nature that is acceptable to God merely by the exercising of a person’s power or choice alone, and therefore death, the penalty for sin, is visited on all. (30). Sin works in the bodily members, that is, our ‘drives’ and passions are now slaves to serve a self which has a tendency to disobey God. This corrupt nature belongs to a person from the first moment of their being.

The Calvinist argues that because man’s nature has been corrupted, every person, in their natural state, lacks that love to God which God’s law demands, and people lift up their lower desires and emotions above regard for God and His law. People prefer to please themselves rather than God, Whom they often deny, despite, says Scripture, the universal witness and testimony of creation and providence to the existence of God and His natural attributes, such as His power. Ultimately, people are determined in their whole life by a preference of self to God, and have a dislike of God which, though it is sometimes under the surface, at other times it may   become active opposition when God’s will comes into plain conflict with their own. Every faculty is affected to varying degrees. People have no thought, action or emotion, which a holy God can fully approve of, and as such, every person is subject to a process of constant progress in sin, which they cannot successfully overcome.

The curse inflicted by an angry God is a twofold death: Firstly it is a physical death. Secondly it is a resurrection to death or eternal punishment. Though unbelievers are strangers to God during their life on earth, full punishment does not take place until judgement at the end of the age. Human beings live an average of seventy years, and then comes physical death.  Despite this punishment however, it is possible for people to have high moral standards and conduct, for a variety of reasons, but not out of a ‘proper’ love to God and His holiness. (31). Their moral standards may emerge from other religions, from codes in society or from psychological or personality factors, but not out of a love for God.

Not only has mankind fallen from the original condition in which Adam was created but also, Scripture argues, the creation itself is affected by this fall, such that mankind now lives in a very different environment from that originally created by God. There is now a principle of death and decay at work, exaggerated after the flood, whereby all humanity is prone to illness and disease. (32).

COMMON GRACE

The Calvinist maintains that during their time on earth. God, rather than executing instant judgement, deals with unbelievers by His common grace, which is made up of all His acts and communications, however extraordinary, to and upon people that fall short of His quickening them to spiritual life. Thus God orders providential events in His sovereignty and at times restrains sin. (33). Common grace will form an important part of the theological position taken in this study with regard to spiritual gifts.

The introduction through sin of physical death, estrangement from God, an alteration of man’s nature and a changed environment are all seen by the Calvinist as fundamental problems affecting mankind causing an emptiness and frustration in much of what people do.

SUFFERING AND ILLNESS.

Though proneness to disease and death and decay are factors introduced by man’s fall into sin, Scripture declares that God may also make the dumb, blind and the deaf, for example, for his own particular purposes of revealing His power, (34), or because the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children. (35). This may mean that penalties visited upon the fathers may have consequences which extend in time to next generations, or it may mean, that God actually punishes children for their father’s sins.

The Christian too has a mortal body until death, and they too are prone to illness. The Calvinist approaches this by saying that sometimes God may inflict illness or death on the

Christian as chastisement for sin, (36), or as punishment on unbelievers, (37). However, this does not mean that solutions to such diseases should not be sought. Provision is made through common grace for skilled doctors, surgeons and other medical experts to help people cope with illness. The Calvinist does not therefore categorise a person’s illness as arising as the result of a particular sin that the person has committed, though they may examine themselves and perceive illness as a chastisement for a particular sin in some cases. Neither do they consider it wrong in any way to seek treatment for illness, even in the case of such chastisement.  Rather, proneness to illness is seen as the result of mankind’s general state and condition as a general curse against sin.

Generally then, the Calvinist sees the world as a place full of sin and under judgement, where wars, suffering and illness are explained in terms of sin, our fallen state and God’s displeasure. Desolate places on the earth are explained by God’s judgement via the universal worldwide flood. Vestiges of the glory of creation remain for all to see, though they are mere shadows of what they once were, and the harmonious, pleasant aspects of our world are explained and enjoyed in this way. Despite these pleasures of common grace, the Calvinist looks forward, to a better place. He sees himself often as a pilgrim travelling through a wilderness to a celestial city, where a lasting treasure is to be found. He sees this world as a place that will ultimately be destroyed and burned up on the return of the Lord Jesus in power at the consummation of the age. Amongst fundamentalists, there are differing views of the exact nature and chronology of Christ’s return, some seeing Christ as ushering in a literal thousand year reign of the saints on earth. Most Calvinists however, consider that Christ will return at the end of the age and that at that time the earth and present order of things will be destroyed, following the resurrection of all humanity to judgement.

THE EFFECTS OF SAVING GRACE.

Calvinists do not consider that every person is doomed to an eternity in hell, though they consider that God would be perfectly just in doing this. They point out that God has found a way to save repenting unbelievers, by sending His own Son, Jesus Christ, the second Person of the Godhead, to die and take the punishment deserved by the repenting sinner on Himself. Jesus Christ being the God-Man is the only person able to perform this task, and in this situation, both God’s justice and mercy is satisfied: sin is taken on by the sinless Christ, who is punished by God the Father in the repenting sinners place, in order that the repenting sinner may receive mercy. Those who become Christians in the fundamentalist sense of the word consider that they undergo a supernatural change. Such a person is regenerated, quickened, or made alive to spiritual things. For the Calvinist, this is God turning the person to Himself, and is the Divine side of a change that viewed from the human side is called conversion. It is where the person exercises repentance and faith in Christ alone for salvation from his deserved future punishment. This change is brought about in connection with the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Godhead, illuminating the mind so that it can perceive truth, which is found in God’s Word, the Scriptures, which the Spirit often uses as a means to bring people to God. Most Calvinists argue that this change takes place in the soul, by which they understand the immortal incorporeal element of a human being. The change is instantaneous and secret, but is seen in its results of repentance, faith and good works, and is accomplished by the legal union of the person with Christ as their federal Head, giving to the believer the legal rights and standing of Christ. It is a change that is indispensable to the salvation of the sinner, beyond his natural power and given despite his unworthiness. (38).

The sinner who is united with Christ in this way is no longer exposed to the penalty of God’s moral law, but is restored to God’s favour, and declared righteous through faith in the merits and work of Christ, his new Head, (as opposed to Adam, his old Head). As already indicated, this state of acquittal is evidenced by changes in conduct, as the person obeys the will of God out of love for Him arising from a perception of spiritual truth.  (39).  The Calvinist emphasises that God regenerates those whom He elected before the foundation of the world. His election is not dependent on foreseen goodness or faith in the individuals concerned, but on God’s Sovereign mercy. Those whom God elects and predestines to salvation are justified by God and cannot fall away from salvation. (40).

In contrast to these ideas, the Arminian position puts emphasis on a person making a choice for God, and God looking forward, seeing their choice and then electing them. For the Arminian, Christ died for all people, though only some choose to repent and accept the salvation offered, and a person who is saved may fall away from grace again, and is lost. The Calvinist does not accept this, and usually sees Arminianism as inferior, unbiblical and person centred rather than God centred. For the Calvinist, a person is elected for salvation according to God’s pleasure, regardless of any foreseen merits. It is God that chooses the person, not the person choosing God. Christ died only for the elect, and none of the elect can or shall be lost. Both of these contradictory systems can be drawn out of Scripture and a believer goes for one or the other according to which passages and verses are emphasised.  Concern with spiritual gifts embraces both systems.

The Calvinist knows all too well that the believer still fails and disobeys God in many ways however. He argues that in the believer, although he is made alive to spiritual things, there still remain tendencies to evil from the flesh, which are not totally subdued. These two opposing principles give rise to a conflict that lasts throughout life, though the Holy Spirit assists the believer in this fight. (41). The regenerate person receives the gift of the Holy Spirit Himself, who lives in the believer, influencing him to various degrees at different times. (42).

More than this, Christians and particularly fundamentalists, see the world as surrounded by spiritual principalities and powers. Not only does God exist in three persons, but there are also angels, both good and bad who are active in the world. Thus we find Satan or the devil and a host of demons or unclean spirits actively warring against the believer and deceiving unbelievers. There is a considerable difference in the degree of emphasis placed on these beings within different groups within fundamentalism.  Some place great emphasis on these beings, and spend much time in prayer to release people from their influence. Calvinists on the whole put less stress on unclean spirits, referring to them in times of opposition or violence against God, a particular local church, the community of believers in general, or individual believers under severe temptation, difficulty or opposition.  The idea of unclean spirits may be used to rationalise why people do not believe the gospel of salvation. The role of unclean spirits is another important aspect of this study and I shall return to it in a later chapter.

This then has been a very brief overview of a Biblical worldview, drawn from the Calvinist’s particular interpretation of the Bible, and one that we will need to remind ourselves of as we come to look at the gifts of God that include extraordinary and supernatural phenomena.

I note again that many of the terms are rather loose and vague. Some have called this problem Logocide: sometimes a particular word has so many meanings that it is danger of becoming meaningless. In this sense fundamentalists are in fact very tolerant of ambiguity.  The language of Scripture prohibits precise definitions. It is perhaps because of this vagueness that the Scriptures have maintained the credibility that they have. The terms are to a moderate degree, open and changeable; adaptable as new scientific discoveries are made about man and the world.   Indeed, many fundamentalist hold equally to the scientific worldview as well as that of Scripture, and seek to accommodate both. Interpretations of Scripture may be adapted to fit in with prevailing views of science, and science may be used to back up Scripture views. The use of evidence in this is highly selective, and seen most often in debates about creation and the flood, but it can also be seen in cases of miraculous healing and so on. Nevertheless, these ideas provide an underlying view of the nature of man and the world for the Calvinist, though many are not usually as systematic as I have been in this outline. For many fundamentalists, these sorts of ideas may be simply ideas repeated as slogans or indicators of group identity. Modern fundamentalism is more fragmented in it’s ideas than the Christian fundamentalists of 100 years ago who were more noted for their systematic doctrines, catechisms and so on. Note also that there is little or nothing about culture, economics, group effects, class, medical science and so on. There is a lot of information missing, and in this study, I shall be forced to step outside this framework to accommodate other important dimensions relative to the theme of spiritual gifts. For the fundamentalist however, Scripture is the key, it is, they will argue, the foundation of their perception concerning God, the world, man and everything else because it is God’s word. Everything is brought to the light of their particular interpretation of Scripture. Initially I shall take on board that perception as far and as consistently as I can as I look at the various aspects of spiritual gifts from a predominately Calvinist perspective of Scripture.

For the subject of spiritual gifts, it is important to note that there is no reference in this interpretation of the Bible of man having extraordinary powers in his own nature. He cannot naturally transcend time and look forward to the future such that he can see what will definitely take place. He cannot transport himself through space and definitely see what is going on elsewhere. He cannot naturally gain access to the spirit world to see or hear spirits. He does not naturally possess powers of healing, or miraculous powers. He does not have an ability to speak or interpret foreign tongues that he has not learned by normal means. This would be the position that most fundamentalists and Calvinists in particular would take.

CHAPTER 1 REFERENCES.

1) Genesis 1 v 26-28.

   Ecclesiastes 12 v 7.

   Genesis 2 v 7.

   Genesis 35 v 18.

   I Kings 17 v 21.

   Job 27 v 3.

   Job 33 v 4.

   Luke 8 v 55.

   Matthew 27 v 50.

   Zechariah 12 v 1.

   Luke 23 v 46.

2) Genesis I v 27.

   Genesis 2 v 7.

   Genesis 46 v 26.

3) Genesis I v 24, 30,

   Genesis 2 v 7,19,

   Leviticus 24 v 18.

4) Numbers 6 v 6.

   I Corinthians 14 v 7.

5) Matthew 11 v 19,

   Ephesians 6 v 6,

   Hebrews 6 v 19.

   Luke 2 v 35,

   Luke I v 46,

   Matthew  22 v 37,

6) Leviticus 26 v 11,

   Isaiah I v 14,

   Isaiah 42 v 1.

7) Psalm 33 v 6,

   Genesis 3 v 8,

   John 3 v 8,

   II Thessalonians 2 v 8.

8) Genesis 6 v 17,

     Genesis 7 v 15.

9) Joshua 2 v 11.

10) Psalm 76 v 12.

11) Numbers 5 v 14.

12) Mark 9 v 17.

13) Job 20 v 3.

14) Hebrews 1 v 14,

           Luke 4 v 35.

15) Matthew 15 v 19, 20.

16) Romans 8 v 7.

           I Corinthians 14 v 15.

           I Corinthians 14 v 19.

           Colossians 3 v 2.

17) I Corinthians 12 v 12.

18) I Corinthians 15 v 39.

19) II Corinthians 10 v 3.

 20) Romans 3 v 20.

 21) John I v 14.

 22) Mark 9 v 17.

 23) Romans 6 v 19.

 24) I Corinthians I v 26.

 25) I Corinthians 15 v 39,

           Genesis I v 24,25.

 26) Leviticus 19 v 18.

           Acts 15 v 3.

           Ephesians 4 v 26,

           Hosea 4 v 12.

           II Timothy I v 7,

           Numbers 14 v 24,

           Psalm 77 v 3,

           Romans 12 v 9.

           Zechariah 12 v 10,

 27) Romans 2 v 15.

           Acts 24 v 16.

           Hebrews 10 v 22.

           I Corinthians 8 v 12.

           I Peter 3 v 16.

           I Timothy 4 v 2.

           Matthew 6 v 22,23.

           Romans 9 v I.

           Titus I v 15.

           I Peter 3 v 21

 28) John 8 v 31-36.

           Acts 5 v 3,4,5,7-11.

           I Corinthians 9 v 17.

           II Peter 3 v 5.

           Romans 6 v 15-23.

 29) Genesis 1 v 26,27,31.

           Ecclesiastes 7 v 29.

           Genesis 9 v 6.

           Hebrews 2 v 8.

           I Corinthians 11 v 7.

           Psalm 8 v 5-8.

 30) Genesis 3 v 7, 22.

           Ecclesiastes 7 v 20.

           Ephesians 2 v 3.

           Genesis 5 v 3.

           I John 1 v 8.

           I Kings 8 v 46.

           Jeremiah 17 v 9.

           Romans 3 v 10,12, 23.

           Romans 7 v 24.

           Romans 5 v 12-14.

31) John 5 v 42.

           Ephesians 4 v 18.

           Hebrews 3 v 12.

           II Timothy 3 v 2-5.

           Luke 11 v 37-52.

           Luke 16 v 15.

           Luke 18 v 9-14.

           Romans 7 v 18, 23.

           Romans 8 v 7.

           Titus 1 v 15.

 32) Compare Genesis 5 v 1-32 with Psalm 90 v 10.

           Genesis 2 v 17.

           Genesis 3 v 17-19.

           Genesis 7 v 19-24.

           Matthew 25 v 41.

           Matthew 7 v 23.

           Romans 5 v 12,14-17.

 33) Psalm 90 v 10.

           I Samuel 19 v 23.

           Psalm 124 v 2.

           I Corinthians 10 v 13.

           II Thessalonians 2 v 7.

           Hebrews 6 v 4-6.

           Genesis 20 v 1-7.

           Genesis 41 v 1-8,

           Matthew 7 v 22,23.

           Matthew 10 v 1,2,4.

 34) Exodus 4 v 11,

           John 9 v 3,

           John 11 v 4.

35) Exodus 20 v 5.

36) I Corinthians 11 v 30.

37) Romans I v 27.

38) John 3 v 7.

           Acts 13 v 39.

           Acts 16 v 14.

           Colossians I v 13.

           Ephesians 2 v 1,5,10.

           Ephesians 3 v 17.

           Ephesians 1 v 17-20.

           Galatians 6 v 15.

           Hebrews 11 v 1,

           Hebrews 4 v 12.

           I Corinthians 3 v 6,7.

           I Peter I v 3,23.

           II Corinthians 5 v 17.

           II Corinthians 7 v 9,10.

           II Peter I v 4,10.

           II Timothy 3 v 15.

           James I v 18.

           Jeremiah 13 v 23.

           Jeremiah 23 v 29.

           Jeremiah 31 v 33.

           John 3 v 18-20.

           John 3 v 8.

           John 5 v 21,24.

           John 6 v 44,65.

           John 1 v 13.

           Matthew 12 v 33,35.

           Matthew 15 v 19.

           Matthew 6 v 24.

           Philippians 2 v 12,13.

           Philippians 3 v 8,9.

           Psalm 51 v 10.

           Romans 10 v 10.

           Romans 3 v 20.

           Romans 8 v 1,17.

           Romans 8 v 2.

39) Romans I v 17.

           Colossians 3 v 1-4.

           Ephesians I v 17.

           Galatians 3 v 11.

           Genesis 15 v 6.

           Hebrews 11 v 4,7.

           Hebrews 2 v 4.

           II Corinthians 5 v 21.

           Philippians 3 v 21.

           Romans 14 v 17.

           Romans 3 v 24-30.

           Romans 6 v 13.

40) Ephesians 1 v 4.

           Romans 8 v 1, 31-39.

           II Thessalonians 2 v 13,14.

           Romans 9 v 10-24.

41) Romans 6 v 12.

           Galatians 5 v 17.

           I Corinthians 6 v 11.

           I Thessalonians 5 v 23.

           I Timothy 6 v 12.

           II Timothy 1 v 14.

           John 14 v 17,18.

           Romans 8 v 13, 14.

42) I Corinthians 6 v 19.

           Acts 2 v 4.

           Ephesians 5 v 18.

           I Corinthians 3 v 16.

           I Thessalonians 5 v 19.

FALSE GUIDANCE, SIGNS AND WONDERS.

Many Christians, and certainly most fundamentalists will argue that since early times, shortly after the fall of man, human beings have attempted to learn secret information, predict the future and work wonders and miracles. All kinds of people have attempted to offer guidance and claimed to have messages from God, or be oracles of some kind. Sometimes people attempted the casting out of evil spirits, sometimes they attempted healing, sometimes they attempted performing extraordinary feats, but most often, the practice of extraordinary gifts took the form of some form of guidance, by mediums, spiritualists, prophets, astrologers, or by using crystals, pendulums, trances or drugs or by means of other religions and philosophies as well as within certain groups within Christianity itself.

It can be shown from Scripture that there is a continuum from false teachers and prophets teaching minor variations and differences to teachings in Scripture, through to those teaching fundamentally different doctrines from those in Scripture, though still claiming Jewish or Judeo-Christian beliefs and beyond to others outside the Christian sphere who advocate quite alien frameworks of belief, progressing still further through to those openly opposed to God and His work: antichrists.  A number of categories can be drawn out of Scripture though, which illustrate the kinds of characteristics that such ‘false guides’ have. But, because these people fall into a continuum, it is not possible to categorise them in a precise and rigid way, and while some exhibit only one of these tendencies, others may illustrate a number of these categories together.

The Scriptures indicate the following tendencies:

The first category consists of the worship of other gods and goddesses.  This consists of actual, practical service and worship of any kind of deity other than the Scriptural God. Here, one would include all forms of idol worship, other religions, devil worship and worshipping the stars, sun or moon. Also included here are ideas that God is an impersonal force, or that He is in all things as such a force. People whose beliefs fall into this category may have unusual experiences, trances, and effects on the body such as trembling or paralysis and other phenomenon in connection with their religious practice.

The second group consists of those who believe in an ability to contact the spirits of dead persons.  By various means, according to such people, these spirits may be contacted to give guidance and advice. We are now in the realm of mediums and spiritualists. Here again, there may or may not be a belief in a personal Deity, or impersonal force, but the prime emphasis is on communication with the dead as an extraordinary means of guidance. Here, there may be predictions, guidance and unusual phenomenon.

Thirdly, there are those who emphasise science, that is, formalised knowledge, but in a secret and hidden way. This is not open scientific inquiry, but rather, it has this hidden, secret, deceitful aspect about it, in order perhaps to impress, influence or manipulate others. Here again, guidance may be offered, unusual phenomenon performed or experienced and so on. The Calvinist will argue that the Scriptures are not anti Intellectual, or anti scientific. The Scriptures do not condemn knowledge in and of itself, but rather condemn things done in secret, hidden, deceptive ways. This category may also refer to a wisdom; a knowledge that rests satisfied in itself as sufficient to solve the various problems that mankind might meet. Some Christians may refer to an attitude in scientific inquiry that puts itself above God, or rests on itself alone, dismissing any recourse to God. It would be argued that the Scriptures condemn beliefs that rest satisfied in themselves, and which thus put themselves as superior to God or as not needing Him. This, as we have seen, is part of the essence of sin as perceived by the Calvinist and indeed by other Christians and fundamentalists. Thus, for some Christians, this can be one of the problems with natural science and social science:  Belief systems can be put forward as if they are superior to Scripture: science is not analysed in the light of Scripture, but the other way around. For the fundamentalist, everything has to be brought to the light of Scripture, and they protest that scientists sometimes see Christianity as a primitive belief system, which was O.K. for the ancient world and middle ages, but which is now out of date. Now, it is claimed by scientists that there are better theories, and the Scripture truths are subservient to them.  As far as the fundamentalist is concerned, there can be a very real sense that science and social science can and do fall into this stance which is perceived as erroneous, arrogant and sinful in it’s approach to God’s word. Nevertheless, many fundamentalists accept the prevailing scientific views and seek to interpret the Scriptures in such a way as to harmonise them with prevailing scientific worldviews, some doing more violence to Scripture interpretation than others.  Also, we can include pseudo-science in this category: things that have an appearance of being scientific or knowledgeable, but which are not proved, and have a great amount of superstition and so on in them. I am thinking now of things like crystal therapy, astrology, alchemy, palmistry, certain kinds of witchcraft and so on. In these areas there may be claims to extraordinary guidance and power. This may or may not be combined with a philosophy about God being in all things as an impersonal force, or belief in a personal Deity. It may be combined with our last category, but with human wisdom and systems taking precedence over Scripture for example.

Fourth and last, there are false prophets and teachers. These are people who claim to be inspired by God to declare His will or foretell future events. I am referring to those found in the Christian sphere in it’s broadest sense, but who, to various degrees and for various reasons teach and promote false doctrine   and   practice   as   far   as   the   fundamentalist interpretation of Scripture is concerned. These too may promote and practice extraordinary gifts.  I include every sect and cult that goes under the name of Christian in this category.

Every fundamentalist fellowship has those who can be declared to be mistaken in their understanding and interpretation of Scripture.  They may be found in the Baptists, Methodists, Church of England, Pentecostals, Evangelicals, Calvinists and so on. This is a matter of degree, and I am thinking now of those who persist in teaching what is considered erroneous in these various circles, causing schisms and breakaway groups from the main body of people. But this category goes wider for the fundamentalist, to include other broadly Christian groups such as Roman Catholics, Mormons, Christadelphians and Jehovah’s witnesses who are perceived by the fundamentalist to be clearly in error as far as the Scriptures are concerned. But in this category I go even wider to include any group with a broadly Christian banner such as the    Children of God, Christian Science. Branch Davidians and others. Any group that takes aspects of Christianity, though it may be distorted, as a fairly central tenet to its faith and practice, would be included in this category of false teachers and prophets. Similarly, there are also those who claim to be inspired by God who are outside any formal Christian organisation. The key thing here, in this section, as that these people claim inspiration from the Judeo-Christian God one way or another and also claim to teach His will.

All these categories may be mixed together in various ways. Thus Scripture gives us Jewish sorcerers (1) and today we have Christian spiritualists and those who analyse Scripture in the light of the ‘superior’ wisdom of science, psychology and so on.  It is clear that these categories are not mutually exclusive. I will now look at how these categories are brought out in Scripture.

1) OTHER GODS AND RELIGIONS.

For many Christians, Scripture is seen as forbidding other deities, idol worship, worship of sun, moon and stars, (2) and a merging or marrying of other religious systems with the Judeo-Christian one. In the Old Testament it is summed up in the first two commandments. ‘You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in the heaven above, or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God.’(3) When Israel entered the Promised Land, it was instructed to be intolerant of other religions. Religious artefacts were to be destroyed and there was punishment when some sought to hide artefacts for themselves. (4).  Neither were the children of Israel to intermarry with those who belonged to the nations that they were to defeat.  ‘Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy. Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons, or take their daughters for your own sons, for they will turn your sons away from following me to serve other gods and the Lord’s anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you. This is what you are to do to them: Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, cut down the symbols of their goddess and burn their idols in the fire. For you are a people holy to the Lord your God.’(5). Note that the reason given is to prevent the Israelites being drawn away from God, or contaminated. Even in the New Testament, for similar reasons, marriage of believers to non-believers is spoken against. (6).

These are taken by the Calvinist and certain other fundamentalists as indications that the modern believer is to hold to the purity of the Word of God and the faith, and not corrupt it with other frameworks of belief. Fundamentalists consider that Jesus alone is described as the way, the truth and the life, and no man can come to the Father except through him. (7). There is only one way to God, and other religions are false and in error and do not offer alternative paths to God. However, it is not seen as the believer’s duty to go into the world defending the Christian faith against other religions, or to go about destroying their places of worship and so on. These Old Testament commands are interpreted as principles to be applied to the New Testament age. However, the line is drawn if those of other religions come into the local church, and cause disruption, and seek to lead others astray.  In this situation fundamentalist leaders would argue that they are to be vigorously refuted, and the faith and flock defended. But in the world, that is, outside the church sphere, they are to be left alone. Those of other religions   are considered to be blind guides of the blind, and if a blind man leads a blind man, they both fall into the pit. (8).  Fundamentalist Christians are encouraged to keep away from those of other religions, in case they are corrupted and led astray from the truth as revealed in Scripture and expounded in their churches. (9). In their personal life, fundamentalist believers are encouraged to keep away from such practices and beliefs. It is perceived by Calvinists that it is fashionable amongst some churches to accommodate and merge the traditions and beliefs of other religions with Christianity in an attitude of tolerance and friendship.  But this is seen as a mistake, which only corrupts and draws the person away from the truth as defined by the Calvinist interpretation of God’s word. I do not mean that Calvinists are necessarily intolerant of the people, or unloving towards those of other faiths, but they do not have an attitude of compromise with their faith and the Scriptures. Despite these encouragements from fundamentalist leaders, in practice, many fundamentalist Christians are more easy going, and quite happy to look up their horoscope in the paper; marry someone of another faith and so on. That said, I know of at least one occasion when a fundamentalist minister refused to marry a church member to an unbeliever.

The further one gets away from the truth as defined by Scripture, the less Scripture elaborates on the systems used. There is no analysis in the Bible of other religious systems though some of the abominations that were performed such as child sacrifice are mentioned.  Some of these frameworks of belief by one means and another may produce considerable effects: They may be awe-inspiring, cause wonder, affect the emotions and body and so on.  But the fact that the framework of belief is condemned, and worship of other deities is forbidden in Scripture is usually enough for the earnest fundamentalist.

2) MEDIUMS AND SPIRITUALISTS.

There are those in Scripture who are recorded as supposedly being in touch with the dead in order to provide guidance to the living. As far as many Christians are concerned, God condemns these people. (10). In the Old Testament, there is the account of Saul visiting the medium, and this is the fullest account that we have of such a practice in the Bible. (11). Saul found that God was no longer speaking to him by dreams, or through the prophets or Urim.  He was anxious concerning a future battle with the Philistines, so against his own edict and that of God’s, he sought out a medium, going to her in disguise. He asked the woman to bring up Samuel from the dead. These mediums and spiritists appear to whisper and mutter (12). As soon as the woman saw Samuel, she also saw through Saul’s disguise and became afraid for her own life in the light of Saul’s edict that mediums should be put to death. But Saul assured her that no harm would come to her and urged her to go on. The woman described spirits or gods coming up out of the ground and was able to describe Samuel as an old man wearing a robe. When the woman described what she saw, Saul immediately recognised that this was Samuel, and prostrated himself on the ground.  Samuel declared through the woman,  ‘Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?’ Saul declared that he was seeking guidance. Samuel replied ‘Why do you consult roe now that the Lord has turned away from you and become your enemy? The Lord has done what He predicted through me. The Lord has torn the kingdom out of your hands and given it to one of your neighbours – to David. Because you did not obey the Lord or carry out His fierce wrath against the Amaleks, the Lord has done this to you today. The Lord will hand over both Israel and you to the Philistines, and tomorrow, you and your sons will be with me.’ At these words, Saul became weak and afraid. The prediction fell out correctly, and Saul and his sons were killed in battle. (13).

This is a difficult passage for the fundamentalist, and open to a number of interpretations by them, none of which are fully satisfactory if one is accepting the authority of Scripture. Generally mere trickery is ruled out, as the whole thing is considered too impressive and accurate for that. Neither is there a warrant for fundamentalists to argue that unclean spirits are at work. To give such a reason is only to speculate and assume. Scripture itself does not reveal such a cause. Some might argue that this is God speaking in some way or another, but this seems unsatisfactory also. The terminology used is not correct. It would also seem to be a pointless charade. God had declared that he was not guiding Saul. The orthodox Christian position on death is that an incorporeal, or non physical element of man, his essential self, his spirit or soul, immediately goes to God, especially if one of God’s people.

This then leaves us with the problem of why God would allow such an entity to return to earth. Again there is no Scriptural warrant for such an idea. Unfortunately, here I must leave orthodox belief to maintain a satisfactory understanding of this section of Scripture from a fundamentalist position.  I do not consider that Scripture declares that man has an incorporeal, or non-material element at all in his nature. Look again at our previous chapter on the Biblical worldview. No such element is described in Scripture. The idea of a non-material, rational, thinking, feeling element to our natures is a complex one, and I would argue, cannot be drawn out from the Scriptures as they stand.  I would propose, that Scripture declares that at death, all persons go to Hades, which is from a root word meaning ‘all receiving’. Hades always follows death (14). Hades is not the grave or the permanent region of the unsaved.  It is distinct from death itself though closely related to it. After the judgement, death and Hades are cast into the lake of fire (15). Hades is in opposition to the Church though its gates shall not prevail against the Church, because Christ holds the key (16). Hades is also distinct from the deep, or the abyss where the demons are kept (17). Hades, I suggest, is the STATE of death as opposed to the event of death itself. This is the state of all people who have died, the state or condition of death. The vital principle of life has ceased. There is no consciousness until the resurrection prior to judgement. There is soul sleep. I suggest that either, in some way, consciousness was restored for Samuel, he was disturbed, and gave this message, which again seems hard and unlikely, for as Job indicates,  ‘As a cloud vanishes and is gone, so he who goes down to the state of death does not return’, (18), or the woman had unusual sensitivity and in some way was able to perceive imagined yet accurate images and sounds related to a dead person. Even here though, there are problems, and I do not wish to dwell too long on such a difficult passage. Whatever position the fundamentalist holds from Scripture, it is plain that seeking to communicate with the dead is condemned by Scripture.   As far as the fundamentalist is concerned, the believer that turns to mediums e.t.c. will find that the Lord will set His face against them. He prostitutes himself by turning to such things, (19) and will be defiled (20). Scripture says, ‘ought not a people to inquire of their God? Why consult the dead on behalf of the living. To the law and testimony. If they speak not according to this word, they have no light of dawn.’(21).

In this area of the dead contacting the living there are many apparent examples and many contemporary theories.  There are accounts in abundance of near death experiences and also experiences of those closely related to those who die having a communication from the dying person at the point of death though they may be many miles apart. A person may know quite unexpectedly, and without apparent reason, that a close relative has died, though they are miles apart and sometimes hidden information is given as to whereabouts of savings or personal belongings. Sometimes there are even premonitions and dreams that a person will die, and they fall out as predicted. But for the fundamentalist, Scripture is tantalisingly silent on this matter, except to condemn those who seek this form of communication as means of guidance and for the fundamentalist to simply present these experiences as the work of demons is I think a little premature and simplistic.

Spiritualism itself is well known to be full of cranks, charlatans and deceivers, and has a bad reputation. Sleight of hand, psychological   tricks, secret   assistants, optical illusions, observation of sensory clues, prior knowledge obtained secretly, ability to think on one’s feet, and other techniques are used in combination by some of these people to delude and to deceive in guidance and other matters. Much of what takes place in séances and other attempts to talk to the dead have been shown to be deceptions and tricks. There is, as far as many fundamentalists are concerned, an openness by people involved in these practices to be deceived by unclean spirits, which we shall look at later. This is an aspect over emphasised by many fundamentalist Christians, though whether it is wise to go to the other extreme and ignore such a possibility is open to debate.

3) THE WAY OF SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE AND HIDDEN WISDOM.

Another way in which guidance and help can be sought and unusual phenomenon performed is through hidden wisdom and superior knowledge. We are now looking at those who use formulas and incantations, those who use charms and amulets, those who seek guidance by astrology,  (22) those who use potions and drugs, (23) snake charmers and seers. (24).  This category includes any sources of  ‘wisdom’ which provides guidance and signs concerning the future, such as sorcery, wizards and witches. This is not just a lack of belief in following Scripturally defined ways of Godliness, but a positive belief and practice in the above kinds of behaviours and philosophies. It is quite wrong for a fundamentalist to call an unbelieving woman a witch simply because she is an unbeliever or holds to a worldly framework of belief. Such an attitude betrays its advocate as one who hates women rather than the true Scriptural position. A witch as far as Scripture is concerned is someone actively involved in a philosophy of charms, incantations, formulas and spells, which may or may not involve unclean spirits. The male equivalent is the wizard, who is equally condemned.

This category also includes sorcerers. The word Sorcerer means ‘wise’. The Greek word is ‘Magos’ or ‘Magi’ from which we get our word ‘magic’. Magician entertainers help us to focus on what is meant here.  Entertainers such as Paul Daniels and others perform illusions by using secret, hidden knowledge. There is no appeal to supernatural powers by them. We know that what they do is by sleight of hand, by misdirection and clever use of hidden information, such that we are often amazed. Most fundamentalists would say that there is nothing wrong with this as an entertainment. But what we have in this category are people practising this kind of hidden knowledge in order to impress others as guides and oracles, to impress others and amaze them in order to gain a following after some framework of belief or other that is not Biblical.  Some, who are entertainers in this area, seek to expose those who make such claims.  Paul Daniels regularly illustrated the kinds of deceptions that may deceive others into losing money at Casinos or fairgrounds, and James Randi has also challenged those who propose such deceptive ideas as being something other than sleight of hand.

In this group are the wise men who came to see Jesus at his birth. These are the ‘magi’. They are wise men, philosophers perhaps, and they may be quite sincere in the belief systems that they hold. The element of deliberate deception is not necessarily present in this category. The emphasis rather is on knowledge, though not in conformity to Scripture, and often in connection with being involved in a sacred caste of another religion. The magi specialised in dreams and omens and claimed the gift of prophecy. Therefore they observed the skies, and saw the star in the East, which according to their beliefs was of significance.

This category also includes diviners, those who seek to foretell the future through interpreting omens, or the actions of animals or birds, casting lots, or any other fashionable means by which to see or have foreboding of future events. It is an attempt to discover hidden knowledge by mechanical means; sometimes for example, the examination of entrails was made for divination. (27). Sometimes the aid of claimed supernatural powers was declared. The first indication of the word ‘divine’ in Scripture is to be found in Genesis 30 v 27. The same word is used in Genesis 44 v 5, 15. According to Strong (25) it means to hiss, to whisper a magic spell, to prognosticate, enchant, to learn by experience and diligently observe. The idea of diligent observation and learning by experience are here in these references, whereas elsewhere, a different word is used, which puts greater emphasis on soothsaying and casting of lots. Thus it was that Laban learned that God had blessed him through Jacob, by divination, by experience and close observation. By Genesis 45, reference is made to a cup used for divination, and already the idea is coming in of close observation of something in order to predict the future, rather like reading tea leaves at the bottom of a cup. The references in Genesis are to Joseph divining by means of this cup. ‘If we understand the word which is rendered ‘divine’ in that sense which our translators understand it, we may conclude that the Egyptians had not words to distinguish between the pretended arts of their diviners and the true gift of prophecy with which the Hebrew patriarchs were blessed. As the prophets of Baal and the prophets of Jehovah are called by the same general name of prophets, so the Egyptians would give to such a prophet as Joseph appeared to be the same appellation which they gave to their own pretended prophets. Joseph, therefore, when he laid claim to what was called divination in Egypt, did not mean that he was a diviner of the same kind as those of Egypt, but simply one that had the gift of discovering things hidden from other men.’(26).

Those involved in this wide-ranging category of hidden knowledge may be men or women, (28) and are plainly outlawed in Scripture. ‘Do not practice divination or sorcery’, (29).’Let no one be found among you…who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft or casts spells or who is a medium or spiritist, or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord (30). Under the particular laws of ancient Israel, they were to be put to death (31). The Calvinist will argue that this was to do with the purity of Israel’s faith as a type of the Church.  Thus believers must have nothing to do with these things either. It is also forbidden because it shows an ungodly concept of the world as being controlled by Impersonal cause and effect; mechanistic rules and forces, hence the formulas and spells; or by unclean spirits hence the incantations, as opposed to being controlled by God.  These are seen by the Calvinist as unbeliever’s attempts to achieve what they cannot achieve by their normal powers. When God rose against Nineveh, the city was described as alluring, a mistress of sorceries enslaving people by witchcraft, and God declared Himself against the inhabitants.   (32). Similarly. Manasseh turned to sorcery and kindled God’s anger. (33). Saul was put to death because he consulted a medium.  (34).  For many fundamentalists, such practices are described as the ‘works of the flesh’ (35), the works of our sinful nature in opposition to the work of the Holy Spirit.  Thus they are grouped with murder, theft and sexual immorality (36). Rebellion is compared to witchcraft (37). It is a turning away from God to seek and serve other philosophies. This is something that new converts recognised in Acts, where we read that on being converted, those who practiced sorcery publicly burned their scrolls which they used for such practices (38). These works are also described as futile. Those in Babylon who had defeated Israel were about to be overcome. They felt secure, and said to themselves, ‘I am, and there is none beside me’. But desolation was about to overtake them. They had much sorcery, many potent spells, which they had laboured at since childhood. Astrologers came forward and gazed at the stars and made monthly predictions.

These people trusted in their wisdom and knowledge, but when disaster came, they did not know how to conjure it away, they could not foresee it coming, they were like stubble, the fire burned them up, they could not even save themselves from the power of the flame (39). The fundamentalist believer may point out that it should be remembered that these people were educated, they were wise men, working as judges and scribes as well as royal advisors and chaplains. (40).

People in this group may have some considerable effect on people’s minds, emotions and bodies. The wise men, sorcerers and magicians of Egypt were able to duplicate by their secret arts some of the signs performed by Moses and Aaron. (41).  Two sorcerers are mentioned in Acts. One is found in Acts chapter 8, and his name was Simon. Alexander (42) points out that these sorcerers were priests, philosophers, men of science, and that in these times, there was a connection between oriental science and occult arts such as for example between astronomy and astrology. Simon amazed all kinds of people from all kinds of different backgrounds and lifestyles. These people followed him and gave him their fixed attention. He boasted that he was great, not just a great man, but also something superhuman and he amazed the people with the things he did. When some of the Apostles entered the city he believed their message, and was baptised. He was amazed, astonished and full of admiration at the miracles and signs that the Apostles performed. So much so, that he offered the Apostles money to get the power of being able to give the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands, for himself. (43).  But for this, he was condemned by Peter, who said, ‘Let his money perish with him for ruin if he will not repent, there is no portion of the word, (that is, this new doctrine and religion), assigned to him because his heart is not right or straight before God.’ It appears Chat the main attraction for Simon was these extraordinary miracles that the Apostles performed. He made out that he believed, but other motives of great interest in this phenomenon, in order no doubt to continue to impress others, were hidden. His heart was not straight.  He was not open and honest.  Peter said,  ‘I perceive that you are in the gall of bitterness, the bitter poison of moral corruption, and in the bond of iniquity, enslaved to unrighteousness.’(44) This would have been Simon’s long continued and settled state, before and during his baptism and profession of faith. He had an appearance of conversion, but it he was not saved.

The other example is in Acts 13 v 6-12. Here too is a sorcerer, in the same sense as above. His name was Elymas, and the roots of this word in Arabic means ‘to know’ and in Hebrew ‘to hide’, and these form the roots of occult science – hidden knowledge. Elymas was not a heathen, but a Jew, a teacher of high science with religion. He openly resisted Barnabas and Saul, and the Greek word suggests that this was not only with argument and dispute but also by indirect methods. But, according to Acts, Paul was filled with the Holy Spirit, and he was specially inspired to utter a denunciation against Elymas. Paul looked intently at him and declared that he was full, not just tainted, but full of deceit, craft, guile and subtlety. He had a desire and disposition to deceive and was full of mischief, unscrupulousness and recklessness. He was declared a son of the devil. The word devil means slanderer, false accuser, and Paul declared that Elymas was a son of the devil, he was like him, he had his characteristics, he belonged to his group, the devil’s children being liars and sinners. (45). Paul declared that he was an enemy of that which is right and good. Elymas would not cease; he persisted in distorting and misrepresenting the ways of the Lord, which are straight and right.  As punishment, Scripture declares that God’s power made him blind. In this section some fundamentalists would include a way of thinking in science and social science that sets itself up above God. We have already seen how confident the Babylonians were, resting secure in their knowledge, and how originally, science and hidden knowledge were close together, science coming out of astrology and alchemy and so on.  Some fundamentalists would say that there is nothing wrong with open scientific inquiry as such, but science can have assumptions and beliefs which are contrary to Scripture. It is perceived by the fundamentalist as a mistake when those beliefs take over from Scripture truth, or when scientists rest satisfied in their own framework of beliefs, thinking them superior to the Word of God. It is perceived as wrong when science believes it can eventually get all the answers and can solve the problems that mankind has and when science regards Christianity as superfluous. That kind of thinking falls into this category for many fundamentalists. It is significant that in the U.S.A. at least, there is a wide gap between the rates of religious affiliation in the U.S. population in general, and that of American scientists. (46) There is still this opposition between science and religion in general. Indeed, in this age of disappointment and dissatisfaction with the world and feelings of emptiness, there is an increase in fundamentalism of all kinds and a move to pseudo beliefs such as new age ideas and so on. Coupled with this is an anti scientific movement, evidenced in the U.S.A for example by the rise of Creationist teachings alongside the teaching of evolution in schools. Of course, also, as with all these categories, there is a wide spectrum of religious belief among scientists. Some believe in Impersonal forces, others are Mormons, others Baptists and yet others Buddhists.  For the Bible believing Christian, scientific inquiry has to be conducted in a way that is respectful to God and His word, with humility before Him.  It has to be in accordance with Scripture principles and commands. For further reading on this subject, I recommend ‘Philosophy of science – The natural sciences in Christian perspective’ by Del Ratzsch, I.V.P. (1986).

4) FALSE PROPHETS.

False prophets, according to Scripture, are those claiming that they are declaring God’s secret will or foretelling future events by inspiration, when in fact. God is not speaking to them and rather, their predictions, teaching and or lives are in opposition to Scripture commands and principles. The term also includes those who declare false teaching, those who preach   another   gospel, such   as, according   to   the fundamentalist, salvation by works.

Concerning false prophets. Scripture pours out venom, such that when the statements are put together to produce a rounded description, what we have in effect is an incredibly negative caricature.  From O.T. passages we find the following concerning false prophets: (47) they were both men and women. False teachers and prophets were not limited to men only. (Calvinists tend to insist that only men should be teachers.) Indeed, no doubt they were not even limited to adults. We find that they gave out a false message, and had flattering visions, saying for example that the Jews would not see famine or sword, but that they would have peace, when in reality they were about to be carried of into captivity. God said that His word was not in them, that He did not command them or speak to them. We find that the way in which they received their messages was either by dreams or visions, which they appeared to become quite excited about, saying, ‘I had a dream! I had a dream;’ The source of these things was actually themselves says Scripture. They were delusions of their own hearts and minds; thus, they wagged their OWN tongues, but said that ‘The LORD declares…’ They had seen emptiness futility and vanity and their messages came to nothing.  These prophets were foolish, unwise and unthinking, or thinking wrongly according to Scripture. They practiced deceit and declared reckless lies, but they had no shame, they did not even know how to blush. The prophesying was done for gain, out of greed.  The Apostle Paul spoke free of charge and paid and worked for his upkeep, and Overseers are charged not to be lovers of money. False prophets were hunters of souls; they ensnared people, like birds, but were condemned by God, and incurred His wrath. Though they led people astray, the people were partly to blame: Israel was rebellious. They declared, ‘do not see, do not prophesy unto us right things, rather speak to us smooth things, prophesy deceits, pleasant things and illusions’. They encouraged them to have dreams. The effect of their message was to make the righteous sad, and to strengthen the wicked by promising life. We read elsewhere that God foils the signs of false prophets and makes fools of diviners. God frustrates their schemes and systems and often makes their predictions come to nothing.

The New Testament also pours venom on false prophets. (48). They are described as coming in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly, they are ravening wolves. It is the characteristic of these people to appear kind and gentle, to even appear as a Christian, for Christians are described as being like sheep, and Christ as a Lamb. Thus false prophets and teachers can be involved in the local church, and associate with Christians, and have an appearance of being believers. But they will not spare the flock. They are also described as a bad tree, and a bad tree cannot bring forth good fruit. The word fruit does not refer to converts, but to a quality of life. They cannot bring forth the fruit of the Spirit, and this is how they can be known. Ultimately, like a bad tree, they will be thrown in the fire.

Scripture declares that Jesus Christ sows His seed, believers, into the world, but the devil sows weeds, his own sons also, and these two co-exist until the end of the gospel age. Then the angels will reap the harvest and the weeds, the sons of the devil, will be gathered and burned with fire. The Angels will gather up all causes of sin and evildoers, and throw them into the fire. But the weeds are not gathered now in case believers are gathered up with them.  They grow together until the harvest. Anyone who has done gardening will be familiar with this illustration. When weeding a garden, the weeds may be so intertwined with the flowers that in pulling out the weed, the flower is uprooted too.  Believers, false teachers, false prophets and unbelievers are so enmeshed, so intertwined in this world, that God forbids the gathering of the weeds now, lest believers be uprooted and harmed also. According to the Calvinist, the present order of things must continue until the full number of the elect is effectually saved. These false prophets and teachers can be so like believers, that they are described as having once escaped the corruption of the world by knowing the Lord Jesus, and then becoming entangled and overcome by the world again.  This can be quite a strong dimension in Calvinist circles…professing Christians who are not really Christians at all but only nominal Christians. Thus in their view there are bishops who are false teachers and so on.  There is almost an element of paranoia amongst some fundamentalists where people are not what they appear to be, and enemies and devils are everywhere.

Scripture says that many such false prophets and teachers have already gone into the world, and many more will arise and will surely bring in destructive heresies, under the cloak and colour of truth.  ‘The Spirit clearly says that in the later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.  Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. At the very end of the age, false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles, which would deceive even the elect if that were possible. Thus there is a sense in present day Calvinism that things are going to get worse in the church, that corruption and deceit will increase.

False teachers and prophets give out a hollow and deceptive philosophy.  They often have a false humility, going into great detail about visions that they have had.  They despise authority, yet they may also be legalistic, insisting on the observation of certain days, or forbidding the eating of certain foods, or forbidding marriage, e.t.c. They promote myths and made up stories, thus exploiting their followers, they promote controversies, and are full of meaningless talk dwelling endlessly on things like genealogies. Their desire is wealth and praise and commendation by increasing their followers. They like the power of being leaders and having others follow them. They are people of instinct and emotion.

As the fundamentalist knows, these people are not unpopular, in fact many follow them. The false prophets appeal to the desires of a fallen human nature. They entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error. ‘By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people’. Listeners become double minded about Christianity, and a double minded person is unstable in all that they do. Such people are blown here and there by every wind of teaching. The false teachers promise freedom from moral restraint, but go into licence and bondage to sin.  They are zealous to win over Christians, but for no good: what they want is to alienate Christians from respected leaders, so that they may be zealous for the false teachers instead. Thus they are divisive.

The Bible presents then a caricature of the false prophet and declares that the visions, teachings and prophesies of these people are worthless because they do not expose sin, are false and misleading. One of the chief aims of Scripture for the fundamentalist is to promote holiness and purity of life for the believer, but the words of false prophets do not expose sin, but lead to it. They bring the truth into disrepute. Their association with true believers and close connection with them means that they bring other believers and the truth as declared in Scripture, into a low reputation.  Those outside the fundamentalist church lump them all together as one, and as one is condemned so is the other. These days, for the Calvinist, it is impossible to call oneself an evangelical, or a Bible believing Christian, or a born again Christian because these terms have been brought into disrepute as far as they are concerned by such false teachers and by extremists. Calvinists and Christian fundamentalists generally like to present a benign, positive image of themselves and their religion. Thus, as these words and phrases come to mean something other than they intend, they seek another label.  The very term fundamentalist is one that is disliked because it indicates extremism.

False teachers are not ignorant of their position: They are described as hypocritical liars, their consciences being seared as with a hot iron. Their consciences bear witness to their sin. Scripture declares that the condemnation of these false prophets is sure, because God did not spare the angels that sinned or the ancient world, which He flooded, or Sodom and Gomorrah, which He destroyed as an example to show what is going to happen to the ungodly.  No pleasant attribute or position in society will save sinners from judgement according to the fundamentalist. The false teacher’s   popularity and prosperity will not save them. Yet God rescued Lot, and Noah and his family. God knows how to save the righteous, whilst punishing the guilty. Like the Old Testament false prophets, they will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Blackest darkness is reserved for them.  According to the Calvinistic interpretation of Scripture, these false prophets and teachers once escaped the world and it’s corruption, through a notional knowledge of Christ. They may have a great knowledge of Scripture and doctrine, being very educated in the subject. Some men, the Calvinist argues, are for a time kept from the pollution of the world by knowledge of Christ, though they are not renewed in the spirit of their mind. It is mere restraint through religious education, a common grace influence. But they return to the world, like a dog returning to it’s own vomit. Better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than to have known it and then turned their backs on it.

‘The times will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather round them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears way from the truth and turn aside to myths. Like those in Old Testament Babylon, Scripture declares that people will no longer want to hear the truth, (as declared by the Bible), but prefer pleasant myths. Many fundamentalists believe that this is being fulfilled in their own generation.

This whole chapter has been dealing with what the Bible labels as erroneous beliefs and practices that arise from within the person. There has been no reference to unclean spirits or demon possession. These things will be looked at shortly. What we have looked at here, with the exception perhaps of certain spiritualises, are what Scripture calls deceits of the heart: false emotions, experiences, motives and thoughts arising from within, that serve to provide monetary gain, popularity, power, and influence, and which satisfy and please the fallen nature. Scripture declares that there are frameworks of belief that are opposed in some way or other to Scripture and the God it declares, but which nevertheless are offered as guidance, or provide extraordinary phenomena and of course it roundly condemns these. It reserves it’s most severe condemnation for the teacher espousing values contrary to Scripture within the church or in the name of God.

It would be profitable to consider some of the explanations for what goes on in Charismatic and Pentecostal circles at the level of motivation, cognition and emotion. We are interested now in what processes may be taking place at a purely ordinary level to produce such apparently unusual phenomena as tongue speaking and healing. But to do this I must step outside of the fundamentalist framework because of the shortcomings of it’s perspective, and the fundamentalist’s general opposition to alternative perspectives.  However, I wish to save this for general discussion and comment later in the study. For the moment, I wish to remain within the fundamentalist framework, and note that this is all it has to say at this level…presenting a caricature of deceit, evil, rebellion and condemnation. According to Scripture, someone in a charismatic church who practices a gift not in reality given by God is acting on the deceit of their own heart and mind, and furthermore, may be deceitful and greedy for attention and gaining a following. In order to express disapproval, groups often use the idea of sin or condemnation of a given idea or practice, fundamentalists use this no more or less than other religious groups. Calvinists and Arminians differ in their views of the extent of sin however. The Arminian talks in terms of human agency in salvation, or reaching for the lifeline offered by God. He does not see sin in quite the all-pervasive way that Calvinists do, and therefore may not be so mistrustful of inner thoughts and emotions.  The Calvinist has an existential view of guilt: The whole person is guilty in every aspect of their being by their very nature. Calvinists are, I suspect, more distrustful of themselves and more aware that their heart is deceitful above all things.  They are more suspicious of their feelings and thoughts, and less likely to be carried away by them. Calvinism is also a dour and austere form of Christianity, not given to emotional displays, but rather emphasising teaching, doctrine and self-control. It can have an appearance of soberness, depth and intellectual quality. It does not advocate an idea of ‘let go and let God’.

Many fundamentalists however are happy to adopt this idea of self surrender, of letting go of the self, of putting away rational thought in order to let God move and speak to them, in order to experience Him. I have very rarely come across this in Calvinist groups, who are far more concerned with understanding Scripture correctly and exercising self control to keep sin down and maintain an ordered spiritual life. This difference   in   approach   is   probably   crucial   to   the fundamentalist’s   attitude to gifts.  In 25 years of being involved in Calvinist circles in Britain, I have only ever come across one Calvinist who regularly practiced gifts of any sort. In many ways, he was a square peg in a round hole, being much more intuitive, spontaneous and emotional than other members in the church, who saw him as slightly eccentric and superficial. Despite regularly speaking in tongues over about ten years in private prayer,  (it was not allowed in church meetings), he too came to the conclusion that he had deceived himself and had been mistaken.

However, in seeing fellow fundamentalists practicing gifts, Calvinists will tend to talk of lack of caution and self-examination, and the deceitfulness of sin.  They may talk vaguely of psychological effects and trickery, but they tend to rest here. Scripture offers no deep analysis and since psychology is often seen as a rival philosophy to be avoided, few explanations come to hand.  Attempts may be made to examine doctrinal errors, and debates may centre around the contexts of verses and the translation of Greek New Testament words and so on, Calvinists often being convinced of the error of the doctrinal position taken by Charismatics. Indeed, the fact that some Roman Catholics are charismatic, and that Roman Catholic doctrine is incompatible with Calvinism, is often cited as proof. The Calvinist asks, ‘Why would God give gifts to those who are plainly in error with regard to Scripture? If God was consistent, he would not. These gifts are false, because they arise from mistaken doctrinal thinking and are experienced by people in fundamental doctrinal error’.  In other words, fundamentalists who deny the continuance of gifts really struggle to provide any sort of explanation as to what modern gifts are.

Certain demonstrations of gifts may be perceived as so excessive or disturbing, so divisive or so against Scripture principles   that interpretation   of   Scripture   and   the explanation of the event by appealing to sin alone may not be considered sufficient. Fundamentalist critics, charismatic or not, may explain such excesses in terms of unclean spirits which is the area I wish to move on to next.

                                      2.17

CHAPTER TWO REFERENCES

1) Acts 13 v 6,

2) Deuteronomy 4 v 19

3) Exodus 20 v 3,4

4) Joshua 7 v 10,11.

5) Deuteronomy 7 v 3-6.

6) II Corinthians 6 v 14 – Ch 7 v 1.

7) John 14 v 6

8) Matthew 15 v 14.

9) II Thessalonians 3 v 6.

10) Leviticus 20 v 27

      Deuteronomy 18 v 11,12.

11) I Samuel 28.

12) Isaiah 8 v 19.

13) I Samuel 31 v 6.

14) Leviticus 19 v 31

15) Revelation 20 v 13.

16) Matthew 16 v 18.

      Revelation I v 18.

17) Luke 8 v 31,

      Matthew 12 v 43,

      Revelation 9 v 1.

18) Job 7 v 9.

      Job 10 v 21.

      Job 14 v 10-14.

      Job 16 v 22

      II Samuel 12 v 23.

      Isaiah 38 v 10, 11.

19) Leviticus 20 v 6

20) Leviticus 19 v 31

21) Isaiah 8 v 19.

22) Daniel 2 v 2, 10

23) Revelation 21 v 8,

      Revelation 22 v 15

24) Eccleslastes 10 v 11

25) STRONG, J. ‘The exhaustive concordance of the Bible. Hendrickson. U.S.A.

26) LAWSON, G. (1972) ‘The history of Joseph’, p. 240. Banner of Truth Trust.

27) Leviticus 20 v 27

28) Ezekiel 21 v 21.

29) Leviticus 19 v 26

30) Deuteronomy 18 v 10

31) Leviticus 20 v 27

      Exodus 22 v 18

32) Nahum 3 v 4,5.

33) II Chronicles 33 v 6,

      II Kings 21 v 6.

34) I Chronicles 10 v 13,14.

35) Galatians 5 v 20

36) Revelation 9 v 21

37) I Samuel 15 v 23.

38) Acts 19 v 19.

39) Isaiah 47 v 8-15.

40) HINNELS, J.R. (1984) ‘The penguin dictionary of religions.’ Penguin books London.

41) Exodus 7 v 10,11;

      Exodus  8 v 6,7,

      Isaiah 47 v 12,

      Acts 8 v 9-11.

42) ALEXANDER, J.A. (1963) ‘Acts’ Banner of Truth Trust. London, p.325, 6.

43) Acts 8 v 18.19.

44) Acts 8 v 23.

45) John 8 v 44,

      I John 3 v 8.

46) ARGYLE, M. & BEIT-HALLAHAMI, B. (1975) ‘The social psychology of religion’ Routledge

        & Kegan Paul p.87. London.

47) Ezekiel 13 v 1,2,17.

      Ezekiel 12 v 24.

      Ezekiel 13 v 7.

      Ezekiel 13 v 10.

      Ezekiel 13 v 15

      Ezekiel 13 v 18-20,

      Ezekiel 13 v 22.

      Ezekiel 13 v 3

      Ezekiel 13 v 6-9, 19, 23.

      Ezekiel 22 v 25.

      Hosea 9 v 7.

      Isaiah 30 v 10.

      Isaiah 44 v 25

     Jeremiah 14 v 13-16.

     Jeremiah 23 v 10.

     Jeremiah 23 v 13-15.

     Jeremiah 23 v 16, 26,

     Jeremiah 23 v 17.

     Jeremiah 23 v 21.

     Jeremiah 23 v 25.

     Jeremiah 23 v 31.

     Jeremiah 23 v 32

     Jeremiah 27 v 14-16.

     Jeremiah 29 v 8

     Jeremiah 37 v 19.

     Jeremiah 5 v 12, 13;

     Jeremiah 6 v 13

     Jeremiah 6 v 14, 15,

     Jeremiah 8 v 10.

     Jeremiah 8 v 11

     Lamentations 2 v 14.

     Micah 3 v 11.

     Micah 3 v 5

     Psalm 124 v 7

48) Acts 20 v 29,30,

      Acts 8 v 20,

      Colossians 2 v 18.

      Colossians 2 v 20-23.

      Colossians 2 v 8.

      Ephesians 4 v 14.

      Galatians 4 v 7.

      Galatians I v 6-9

      I John 4 v 1

      I Peter 2 v 1.

      I Timothy 3 v 3.

      I Timothy 4 v 1,2.

      I Timothy 6 v 4,5.

      I Timothy I v 3-7,

      II Corinthians 11 v 13-15.

      II Corinthians 11 v 7

      II Corinthians 2 v 17.

      II John 7-11.

      II Peter 2 v 1.

      II Peter 2 v 10-13.

      II Peter 2 v 14.

      II Peter 2 v 15.

     II Peter 2 v 17.

     II Peter 2 v 18

     II Peter 2 v 19.

     II Peter 2 v 2.

     II Peter 2 v 20-22.

     II Peter 2 v 3-10.

     II Peter 3 v 16.

     II Thessalonians 3 v 8

     II Timothy 4 v 3.

     Isaiah 56 v 11.

     James 1 v 8.

     John 2 v 16.

     Jude 18,19.

     Jude v 10.

     Lamentations 2 v 14.

     Mark 13 v 22.

     Matthew 13 v 29, 36-43.

     Matthew 24 v 11,

     Matthew 24 v 24,

     Matthew 7 v 15-20.

     Romans 16 v 18.

     Titus I v 1

        8000

DEMONS AND UNCLEAN SPIRITS.

Surveys carried out in Britain (1) show that belief in the Devil is declining, and that far fewer people believe that the Devil exists than believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Scripture informs us that Jesus spoke of the Devil, demons and unclean spirits as being real, and that at the start of His ministry was severely tempted by the Devil (2), and that He also cast out unclean spirits. (3). The fundamentalist argues that if Jesus was the Son of God then He must have spoke the truth concerning the existence of these unclean spirits, but that the unbeliever considers that it is more accurate to dismiss many of these incidents as examples of primitive ignorance, and to try and explain them away as examples of mental illness, epilepsy and so on. Firstly we can note that the Bible distinguishes between epilepsy or lunacy and demon possession, (4) such that they are not necessarily the same thing. Secondly, the fundamentalist argues that to try and explain in terms of mental illness or psychological effect some of the incidents recorded in the New Testament is very difficult, and indeed, that some of these explanations can produce as much disbelief in one person as the idea of demon possession does in another. Take for example, the man in Mark 5 v 13. Suggesting that the man was an epileptic, or mentally ill seems a reasonable alternative, but one also has to explain to the fundamentalist why, when Jesus allows the demons to enter the herd of swine, 2,000 of them rushed off a cliff into the sea. Nevertheless, for the fundamentalist, it seems clear that ‘mental illness’ and physical illness can be caused by demons, as we shall see. Despite a general disbelief in the existence of the Devil, there is an exploitation of the dark side of the supernatural in popular films, books and television.  Often aimed at a teenage market, the type of supernatural phenomenon portrayed here bear little resemblance to those portrayed in the Bible, so it would be good to take an overview of what the fundamentalist, and particularly the Calvinist interpretation of the Bible has to say about these beings.

The Bible describes the demons and unclean spirits as angels, and indeed, in recent years it has become very fashionable to talk of angels, who have become a post new age icon, particularly in the U.S.A.. However, again, I want to be clear as to what the Scriptures appear to say about these beings.

Scripture indicates that as part of the creation. God made angels, (5), who are spiritual beings,   (6) possessing superhuman power and intelligence, though they are not as wise or as powerful as God. (7). They are great in number, (8), and were created by God in an innocent and pure condition. (9). The Calvinist argues, that before man was created, there was a fall from Innocence and God’s favour by some of these beings, (10), who rebelled against God, their leader being Lucifer, Satan or the Devil as he is variously called. These rebellious spiritual beings were immediately cast out of heaven by the judgement of God, into an abyss, a deep, or wilderness, where they cannot find rest. (11). At this present time, they are in a state of open rebellion, and seek to undo all that God does. They do this by slandering God to man: ‘Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden?… .You will not surely die, for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’ Genesis 3 v 1-5. Compare this with Genesis 2 v 16 & 17 where it is recorded what God actually said. They also slander man to God. ‘Does Job fear God for nothing? Stretch out your hand your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face.’  Job 1 v 9,11.  Sometimes they can go to extraordinary lengths in their opposition, controlling wind and lightning, (12) affecting the human body causing sickness, disease, deformity, dumbness, blindness, and convulsions, (13), or giving physical strength and power (14). They may affect the human mind, causing fits and thinking disorders, (15), or they may give information to the mind that it could not know by other means, and as such, we find Saul prophesying, (16), and so too Ahab’s prophets. (17). We also find a woman possessed of a spirit of divination, bringing her masters much gain by soothsaying. (18). These beings can cause wonders and portents to be performed. (19). They may, in seeking a resting place, enter into a human body, (20), and more than one demon may enter a person at one time, (21), causing some of the effects already listed. Demons and unclean spirits are also very subtle. (22). The Apostle tells us: ‘For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no marvel, for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light, therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness.’ II Corinthians 11 v 13. We find that there is nothing so holy and pure that these unclean spirits may not use it to oppose God, and that there is no one so holy and pure that they dare not tempt them. Fundamentalists point out that the Bible records that the Devil readily tempted the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Himself, and did so with God’s own word, the Scriptures. (23). Satan and the fallen angels know disobedience only too well, because they are well experienced in it, and they know human nature well also, and are clever at using subtle temptations to lead people into disobedience   and   unhappiness.   Often   of course, these temptations are presented in desirable, alluring or exciting forms, promising freedom from the burdens of life together with an assurance of happiness.  It is no surprise to find the Apostle Paul saying that believers who are trying to live a life of obedience to God out of love for Him ‘struggle not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms’ Ephesians 6 v 12.

It is to the comfort of fundamentalists to know that these spiritual beings are not left unchecked, for if they were allowed to do as they please, the fundamentalist considers that our world would be a turmoil of evil and darkness greater than that which exists now.  For the fundamentalist, the Bible declares God to be a sovereign God, a ruling God, Who is in control   and exercising power and   restraint over His creation. (24). Thus we find that as far as the fundamentalist is concerned, the activities of these unclean spirits are curtailed, and that God limits the degree and extent to which they can use their powers, because He is still their God. (25). So we find that it is God Himself who sends an evil spirit into the camp of Abimelech. (26). Similarly, God sends an evil spirit to Ahab’s prophets (27) and to Saul. (28). The demons are often afraid of Jesus because of this power. (29). It is Jesus who gives the unclean spirits PERMISSION to enter the swine. (30).

For the Calvinist, God operates with sovereign omnipotence over evil spirits,  ‘The Lord said to Satan,  ‘Very well then, everything he has is in your hands, but on the man himself, do not lay a finger. Job 1 v 12. God gives Satan permission to try Job, and tells him exactly how far he can go. As a result, Satan causes men to steal Job’s cattle and oxen and cause lightning and wind to destroy Job’s property and family. (31). In some cases. God gave the power to cast out unclean spirits to His disciples, (32), though they did not always succeed before Pentecost, and this seems to be due to a lack of faith. (33). Scripture indicates that to presume this power when it is not given can be very unwise. (34).

The idea that demons can cause disease is an interesting one. We must note at once two possibilities concerning this statement.  People may deny the existence of these spirit beings, and interpret this as a superstitious, primitive approach to illness, or like many of the fundamentalists, argue that there are indeed such beings that cause such effects, though they   are not the sole cause of illness. Scripture informs the fundamentalist that through Adam’s sin, a principle of death and decay was introduced as a judgement from God, (35), and the whole of creation was fundamentally changed. (36).

Later, there was another cataclysmic change with the flood, and the face of the earth was changed forever. (37). As one of the effects of this, fundamentalists point to the life spans of those who lived before and after the flood. These life spans change from hundreds of years to an average of seventy years, giving an indication of the magnitude of these changes. (See Appendix I). For the Calvinist certainly, illness and disease is now the natural order of things due to Adam’s disobedience and subsequent judgement. To try and make distinctions between illnesses caused by our fallen condition and that caused by unclean spirits is difficult if not largely impossible for the Calvinist, and they certainly consider it a great mistake to assume that every physically or  ‘mentally ill’ person is oppressed by some unclean spirit or other. Some fundamentalists however will readily ascribe illness to evil spirits, even using the idea of spiritual discernment, a sort of appreciation of secret, hidden knowledge of the work of spirits.

Another important consideration for Calvinists concerning unclean spirits is responsibility. If unclean spirits oppresses a person such that they are demonised, and an unclean spirit has entered into them, are they responsible for their actions? Are they accountable? Or are they out of control, helpless, and not to be held responsible for what they do? It is indeed common for believers to blame the devil for their misdemeanours. They say that they could not help themselves, that they were greatly tempted, and that Satan led them astray.

However, Scripture informs believers that God does not tempt a person beyond their means, and there is always a way of escape. I Corinthians 10 v 13. It also appears that in some cases the person has a joint responsibility with unclean spirits in their transgressions, particularly believers, who have the advantage of a new nature given at conversion. When the believer tries to live a life that is pleasing to God, there is a co-working with God. (38) The believer is given responsibility to work out their salvation, that is to make the effort at living a life acceptable to God, as the many Scripture injunctions indicate, (39), yet it is God who works in the believer and strengthens them, Philippians 2 v 12,13. For the Calvinist, a similar type of accountability seems to exist with unclean spirits. They see this evidenced at the fall of man.  It is the serpent that beguiles and tempts with lies and deceit, but Adam is held to be co-accountable for allowing himself to be deceived, (40), and it is Adam who receives the judgement, as well as Eve and Satan. Consider also Judas Iscariot. The Calvinist reads in the gospels that Satan entered Judas Iscariot, (41), inclining him to betray Jesus. Is Judas now helpless, a mere pawn of Satan, unable to resist and beyond accountability? Scripture tells the Calvinist   that   Judas   is   held   accountable   for   his transgression…’Better for that man if he had not been born.’ Matthew 26 v 24. Here is the Devil at his most subtle and wicked, enticing a man to betray the Son of God, but the man is held jointly responsible, despite Satan’s superior power.

Consider also Anannias and Sapphira. (42). Some of the early believers decided to sell their land, and give the money raised to the Apostles. (43). But Anannias and Sapphira plotted to sell their land, and keep some of the proceeds for themselves whilst making out that they had given all. However, Peter was given discernment to see their deceit, and he challenged Anannias. The accusation is double edged. In verse three of Acts chapter five; he says ‘Why has Satan filled thy heart’ but in verse four he says ‘Why hast thou conceived this thing in thy heart.’ There is an activity by both Satan and Anannias.  At the accusation, Anannias fell dead, and shortly afterwards his wife died also. In this case, the devil is not rebuked, and in other cases, it is the devil that is rebuked and not the person. Scripture indicates to the Calvinist that a person has some responsibility for their actions, even when tempted or possessed by an unclean spirit. Thus it is that believers are exhorted to resist the devil and fight him at the outset. (44).

It appears though, that this joint responsibility does not occur every time Satan tempts a person. Job was not held responsible or jointly responsible when Satan was allowed to provoke him. Similarly, the Apostles were not held responsible when Satan hindered them from visiting the Thessalonians. (45). But it appears that when a person takes counsel with themselves and thinks things through, and then embarks upon a particular action, then they are held jointly responsible if they disobey God, despite the thoughts and temptations put there by unclean spirits. It is the yielding to these temptations that is the sin, and that people are held responsible for. No doubt the unclean spirits are held accountable for tempting and seeking to undo God’s purposes.  For the Calvinist, and many fundamentalists then, as regards human beings, temptation is not sin, but we are held accountable for our actions.

We have then considered the subject of unclean spirits in a general way, looking at a number of the main ideas that Scripture presents according to the Calvinist. Obviously, these spirit beings are very important in our consideration of unusual phenomena, because

a)      They may genuinely exist and cause such events, or

b)        They do not exist but form an important part of the fundamentalists and others’ belief systems. 

As far as fundamentalists are concerned, church history and present day missionaries testify to the fact that Satan and his rebellious group are still active, and I shall point out just three examples that fundamentalists might use by way of illustration from church history.  They are not all spectacular, but rather show something of the diversity and subtle nature of the activities of such spirits as far as the fundamentalist is concerned.

John Cennick was a minister of the gospel in the great revival and awakening that swept Britain and America in the eighteenth century.  During this revival, he recorded an incident concerning a woman named Sally Jones. ‘Sally Jones could not read, and yet would answer if persons spoke to her in Latin or Greek.’ She was one of three women at a particular location who were greatly affected by the revival. They began to cry out as Cennick was preaching, until it was all he could do to stop them. On one occasion, more than twenty were shrieking and roaring together, and these three women in particular ‘could tell who was coming into the house, who would be seized next, what was doing in other places e.t.c..(46). Sally Jones was a self-confessed demoniac. Now it is obvious that there is a great deal of emotion and hysteria with these women, but their ability to speak new languages, foretell the future and tell what was going on elsewhere make this example a little more special and interesting. Cennick himself could not speak Greek, and Arnold Dallimore, in quoting this example in the biography of George Whitfield, one of the leaders of the revival, thinks that Cennick may have enlisted the help of John Wesley. Neither is this incident a once only experience, but rather it appears that they were affected like this on a number of occasions. Unfortunately then, it is not clear whether these women were actually speaking Greek or some form of pseudo-language.

Edward Irving was the leader of a nineteenth century sect called Irvingism, which placed great emphasis on speaking in strange tongues during worship, and on prophesies and so on. His associate, Robert Baxter,  ‘when the power was upon him, delivered himself authoritatively in specific commands to Irving, and arrangements for church order and the like, and even    definite    predictions    for    the    future    were given…Contradictions began to appear between the several deliverances by the same person, or between several people. Spirit was arrayed against spirit. The Spirit that had spoken acceptably by one, was pronounced by another, speaking in the spirit, nothing other than an evil spirit.’ Baxter later said, ‘My conviction was that we had all been speaking by a lying spirit, and not by the Spirit of the Lord.’(47). In certain ways, Irvingism was very Impressive, mainly in the style of its services. It has many parallels in the modern day charismatic movement. But the above example shows the confusion that was at its core, and the resulting disillusion that it caused amongst its leaders. There is nothing in this example that could not be reduced to psychological and emotional causes, and that indeed may be all it was. As far as the fundamentalist is concerned, it may be that unclean spirits were at work in some areas. As I have said, the distinction is virtually impossible to make in some cases for the fundamentalist. Thus these words by Jonathan Edwards:  ‘There are other spirits who have influences on the minds of men besides the Holy Ghost. ‘There are many false spirits, exceedingly busy with men, who often transform themselves into angels of light, and do, in many wonderful ways, with great subtlety and power, mimic the operations of the Spirit of God.’(48).  Irvingism is an example of a popular religious group, impressive in its style of service and rich in emotions, which is plunged into confusion by error, emotionalism and possibly, according to the fundamentalist, evil spirits. It is a clichéd fundamentalist statement that the Devil’s greatest work is to persuade us that he does not exist. With so few believing in the Devil, as the surveys have shown, many do not consider demons as an influence, especially when the phenomena is naturally attractive to them, such that they feel joy and peace, and are presented with images of Christ and heaven. This argues the fundamentalist, is Satan at his most subtle.

For the fundamentalist, Christian spiritualism is wide open to this source of influence, as are the different branches of the charismatic movement, however attractive and comforting they may seem. As far as the Calvinist is concerned, attractiveness and comfortableness are not tests to be applied. Spiritualism and mediums are very much associated with trickery and cheating, and certain charismatic or Pentecostal leaders are no more than charlatans, though I am certain that there are many sincere leaders to be found in that movement, who have interesting and unusual experiences. The question is, are these experiences what these people think they are, or what they claim them to be. Such experiences may be beyond voluntary control, produce unusual voices and reveal unknown facts, and appear helpful and comforting, but as far as the Calvinist is concerned, there is nothing here beyond the power of unclean spirits, who, whilst keeping a person’s interest by means of unusual phenomena and comforting words, also keeps them from what the Calvinist regards as the truth. One of the tests in Scripture for those that declare themselves as prophets of God, and who offer their gifts in such a capacity, is not the gifts themselves, not the experiences, but the teaching and beliefs that these persons hold. (49).  If that teaching is, in a fundamental   way, contradictory   to   Scripture, which fundamentalists see as a unified whole, then that person is to be rejected as a guide, even if their prophecy is fulfilled.

Scripture is presented by the fundamentalist as God’s inerrant revelation to us, and as such it is to be the light and guide to our lives. Everything is examined by it, and someone who rejects basic and fundamental teaching that it contains, or who preaches another gospel, is to be rejected as a guide. In this context, for the fundamentalist, Christian spiritualism is a contradiction. Nowhere does Scripture instruct us to seek the dead for advice about the living. Rather it condemns such an idea. (50).

John L.  Nevius, a missionary in China, encountered demonic activity in a woman named Kwo. After suffering for eight years, the woman was taken to some Chinese Christians, one of whom was named Leng. After seeking God’s help in prayer, Leng said to the woman, ‘Have you no fear of God? Why do you come here to afflict this woman?’ The reply came back, ‘God and Christ will not interfere, I have been here seven or eight years. I claim this as my resting place. You cannot get rid of me… I want a resting place and I’ll not leave this one.’. A few months later she was found raving wildly at a church service, throwing books and Bibles on the floor. Another woman started raving with her, and one was heard to say to the other, ‘Those men are coming here, and have got as far as the stream.’. When someone asked them who it was that was coming, the emphatic answer was given, ‘One of them is that man Leng’. Leng was not expected for several days, and the woman was told so, but the reply came, ‘If he does not come here today, then I am no spirit. They are now crossing the stream, and will be here when the sun is so high.’, and she pointed to the west. Leng and his friends arrived as predicted, and Leng rebuked the demon which replied, ‘I’ll not go!  I’ll stay and be the death of this woman.’. However, after continued prayer, the woman was delivered, and did not appear to be affected again. (51). This appears to be an example of a more extreme type of demonic activity. It is interesting for a number of reasons. We might again dismiss this as psychological, as the effects of emotionalism, hysteria and conflict. We might explain it as a deep-rooted personality disorder, but again, the prediction makes it more interesting.

Here also, we see a mixture of truths and half-truths delivered in an authoritative manner.  Confident assertions are made concerning the unexpected arrival of these men, together with the fact that the demon needs a resting place, and will be the death of the woman before the spirit leaves.  Despite the accuracy and truth of the first statements, the demon does in fact leave after prayer. It is also worth noticing at this stage, that these experiences are not necessarily involuntary.

We have already noted that for the Calvinist, Scripture declares that we are held accountable for our acts, even when tempted or demonised, and so there is an implication that we have the power, at least initially, and certainly if we are born again, to resist the power of the devil. People who give way to Voodooism, for example, are not taken into a trance against their will, but because, to some degree they permit themselves to go into this state, which is usually the idea of attending such a ceremony, and because they believe in that particular creed.   The   same   is   true   of excesses   in Pentecostalism or Charismatic meetings. The observer can choose with great effectiveness not to be affected by Voodoo rhythms, or repetitive chorus singing. For those interested in the power of self-discipline in this matter, J. A. C. Brown discusses it at some length in his book, ‘Techniques of persuasion.’(52).

Calvinists argue then that before the believer begins to follow voices and pictures in their minds as being from God, or take notice of feelings of power or tingling or other bodily effects such as great strength, that they need to exercise much caution, and need greater understanding if they are to protect themselves   from error.   Fundamentalist   conclusions   from Scripture show that unclean spirits can give a person information by revelation, they can cause them to hear soft, whispering voices, pleasant to hear, or authoritative voices giving commands, or voices like thunder or rushing waters. They may present dramatic pictures to a persons mind, whether they are awake or asleep, such that they “nay see white robed figures, or the cross, or the sky turning black and the moon becoming red as blood. There may be thundering and lightning, and a figure looking kind and compassionate, telling the person gently, that their sins are forgiven. The Bible may be quoted, giving the person specific commands or instruction, or giving comfort, and they may have all the attendant emotions that such images may give rise to. The person may have physical power and strength, speak with strange voices and actually perform extraordinary acts. Missionaries have reported these phenomena, together with conflict within the person, hostility to God and Scripture, heightened insight and sensitivity, tongue speaking, mental disturbances and gifts of healing. (53). Calvinists point out that it is not only non Christians who may be affected by such phenomena, but Christians too. The Apostles were tempted by Satan, and so was the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. (55). Jonathan Edwards, one of the leaders in the eighteenth century revival in America, noticed how easily well balanced Christians relied on inner voices and pictures brought to the mind in an extraordinary way, even when the results came to nothing. He saw these phenomena in all kinds of circumstances, and they came to nothing, even when they came to well respected, intelligent men of God, who were in close fellowship with God at the time. Verses of Scripture came to their minds that seemed most appropriate, and sometimes they came very quickly, one after the other, in a remarkable manner, but they came to nothing, the predictions failed, and the people so affected knew that they came to nothing.  (56). The belief that God normally guides His people by voices, visions and dreams has proved the undoing of many in church history, as, according to the Calvinist, unclean spirits can be so active in this area. (54)

Scripture informs the fundamentalist that in the last days, just before Christ returns, the world will be deceived by such demonic signs and wonders, and that one will set himself up as God, deceiving many with all power, signs and consciously intentionally false wonders. (57). It is predicted that just prior to the second coming of Christ, the world will be in a dire state. Satan will be unleashed for a short season, (58), and will conspire with anti Christian government and anti Christian religion to rise up against God, before finally being overthrown by Jesus.   (59).  An excellent fundamentalist commentary on these last things is ‘More than conquerors’ by William Hendriksen, published by Baker. (60) The Calvinist argues that it is not normal for those angels that did not rebel to intervene in the affairs of humankind. Though they too have superhuman powers, and may assist believers, they do not do so except when commanded or permitted by God. Angelic appearances usually mark the beginning of a new era in God’s plan, thus we read of Angels at the completion of creation, the giving of the law, the birth of Christ and the final judgement. (61).

The fundamentalists attitude to the devil and unclean spirits can vary considerably. For most Calvinists, there is little talk of demon possession or of oppression or temptation by spirits. Such talk tends to be focussed on Satan himself. Thus if an inner city church suffers from a spate of vandalism believers may say that ‘Satan is really having a go at our church’ or something similar. Quite why this explanation is given instead of the vandals having a fallen, sinful nature, which is in opposition to God, is rarely made clear. Satanic explanations are probably given for periods of intense or unusual difficulty, problems or opposition.  Thus satanic explanations may be given for people experiencing irrational or uncontrollable emotions and behaviour, especially if related to God or the gospel or other related areas. The lack in Scripture of clearly identifying and defining characteristics of demonic oppression and possession again causes problems. The Calvinist typically moves to the side of caution, human responsibility and self-control in the power of the Holy Spirit. The Calvinist is reluctant to speak readily of demon possession, but rather talks in terms of severe temptations and difficulties which may very generally be ascribed to Satan. Other fundamentalists however are bolder in their readiness to ascribe particular behaviours, emotions, thoughts and situations to the Devil or unclean spirits.   This   is an important difference   in fundamentalism, and very much frames the believers outlook and approach to certain issues.  Whilst the Calvinist may be struggling   against   a   temptation   to   adultery, other fundamentalists may be oppressed or possessed by an adulterous spirit, with all   that   such a belief implies.   Some fundamentalists do indeed place more emphasis on unclean spirits, such that they are surrounded and may be possessed by a spirit of greed, or a spirit of lust or a spirit of hate.

Personally, I consider this to be a misinterpretation of the word ‘spirit’ which we looked at in chapter one. There, I did not define spirit as ‘demon’, but as an inward disposition or inclination. Thus a person may have a spirit of jealousy, in other words, he may have a jealous temperament or easily become very jealous. Many fundamentalists would interpret this however as being oppressed or possessed by an unclean spirit or demon of jealousy. The Calvinist will not talk in terms of Christians being possessed by an unclean spirit.  This is considered impossible, because the Holy Spirit at and from conversion indwells the Christian. If Calvinists talk of anything in this area, they will talk of oppression, where the picture is of the spirit remaining outside the person but being particularly virulent and particular in its attacks on the believer. Such attacks are to be fought by self-discipline in the power of the Holy Spirit and by earnest prayer both secret and perhaps with others, but there is no move to ritualised prayer or formula.

For other fundamentalists, there may be a whole realm of demons attacking and possessing believers, which may require exorcism. The psychological implications of such a belief are profound as are implications for group control, where deviances from the norm or failure to comply may be interpreted not only as sin but the result of demonic possession from which deliverance is required. Similarly, a person in severe conflict and seeking to defend themselves from accusations of guilt may start shouting or covering their ears or some such similar defensive behaviour, and this may be interpreted as demonic possession.  We enter here a psychologically dangerous area which is open to considerable abuse by misguided or manipulative leaders. Again, there are no clear guidelines in Scripture as to how exorcisms are performed, other than by a command by a believer for spirits to come out of the person or as to how demon possession is verified.   It is a logical conclusion by some fundamentalists then that the ability to perceive whether or not a person is demon possessed is connected with revelation, and the discernment of spirits. Now here of course we enter even more dangerous ground, since someone can claim that God is speaking to them, and that they perceive that a person is demon possessed, and if they get the person concerned to submit to the ritual of exorcism, and sufficient people to help, then all kinds of harm may be done.

There have been a number of sad cases in this country of people being jailed for manslaughter or murder when carrying out a supposed exorcism. As I have just indicated, the indicators of such ‘demon possession’ may be no more than a simple resistance to the gospel, or reluctance to follow the fundamentalist interpretation of Scripture. If such ideas are presented more forcefully as a result of this resistance and if pressure of various kinds are put on the person for a response, then it would hardly be surprising that conflict would result, which of course would be taken as another sign of demon possession and so on. The fundamentalist believes strongly in the rightness of their beliefs and in the ‘fact’ that such ‘truths’ as they believe in are obvious, such that sin and the devil can be the only reasons in their minds as to why others do not accept the message of the gospel,

Unfortunately, psychology does not always help, even if it was embraced by fundamentalists, in that the very definition of ‘mental illness’ varies with discipline to discipline, and is often woolly and vague, being a loose term to cover unsocial, unconventional or undesirable behaviour as much as known biological disorders like schizophrenia.  A very tight definition of mental illness is required in this difficult area, one I suggest usually provided by the anti psychiatry movement, as being firmly rooted in biological dysfunction and properly identified as such. But this is easier said than done, and this very vagueness of the way in which lay people interpret the behaviour of others means that unconventional behaviour will tend to be labelled as mental illness, or by the fundamentalist as demon possession. Much exorcism is concerned with formulas, repetitive prayers, fasting, assertion, group dynamics and other practices which are dubious in that they have considerable psychological and physiological effects. In fact, these sorts of techniques are used in political ‘brainwashing’ and thought reform cults. (62). Since Scripture is predominately silent on this matter, the Calvinist wisely thinks that it is well left alone. But many fundamentalists do involve themselves in areas of demon possession.

The fundamentalist sees the world quite differently in a basic way from others who have no religious beliefs.  For the fundamentalist, every event and act has a purpose. God is working His purpose out as year succeeds to year, and, certainly for the Calvinist, there is no such thing as luck, or chance. Everything is determined by God, and organised by Him to work out His ultimate purpose. Plus, all around, there is a spiritual warfare, as unseen forces are in conflict with God and the believer. Behind the visible, material world, powerful invisible beings are at work. As events take place, especially in the believer’s personal world, they may be explained in terms of these beings and their purposes. A brick thrown through a church window is not mere vandalism, but the work of Satan. Someone falling and breaking an ankle is not simply an accident but will be explained in terms of God’s will or Satan’s opposition.  Similarly, resistance to belief and unusual behaviours are often classified in this way, providing a simple but potentially dangerous categorisation which is aggravated by a vagueness and lack of clarity in Scripture.  I will return to this theme later, but now I want to move on to the area of spiritual gifts themselves.

CHAPTER THREE REFERENCES

1)      Argyle, M. & Beit-Hallahami, B (1975)’The social psychology of religion’ Routledge Kegan

        and Paul p. l3.

2) Mark 1 v 13

    Matthew 4 v 10

    Mark 3 v 23

    Matthew 16 v 23

3) Mark 1 v 26

    Luke 4 v 35

    Acts 8 v 7

    Mark 5 v 8,13.

    Luke 6 v 18

    Luke 8 v 30-33

4) Matthew 4 v 24

5) Psalm 148 v 2,5

6) Hebrews I v 4

7) Matthew 24 v 36

    Psalm 103 v 20

    II Thessalonians I v 7

    II Peter 2 v 11

8) Revelation 5 v 11

9) Genesis I v 31

10) II Peter 2 v 4

      Jude v 6

      Isaiah 14 v 12-15

11) Luke 8 v 31

      Matthew 12 v 43

      Revelation 9 v 1

12) Job I v 16,19

13) Job 2 v 1-7

      Mark I v 26

      Luke 4 v 35

      Acts 8 v 7

      Matthew 9 v 32-34

      Matthew 12 v 22

      Luke 9 v 39

      Luke 13 v 11,16

14) Mark 5 v 3-5

15) Mark 5 v 6

      Mark 5 v 15

16) I Samuel 18 v 10

17) I Kings 22 v 20-22

18) Acts 16 v 16

19) Exodus 7 v 11,12,20-22.

      Exodus 8 v 6,7.

20) Matthew 12 v 43

21) Mark 5 v 9

      Luke 8 v 2

22) Genesis 3 v 1

23) Matthew 4 v 1,5,6. Compare with Psalm 91 v 11,12.

24) Isaiah 44 v 24

      Matthew 3 v 9

      Psalm 115 v 3

      Ephesians I v 11

      Romans I v 24,26,28.

25) Revelation 20 v 1-3

26) Judges 9 v 23

27) I Kings 21 v 23

28) I Samuel 16 v 14

29) Mark I v 24

      Mark 3 v 11

      Mark 7 v 25

      Luke 4 v 34

30) Mark 5 v 12, 13

31) Job I v 15-19

32) Mark 6 v 7

33) Luke 9 v 40,41

34) Acts 19 v 13-15

35) Romans 5 v 12-14

36) Genesis 3 v 17,18

      Romans 8 v 22

37) Whitcomb, John C. (1986) ‘The early Earth’ Baker Book House.

38) Philippians 2 v 12,13

39) Colossians 3 v 12- Ch 4 v 6

      I Thessalonians 5 v 8-22

      I Peter 1 v 13-16

40) Genesis 3 v 1-24

41) Luke 22 v 3

     John 13 v 27

42) Acts 5 v 1-11

43) Acts 4 v 31-37

44) Ephesians 6 v 10-18

45) I Thessalonians 2 v 18

46) Dallimore, A. (1970) ‘George Whitefield’ Vol 1. Banner of Truth Trust p. 327.

47) Warfield.B.B. ‘Counterfeit Miracles ‘ Banner of Truth Trust p. 142.

48) Edwards, J. (1974) Works vol. 1 Banner of Truth Trust ‘On the religious affections’.

49) Deuteronomy 13 v 1-5

50) Leviticus 19 v 31

      Leviticus 20 v 6

      II Kings 21 v 2,6.

      I Samuel 28 v 6,7.

      Isaiah 8 v 19,20

      I John 4 v 1-5

51) Leahy, F.S. (1975) ‘Satan cast out’. Banner of Truth Trust. p.l25.

52) Brown, J.A.C. (1963) ‘Techniques of persuasion’ Pelican

53) Leahy, F.S. (1975) ‘Satan cast out’. Banner of Truth Trust. p.l28

54) Luke 22 v 31, 40

      Ephesians 6 v 11

      Acts 5 v 3-5

55) Matthew 4 v 1-11

56) Edwards, J. (1974) ‘Thoughts on the revival’ Works vol. 1 Banner of Truth Trust, p 404

57) II Thessalonians 2 v 9

      Revelation 13 v 11-15

      Matthew 24 v 24

58) Revelation 13 v 4-15

      Revelation 20 v 1-3

      Matthew 24 v 25

59) Revelation 11 v 18

      Revelation 20 v 9-15

60) Psalm 103 v 20

      Psalm 104 v 4

      Revelation 14 v 18

      Matthew 28 v 2

      I Kings 19 v 5

      Psalm 91 v 11

      Hebrews I v 14

      Job 38 v 7

      Galatians 3 v 19

      Luke 2 v 13

      Matthew 25 v 31

61) Hendriksen, W. (1980) ‘More than conquerors’ Baker book House

62) Hassan, S. (1990) ‘Combating cult mind control’ Park Street Press.

      Lifton, R.J. (1967) ‘Thought reform and the psychology of totalism’ Penguin.

GOD GIVEN GIFTS: AN OVERVIEW.

Having taken a general look at the nature of man, and false influences, and also looked at unclean spirits, from a fundamentalist, and particularly Calvinist viewpoint we are now ready to take an overview of what fundamentalists consider to be God given gifts. These gifts are given to the Universal Church, which consists of individual believers throughout the gospel age who have repented of sin, and are exercising faith in Christ for salvation, and who, preferably, have been baptised. The word church is also used in a local sense whereby believers are found joining together in a specific location for worship and fellowship. This congregation is described as being like a human body. (l) There are many members in a body, hands, arms, feet, e.t.c., all having different roles and functions, but nevertheless, one body. So too the local fellowship is made up of a diversity of individuals, but they have one God, one Lord, one faith. Thus there is unity in diversity, any division being tempered by seeking after love. (2). Each individual seeks to exercise the gifts they have been given by God, for the edification and up building of the whole body.

GIFTS TO THE CHURCH.

(i) UNIVERSAL GIFTS TO THE CHURCH.

We can interpret Scripture as declaring that God gives many gifts universally to the Church. The chief gifts are the gifts of Christ’s life as a ransom, (3), and connected closely with that, the gift of living water, (4), the Bread of Life, (5) and eternal life, (6) It is also a gift to be able to come to Jesus for salvation, for no one comes unless it is given. (7). Thus Jesus   is   able   to   give   knowledge   of   salvation   and forgiveness, (8), and to the disciples, and to varying degrees, all believers, knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven. (9).  Also, the gift of the Holy Spirit Himself is given. (10).  From the indwelling of the Holy Spirit follow various unique influences on all believers such as the sealing, witnessing, earnest and leading of the Spirit, some of which are given in varying degrees. These gifts are universal to all New Testament believers, and those who are outside the Kingdom of God cannot partake of them, because they are not given to any but the elect. In addition to these universal gifts to believers, God, gives other gifts to the Church, as He pleases, to whom He pleases.

(ii) GIFTS DISTRIBUTED ACCORDING TO GOD’S PLEASURE.

These gifts, referred to mainly in I Corinthians are called spirituals.  In this context, spirituals refer to those qualities and persons given by God, to the Church. God has given spirituals, according to His sovereign mercy and they proceed from God, rather than man. The word ‘spiritual’ convey the idea of invisibility and power proceeding from a spirit being. It is easy here to fall into a dichotomy between natural and supernatural gifts, as though natural gifts are not from God, but arise by natural or ordinary means, but this I think is a mistake. The usual means that God uses is through nature. God does not work against nature, or promote that which is unnatural.  The unnatural, such as unnatural relations of homosexuality, (as Scripture defines it) are always condemned by God. Many gifts, though from God, are given by natural means. The gift of teaching is an example, whereby the skill and craft of teaching has to some extent been learned, yet we might call the person a natural or gifted teacher. So too with Bezaleel in Exodus, who was gifted in arts and crafts with wood, precious stones, e.t.c., and chosen to build the Tabernacle. (11). God may, however, transcend nature. He is not confined to it’s laws, and may, at extraordinary times and seasons, or for special reasons, provide SUPERnatural or miraculous gifts, usually with the specific aim of drawing attention to a person, or delivering them, or giving a sign.

THEIR PURPOSE:

These spirituals were given at the establishment of the New Testament Church, (the word is a post Pentecost word), for the making fit, complete adjustment and full preparation of those who are set apart by God, that is, the elect, in an implied process leading to consummation. They are given for the work of service and the building of the Universal Church as a body of God’s elect, until they all attain unity of faith, knowledge of the Son of God, and reach mature manhood to the stature of the fullness of Christ so that they are not tossed about by every wind of doctrine or by cunning lies. (12) Some, as we shall see in the next chapter, are given to show that God is with certain people, to give authority to their words and teaching, and promote acceptance of a new order of things following Pentecost.  They are truly given, and cannot be created or worked up or learned by the Church. There is no formula or procedure given to guarantee receiving any of the spirituals. Spirituals are sometimes called gifts, or charismata to the Universal Church. Charismata are gifts of God’s free grace, an unmerited kindness by God to the Church. (13).  They are spiritual because they proceed from God, Who is a spirit Being.

THEIR DESCRIPTION:

There are diversities of spiritual gifts, favours or kindnesses from God, but the same Spirit that gives them all. (14).

There are also diversities of administrations. The word here is the same as that for deacon. It means service, ministry. The word is used widely, referring to servants, waiting at tables, (15), preparing food, (16) and serving in the church in particular. (17). It refers to attending to anything that may serve another’s interests, (18) in a variety of ways. (19) However, though distinctions can be made between different ways of service, there is the same Lord. (20)

There are also diversities of operations. This is from a word meaning energy, and refers to what is wrought, the effect produced by energy, or by Chat which is operative and working, in this case. God. (21). Though there are distinctive effects and outworkings of that energy, it is the same God working all in all.

These spiritual gifts to the Church are listed in Scripture, generally the foremost gifts first, descending to secondary ones, though the types of list given vary. Sometimes it is the gift that is referred to, at other times, the person. Hence, sometimes it is prophets, at other times, prophecy. Both the influence and the persons are gifts to the Universal Church.

In approximate order they include:-

 1) Apostles

 2) Prophets

 3) Evangelists

 4) Pastors

 5) Teachers

 6) Exhorters

 7) Word of Wisdom

 8) Word of Knowledge

 9) Working of Miracles

10) Faith

11) Healing

12) Helps

13) Governments

14) Rulers / Overseers

15) Ministry

16) Mercy

17) Giving

18) Discerning of spirits

19) Tongue speaking

20) Interpretation

21) Continence

22) Casting out of demons

23) Receiving of certain truths

(Ephesians 4 v 11,1 Corinthians 12 v 28-30, Romans 12 v 6-8, I Peter 4 v 10,11, Acts 16 v 18, I Corinthians 7 v 7, Matthew19 v 11, Matthew 10 v 1).

In more detail, the gifts of God to the Universal Church are: -

1) APOSTLES. An Apostle is a delegate, one sent forth with orders. Christ is the chief Apostle (22), then come the ‘twelve’ and then the post Pentecost Apostles of Paul, (23), James, (24) Barnabas, (25) and Andronicus and Juntas, (26). These Apostles were made and sent forth by Christ, and had signs and tokens in their lives by which they were made known. They were constant and steadfast in their purpose, even under the greatest of trials, performing deeds so strange as to cause them to be watched, performing portents and miracles with power. (27). Their purpose was to lay the foundation of the New Testament Church. The Calvinist argues that there appears to be a distinction between Apostles and Elders. (28).

Qualifications for an Apostle appear to be: -

i)                   A direct call from God for them to be Apostles. (29)

ii)                  They had to see the Lord Jesus Christ and be an eyewitness to His resurrection. (30).

iii)                They had an ability to pass on gifts to others by laying on hands. (31).

iv)                Their task was to lay the foundation of the New Testament Church by God’s Word which they could distinguish from their own. (32).

v)                 Their lives were consistent with the teaching of the Lord Jesus and Scripture.

The Calvinist, but not all fundamentalists, argue that this gift has ceased.

2) PROPHETS.  A prophet is one who speaks out, from the Greek word meaning ‘to divulge, make known, announce’. They speak as the result of an extraordinary impression made upon them by the Holy Spirit.  Thus they are spokes persons for God for the Church’s benefit. Sometimes the gift is referred to as prophecy, that is by the act rather than the person. This is an extraordinary influence, and not the product of self-effort. It is not a preacher or teacher delivering a message or sermon that is the product of their own reason and intuition on known truth. The source of the prophet’s message is the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It is by this means that the fundamentalist believes Scripture was given to us, the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, or prophetic paradigm.  Prophecy, according to the fundamentalist, may take the form of an exhortation, encouragement, prayer or song. A prophet is the mouthpiece of God, one who forth tells the word of God, the main purpose being the edification of the church. (33). Again, there can be an overlapping of the gifts, such that prophecy may contain a prediction, or a word of knowledge and or wisdom. Prophecy may be the declaration of known information, such as Scripture, but as inspired by the Holy Spirit, and therefore spoken at the right time, and with authority and power. Scripture is full of examples of prophecy. (34).  But prophecy is not limited to theological or ‘spiritual’ matters. Thus Agabus, a prophet from Jerusalem, foretells a famine by the Holy Spirit. (Acts 11 v 27,28). Neither do predictions always fall out correctly. For example, Jonah predicted the destruction of Nineveh, but since they repented, the destruction did not take place, despite the prophecy. Those other than fundamentalists have pointed out the conditional nature of many prophesies, which are usually moral and religious statements, with the assertion that God stands behind such views expressed by the prophets. Furthermore it can also be pointed out that such prophecies do not always fall out as predicted. Compare the prophecy about the fall of Tyre in Ezekiel 26 v 9-14 with the apparent failure of this in Ezekiel 29 v 17-20. Fundamentalists however hold a view of prophecy which in their view is central to inspiration and inerrancy.

I have already indicated that for the Calvinist, the gift of Apostle has ceased, and this is because the qualifications Calvinists give for it can no longer be fulfilled. The gift of a prophet is less certain. Certainly, just because a person has an extraordinary influence doesn’t mean that they become the resident prophet.  The very term implies a continuing gift rather than a one off experience. The test of a prophet is not only the influence they receive, but also their teaching, which must conform to the Scriptures, not only in the gift itself, but also as regards their belief and practice.  Deuteronomy 13 v 1-5. If the gift continues, it is a very high gift, and not one to be assumed lightly. Neither does it confer absolute authority, for everything must be tested by the Scriptures, and people should follow the prophet only as far as the prophet follows Christ and conforms to Scripture, which for the fundamentalist is the absolute authority.

3) EVANGELISTS. An evangelist is a bringer of good tidings, an announcer of good news, especially of the Kingdom of God, salvation through Christ and things relating to this salvation. He would probably be a man of high standing, possessing Eldership qualities, because he establishes new churches and ordains Elders there. (35).  Philip was an evangelist after initially being elected deacon (36) and then being scattered with the disciples by reason of persecution. (37). Timothy was also an Evangelist. (38). Initial evangelism was carried out in the synagogues.

4) PASTORS. A pastor is one who is as a shepherd of believers. The word is often used in connection with guardianship. (39)

5) TEACHERS. Self evidently, a teacher is one fitted to teach the things of God for the building up and edifying of the church. He is one who holds discourse with others in order to teach or instruct them. This is a role often taken by Elders, but it is by no means limited to them. Christians who are not Elders or Deacons may teach. Even so, for many fundamentalists, handling of the Word of God is an awesome thing, not to be taken lightly. Indeed, it part of the basis of conservative evangelicalism to preserve their tradition of Biblical interpretation.  Only those likely to maintain this  ‘sound’ tradition are given the role of teaching. Scripture counsels that not many should seek to teach. (40)

6) EXHORTERS.  A person enabled by the Spirit to give encouragement and exhortation to the church in the things of God. They may call on and entreat the fellowship, admonish, or urge on to some course of action, looking to the future, especially in the light of Scripture.

7) WORD OF WISDOM. A revelation by the Holy Spirit of the mind and purposes of God, His will, commands and plans. We should notice straight away that the word used in the Greek is a widely used word, with many meanings, so its particular meaning in any passage is best understood by looking at the context. The fundamentalist declares straight away that this influence does not refer to a person’s natural wisdom being enhanced and purified by God. It does not refer Co skill in interpreting the Scriptures correctly, or in helping and advising people on spiritual matters. Neither is it a skill at managing meetings. Rather, they say, the wisdom that is referred to here is God’s wisdom, given to man as a gift. This wisdom consists of the Holy Spirit revealing to a person the mind and purposes of God, His will, commands and plans. Importantly again, it is the same means by which, the fundamentalist believes.  Scripture was given to us, though in the case of Scripture, the fundamentalist argues that the Holy Spirit also restrained the sinful influences of the writer’s fallen nature, which if not restrained, would have corrupted the gift, preventing inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture.  Thus the Scriptures are described as the oracles of God. (41). So it is that the word of wisdom reveals to us vital spiritual truths and the sovereign purposes of God, giving us doctrines, commands and principles to live by, together with God’s purposes and plans for the future. By this influence, Noah was warned of the flood, (42), believers in the early church were prepared for an approaching famine, (43), leaders were called and confirmed, like Paul, (44), Moses, (45) and David. (46).  Specific plans were given, (47), sin was judged, (48), blessings revealed, (49) and comfort given. (50).

8) WORD OF KNOWLEDGE A revelation by the Holy Spirit of hidden Information, past, present, future or spiritual.  For the fundamentalist, this does not refer to a person’s knowledge obtained by natural ability, even if that knowledge concerns Scripture carefully studied and examined. Rather, it is an extraordinary knowledge, information given to us by God that we could not possibly know except by revelation, by God revealing it to us. It may inform us of events past, present or future or reveal hidden, spiritual things. It is obviously very closely connected to the word of wisdom, but wisdom appears as the higher gift, implying not only a knowledge of information, but in addition, a gift of being able to use and practically apply such information.  I think that for our purposes, it is a technicality to draw hard and fast lines in this matter, and in this context, not particularly profitable.  The information given to us by a word of knowledge would be pertinent and important for the recipient, and thus we find examples like Mary and Joseph being warned about Herod in a dream, (51), and Paul being warned of the storm that was to cause a shipwreck. (52). We may also find the true characteristics of a person being revealed instead of the outward appearance. (53).

9) WORKING OF MIRACLES. This is a gift of power whereby the laws of nature are controlled, interrupted or suspended and is usually given as a sign that may cause people to see the power and majesty of God, (54).  It may confirm the gospel and establish faith, (55), provide for those in need, (56) deliver from danger, (57) or bring judgement. (58).

10) HEALERS Those who by a working of the Spirit are able to heal the sick of all kinds of illnesses, from mild to severe. In the Greek, the word is plural, so, properly it is the gift of healings. For the fundamentalist, this gift is not a skill in normal medical practice. The work of doctors, surgeons and nurses are not to be ignored, as these are the normal means of healing, but there may, occasionally be an extraordinary healing from God. Many quote the passage in James 5 v 13-16, as a formula for healing, whereby Elders, laying on hands and praying in faith heal the sick. Yet despite the fact that people seem to fulfil these qualities and conditions, the healings often fail to materialise, producing instead, doubt and uncertainty. People have believed James’s word as intensely as possible, and everything commanded has been done, but the person concerned has not been healed. For the Calvinist, there is obviously there is something wrong with that interpretation of the passage. There is a similar passage in Mark 11 v 22-24 that is also wrongly interpreted. We must ask, what is this prayer of faith? What is this ability to heal? Sincere and thoughtful believers realise that they cannot bring themselves to the persuasion that someone is going to be healed. They cannot force themselves or work themselves up to this belief. This is something that is given by the Holy Spirit, and when He gives it, there is no doubt or uncertainty. When the Apostles healed, they never announced beforehand that they were going to heal. They were not like modern faith healers who announce special meetings. Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones considered that the reason for this was that they did not know beforehand when the Lord would heal. They did not have a permanent power and turn it on. (59). Look at Paul in Acts 14 v 8-10. He did not know until he saw the man that he would heal him by God’s power.

Also notice, that after Pentecost, the Apostles never failed in their healings. The power of healing is not simply given to the Church such that believers simply have to exercise it or claim it as their power and act upon it. Rather, like the gift of faith, it is given to individuals at specific times to heal a specific person. Here, fundamentalists are divided. Many do regard the gift as being resident in the church or believer, and that it has to be claimed, or faith worked up to bring it into effect. Calvinists take the position of Dr. Lloyd-Jones, whereas many Pentecostals and charismatics do not. According to Scripture, this gift may heal mild or severe, physical or mental illness or deformity.

11) FAITH A confidence given by God to meet a specific need, or to protect or deliver a person in trial or assist in difficulty, based firmly on a clear perception of God’s ability and character, and His willingness to assist in a particular instance.  There are a number of different kinds of faith mentioned in Scripture, so we should be clear as to what this gift of faith is, and what it is not.  The faith that is referred to here is not saving faith, that is, the faith that enables a person to trust in Christ for salvation from future judgement. Saving faith is continuous, but the faith described here is temporary, and for a specific purpose and instance. Neither is it the fruit of faith. It is not the result of growth in the Christian life or the application of knowledge and saving faith. Neither is this faith a product of natural ability, or even spiritual ability on the part of the believer. This faith cannot be created or worked up by the believer, but rather, it is a gift, given to a person by the sovereign will of God. This gift of faith is an extraordinary confidence given by the Holy Spirit to meet a specific need, and those needs may be very varied. It has a firm basis in the perception of the power, ability and character of God as able to deal with a specific problem, together with an assurance that He is going to deal with it. Thus, Moses and Aaron have the confidence to obey God to give Pharaoh a demonstration of power, (60), by throwing down the rod where it would be turned into a serpent. They had a confidence that this would take place. So also Paul, who had confidence of a safe deliverance from the storm threatening to engulf everyone on the ship. (61). There is a whole list of those given extraordinary faith in Hebrews 11 v 17-39. The gift of faith often works in conjunction with other gifts, such that one has confidence to act on information which is hidden from others, or one may receive comfort when there is no obvious reason externally for such a comfort as far as others can see, and so on.

12) HELPS From a word meaning to lay hold of so as to support. A gift from the Spirit involving anything to help and support he poor and weak, especially in the Church.

13) GOVERNMENT.  From a word meaning piloting, steering, directing. God has gives to the Church those who are able to guide and direct the Church according to God’s purpose and glory. (62)

14) RULERS. Those who, by a gift of God, preside, stand before and lead the fellowship with care and diligence. (63)

15) MINISTRY. A gift of service in all its wide forms, in the church, for the benefit and up building of the Church. There is an interesting reference in the Old Testament to Bezalel, (64) who was filled by God’s Spirit with wisdom, that is, skill and dexterity, understanding   or   insight, knowledge, and workmanship, or ministry or service especially as an artisan in gold, silver, brass, stone cutting and wood carving. This was for the specific purpose of making the Ark of the Covenant. Thus, whilst spirituals are not specifically mentioned in the Old Testament, this kind of influence forms a preview of the kinds of influence that will be poured out on the Church under the New Covenant. Whilst in this list of gifts, there is no reference to gifts of carpenters, fishermen, and tax gatherers e.t.c. it does seem as though God may give a person gifts which encompass various craft and other skills, which may be of service to the Church, and which would fall under this heading of ministry.

16) MERCY.  A gift of feeling sympathy with the misery of another, especially sympathy manifested in action, and given with readiness of mind.

17) GIVING.  A gift of sharing, and imparting simply and sincerely, without affectation, especially for the up building of the Church.

18) DISCERNING OF SPIRITS   This influence is not one of criticism or finding fault in others, neither is it normal spiritual discernment, whereby we assess the spiritual position of others.  (65).  Nor is it spiritualism or other occult practices which are condemned in Scripture. (66) Rather, this is an extraordinary gift, whereby through the power of the Holy Spirit, a person may see into the spirit world, past present or future, revealing good or unclean spirits.

19) TONGUE SPEAKERS. This is an ability to speak in a tongue or language that is unknown to the speaker by normal means. It is the result of the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Sometimes, this has been a powerful gift in spreading the gospel, where foreigners hear the message in their own tongue. (67). Where it is not understood by those who hear it, it is a blessing to the speaker, but confusing to listeners. (68). Scripture does not say whether this is limited to an earthly language or whether heavenly language may be used as well, but many consider this gift to include an ecstatic or heavenly language. The idea that this tongue is heavenly is drawn from implications in I Corinthians 14, but it must be said that Scripture gives no evidence of heavenly tongue speaking, either in the Old or New Testaments. The word ‘glossa’ used to describe this gift is never used in the sense of heavenly language, but only earthly language, and the only clear descriptions of tongue speaking, in Acts 2 v 6-11 and Acts 10 v 46 definitely refer to human language. There appears therefore to be no warrant to consider these tongues as heavenly or ecstatic. There is no place for tongue speaking unless there is an interpreter. Paul placed great emphasis on understanding as we shall see, and to speak in a foreign tongue without interpretation was not profitable.  The giving of tongues appears to be a fulfilment of Isaiah 28 v 11,12. This is addressed to rebellious Jews, who have been given plain revelation, yet have refused to listen. God declares that He will give the message in another language, though even then they will not repent. Thus, at Pentecost, revelation was given in the language of the Gentiles as a sign of the judgement of God which was about to fall on the Jews. Thus, it is a sign to UNBELIEVERS, to disobedient Israel, that God is with someone, (Acts 2 v 22, 10 v 38, John 3 v 2, 9 v 33, II Corinthians 12 v 12). There is no evidence that it has been subsequently used as a missionary tool to preach to foreigners.

20) INTERPRETERS. Those who have a gift from the Holy Spirit to interpret and explain a message given to the fellowship in another language, into a coherent language, without such an ability being learned.

21) CONTINENCE. A gift of being able to restrain from natural sexual relations in marriage in order to give oneself over to service to the Lord. (69) Even this saying and precept cannot be accepted except God gives it. (70).

22) POWER TO CAST OUT DEMONS. The power to cast out unclean spirits who have possessed or indwell a person, and thus deliver them from the influence of these spirit beings. This appears to be a gift of authority, (71), and is not limited to the twelve, (72). It is implied that faith is very much involved in this ability, (73), together with prayer, (74). To presume this gift can be dangerous. (75).

23) RECEIVING OF CERTAIN TRUTHS. As indicated in 21 above, certain sayings, precepts and truths cannot be accepted or thoroughly believed unless the power to receive is given by God.

These gifts are given to the Universal Church to benefit it as a whole. When the body of believers come together, when each part is working properly, exercising their gifts, then there is growth and building up in love, and addition of new members. It should be noted however that these gifts are distinct from spiritual, social and moral obligations. Hospitality, love for one’s neighbour, obedience to civil authorities are not described as spirituals, for example, though Christians are encouraged to practice these things. Gifts are also distinct from the fruit of the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit is Love, Joy, Peace, Longsuffering, Gentleness, Goodness, Faith, Meekness, and Temperance. (76). Without the co exercising of the fruit of the Spirit, gifts may be reduced to nothing because of sin. (77)

A DIVISION OF GIFTS.

It can be seen that gifts do not readily fall into those belonging to Elders, and others for deacons and yet others for other believers. Neither is there a fixed and obvious line between natural and supernatural gifts. Rather the point of division is hazy and vague.  But all are special in that God gives them, but some appear to transcend ordinary means of nature and or knowledge. How then do these gifts come?

HOW ARE EXTRAORDINARY GIFTS COMMUNICATED?

Some of them come in the form of a burden from the Lord, (78), such that a persons mind and spirit is weighed down and that to keep silent creates only a burning in them. (79). There may be a voice in our mind or spirit, which does not seem to be the product of our own reasoning, or from Satan, (80). Rarely, there may even be an audible voice. (81). Some may come in the form of a vision, which may, in some cases cause the person to be oblivious of their surroundings, (82) putting them into a different state of consciousness. (83).  In other cases the person may still be aware of their surroundings. Visions may come while the person is asleep, in the form of a dream. (84). Also, visions and dreams may come in symbolic form, requiring another to interpret. (85). This symbolism itself may be distinctive and like that used in Scripture. There may be a heightening of insight and perception of spiritual things, as if a veil has been lifted such that one can see clearly and to a greater depth, making things appear certain and sure. This perception may be so powerful as to cause physical and emotional effects. See for example, the experiences of Mrs. Edwards, the   wife   of   New England minister Jonathan Edwards. (86). There may be an awareness of power, say to heal, coupled with these effects.  Though powerful, yet there is usually a sublime quality, based on discoveries of the character of God, which accompanies the influence, taking away any fear concerning the influence’s power and force. Thus, in the revival of 1859 in Wales, Mr. Thomas John declares solemnly that he saw not one of the thousand or so people at a meeting and says, ‘ I saw no one but God. I am going home, how terrible is this place! It is too terrible for me. My flesh is too weak to bear this weight of glory…’. His use of the word terrible refers not to any fear of the experience, but rather a very sobering and weighty discovery of God and His glory. (87). It appears that an altered consciousness may be present in these influences, whereby a persons awareness of spiritual things is so great as to cause a lack of awareness of other things. The passage in II Corinthians 12 v 1-4 is interesting in this respect. It is considered by many commentators that Paul is talking of himself here, and he says that God revealed things to him that cannot be told, which a man may not utter. He had an abundance of revelations (v7). He says that he was caught up to the third heaven, to paradise, and whether he was in the body or not he could not tell! Such was the abounding effect of this blessing, that he no longer knew whether he was in the body or not. Peter also had a vision when in a trance. (88).

What exactly is meant by ‘caught up’, and ‘trance’? The word used for ‘caught up’ means to seize on, to claim for oneself eagerly, to snatch out or away. It is written in a passive tense, which means that Paul did not catch himself or seize himself, but rather that it was done to him. Paul was passive, he did not follow a ritual or routine to get himself in this state, but rather, the Spirit caught him up. We can see by the words used that this is powerful, possibly sudden, and given, as I have shown with the rest of the gifts. Paul did not go through exercises or effort to achieve this state. The word ‘trance’ means a casting down of a thing from its proper place or state, a displacement, a throwing of the mind out of its normal state, alienation of mind, (89), and has with it the same implications as Paul’s phrase in Corinthians.

THE DISTRIBUTION OF GIFTS.

According to the Calvinist interpretation of Scripture, these gifts are given, by God’s sovereign pleasure to the Universal Church throughout the gospel age, in varying degrees. From this it should be noted: -

a)      Each local church does not have all the gifts. (90) God gave to the Church gifts, including Apostles, yet Apostles have now ceased. Gifts are given to the Universal Church, which has received the gift of Apostles as a foundation, though many local churches did not have an Apostle, and now Apostles are no longer present. The reference cannot be to the local church.

b)      No one person has all the gifts. (91).

c)      It appears (92) that each person has a gift, some after this manner, and some after that. Here Paul is referring to continence, and saying that though as a personal preference, he would prefer all men to be unmarried, continence is a gift that not all men have, nevertheless, EACH HAS HIS GIFT FROM GOD.

The only conclusion must be that the scope of these gifts is very wide as indicated under ministry, above. Every person has at least one gift, and to say that one has no gift is to say that one has no use, value or purpose in the Church, and no part whatsoever in contributing to it.  It is either to misconceive one’s abilities or for the Church to fail to recognise them, or both. The Corinthians were boasting of their privileges, wisdom, and there was dissension, some were of Paul and others of Appolos, and so on, and they were judgemental of those with lesser qualities.   But Paul, after drawing illustrations from the lives of the Apostles says, ‘What have you that you did not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift?’. (93) It does appear that the Sovereign predestinating power of God orders all the circumstances, abilities, powers, skills, wisdom and personality of Christians, such that they are a gift, yet in such a way as not to remove the believer’s accountability to God.

GIFTS AS A DIVISIVE INFLUENCE.

I CORINTHIANS 12-13 EXAMINED.

We have now seen the types of influence that Scripture declares that God can give, and something of the manner in which they come. We can get further insight on these influences from the largest section in Scripture that deals with these influences which is found in I Corinthians chapters 12-14. For the moment, we shall look at the first two of these chapters. The Apostle introduces this section by saying that he does not want the Corinthian Christians to be ignorant about spiritual gifts and he proceeds to give them teaching. He lays down a general principle that can be used to distinguish genuine gifts from false experiences, in verse three, and I shall look at this later.

He then goes on to explain in verses 4-11 that there are a variety of gifts, as we have seen, but that they have one Author, one Inspirer, and that is God the Holy Spirit. (verses 4-6).  He then tells them that these manifestations of the Spirit are given for the common good. They are not given to boost the spirituality or pride of the person concerned, but to further the cause of the gospel, to make war with sin and the Devil, to edify, build up and protect the Church of Christ. He then lists the gifts, and explains, in verse 11, that one God; one Spirit inspires all these gifts and gives them to individuals as He pleases. Not everyone has a particular gift, but rather, different people have different gifts, and they are given according to the pleasure of God. As far as the Calvinist is concerned, they are not resident in the Church, in believers, to be claimed or worked up by faith. They are given to whom God pleases as He pleases. To illustrate this point, the Apostle makes an analogy in verses 12-26. He says that the Church is like a human body, in that a body is made up of many different parts and members, such as arms, lags, feet e.t.c., which together make up a unified whole, one body. The Church is made up of many different types of people, with different ages, backgrounds, temperaments, skills and positions in life. But all these people come together to make a unified whole, one Church, having one God and Spirit. Then he goes to show how ridiculous and tragic it would be if the body was made up of just one member, if the body was just a foot or an eye. It would take away the effectiveness of the body. No part of the body is so important or self sufficient as to be able to do away with or discard the rest of the members. Rather, the body is made up of many members, each being important, and contributing to make the whole body, that works effectively. Some parts may look nicer than others, some may be more honourable than others, but every part is important, and contributes to the whole. From verses   24-26, Paul tells us that God has deliberately designed the body in this way, giving greatest honour to the inferior members, that there may BE NO DIVISION in the body, and that more than that, the body cares for itself. If one part of the body suffers, all suffer, and if one is honoured, all rejoice together. We know for example that when we get a bad headache, our entire body can begin to suffer.

Now, why all this talk about the body? Why, when Paul has introduced a section on spiritual gifts, does he go on to talk about the body and its members? I suggest that the key is found in verse 25, and in the section that we are about to look at. There was division in the body of the church at Corinth, and it was caused by a misuse and misunderstanding of spiritual gifts. So the Apostle begins to apply this teaching about the body in verses 27-31. He says to the Corinthians, ‘You are the body of Christ, and members in particular’. He then lists a hierarchy of gifts and roles, saying that some are more important, more honoured than others, and that not everyone has the highest gifts. It seems as though all of the Corinthian Christians wanted the best gifts only, to the point of looking down at those with lesser gifts, or no extraordinary gifts, as inferior. They felt that they could do without them. They only wanted the most excellent gifts. They all wanted to be apostles and prophets. Paul’s illustration shows the absurdity of their actions, because the normal body does not make war with itself, and neither should the Church. The implication is that every church member is important, even though different members have different gifts, some of which may be higher than others. Even the lesser gifts are important and go to make up the whole body. Paul does not need to go into more detail; the mistake is obvious, verses 28-30, just as God has designed the human body to be comprised of many members, so in the same way He has designed the Church. Just as the body is not an eye or a leg, so the Church is not just Apostles. The Apostle acknowledges that the Corinthians were right to eagerly desire the best gifts, but then, he goes on to show them a better way, verse 31. You are right to seek the best gifts says Paul, but look where it is getting you. You have division and argument because there is something lacking. Let me show you a better way to go about it.

This better way he begins to describe in chapter thirteen. It is of course the complete antidote to division, the way of love. In verses 1-3, he shows that no matter what gifts a man may have, if he does not have love, he is as nothing. He may prophesy, speak in tongues, have extraordinary knowledge or faith, give all his possessions to the poor or even become a martyr, but if he does not have love, it would be a waste of time. In effect, Paul is saying to the Corinthians, ‘You can squabble for the gifts if you like, but there is so much bitterness, pride, hatred and envy involved, that by the time you have finished, no one will listen to you. You are behaving like the unbeliever, but you are different, you are born again, indwelt by God and new creatures in Christ. You are in the world, but no longer of it, and your lives should reflect that. Stir up the gift of love within you, and let it permeate your actions.’. Paul describes the qualities of this love from verse 4 onwards, and as we look at these qualities, we soon see that they reflect the character of God. These qualities are the tendencies and influences of grace in the Christian life, such as longsuffering, kindness, an absence of envy and pride. It means that a person is not easily provoked, and refuses to entertain evil, but rather desires to behave in a manner that is pleasing to God. As the Calvinist sees it, the Corinthians had not fallen from grace, but rather were not putting into practice the grace and power that God had given them. Living the Christian life is regarded by the Calvinist as a co-working with God. There is effort required on the believer’s part, but the Corinthians had given way to selfishness and pride.

From verse 8, Paul goes on to show the superiority of Divine love over and against gifts. ‘You really want the best gifts?’ says Paul. ‘Well, Divine love is better than the best gifts.’. Love will never collapse or suffer ruin, but gifts will be rendered useless. Why will gifts be rendered useless? Because our knowledge and prophecy is only in part, it is incomplete. But when perfection arrives, when completion arrives, the partial is rendered useless, or superseded. (Verse 9,10.). It is like a child growing up, says Paul. As a child, I thought, spoke and understood differently than I do now as a man. Those childish things have been rendered idle; I have put them behind me. Then the Apostle shows that both he and the Corinthians are but children in comparison to what they shall be when this perfection arrives. (Verse 12). They need gifts because they are in an incomplete or immature state.  When they become mature, gifts will be rendered idle, but Divine love will remain.  It will never cease.  ‘Now, at this moment, we are incomplete, we see through a glass darkly, we cannot see everything clearly. But when this perfection arrives, we shall see everything clearly, face to face. At this point in time, even MY knowledge is incomplete.’. Notice how he refers to himself. ‘At this moment, my knowledge is incomplete, but when this perfection arrives, I will know God by the same means that He knows me, by observation, I shall see Him as He is.’. (94) Paul is looking forward to a condition of maturity for himself, a condition that he will reach when ‘that which is perfect is come.’. Then, in verse thirteen, the Apostle returns to the present. This is not a conclusion by the Apostle. He does not say, ‘And so’, but ‘And now’, and it is emphasised to mean ‘at this present time’.  He has introduced this idea of future completion or perfection to show that gifts are secondary and temporary to Divine love, which is eternal and which will never collapse.  But remember, the Apostle is concerned with the Corinthians attitude to gifts, and he is trying to correct their attitude of selfishness and pride by getting them to stir up and practice love. So he does not stay in the future, he returns to the Corinthian situation, ‘ And now, at this moment, faith, hope and love steadfastly continue, the greatest of these being love.’. He directs the Corinthians to the most important gifts of all, and shows that the better way is to ‘Follow after love and desire spiritual gifts.’(Ch 14 v 1). The qualities of love must be infused and incorporated into their earnest seeking after gifts.  The Apostle then goes on to specific advice about particular gifts and procedures, which I shall look at later. What is the aim of these chapters? ‘Let all things be done decently and in order.’.(95).

So, we have looked so far at the different types of gifts, something of how they are communicated, and now we have seen that God distributes them as He pleases, to whom He pleases, giving different gifts to different people.  There is a hierarchy of gifts, but all are important, and an attitude of Divine love is essential for their correct management. Gifts are secondary to this love, and will eventually be rendered idle. But what else does Scripture tell us about these gifts?

GIFTS AND UNBELIEVERS.

Gifts are given to the Church, but obviously, there are many unbelievers who have skills, abilities and so on. It appears also that there are many unbelievers in and out of Scripture who experience extraordinary influences from God by His Common Grace. These influences appear to be the same as those given to believers, but since spiritual gifts are given to the Church, the purpose and outworking of such influences in unbelievers is different from those given to believers.  For Christians, Scripture declares that they are given for the distinct purpose of edifying and building up the Church, as explained above.

Unbelievers prophesying by God’s power usually have a close connection with one or some of God’s people in Scripture, or with specific purposes being outworked by God, as with Pharaoh, who was raised up to show forth God’s power, (96) but here, the influence is not given for edification, unity and building up of the Church or believing community primarily, though that may be included, but rather for other, specific providential purposes.

It is often claimed by certain religious groups such as the Charismatic and Pentecostal movements that these God given influences are for Christians only, but Scripture reveals that this is not so.  It is true of course that in the main in Scripture, it is believers that receive such influences. Daniel had a number of prophetic dreams brought to him by God’s Spirit. (97). Jacob likewise had a dream from God, (98). Joseph was given the power to interpret the dreams of Pharaoh, (99), and it was by the power of the Spirit that the Old and New Testament prophets prophesied. (100). But we also have records of   unbelievers, even   God’s   enemies, receiving   such extraordinary powers from God. Pharaoh had a dream concerning Joseph. (101). Nebuchadnezzar had a representation concerning Daniel. (102). Abimelech, King of Gerar, had a dream concerning Abraham. (103).  God gave instructions to Laban as he was pursuing Jacob, by causing him to dream. (104). Saul prophesied by the Holy Spirit, but never found salvation. ‘And the Spirit of the Lord came upon Saul also, and he prophesied’. (105) Matthew Henry says of this verse, ‘One would have thought that so bad a man as he had been was in no danger of being turned into a prophet.’ But yet an even more notorious man received extraordinary gifts from God, the ‘son of perdition’ himself, Judas the traitor:  ‘And when Jesus had called unto Him His twelve disciples. He gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness, and all manner of disease. Now their names are…. and Judas Iscariot who also betrayed him.’.(105). Hebrews 6 v 4-6 are interesting verses in this connection. ‘For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance.’. Now Scripture is very plain for the Calvinist concerning those that Jesus came to save. It says that the true Christian, the person who has received salvation by Christ through faith in Him, cannot fall away. They cannot lose their salvation. They may fall into grievous sin, but it is impossible that they should lose their salvation. ‘ I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand.’.(107). Speaking about the Christian and his salvation, the Apostle Paul says, ‘For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth nor any other creature shall be to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus.’. (108). These are very emphatic and plain statements about the Christian. They cannot fall from grace. So how do many Calvinists understand these verses in Hebrews? They argue that if these people have become apostates, then they were never really saved or born again. What is it then that they have experienced? Some theologians explain that amongst other things, these people received the gifts of the Spirit, though they did not find salvation. Jonathan Edwards says, ‘ If any man think that the apostle here used expressions too high to denote any gifts of the Spirit, common to good and bad men, though miraculous gifts, I answer that the drift of the Apostle and his arguments in these words led him to set forth the greatness of the privileges that such persons received, that he might better show forth the aggravations of their apostasy.’. (109). Matthew Henry says, ‘They may be made partakers of the Holy Ghost, that is, of His extraordinary and miraculous gifts, they may have cast out devils in the name of Christ, and done many other mighty works. Such gifts…were sometimes bestowed on those who had no true   saving grace.’.(110).  Matthew Poole records, ‘He is proving by His gifts unto them how much supernatural good, and workings towards salvation they are capable of, without the putting forth of the exceeding greatness of His power to make them new creatures.’.(Ill). Dr. J. Brown in his commentary on Hebrews says, ‘It is highly probable that the inspired writer refers principally to the miraculous gifts and operations of the Holy Spirit…these gifts were by no means confined to those who were ‘transformed by the renewing of their minds’. Under the former economy, we find Balaam and Saul endowed with miraculous prophetic gifts.  We have no reason to doubt that Judas Iscariot, as well as the other apostles had the power of working miracles…their possession and an unregenerate state were by no means incompatible.’.(112).

A comparison of two other Scriptures will support for the Calvinist what has been said in Hebrews. Matthew 12 v 22-30 records an incident where Jesus casts out an unclean spirit, and the Pharisees accuse Him of doing this by the power of Satan, verse 24. Jesus says that this cannot be so; because Satan would be divided against himself, and his entire kingdom would fall, verse 26,27. Jesus used this argument to show that He cast out devils by the power of God. Earlier in Matthew’s gospel, in Chapter 7 v 22,23, we have a picture of judgement day, with all souls assembled before God. ‘Many will say to me in that day. Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy Name? And in Thy Name cast out devils? And in Thy Name done many wonderful works? And then I will profess unto them, I never knew you, depart from me, ye that work iniquity.’. Scripture reveals that the power of casting out devils is from God alone and yet in the last day, there will be those who have cast out devils by God’s power who will find themselves going away into everlasting damnation. Scripture indicates that men cannot take it upon themselves to cast out devils, (113), though devils may leave voluntarily with an appearance of being cast out, to delude people.

It is clear then to many Calvinists that miraculous gifts of the Spirit are by no means limited to believers only. Theologians, in recognising this, have put the works of the Spirit into one of two types, as we have seen. There is the work of the Spirit that regenerates a person, converts them and makes them a new creature in Christ, together with all the works of the Spirit that are unique to the Christian, and which the unbeliever cannot experience. These works of the Spirit are called the saving or gracious operations of the Spirit. Then there are the works of the Spirit that are common to all people, believers and unbelievers. An unbeliever may receive these influences without being converted.  Because they are common to all persons, they are called the common operations of the Spirit, amongst the most extraordinary of which are these unusual phenomena. Jonathan Edwards and John Owen pointed out some of the differences between these two types of work. (114).

In gracious operations the Holy Spirit actually indwells the believer, (115). He becomes like the sap in a tree, conveying life and enabling the soul to serve God. In a common influence however. He only acts upon the person, without indwelling them, and though a lot of light may shine on the person, they themselves remain black. They may receive much understanding and knowledge and power, even in a miraculous way, yet not find salvation. The believer, it is argued, being subjected to God’s gracious influences has something of the nature of God. Just as you have heat with fire, so you have purity and holiness with the Spirit, and when He indwells a person, they partake of the same holiness. The sun shines on a diamond and it reflects light of the same nature, though infinitely less in degree. ‘That which is born of the Spirit is spirit.’.(116). But common operations do not cause people to partake of the Divine Nature. Believers who are indwelt by the Spirit have the fruit of the Spirit. (117). Just as the sap in the tree causes it to grow and bear fruit, so the indwelling of the Spirit causes the Christian to grow and bear the fruit of the Spirit. (118). Common influences are effects upon a person, not the fruit of His working in them.  Saving grace affects the whole soul, causing the soul to be sanctified. (119). Common influences are seated only in the mind or body, however extraordinary they are, though they may change a person’s behaviour and attitude. Once fundamentalists recognise these two types of operation by the Holy Spirit, it can draw them to other conclusions.

Firstly, spiritual gifts are not limited to Christians only. As we have seen, this is quite contrary to Scripture.

Secondly, if they are not limited to Christians, then it is not necessary to receive the Baptism of the Spirit in order to receive these gifts. The Baptism of the Spirit is an experience that is unique to the believer, and cannot precede an extraordinary influence in an unbeliever. 

Thirdly, the leadership of the Spirit is not made up of dreams and visions. Romans 8 v 14 says, ‘As many as are led by the Spirit are sons of God’. If you have this leadership, then you are a believer. It is only given to believers. But we have seen that voices and pictures brought to the mind, or the rising unusual powers are not unique to believers, therefore the leading of the Spirit must be something other than voices and visions.

Fourthly, and by the same reasoning, the Witness of the Spirit is not made up of voices, visions or unusual powers either.  The Calvinist interpretation of the nature of the leading and witness of the Spirit will be looked at later.

THE PRACTICAL REALITY OF GIFTS.

As has been outlined. Scripture seems to indicate that no one local church has all the gifts and no one individual has all the gifts. But the Universal Church, is equipped with all the gifts necessary for it’s maturation by God’s will and pleasure. However, every person has at least one gift. It follows that:

         i) A person has a gift but:

a)      may not recognise it or is not aware of it, perhaps because it is a subtle, unspectacular gift, and not drawn out by the church, (see d below).

b)      may be unwilling to use it because, according to the fundamentalist, there is a principle of sin and spiritual apathy at work in our natures.

c)      may not acknowledge their gift out of false humility or low self-esteem.

d)      it may not be recognised by the church.

                   Reasons for this may include:

i)                    The organisational and administrative procedures may not allow the fellowship to minister to each other in worship services, such that only Elders contribute.

ii)                   The church may be critical, legalistic, or judgemental, which may have the effect of suppressing any participation.

iii)                 Elders may be fearful of losing control, or proud and therefore reluctant to allow others to participate.

        ii) A person may not be gifted in a particular area but may:

            a) Believe that they are gifted by reason of pride or ambition.

            b) Be over eager to get involved in a particular work.

            c) Be put under pressure to work by the church under a ‘get people involved’ or ‘the

                     need is the call’ policy.

            d) Believe that they have a particular gift because of erroneous teaching.

            e) Believe that they have a particular gift because of an emotional experience related

                     to religious activity.

WHEN ARE GIFTS USED OR PRACTICED?

It is a mistake to think that because one has a gift, it MUST be used every week, especially in the worship service. There is no such compulsion. Some gifts may not be practical in the worship service, such as the gift of mercy, but rather best exercised outside the immediate service. If a believer has a gift of carpentry, it would be absurd to try and use this every week in the worship time. Thus, though many gifts are used in the worship service, others are not. Also, it can be considered that some gifts should be exercised as an appropriate need in the church arises. This is not a call from God to service, but a common sense use of willing, appropriately skilled people.

Other gifts are exercised as God gives the burden, inspiration revelation or power. It would seem absurd for God to give a gift to an individual in the Church and then for it to be hidden both to the recipient and others. (120). It would seem equally absurd for Christians to be overly anxious and introspective over what their gift might be.  It is also a mistake to think that believers are required by God to perform some work or task without being equipped for it.  Many Calvinists would argue that God does not require those who have no teaching ability to stand up before a crowd and teach.

EVIDENCE OF GIFTS.

There are a variety of ways in which gifts are evidenced, some being evidenced one way, and others a different way. Some have a lot of evidence, others are more subtle, requiring testing, examination and weighing up.

Some of the spiritual gifts that are listed appear fairly self-evident.  It is self-evident whether a person has skill in public speaking or not. It is self-evident whether a person is a gifted exhorter or not. If preparation of food is required in fellowship meals, it becomes fairly self evident who the good cooks are. Thus these gifts may be evidenced in the way that they may appear to be intrinsic to the person, giving them a readily evident aptness for a particular administration in the church, such as teaching.  Such a quality may appear to be natural, a product of biological makeup, temperament, e.t.c., such that we say that they have a natural gift for music, cooking or whatever. But, it would appear from the Calvinist interpretation of Scripture that it is a gift of God who is using natural means. Some gifts have qualifications listed in Scripture, such as those for overseers and deacons, which can be used as tests. (121). Some gifts are evidenced by either being so unusual as to draw attention to themselves, as in miracle working, or they suddenly appear such that a person has a supernatural ability today that they did not have yesterday. Many fundamentalists would argue that such a gift would be one that plainly reflects God’s character and equips and edifies the church. This is a theme that we shall expand on shortly.

The local church is sometimes required to confirm a gift, as in electing a person to overseeship or ministry, to safeguard against sin and pride, or in examining an utterance or exhortation with wisdom and understanding in the light of Scripture. (122). It is often considered to be part of the local church’s responsibility to observe the particular gifts of it’s members, to draw them out, and test them, so that the whole church may benefit.

GIFTS, THE MIND AND EMOTIONS.

Finally in this chapter, it is important for us to remember one of the main purposes of Christians meeting together. For the Calvinist particularly this is for edification:  upbuilding. (123), in order to glorify God more effectively. This places emphasis on the Calvinists mind, and on their understanding. According to Calvinist and fundamentalist thinking, the Holy Spirit uses the Word of God to give the believer understanding. Experiences are meant to be ‘improved’ that is, believers are meant to think upon them and draw out lessons and truths with their minds. Or, experiences are meant to arise from a clear apprehension and understanding of truth as defined by the Calvinist or fundamentalist interpretation of Scripture. The whole emphasis of I Corinthians 14 is on decency, order, understanding, edification and upbuilding in truth.

There is a danger as far as the Calvinist is concerned, of emphasis on experiences, feelings and moods without using our understanding or applying truth as perceived in Scripture, a mindlessness, that is often a feature of paganism. When Paul was in an ecstatic trance, (124), he was not mindless, or unthinking, dwelling on the feeling alone.  His mind was apprehending deep perceptions of God, and his experiences followed from this apprehension. It is important then for the Calvinist always to have an active, understanding mind, testing and interpreting everything by their knowledge of Scripture, that they may be upbuilt, but also to have, as they see it, a right balance, filtering out that which is perceived as unscriptural.  They perceive what they consider to be the excesses of the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements, and the lack of doctrinal substance in these movements with their tendency towards emotionalism and triumphalism.  However, Calvinists do not see Christianity as formal academia either. They would argue that Christianity involves the whole person, mind, heart spirit and soul, and that this balance is reflected in their meetings and personal lives, but in practice, most Calvinistic churches are very formal, with a considerable bias towards didactic teaching and away from emotionalism and spontaneous self expression in worship.

Fundamentalists, we should note are again divided on the issue of gifts. Some, indeed many, fundamentalists consider that they are for believers only, and indeed, may even be evidence of receiving or attaining a higher level of spirituality in the Christian life. Others believe that unbelievers may experience these influences.  The other major division is in the continuation or cessation of these influences. In the passage in Corinthians which we studied, Paul refers to the fact that gifts will be rendered idle when perfection arrives. We must ask, what this perfection, this completion is, because many Calvinists use this idea to indicate that gifts have now ceased, or at least the extraordinary ones. This has been a major debate in Reformed evangelical circles and we must address this problem in the next chapter.

CHAPTER FOUR REFERENCES.

    1) I Corinthians 12

    2) I Corinthians 13

    3) Mark 10 v 45,

        John 3 v 16

    4) John 4 v 14

    5) John 6 v 32,33.

    6) Romans 5 v 15,16

        Romans 6 v 23

    7) John 6 v 65

    8) Luke I v 77

    9) Matthew 13 v 10-17,

        Luke 8 v 10.

  10) I Corinthians 6 v 9

  11) Exodus 31

  12) Ephesians 4 v 12>

  13) I Corinthians 12

  14) I Corinthians 12 v 4

  15) Matthew 8 v 15,

        Luke 4 v 39

  16) Mark I v 31

        Luke 10 v 40

  17) I Timothy 3 v 10,13.

  18) II Corinthians 3v3.

  19) II Timothy I v 18

  20) I Corinthians 12 v 5

  21) I Corinthians 12 v 6,10.

  22) Hebrews 3 v 1

  23) I Corinthians 15 v 5-8.

  24) Galatians 1 v 19

  25) Acts 14v4, 14.

  26) Romans 16 v 7

  27) II Corinthians 12 v 12.

  28) Acts 15 v 2,4,6,22,23; 16 v 4.

  29) Romans I v l,

        I Corinthians I v l

        Ephesians I v l,

        Luke 6 v 12-16.

  30) John 15 v 27

        Luke24 v 44-48,

        Acts 1 v 8, 21-26,

        I Corinthians 9 v 1.

 31) Acts 8 v 6 with Acts 8 v 14-18,

       Romans 1 v 11.

 32) Ephesians 2 v 19-20.

       I Corinthians 3 v 10,11,

       I Corinthians 2 v 12,13,

       I Corinthians 7 v 10-12.

 33) Ephesians 2 v 21-22

 34) Matthew 16 v 13-17

       The book of Revelation

       Revelation 1 v 3

 35) Matthew 10 v 1-13,

       Mark 6 v 7-13,

       Luke 9 v 1-6,

       Acts 14 v 23,24,

       Acts 18 v 1-4,

 35) Acts 6 v 1-6

 37) Acts 8 v 2-6; 21 v 8; 8 v 40.

 38) II Timothy 4 v 5,

 39) Acts 20 v 28 with v 17,

       I Peter 5 v 1,2.

 40) James 3 v 1.

 41) II Timothy 3 v 14-17

      John 10 v 35

      Acts 7 v 38

     Romans 3 v 2

     Hebrews 5 v 12

42) Genesis 6 v 18-22

43) Acts 11 v 27-30

44) Acts 9 v 10-17

45) Exodus 3 v 1-13

46) I Samuel 16 v 6-13

47) Acts 13 v2

     Joshua 15 v 13- Ch 6 v 5

48) Acts 5 v 1-11

49) Genesis 12 v 1-12

50) Acts 23 v 11

51) Matthew 2 v 12,13.

52) Acts 21 v 10-22

      Acts 27 v 10,11, 21-26

53) I Samuel 16 v 6,7

      I Kings 14 v 5, 6

      II Samuel 12 v 1-9

      Ezekiel 13 v 2

54) Exodus 18 v 16-19

55) John 2 v 11

      John 2 v 23

56) Mark 6 v 35-44

 57) Luke 8 v 22-25

 58) Exodus 8 v I- Chapter 10 v 29

 59) LLOYD-JONES, D.M. (1982) ‘The Christian Warfare’ Banner of Truth Trust, p 324-327.

 60) Exodus 7 v 9,10

 61) Acts 27 v 18-26

 62) I Corinthians 12 v 28,

 63) Romans 12 v 8.

 64) Exodus 31 v 3-6.

 65) Matthew 7 v 6

 66) Leviticus 19 v 31

       Leviticus 20 v 6

       Acts 13 v 1-12

       Galatians 5 v 19

       I John 4 v 1-4

 67) Acts 2 v 4-12

 68) Acts 2 v 12

       I Corinthians 14 v 2-19

 69) I Corinthians 7.

 70) Matthew 19 v 11,12.

 71) Mark 3 v 15.

 72) Luke 9 v 49.

 73) Mark 9 v 17-19.

 74) Mark 9 v 29.

 75) Acts 19 v 13-15.

 76) Galatians 5 v 22,23.

 77) I Corinthians 13 v 1-3.

 78) Jeremiah 23 v 33

 79) Jeremiah 20 v 9

 80) Acts 8 v 26

       Acts 10 v 19,20

 81) Acts 9 v 4-7

       I Samuel 3 v 4-21

 82) Acts 10 v 10

       Acts 11 v 5

       Acts 22 v 17

 83) II Corinthians 12 v 1-4

 84) Numbers 12 v 6

 85) Daniel 2 v 1,2,25-30

 86) EDWARDS, J. (1974) Memoirs. Works vol. i. p.lxli. Banner of Truth Trust.

 87) EVANS, E. (1967) ‘When He is come’. Evangelical Press.

 88) Acts 10 v 10

 89) GRIMM, W. THAYER, J. (1901) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. T. & T. Clark.

 90) Romans 1 v 11.

 91) I Corinthians 12 v 28-30.

 92) I Corinthians 7 v 7.

 93) I Corinthians 4 v 7.

 94) I John 3 v 2

 95) I Corinthians 14 v 40

 96) Romans 9 v 17.

 97) Daniel Chapter 7

 98) Genesis 28 v 11,12

 99) Genesis 41 v 17-32

100) I Corinthians 12-Chapter 14

101) Genesis 41 v 1-8

102) Daniel 2

103) Genesis 20 v 1-7

104) Genesis 31 v 24

105) I Samuel 19 v 23

106) Matthew 10 v 1,2,4.

107) John 10 v 28.

108) Romans 8 v 38,39.

109) EDWARDS, J. (1974) ‘Notes on the Bible’ Works vol. 2. Banner of Truth trust 1974 p.808.

110) HENRY, M. ‘A commentary on the Holy Bible’. On Hebrews 6 v 4-6.

111) POOLE, M. ‘Commentary on the Holy Bible’ On Hebrews 6 v 4-6. Banner of Truth trust.

112) BROWN, Dr. J. ‘Hebrews’ Banner of truth trust, p.286-290.

113) Acts 19 v 13-17

114) OWEN, J. ‘On spiritual gifts’ Works vol. 4. Banner of Truth trust.

        EDWARDS, J. (1974) Works vol. 1 & 2 Banner of Truth trust

115) I Corinthians 6 v 16

        John 14 v 16,17

116) John 3 v 16

117) Galatians 5 v 22

        Ephesians 5 v 9

        Philippians 1 v 11

118) John 4 v 14

119) I Thessalonians 5 v 23.

120) Luke 11 v 33.

121) I Timothy 3 v 1-13.

122) I Corinthians 14 v 29.

123) I Corinthians 14 v 6

124) II Corinthians 12

ARGUMENTS FOR THE CESSATION OF GIFTS CONSIDERED.

Because of the way certain Scriptures are interpreted by Calvinists, because of what are perceived by Calvinists as excesses in some Charismatic and Pentecostal groups, and because of an emphasis on teaching and formality in some evangelical reformed groups, most Calvinists, together with some other sections of the church consider that these extraordinary influences by the Holy Spirit ceased long ago. They observe the emotionalism, charlatanism, errors and divisions that are present in some Charismatic groups, and with an emphasis on the mind and scripture, they reject the idea that God moves in this way today. It is necessary for us to examine the arguments put forward, in the light of Scripture, to determine their validity. We can note at once that Calvinists argue that the ordinary common grace operations of the Spirit still continue. God is still seen as restraining sin in unbelievers, (1), as still sending rain on believers and unbelievers alike, providing for both. (2). The more ordinary gifts of teachers, pastors and personal gifts, say in music and so on, are perceived as still continuing in even the most conservative Calvinist circles. So the question is whether or not the more extraordinary, or supernatural common grace operations of the Spirit, such as prophecy, tongues and healing, continue or not. It seems that there are about five main arguments put forward by Calvinists and those of a similar persuasion, to suggest that they nave ceased, and I shall look at each of these in turn.

1) THESE GIFTS ARE THE SIGN OF AN APOSTLE, AND CEASED AT OR NEAR THE DEATH OF THE APOSTLES.

It is recorded in Scripture that the Apostles did perform signs and wonders, and did, by the laying on of hands, transfer them to others. It appears though that these recipients could not in turn pass them on to others. Philip had these gifts, (3), but could not pass them on, which is why Peter and John came and joined him, so that gifts might be passed on by the laying on of hands. (4). So, some argue that when the Apostles, and those on whom they laid hands died, these extraordinary influences ceased to be present in the church. Among the notable people who hold this view are, A. W. Pink, C. H. Spurgeon and Matthew Henry.

Strong (5) defines signs as a flag, a signal, beacon, omen, prodigy or evidence. Wilson (6) says they are those things which arrest the attention. The word ‘sign’ is often used in conjunction with ‘wonder’. Grimm-Thayer (7) describes them as transcending the normal course of nature, and defines a wonder as something so strange as to cause it to be watched and Wilson as a miracle or prodigy exhibited by God and his messengers. The word ‘sign’ can be used in a non-miraculous sense, such that for example, the sun and moon serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years. (8). But it is in the extraordinary sense of the word that we are interested.

In Scripture, we find that when God commanded Moses to speak to the children of Israel and to Pharaoh, Moses was concerned that the people would not believe that God had spoken to him. So God gave him miraculous signs in order to persuade the people. These involved his rod turning into a serpent, and his hand becoming leprous. (9) These signs were miraculous  (10), and their purpose was that the people might believe in God (11), that they may know that the Lord is God and that besides Him there is no other (12). God through Elijah works a sign against the prophets of Baal for similar reasons. The false prophets try everything they can to get their gods to pour fire down onto prepared wood. Elijah pours water on his wood, but it is still ignited by fire from heaven. The result: ‘When all the people saw this, they fell prostrate and cried, ‘The Lord-He is God! The Lord-He is God!’.(13). So too regarding Samuel and Saul. A number of events were accurately predicted by Samuel, their fulfilment being a sign that God was with Saul. (14).

Sometimes, as God was speaking to a person, they asked for assurance or confirmation, and God gave this by some kind of sign. Thus Abraham asked,  ’0 Sovereign Lord, how can I know that I shall gain possession of the land?’ (15). And God gave him certain commands and messages as a sign. So too Gideon (16). ‘Give me a sign that it is really you talking to me.’. Again, he was given certain commands and certain events follow which proved to him that it was God who was speaking to him. Gideon offered meat and unleavened bread on a rock and fire came out of the rock and consumed it and the angel of the Lord disappeared.  Later, Gideon asked for two further signs of confirmation in the famous story regarding the fleece (17). Hezekiah asked Isaiah for a sign that the Lord was going to heal him and that in three days he would go up to the temple. (18). The sign was that the shadow caused by the sun went back ten degrees. When God spoke to Ahaz through Isaiah, He offered to perform a sign for him as verification of what He was saying.  ‘Ask for a sign in the deepest depths or highest heights, but Ahaz said, ‘I will not ask, I will not put the Lord to the test.’.’. (19). Matthew Henry says, ‘Ahaz rudely refuses this gracious offer…because he resolved to persist in his unbelief, and would indulge his doubts and distrusts, yet he pretends a pious reason…as if it would be a tempting God to do that which God Himself invited and directed him to do.’. I think that it is important to note that in all these cases, it is God who appears and begins to speak first. Signs were not asked for in the way of guidance in the absence of an indication of God’s will, but rather as a confirmation that it really was God who was speaking, and that He was going to perform the things that he was saying in a communication that He had begun.

When Daniel was delivered from the lion’s den, it was a sign and portent. (20).  Thus, these signs were not limited to Moses bringing the Israelites out from Egypt, though those particular signs and wonders are often referred to in Scripture. Thus, God ‘performed miraculous signs and wonders in Egypt, and has continued them to this day, both in Israel and among all mankind’ and has gained the renown that is still His. (21) So too in the New Testament, signs were indications, miracles and tokens. Jesus performed many miracles, and here again, we see the idea that they are a proof that God is with a person.

Thus, Nicodemus declared ‘We know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him. (22). See also John 7 v 31, John 9 v 16. ‘If this man were not from God, he could do nothing. (23). Jesus Christ is ‘a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs which God did among you through him.’. (24). He did these miracles because God was with Him. (25). When Jesus cleansed the Temple of moneychangers and traders, the Jews demanded, ‘What miraculous sign can you show us to prove your authority to do this?’  Jesus answered, ‘Destroy this Temple and I will raise it again in three days’. Here He was referring to his own body rather than the temple building. (26). In His ministry and by His miracles, Jesus, according to the Calvinist, gave ample evidence of who he was.

But, even after Jesus had done all these miraculous signs, witnessed by many, they still would not believe in Him. (27). Thus, argues the Calvinist, Scripture takes the position that it was highly sinful for people to come to Jesus asking for a sign in heaven because Jesus himself and his words and works were the best sign that they could have. Accordingly, he refused to give them a sign, and condemned them as a wicked and evil generation, pointing them only to the sign of Jonah as a picture of judgement. (28). Signs, and seeking after them can, then, be an indication of unbelief. Moses persisted in making excuses, and God became angry with him, (29). Gideon was well aware that in continually asking for signs, he was in danger of incurring God’s wrath, and he asked with much humility, pleading his weakness. (30). The people were criticised for not believing Jesus unless he performs miracles and signs, (31). Zechariah asked for assurance regarding the birth of John the Baptist when the angel informed him of these things. He was struck dumb because he did not believe the angels words. (32).

But for many others, miracles and signs did serve as a confirmation of Jesus’ authority, such that His enemies complain: ‘If we let Him go on like this, (performing miracles) everyone will believe him.’. (33). The response of God to a request for signs varies from giving such signs, to a refusal to grant them, to punishing a person for requesting them, to a declaration that if people will not believe Moses and the prophets, they would not believe even if one rose from the dead. They are used as indications of God’s presence with a person, and also as an indication of unbelief.  The exact response seems to vary according to the motives and beliefs and sincerity of those asking. The fact that miracles had been performed and people still refused to believe only served to aggravate their position.  ‘Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of His miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. “Woe unto you Korazin! Woe to you Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgement than for you. And you Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to Hades. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgement than for you.”.’.  (34). For the Calvinist, Scripture declares that these people had evidence before their very eyes of an astonishing nature, yet they refused to believe, they closed their minds, and resisted the evidence that they saw, making their condemnation more sure. This is a definite principle in Scripture. The more light, understanding and evidence one has, the greater one’s condemnation if sin is persisted in. Jesus said of some, ‘If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin. Now however, they have no excuse for their sin’. (35). Thus it is, as we have seen, that there is greater punishment for false teachers, that it was worse for them because they turned away from God having understood the gospel to some degree. Thus it is, that as regards Judas, who had so many privileges, it would have been better if he had not been born. The presence of miracles makes sin more acute, as does knowledge of truth, (36), which for the fundamentalist, is defined by Scripture.  According to the Bible, many of the signs which Jesus predicted were fulfilled at Pentecost (37) and of course, the Apostles performed many signs. (38). Thus for example Stephen was a man full of God’s grace and power, and did great wonders and miraculous signs among the people. (39). Some of these signs appear to be unique to the Apostles, confirming their position. ‘Truly the signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs   and wonders and mighty deeds.’. (40).   ‘God   did extraordinary miracles through Paul, so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them.’(41).  Here, these are described as  ‘extraordinary miracles’, and this is one of the few   certain and plain references to this kind of miracle. There is a similar strange event described of Elisha. ‘Once, while some Israelites were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the mans body into Elisha’s tomb. When the body touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet. (42). As far as Scripture is concerned, these extraordinary phenomena caused these men to be marked and noticed, giving authority to their ministry.

Scripture tells us that in the Apostle’s time, the purpose of these signs and wonders was to confirm the Apostles message of grace to the Gentiles.  (43). To testify to the message of salvation (44). To help the Gentiles to obey God, (45). To help the believing Jews to accept that God was also working amongst and converting Gentiles.  (46). They are also, in the main, related to belief in God.  Paul poses this question to the Galatians. ‘Did God give you His Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law or because you believe what you heard?’(47). Though, as we have seen, some influences are given to unbelievers, for very specific purposes, usually connected with God’s people, in the main, such influences are given to believers, not to those who hold a form of religion or godliness, but to believers, mainly for the strengthening and up building of the church, particularly in it’s infancy. Thus, signs and wonders confirm that it is God who is speaking and working, providing further evidence and attestation that it really is God, and they also give authority to those performing such wonders. They draw attention to the person, causing them to be watched and help to authenticate the message that they are delivering. This of course is why the man of sin, predicted by Scripture to appear at the end of the age will perform pretended signs and wonders. Such things will draw attention to him, and appear to authenticate his position. (48).

Such signs and wonders were not limited to the Apostles. At various times, as I have shown, signs and wonders were performed throughout the Old Testament. And of course, in the New Testament, the Church exhibited extraordinary gifts also. These influences are obviously not the normal way of things. They occur mainly at times of great upheaval, such as the Israelites leaving Egypt, in times of opposition, as with Elijah and Elisha, at the beginning of large changes, such as before the captivity of Israel, with the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah before the captivity and especially at the advent of the Lord Jesus Christ, the establishment of the New Testament Church and the approach of the final judgement. Most occur in the ministry of Jesus, to attest to Him as the Son of God. Strong   (49) argues   that   ‘miracles   are   the   natural accompaniments and attestations of new communications by God.

The great epochs of miracles-represented by Moses, the prophets, the first and second comings of Christ-are coincident with the great epochs of revelation. Miracles serve to draw attention to new revelations about God and His dealings, and cease when these ideas have gained currency and foothold.’. It is also worthy of note that the great prophets, Isaiah, Amos, Micah, Jeremiah, John the Baptist, worked no miracles. But there are also some others, such as Gideon and Daniel from time to time who do experience such events.

How do signs and wonders relate to gifts? The area of gifts is, as we have seen, a very wide-ranging one, of which signs and wonders are only a part. The Apostles had gifts and performed miraculous signs, yet the Apostles themselves are described as gifts to the Church. The area of gifts encompasses all these miraculous events and more.

Why does God allow false gifts, signs and wonders?  One indication is given in Deuteronomy 13 v 1-4.  Here, the situation is given of a person performing successful signs and wonders, but who then says, come, let us follow other gods. His signs are successful, but he does not declare ideas consistent with Scripture, which is portrayed as God’s truth. Obviously, Scripture counsels that believers do not listen to him or follow him. Why has this been allowed? The reason given is that the Lord God is testing believers, to see whether they love God with all our heart, mind and soul. Now in Scripture, according to the fundamentalist, God is omniscient. He knows all things, including our innermost thoughts and motives. This testing is not for His benefit. It is not in order for Him to discover information about us. It is rather for the benefit of believers and those around them. If believers continue serving the Lord in the face of such a trial, it is an added confirmation and assurance to them and others around them that they are truly the Lord’s.  But, if they are captivated by the signs and wonders and go off serving another, then it is an indication to the believer and others that their faith is seriously in doubt, and the believer can have no assurance of their salvation whilst they continue in that way.

As regards the Apostles, these influences were only part of their qualifications and authority of Apostleship.  Other requirements for an Apostle appear to be: -

          1) A call from God for them to be Apostles. (50).

          2) They actually had to see the Lord Jesus Christ,

              and be an eyewitness to His resurrection. (51).

          3) They had an ability to pass the gifts on to others

              by laying on hands. (52)

          4) Their task was to lay the foundation of the New

              Testament church (53), by their word which they

              knew was God’s word. (54).

          5) Their teaching and conduct was consistent with the

              Scriptures and Jesus’ teaching.

From these qualifications we can draw two conclusions at least.

Firstly, the gift of Apostles has ceased.  Secondly, just because a person had spiritual gifts, it did not make them an Apostle. An Elder must be above reproach, but not all who are above reproach are Elders. We have already seen that these influences are by no means limited to Apostles, or to those upon whom they laid hands.  We have seen these influences throughout Scripture, given even to God’s enemies. Now some may argue that those in the Old Testament did not experience the same thing as those in the New Testament. But I cannot discern any difference in the nature of the influences. What is the difference between a man prophesying in the Old Testament and a man having the gift of prophesy in the New? Neither person can prophesy of his or her own accord. Both require the enabling of the Spirit. The nature of the influence is the same, a common grace influence. Jonathan Edwards concluded,’ A leading or directing of a person by immediately revealing to him where he should go, or what shall hereafter come to pass, or what snail be the future consequence of his doing thus, or thus… is no more than a common gift, there is nothing in it but what natural men (unbelievers) are capable of and many of them have had….it is no more than a gift of prophecy, as the Apostle largely shows. I Corinthians 13 v 2….such a way of being directed where one should go, and what he shall do, is no more than what Balaam had from God.’. (55). I must admit this, that in the period immediately after Pentecost, there seems to be an abundance of these influences, particularly in the church, and perhaps resident in a person for some duration, whereas unbelievers, particularly those in the Old Testament, have short or one off experiences.  But this is a similar case to that of the intervention of sinless angels that we saw earlier. The period after Pentecost is the beginning of a new era, the establishment of the gospel dispensation and Church. To give it authority and foundation, it is accompanied by a heightening of spiritual phenomena.  But I must conclude that in Scripture these influences were by no means limited to the Apostolic period, and did not necessarily cease when the Apostles or those upon whom they laid hands died.

2) SCRIPTURE IS COMPLETE, THEREFORE REVELATION IS COMPLETE.

Some fundamentalists argue that when the Holy Spirit gave words to a person by direct inspiration, then what they said was infallible, and therefore had to be recorded in Scripture. Now however, the canon of Scripture is complete, so, they argue, revelation and inspiration must have ceased. Fundamentalists certainly regard that Scripture is complete. As the Westminster Confession of Faith declares:  ‘The whole counsel of God concerning ail things necessary for His glory, man’s salvation, faith and life is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture, UNTO WHICH NOTHING AT ANY TIME IS TO BE ADDED, WHETHER BY NEW REVELATIONS OF THE SPIRIT OR TRADITIONS OF MEN.’ (56).

However, Calvinists and other fundamentalists cannot use this argument for the cessation of gifts, because it regards inspired revelation and Scripture as being inseparable in the sense that every inspired revelation must be recorded in Scripture. It is quite unscriptural to say that! It is plain from I Corinthians 12-14 that the Corinthian church had those in its fellowship who received inspired revelation from the Holy Spirit. But it is not recorded in Scripture what they said. There are some Old Testament people in Numbers 11 v 24-27 whom the Lord causes to prophesy, but all that Scripture records is that ‘they prophesied’, (verse 25) ‘they prophesied in the camp’, (verses 26, 27). New Testament disciples were moved to prophesy as ‘the Holy Ghost came upon them, and they spake with tongues and prophesied’ (57), but it is not recorded what they said. So too with Saul, (58). Paul was not allowed to utter what he saw. (59). Scripture, then, is not all the Divine revelations that were ever given. It is not all the inspired statements that were ever uttered, but rather, as far as the fundamentalist is concerned, that inspiration and revelation that God has caused His people to write down, which is what the word ‘Scripture’ means, – that which was written down. It is reasonable for the fundamentalist to say then, that even though Scripture is complete, it is still possible to have inspiration and revelation from the Holy Spirit, because Scripture is not all the inspired revelation ever given.

Those who put forward this argument for the cessation of gifts however are very aware of the importance of Scripture to fundamentalism and the danger of adding to it, or being led astray by unusual experiences, so I must look at this a little more. For the Calvinist, there is a sense in which revelation has ceased, and it is important for us to recognise this. Jesus Christ is considered by Calvinists to be the complete revelation of God. He was God in the second Person and he dwelt on earth with men.  Scripture indicates that concerning the method of salvation, the government and institution of the New Testament Church, matters of doctrine and the nature of God, Jesus taught and revealed all that was necessary. Jesus is described as  ‘the Word’, (60), and  ‘the Truth’. (61).  He is pictured as the full expression of God the Father, for Jesus said, ‘he that hath seen me hath seen the Father’. (62). Jesus then promised to His disciples the Holy Spirit, to teach and remind them of what He had taught them,  ‘But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my Name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.’. (63). Scripture tells us that Jesus did and said many other things besides those recorded in Scripture,  ‘the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.’. (64). As promised, the Apostles were enlightened and reminded of such things by God’s Spirit, and laid one of the foundations for God’s Church, namely their inspired word, recorded in Scripture. (65).  It would appear then that in this area, revelation is complete. That is, most fundamentalists do not expect the Holy Spirit to give us new ways of worship, or to reveal new characteristics of God, or new, alternative ways of salvation, or new qualifications for Elders or Deacons, or new purposes for God’s Church or new moral codes. All this was either summed up by Christ, or expressly taught by Him once and for all, being recorded once and for all by the Apostles.

In what sense does revelation and inspiration continue then? In what area do they exert their activity? I would suggest that some Calvinists consider that they continue in the area of God’s providence. Providence, in its general definition, is a common grace   influence, being common to   both believers and unbelievers. Extraordinary gifts   I shall class as Special Providence. These influences may be given to assist believers, or for their safety welfare and comfort, to deliver them from danger or give assurance.  They may be given to encourage greater diligence.  They may be given to provide power for difficult situations, to demonstrate God’s power and truth, or as signs and authentications. God may give them to prevent unbelievers from harming God’s people, (66), or to test God’s people, (67). Very many and particular are the reasons why God may move in this way, but none of them add to or alter Scripture or the New Testament scheme of worship or the fundamentalist’s ideas about God.

Many would draw attention to I Corinthians 13 to support the fundamentalist   view that it is Scripture that supersedes gifts. We have already looked at this passage, but I want to do so briefly again in the light of the objection that we are considering. Paul argues in vl3 that three things steadfastly abide or continue, faith, hope and love and that the largest of these is love. Only of love can it be said that it never fails. There will be a time when faith fails, (68), when hope fails, (69), and when gifts will be rendered useless,  (70).  I understand from this that gifts will cease at the second coming of Christ, but love will never end. I consider the passage then to be saying this:  Now, in this present dispensation, all remain. Gifts, faith, hope and love, but when three of the pass away, love will remain, love is the most important because it is eternal and without love, whatever else we have, we are nothing. The contrast is:-

NOW                                 AND       THEN

GIFTS, FAITH, HOPE      AND       LOVE

TRANSIENT                            AND       ETERNAL

Now some isolate prophecy, knowledge and tongues from the rest of the gifts, because they are specifically referred to in this passage, but I suggest that these are chosen by the Apostle as representative of all gifts. I suggest he picked these out because the Corinthians prized them above others. The whole context of the passage is spiritual gifts, and not just prophecy, knowledge and tongues. I suggest that Paul is saying that this whole order, of which gifts are a part, will pass away, and only love will remain.  They pass away when completeness comes. The word is ‘Teleion’ and means to end, to complete, perfection. ‘An ending, a finishing, wanting nothing necessary to completeness’ (71). It is used 37 times of at least 24 subjects, including spiritual maturity, love for God, God, harmony, fruit, faith, Christ, law, conscience, heroes of faith, Paul, God’s power, the will of God, love, gifts, all men. (I Corinthians 2 v 6, I John 4 v 12, Hebrews 6 v 1; 7 v 9, 11; 10 v 4; James 2 v 22; Philippians 3 v 12; Romans 12 v 2; Ephesians 4 v 13). It is such a wide ranging word that it does not seem valid to suggest, as some do, that it cannot refer to our final state.  I would argue that a Biblical world view suggests that there will be an ending of this present dispensation, and at the resurrection, there will be completeness, perfection, a final state, place and condition. This is coming. ‘When that which is complete is come’. In the same way, Christ is coming,  (72), the day of the Lord is coming, (73) and perfection is coming. It is going to come into being, arise, come forth and show itself. (74). Over emphasis on prophecy, tongues and knowledge enables the argument to centre on revelatory gifts, and to introduce the idea that the coming perfection is to do with revelation, the completed revelation of Scripture. But not all gifts are revelatory, and the context of this passage is to do with ALL gifts.  Paul argues that when the completeness is come, believers shall see face to face. Christian believers   are not already perfect, neither have believers obtained righteousness or resurrection from the dead, (75), but, according to Scripture, they   shall see God, they shall see the whole new order of things, clearly, by direct observation, thus, faith, hope and knowledge, that is the extraordinary gift of knowledge, will cease. ‘We shall see Him as He is’  (76). There will be objective observation as opposed to revelation through writing and symbols or the working of the Holy Spirit on the mind. I do not believe it to be accurate to say that believers see God face to face ‘in Scripture’, or that they are thoroughly complete, or that perfection has arrived.

We have an indication of what face-to-face means from certain references in Scripture.  In the unusual incident of Jacob wrestling with God, described in Hosea 12 v 4 as an angel, physically wrestling, Jacob declares, ‘I saw God face to face and lived’ (77). To Moses for example. ‘The Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with a friend.’. (78). The Lord proclaimed His name in Moses’ presence, and Moses was sheltered by the cleft of a rock and the hand of the Lord, and Moses saw the back of God, but not His face, for no-one can see God and live.  (79). So, God speaks to Moses face to face, clearly and not in riddles, he sees the form of the Lord. (80). When Gideon realises he is looking at an angel of the Lord he exclaims, ‘I have seen the angel of the Lord face to face’ (81). So too Manoah exclaims ‘We are doomed to die! We have seen God!’. (82). The idea of seeing God face to face includes both ideas of an absence of symbols and riddles, and but also objective sight of God.

All these are examples of Theophanies, of visible and/or audible manifestations of God. The idea that no one can see God face to face brought terror and fear to those who saw the angel of the Lord, because they knew that they had been close to God, and feared that they must die because of what they had seen. Theophanies are prevalent in the Old Testament, though God is never revealed fully, and the revelation is temporary rather than permanent. They usually have an introductory description, (the LORD appeared) a self-assertion:  (I am the God of Abraham), a command not to fear, an assertion of divine presence,  (I am with you) and a concluding blessing and description. Some argue that these are appearances of the pre- existent Christ, though there seems no Scripture warrant for this view.  Others suggest that these are merely angels or messengers, and not God Himself. These messengers appear to be both distinguished from the Lord himself and yet identified with him. It may be that this is a personal messenger of the Lord, representing him and bearing his credentials, speaking on behalf of and identified with the One Who sent him. Or it may be that these are physical manifestations of God, apart from Christ. The important element for us is that there is objective sight and observation of something or someone and audible voices are heard, and they are so unusual that these people think that they have seen God face to face… they haven’t read about Him, or heard accounts… they have directly seen and heard. This is the meaning of ‘face to face’.

What then does I Corinthians 13 declare? Love is a better way than ambitious squabbling and division over who has the best gifts.  Love is defined, and declared as eternal, whereas prophecies, tongues, knowledge, faith, hops and other gifts will be rendered idle, because all these are a constituent part as opposed to complete, finished wholeness. When this ending comes, this wanting of nothing necessary to completeness, the constituent part will be rendered useless, just as childish ways become useless when we become mature. Now, we see in a looking glass, a reflection, we see an enigma, an obscure thing, but then, at completeness, we shall see face-to-face, knowing perfectly God’s will, purposes and nature being complete ourselves. When this ending and finishing comes, I (Paul) shall know divine things accurately, thoroughly, well, even in the same way that I am thoroughly, accurately known. At this moment, faith hope and love steadfastly continue, but the greatest, the larger of these is love. Therefore, follow love and earnestly desire gifts. Let the attitude of love underscore all your searching for and practice of, gifts, that all things may be done decently and in order and glorify God. This I think is the position of Scripture with regard to revelation and gifts as argued from a fundamentalist standpoint. The idea that Scripture is complete does not mean that extraordinary gifts have ceased, however, I must consider yet another argument.

3) SEEKING AFTER SPIRITUAL GIFTS IMPLIES A DEFICIENCY IN THE WORD OF GOD.

It is true to say that in many modern day movements in the church, where there is an emphasis placed upon the use of gifts, there may be more excitement over gifts than over the teaching of what fundamentalist’s regard as God’s word. But does seeking after gifts necessarily imply a deficiency in the Scripture?

For the fundamentalist, Scripture is absolutely sufficient in all matters of faith, doctrine and moral conduct, (83). They completely agree with the Westminster Confession of faith on this point. (84). As fundamentalists, it is very important for them to have a high view of the Word of God. Scripture is seen as the normal means used by God to guide His people to truth, but it is not the only means. God uses many things to lead, motivate and encourage the believer. ‘All things work together for good to them that love God’. (85). For the fundamentalist, there is only one rule however, only one standard to go by, and that is the Word of God. Everything must be brought under its light and examined by its precepts.  Considerations for the correct use of Scripture by fundamentalists are given elsewhere in this study.

It is plain to the fundamentalist from Scripture that God’s providence is a guide to God’s people. It has a great influence upon us. John Flavel shows how God, by His providence forms us and protects us in the womb, decides the time and place of our birth, who our family should be, occasions the means and instruments of our salvation, and our employment and calling in the world. Providence preserves from sin and danger, and grants aid and assistance in the service of God. (86). So, providence guides and influences in many ways, but it is not the believer’s rule of faith. Calvinists do not use the casting of lots, or the opening of a Bible at any page, as a rule for behaviour, because, after Pentecost, and the giving of the Holy Spirit in a fuller measure, this is seen as a misuse of providence. As Edwards says, the believer does not really know enough about providence to use it as a rule for behaviour. God has not given providence to be a rule, but rather has given the Scriptures to be the believer’s rule of faith, unto which nothing is to be added. Sometimes, God gives success to behaviour that is not in accordance to Scripture, but the believer is not to presume that because of that success. God approves of that behaviour. Providence must be interpreted by one rule, the Scriptures, though it often remains a mystery to the believer.  (87).

Providence, for the Calvinist therefore, is an assistance to faith, and believers only understand it properly in the light of Scripture.  It is a means that God uses in order to accomplish .His purposes, like the preaching of the Word, and prayer, and I classify these extraordinary gifts under Special Providence. Is there a Christian who will tell me that God’s providence, be it ever so extraordinary, implies a deficiency in God’s Word? Consider some events in Scripture. The Apostle Paul could have obtained salvation by the preaching of the Word attended by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit… but God chose to accomplish his salvation in an extraordinary way, by giving him visions and causing him to hear a voice. (88). He could have been taught by fellow disciples, but God chose an extraordinary method, (89). But this does not imply a deficiency in the normal means. God could have softened Pharaoh’s heart, such that he let the children of Israel go, but rather. He hardened Pharaoh’s heart to show forth His power. (90). The use of extraordinary means does not imply a deficiency in normal methods.

Even though as far as Calvinists are concerned, gifts may be misused, and emphasis put on them rather than the preaching of and desire to obey the Scriptures, this does not mean anything other than a lack of balance. The Corinthians had a lack of balance, but still had the gifts. As Edwards says. God may still bless those who in some ways are acting contrary to the Scriptures. If perfect obedience and conformity to Scripture were required before the believer received any blessing, then they would all be in a very poor state. Nothing has been more misused and misunderstood than the Scriptures, but for most fundamentalists, that is no argument for withdrawing it from common availability, although some will argue for such a position.

There is another distinction that the fundamentalist draws between the Scriptures and gifts today. When God caused holy men of old to write the Scriptures, He restrained the distorting effects of sin and our fallen nature by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit, and thus, originally, the Scriptures were completely infallible. (91). This influence is by no means promised in the exercise of spiritual gifts, such that they may be corrupted, as the Calvinist sees it, by a person’s fallen nature, or the remains of it’s influence, adding its own intonations and distorting views. Therefore, as with all actions of providence, they must be understood and compared with Scripture, our ONLY rule of faith, and weighed and judged by the fundamentalist’s understanding and perception of Scripture.

4) THE CHURCH REACHED MATURITY AT THE COMPLETION OF SCRIPTURE, AND THEREFORE THE GIFTS ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY.

Those who use this argument say that the early New Testament church was lacking in the Word of God in the sense that Scripture had yet to be written and made available to believers.   Therefore, because   of   this   deficiency, an extraordinary working of the Spirit was required to make up for this. Once the Scriptures were complete, there was no need for such an extraordinary work, and so gifts ceased. Those who hold this view include Jonathan Edwards, George Smeaton, W. G. T. Shedd and Robert Dabney. Once again we find this idea that the completion of Scripture necessarily cancels out these gifts, but I have already shown that this is not necessarily so. (Argument 2 & 3). God has nowhere limited Himself to work only through His written revelation. Often, this argument is one of inference, backed up with reference to church history, but some would draw attention to I Corinthians 13 v 10 to confirm their view. ‘But when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away.

They say that this perfection is the completed Scriptures, so that when Scripture is complete, gifts will cease.  I have already looked at this verse and its context and we saw no reference at all to Scripture as being this coming perfection. To interpret the word  ‘perfect’ as referring to Scripture really does put a strain on things. It does not give weight to the words in verse twelve…Do we really see God face to face in the Scriptures? It may be that we see Him more clearly than in creation, or than in symbolic dreams and visions, but do we see Him face to face? Do we know God in Scripture by the same means that He knows us? Of course not. The Apostle was plainly looking forward to an event for himself and the Corinthians. Does Scripture completion bring that event about? Certainly not. The Apostle and the Corinthians to whom he wrote were dead by the time Scripture was completed. The Apostle is referring here to the consummation of all things and to the arrival of heavenly perfection.  Many theologians agree.  This is the thinking of Charles Hodge in his study of this Epistle. Both Matthew Poole and Matthew Henry argue this way in their commentaries. So does John Owen. (92).  It would appear that there is no passage which indicates that the completion of Scripture causes extraordinary gifts to cease. John Flavel said about forewarnings and predictions:-

                i) God has given enough ordinary provision to make such signs needless

               ii) The Scriptures make such signs needless.

              iii) God’s people do not need such extraordinary warnings, and (unbelievers) are not

                       favoured above God’s people.

BUT THEN HE SAYS…. ‘But though these reasons make the common and daily use of such signs needless, yet they destroy not the credibility of them in some cases and at some times. (93). So we can say this. During Apostolic times, gifts appear to be very common indeed, but, once the Church became established, and the Apostles and those on whom they laid lands died and Scripture was   complete   and   available, these   influences   greatly diminished, but were not extinguished. It can be said then that the believer is not to expect any new revelations about God, or the nature of the Church, its purpose, or any new moral laws. These extraordinary influences are special providences for particular reasons, and must always be tested in the light of Scripture, the fundamentalist’s only rule of faith and conduct.

But there is yet a fifth argument for the cessation of gifts and it is this:

5) GIFTS HAVE CEASED BECAUSE FAITH AND HOLINESS WERE ALMOST LOST IN THE CHURCH, WHICH WAS DOMINATED BY DRY, FORMAL ORTHODOX MEN.

This is an argument put forward by, amongst others, John Chrysostom, and John Wesley. Wesley says: ‘It does not appear that these extraordinary gifts of the Holy ghost were common in the church for more than two or three centuries, we seldom hear of them after that fatal period when the Emperor Constantine called himself a Christian; and, from a vain imagination of promoting the Christian cause thereby, heaped riches and power and honour upon the Christians in general, but in particular upon the Christian clergy. From this time they almost totally ceased; very few instances of the kind were found. The cause of this was not as has been vulgarly supposed, ‘because there was no more occasion for them, ‘ because the entire world was become Christian. This is a miserable mistake; not a twentieth part of it was then nominally Christian. The real cause was ‘the love of many,’ almost of all Christians, so called,  ‘was waxed cold’. The Christians had no more of the Spirit of Christ than the other heathens; the Son of Man when tie came to examine His Church, could hardly ‘find faith upon the earth.’ This was the real cause why the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were no longer to be found in the Christian Church; because the Christians were turned heathen again, and had only a dead form left.’. (94). In another place he said, ‘The grand reason why the miraculous gifts were so soon withdrawn, was not only that faith and holiness were well nigh lost, but that dry, formal, orthodox men, began to ridicule whatever gifts they had not themselves and decry them all as madness or imposture.’(95). Chrysostom declared: ‘Why are not miracles performed still? Why are there no persons who raise the dead and cure diseases?…it was owing to the want of faith, and virtue, and piety in those times.’. Jerome also declared The Church had lost as much of it’s virtue, as it had gained of wealth and power.’.

Now what can we make of this? First of all we must note the Arminian doctrine of Wesley, with his belief that Christians can fall from grace, that they had no more of the Spirit than other heathens.  Thus, for him, the church was in a really degenerated state, and therefore.  God was withholding the gifts, or they were being stifled by dry orthodoxy and rebellion. Yet we could argue that the very degeneration of the church, if it did indeed occur, could be a reason for God to give gifts, because they were needed to overcome such sin. This has often been the case with revivals according to fundamentalists.  The Church has been cold, dead, formal, apathetic, weak, and then God has poured out His power and extraordinary events have taken place. We have seen that the Corinthian were guilty of sins, yet they had gifts, and that even unbelievers have had gifts. But we must ask if there ever was a pure, golden age of the church. Was there an age when it was undefiled in doctrine and practice? You would not think so from Scripture. As we read through the New Testament, we find false prophets in the churches, we find selfishness, we find doctrinal error,  (96), sexual sin,  (97), apathy, (98), legalism and all kinds of problems. We even find that the Apostles themselves argue. (99). Nevertheless, some decline in the Church and of the prevalence of gifts may have occurred together, but it does not mean that the latter was because of the former. Neither does this view fit in with our perception of gifts so far, as signs, as extraordinary, as indicating a new era or epoch and then declining by reason of the establishment of the Church and Scripture, though not ceasing altogether.

These then are the five main arguments put forward for the cessation of gifts. What then is our conclusion as regards the Scriptural position? Spiritual gifts are a very wide category, and within them, we find extraordinary influences called signs and wonders, which occur at times of upheaval and change, to testify that God is working and instigating the changes, and to bear witness to teaching being given. Apart from these, there are particular providential interventions of an extraordinary kind, to deliver persons from threat and danger, for example.

This idea of special periods of signs and wonders, together with the death of the Apostles, and the inability of those on whom they laid hands to pass on gifts to themselves pass them on to others, the establishing of the new order of the New Testament church, and the completion of Scripture and revelation concerning this new order, combine together to give reasons as to why gifts are not the normal part of church life today.  But they do not give sufficient reason for their complete cessation, and thus from a Biblical worldview. God may still intervene in extraordinary ways for the protection of believers and at times of heightened spiritual activity such as revivals and awakenings. However, from this reasoning, gifts are not in daily evidence in a fellowship either, but rather appear at certain times and seasons, in both believers and unbelievers for very particular reasons.  Now, if this conclusion is correct, we should expect to see some examples of these more extraordinary influences in church history. I am going to give some examples involving people in the church who are well respected by those who put forward arguments to try and show that gifts have ceased.

The first concerns John Knox. One day, a friend of Knox’s, David Lindsay, went to visit Knox who had this to say to him. I have desired to see you all this day, that I may send you to that man in the castle, (Edinburgh), the Laird of Grainge, whom you know I have loved so dearly, and whose courage and constancy in the cause of God you have sometimes seen, although now, most unhappily, he has cast himself away. Go, and tell him from me, in the name of God, that unless he leave that evil cause, and forsake that wicked course wherein he has entered, neither shall that rock (meaning the castle), defend him, nor the carnal wisdom of that man he counts half a god (Lexington) afford him any help. But he shall be pulled out of that nest, and brought down over the walls with shame, his carcass being hung before the sun.  So God has assured me.’. Mr. Lindsay delivered the message but met with an unfavourable response. On hearing this, Knox said, ‘Well I have been earnest with my God concerning that man, I am sorry that so shall befall his body, yet God has assured me that there is mercy for his soul.’. These predicted events   were fulfilled   just one year later. (100).

John Flavel decided on one occasion to go to London by ship. The night before his voyage, he had a dream, where he thought that he was on board the ship and a dreadful storm arose, which frightened all the passengers except one, a man who sat at a table looking very serious and stern. Beside him in a cradle was a child who was very rebellious. Then, in his dream, Flavel saw the father take up a little whip and lash the child once, saying ‘Child, be quiet. I will discipline but not hurt you.’. Then, Flavel awoke, and on thinking about his dream, concluded that there was going to be some trouble on the voyage. All his friends assured him that the trip would be pleasant, because the weather was very fair, but he replied that he could not agree with them, and expected much trouble because of his dream, adding that when he had such representations made to him in his sleep, they seldom or never failed.  Surely enough, during the voyage, a terrible storm arose, such that the crew thought that they would all perish unless the wind changed direction. Flavel called a prayer meeting in the cabin, but they could not stop themselves being thrown about because of the violence of the storm.  At one stage, the waves came crashing in on them, and they thought that they were going to be drowned in the cabin.  Flavel grabbed two pillars in the cabin, and begged mercy from God for himself and the rest of the shin, and his faith and hope were so increased that he committed the whole company to God and finished the prayer. No sooner had he finished but that a crewman came down to inform them that the wind had changed and that they would be safe. (101).

One of the leaders of the revival that swept Wales in 1859-60 was David Morgan. We have this account of him, just prior to the revival: – He retired to rest at his usual time on Tuesday evening, and slept for some hours. He awoke about 4 a.m. and was instantly conscious that some strange, mysterious change had come over him. He became aware with awe, of a marvellous illumination of his faculties, especially of his memory. ‘I awoke about four in the morning,’ said he himself,  ‘remembering everything of a religious nature that I had ever seen or heard.’  The congregations were amazed when they heard him pray for converts and relatives. He could remember each name, the details of their spiritual condition, family affairs and circumstances, in the order that they were given, dozens at a time.  This astonishing endowment of memory was revoked as suddenly as it came. One night, in less than two years time, he went to sleep in possession of it, and when he awoke – it was gone! (102).

In the revival of 1904-5 in Wales, Evan Roberts was a prominent figure. He had a number of extraordinary experiences. Here is one given prior to the revival concerning what was to come: – ‘For days he had been brooding over the apparent failure of modern Christian agencies; and felt wounded in the spirit that the Church of God should so often be attacked. While in this slough of despond he walked in the garden. It was about 4 p.m.. Suddenly, in the hedge on the left, he saw a face full of scorn, hatred and derision, and heard a laugh as of defiance. It was the prince of this world who exalted in his despondency. Then, there suddenly appeared another figure, gloriously arrayed in white, bearing in his hand a flaming sword, borne aloft.  The sword fell athwart the first figure, and it instantly disappeared.  He could not see the face of the sword bearer.’

Later, during the revival, at a packed hall in Liverpool, which was capable of holding 6,000 people, Roberts suddenly stopped the service saying, in Welsh and English, ‘There is one English friend in this meeting who tries to hypnotise me at this very moment.  Will you leave the building at once or ask God to forgive you? God will not be mocked. We don’t come here to play. We come here to worship the Lord…. there has been too much playing with sacred things.  People come to the Lord’s temple to play with things that cost Divine blood. It is time they were swept away, or brought in to assist instead of obstructing,’. A hypnotist appearing at the Lyric theatre later publicly acknowledged the truth of his accusation. (103).

A widower named Mr.   Ruskin told C. H. Spurgeon of an extraordinary event concerning his children: – Ruskin went to look at an old farmhouse which he was thinking of buying, and he took his children with him, who instantly started running about tie house exploring the various rooms. They discovered some stairs which went down into darkness and went rushing down at great speed. They were stopped suddenly by a vision of their mother, who had died some time before, waving them back, forbidding them to go on. They rushed back to their father, who on investigating the stairway, found at the bottom an open deep well, completely unguarded. If the children had continued down the stairs they would certainly have fallen in and been killed. Spurgeon concluded that God had impressed a picture of the children’s dead mother on the retina of their eyes, but beyond that, he could not explain it. (104).

Here are some interesting comments on the preaching of Howell Harris by Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones: – ‘His method of preaching was most unusual…”I took no particular texts, but discoursed freely as the Lord gave me utterance. As to the subject of my discourse, it was all given to me in an extraordinary manner without the least premeditation, it was not the fruit of my memory, it was the effect of an immediate strong impulse felt in my soul.” And again, “In all -my discourses before the power comes I open the contexts”…. He writes again, “Learning not to speak when not called; if I do, I shall do no good…no preparation. Leaning wholly on God. Receiving such ability and blessing that I wondered where the words came from, so clear, so prolific, so appropriate. There for nearly nine hours, till broad daylight. No weariness…” ‘…I ask a question at this point  (says Dr. Lloyd-Jones), Was not this what the New Testament calls prophesying? Was it not the prophesying that we read of in I Corinthians 12 & 14? I would venture the opinion that it is. This is a man delivering what was given to him. It is immediate inspiration and it pours out through him. It is not revelation, but inspiration.’. (105).

I have quoted a number of seemingly extraordinary events, many involving those who have a high reputation among those who seek to show that gifts have ceased. I ask, are not these of the same nature as those referred to in I Corinthians? If they are not, then what are they? Believers who deny these extraordinary gifts seem to have some difficulty explaining exactly what these experiences are.

Thomas Mc’Crie, tha biographer of John Knox, when discussing Knox’s prophesies, came to this conclusion: ‘There is a great danger of running into scepticism, and of laying down general principles which may lead us to obstinately to contest the truth of the best authenticated facts and even to limit the Spirit of God, and the operations of providence…That there have been instances of persons having presentiments and premonitions as to events that happened to themselves or others, there is, I think, the best reason to believe. The espirits forts, who laugh at vulgar credulity, and exert their ingenuity in accounting for such phenomena upon ordinary principles, have bean exceedingly puzzled with these, a great deal more puzzled than they have confessed; and the solutions which they have given are, in some cases, as mysterious as anything included in the intervention of superior spirits, or Divine interventions. The canon of our faith is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, we must not look to impressions and new revelations as to the rule of our duty, but that God may, on particular occasions forewarn persons of some things that shall happen, to testify His approbation of them, to encourage them to confide in Him in particular circumstances, or for other useful purposes is not I think, inconsistent with the principles of either natural or revealed religion. Some of the reformers were men of singular piety, they ‘walked with God’, they were ‘instant in prayer’, they were exposed to uncommon opposition, they had uncommon services to perform; they were endued with extraordinary gifts and, I am inclined   to   believe, were   occasionally   favoured   with extraordinary premonitions, with respect to certain events which concerned themselves, other individuals, or the church in general.’. (106).

I suggest that these examples are in harmony with the Biblical world view   that any such influences today are rare and probably not at such a great strength as they were in the days following Pentecost, assuming of course that such influences that I have described are indeed from God.  Certainly the Calvinist would not deny the truth and sincerity of these accounts, and, like those that experienced them, would probably ascribe these incidents to God. As I have already mentioned, in chapters one and two, there would be little informed attempt to explain them psychologically.

Having allowed from a Biblical world view the possibility that such influences may at certain times continue, we now have three main sources of apparent extraordinary phenomena…man himself, unclean spirits, and the Holy Spirit.  I must now address the problem of how a fundamentalist can distinguish a genuine work of God from these other influences. This is one of the major problems for fundamentalists who accept the continuation of gifts.

CHAPTER FIVE REFERENCES.

1) Psalm 124 v 2

   I Corinthians 10 v 13

   II Thessalonians 2 v 7

   Revelation 20 c 2,3

2) Job 37 v 5,10

   Psalm 104 v 14

   Matthew 5 v 45

   Matthew 6 v 30

   Matthew 10 v 29

3) Acts 8 v 6,7,13

4) Acts 8 v 14-19

5) STRONG, J. ‘Analytical concordance of the Bible’ Hendrikson

     1.J. S . A.

6) WILSON, W. ‘Old Testament word studies’. Macdonald. U.S.A.

7) GRIMM, W. & THAYER, J. (1901) ‘A Greek-English lexicon of

     the New Testament. T & T Clark Edinburgh.

8) Genesis 1 v 14

9) Genesis 4 v 9, 10, 17, 30, 31.

10) Exodus 7 v 3

11) Numbers 14 v 11

12) Deuteronomy 4 v 35

    Deuteronomy 29 v 6

13) I Kings 18 v 39

14) I Samuel 10 v 1-9

15) Genesis 15 v 8

16) Judges 6 v 17

17) Judges 6 v 35-40

18) II Kings 20 v 8

19) Isaiah 7 v 11, 12.

20) Daniel 6 v 27.

21) Jeremiah 32 v 20.

22) John 3 v 2

23) John 9 v 30-33.

24) Acts 2 v 22

25) Acts 10 v 38

26) John 2 v 18-21.

27) John 12 v 37

28) Matthew 16 v 1-4.

29) Exodus 4 v 14.

30) Judges 6 v 39.

31) John 4 v 48.

32) Luke I v 18-20.

33) John 11 v 48.

34) Matthew 11 v 20-24.

           Luke 10 v 12-15.

35) John 15 v 22.

36) John 9 v 41.

37) Acts 2 v 16-20.

38) Acts 2 v 43.

           Acts 5 v 12

           Acts 8 v 13.

39) Acts 6 v 8.

40) II Corinthians 12 v 12.

41) Acts 19 v 11.

42) II Kings 13 v 21.

43) Acts 14 v 3.

44) Hebrews 2 v 4.

45) Romans 15 v 18, 19.

46) Acts 15 v 12-19.

47) Galatians 3 v 5.

48) II Thessalonians 2 v 9.

49) STRONG, A.H. (1956) ‘Systematic Theology’, p.128 Pickering

            and Inglis.

50) Romans 1 v 1

          I Corinthians 1 v 1

          Ephesians 1 v 1

          Luke 6 v 12-16

51) John 15 v 27

          Luke 24 v 44-48

          Acts 1 v 8

          Acts 1 v 21-26

          I Corinthians 9 v 1

52) Acts 8 v 6 with Acts 8 v 14-18

        Romans 1 v 11

53) Ephesians 2 v 19,20

          I Corinthians 3 v 10,11

54) I Corinthians 2 v 12,13

          I Corinthians 7 v 10,12

55) EDWARDS, J. (1974) ‘Thoughts on the revival’ Works vol. 1

             Banner of truth trust, p 404-5.

56) ‘Westminster confession of faith’ Publications committee of

             the free presbyterian church of Scotland. 1974 Chapter 1

             article 6.

57) Acts 19 v 6

58) I Samuel 19 v 21,24

59) II Corinthians 12 v 4

60) John 1 v 1

61) John 14 v 16

62) John 14 v 7-10

          John I v 18

63) John 124 v 26

64) John 21 v 25

65) Ephesians 2 v 19,20

66) Genesis 20 v 1-7

          Genesis 31 v 24

67) Deuteronomy 13 v 1-3

68) Hebrews 11v 1

          II Corinthians 5 v 7.

69) Romans 8 v 24.

70) I Corinthians 13 v 10.

71) GRIMM,THAYER, ibid.

72) Revelation I v 7.

73) I Thessalonians 5 v 2.

74) GRIMM, THAYER, ibid.

75) Philippians 3 v 12.

76) I John 3 v 2.

77) Genesis 32 v 30.

78) Exodus 33 v 11.

79) Exodus 33 v 18-23.

80) Numbers 12 v 8.

81) Judges 6 v 22.

82) Judges 13 v 22.

83) II Timothy 3 v 16,17

84) Westminster Confession of Faith. Ibid.

85) Romans 8 v 28

86) FLAVEL, J. ‘Divine conduct or the mystery of providence’

            Banner of truth trust.

87) EDWARDS, J. (1974) ‘Thoughts on the revival’ Works vol 1.

             Banner of truth trust, p.409.

88) Acts 9 v 1-22

          Acts 21 v 1-21

89) Galatians 1 v 11-24

90) Romans 9 v 17

91) STRONG, A.H.  (1956) ‘Systematic theology.’ Pickering and

             Inglis  p.196-242.

92) OWEN, J. ‘The grace and duty of being spiritually minded’.

       Works vol 7 Banner of truth trust p337.

93) FLAVEL, J. ‘A treatise on the soul of man’. Works vol 3

       Banner of truth trust. p66,67.

94) WESLEY, J. Sermon entitled: ‘The more excellent way’.

95) WESLEY, J. works, vol ii p.204.

96) Galatians 2 v 11-17.

97) I Corinthians 5 v 1.

98) Revelation 3 v 15.

99) Acts 15 v 39.

     Galatians 2 v 11-17.

100) FLAVEL, J. ‘A treatise on the soul of man’ Works vol 3

       Banner of Truth Trust, p.66,67.

101) ibid p. 67-71.

102) EVANS, E. (1967) ‘When He is come’. Evangelical press.

      p.54

103) EVANS, E. (1969) ‘The Welsh revival of 1904′. Evangelical

       press, p.135 140.

104) SPURGEON, C. H. ‘The early years’ Banner of truth trust.

       p.502 & p.27.

105) LLOYD-JONES, D. M. (1973) ‘Howell Harris and revival’, a

      paper in ‘Adding to the church and other papers given at

      the Westminster conference 1973. p75,76.

106) M.CRIE, T. ‘The life of John Knox’ Free Presbyterian

       publications p 284

DISTINGUISHING A GENUINE WORK OF GOD.

I have tried to show that the Biblical worldview presents a mixture of causes of extraordinary phenomena, and so the problem that remains for the fundamentalist is how to distinguish a genuine work of God from other events.  The Calvinist, and many fundamentalists do not want to be led by influences arising from within or from unclean spirits, and many of such an inclination merely opt out of this problem by declaring that such influences have ceased, many more fundamentalists though quite happily embrace the notion that gifts continue. Many do not go through the sort of biblical study that we have just entertained, hut rather see others with such  ‘gifts’, are told by leaders to seek such gifts and believe that they are an integral part of Christianity, or even part of a higher form of spirituality, and therefore desire such experiences for themselves for a variety of reasons and motives. It is true though that many of the fundamentalists who seek after gifts have   little caution in this area.

Nevertheless, scripture counsels believers to ‘prove all things and hold fast to what is good.’ (1), and to ‘believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone out into the world.’(2). Church history is full of examples of those who either applied no tests, or who mistakenly applied wrong tests. The sorts of tests applied by fundamentalists are mainly biblical ones, with a smattering of popular psychology, a lay understanding of some science issues, and gut feelings. It is rare for any systematic scientific tests to be carried out. In this chapter I am going to look at Biblically oriented tests which the fundamentalist may use.

FALSE OR INADEQUATE TESTS.

Firstly then, I want to consider Chose approaches that seem like good tests, but which in reality, are not sufficient to distinguish a genuine work of God as far as Scripture is concerned.

The fact that the influence is not voluntary is sometimes used as a test, but this does not make the influence to be definitely of God. Man is a very complex organism, and we cannot neatly divide and separate his faculties into individual elements which are not affected by other faculties. The mind affects the body, and vice versa. The mind works at different levels, often in ways that we are not conscious of. All day long we have involuntary thoughts coming into our minds. For the fundamentalist, unclean spirits may influence minds and bodies also. Thus a person may say ‘I am sure I did not cause this effect myself, it came when I was not thinking about any such thing, and I could not do it again for all the world.’ But, even if the influence concerns religious things, it does not make any difference. Christian concepts are part of our knowledge and awareness, and there is nothing unusual in such concepts suddenly coming involuntarily to mind. Certainly to apply significance to such an event may be quite mistaken, because as far as some fundamentalists are concerned, it may be nothing more than our sub conscious mind at work, or, more sinisterly, unclean spirits alternating to deceive.

Even so, some say that because the influence was involuntary and also contained verses and passages of Scripture, then the influence must be from God.  But just because a verse or passage of Scripture enters the mind in an involuntary way, it does not necessarily mean that God has given it. Again, certain knowledge of Scripture is in our memory and sub conscious, particularly if we are involved in religious activities, so there is nothing unusual in verses coming to the believer’s conscious mind involuntarily. I have shown also that as far as the fundamentalist is concerned unclean spirits readily use Scripture, and are not afraid to tempt any one with it, no matter how religious they are. (3). If they can abuse one text, they can abuse another and another. If they can bring one pleasing verse to the mind they can bring a thousand, with great power and in rapid succession.  Pleasing and peaceful pictures may accompany the verses, again, either as the product of the mind, or put there by unclean spirits according to the fundamentalist. A person may have a picture of a handsome, white robed figure, with a crown of thorns, blood stained hands and feet, dwelling in light saying to us, compassionately, ‘Fear not, thy sins are forgiven thee.’ yet the whole thing may be a mistake, a delusion. I shall look at fundamentalist principles of using Scripture in the next chapter.

Some fundamentalists may object however, and say that this bringing of Scripture, voices and pictures to the mind, is the leading of the Spirit. ‘For as many as are led by the Spirit are sons of God’. (4) ‘But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.’(5). These are the kind of verses used to support this view.  But the verses themselves show the mistake of such an interpretation, because these verses are referring to something unique to the Christian. If the Spirit leads a person, they are a son of God and not under the law. But I have shown earlier that visions, voices and prophesies are not unique to the Christian, and that therefore these verses must refer to something other than Scripture verses and religious imagery coming to the mind. The leadership of the Spirit consists of an inclining of the Christian to do the will of God and live in purity. The Spirit leads and inclines the believer to those things that God approves of, such that they are commanded to be  ‘transformed by the renewing of their minds’  (6).  According to fundamentalist understanding of Scripture, the Spirit teaches the believer the truth about God and His purpose for His people.  The Spirit gives a singleness of purpose and outlook. The taste or inclination of the person is altered, so that they savour and relish the things of God, choosing that which is good and wholesome, rejecting and disliking that which is disapproved of by God.  The Spirit enables the believer to ‘rightly understand’ the commands and counsels of God, as they are in Scripture, and to apply them ‘correctly’ out of a love for God and His holiness. This is the leading of the Spirit, which the unbeliever knows nothing of.

Similarly, the witness of the Spirit is not made up of voices and pictures brought to the mind in an extraordinary way. Jonathan Edwards considered such a view ‘ a mean and ignoble notion of the witness of God’s Spirit given to His dear children, to suppose that there is nothing in the nature of that influence, but what is common to natural man, altogether unsanctified, and the children of hell.’(7). The witness of the Spirit consists of the Holy Spirit revealing to the Christian the evidence of their regeneration, especially when they are exercising those graces in their heart. The Spirit draws attention to every characteristic feeling and distinctive mark of a regenerate heart, giving testimony to the person that they are truly saved by grace. He brings out clearly the true nature of every feeling and affection, every hope and fear, every joy and sorrow, every fruit of the Spirit, every characteristic pain or pleasure, desire or aversion of the regenerate heart.’(8).

Some fundamentalists make an appeal to great confidence as a test. They may say,  ‘As sure as there is a God in heaven, I know that He is the Author of this, I know He has shown Himself to me.’  The person may not appear to have any doubts or questions at all, but that does not mean that the influence is what they think it is. Such a confidence may be built on false reasoning. They may not have a cautious mind or a dread of being deceived. Such certainty puts an end to self-examination and stupefies the mind. The fundamentalist may argue that such a person may not be aware of how deceitful the heart and mind can be, but rather boast of inner light and understanding. They may not be aware of the Cricks that the mind can play, or of the subtle power of unclean spirits.  A deluded person may retain their confidence until they die. They may see their name in the book of Life and suppose that God Almighty has revealed this to them, yet they may never nave truly repented and believed of the Lord Jesus Christ. There is nothing here that the mind cannot manufacture or evil spirits counterfeit as far as Calvinists are concerned.  Such confidence may be held contrary to all evidence and reason, possibly to the person’s own destruction. The Calvinist may argue that a genuine work of God may give great confidence, but that it is firmly based on evidence given by the Holy Spirit and perceived by faith. Confidence alone is no argument, but rather one has to look at the reasons for that confidence.

Some argue that great emotional and or bodily effects are a sign of a work of God.  Again, whilst fundamentalists would agree that a work of God might affect people greatly, not all people affected by religious things are influenced by God. Many fundamentalists would argue that football, music, art, lively speeches, biological imbalances, intense concentration, group reactions, hope, expectancy, Satan and all manner of things affect people. If our thoughts are intense enough, they may cause effects upon the body also, because our mind and brain are part of our body.

In religious matters, a person’s behaviour may be changed, they may talk fluently about religious things, be very zealous and spend much time in religion, even die for their beliefs, but all that these things show is that the person has been greatly affected, and being affected is not evidence in itself of a work of God. The stony ground hearers listened with joy, and the Pharisees made long prayers and fasted twice a week but they were all condemned. Many emotions nay arise together…. A person may see Christ on the cross saying,  ‘thy sins are forgiven thee’, spoken in a soft, compassionate voice.  The person may begin to admire God’s perfections, have sorrow for their sin, abasement, gratitude, joy, religious longings and zeal, an interest in the good of others, and all these may be very deep, and carried to a great height, causing the person to be overcome, or faint, or be filled with strength, or cry. They may become fervent and fluent in religious things, in prayer, in   church   attendance   and   in   exclaiming   their   own unworthiness…. But certainly, as far as the Calvinist is concerned, all this may arise from a mistake, a delusion a subtle deceit of mind or unclean spirits, such that the person becomes secure in their experiences, when in reality they are bound for eternal damnation, because they have not REPENTED. True repentance and proper belief and faith in the Christ of Scripture are the requirements of salvation, (9), as far as the Calvinist is concerned. True repentance is evidenced by it’s consequences, the   fruit   of repentance, which includes confession of sin, surrender to Christ, turning away from sin, reparation for wrongdoing  (Luke 19 v  8), moral conduct consistent with that approved by God in Scripture and a profession of faith.  It is intellectual,  (Psalm 51 v 3,11, Romans 1 v 32), and concerned with offences that have offended God, rather than any self interest that may be gained by it’s exercise. It is also emotional. There is a feeling of sorrow because of this knowledge of transgression against God. It also has a voluntary element, a willing change of purpose, from sin to a disposition to seek pardon and cleansing from God.

So, in the light of this, we can say that great praise to God is no evidence of a work of God. People may have their mouths full of praises and be calling on others to praise Him, but again, they may be deluded as far as the Calvinist is concerned. Whilst it is true that Christians praise God, not all that praise Him are Christians. Christ’s miracles caused the multitudes to praise God, (10) and false prophets shall praise Him. (11).

Similarly, an appearance of love is no evidence of the Spirit’s working. Love may be built on an error, a misunderstanding of the nature and character of God as the fundamentalist sees it in Scripture for example, or from a mistaken belief of being in favour with God. It may be a counterfeit love, given by Satan. The Calvinist would argue that a Christian joys of God arises from a ‘right and proper understanding’ of the ‘true’ nature of God as revealed in the Scriptures, and has as its object God’s perfections, and especially His holiness and purity.

The fact that many people are affected at the same time does not mean a thing; neither does the fact that emotions come in a particular order. All these aspects are dealt with in a more thorough way by Jonathan Edwards. (12).

Others like to apply the test of time, to see whether the phenomena continue.  But this is wholly unsatisfactory. Movements of God that conform to the fundamentalist’s understanding of Scripture may only last a short time, and some are one off experiences.  Sometimes, an influence requires immediate action, and there is no time to wait.

Yet others may look at the quality of a person’s life, but this may be no test purely because these influences may affect an unbeliever, even an enemy of God’s people. Hare it depends on the purpose of influence and the use to which it is put. If it is some sort of providential intervention to protect a life e.t.c.  then  the  quality  of  the  person’s  life  is  of  no consequence. The event itself may be so unusual as to cause a person to stop their course of action, and that may be all that is intended of the influence. The quality of a person’s life is most important when they claim that such influences are an attestation of their teaching; an indication that what they are saying and doing is approved of by God. The lives of Jesus, the Apostles and prophets, all, in their main tendency, according to the fundamentalist, reflected the Holy God Whom they served.’ Their lives did not contradict their message.

Others may look at how the gift is used. But this may not be an adequate test. It is evident that the Corinthians misused their gifts, or at least did not use them in an orderly way. So this may not be an adequate test. Certainly for example, a person may be a gifted musician, or teacher, yet they may not use their gifts in service of the Lord.

These then are some of the ‘tests’ that are applied by some, but which really are not Biblical tests at all and lead some believers to wrong conclusions concerning the authenticity of gifts as far as some fundamentalists are concerned.

BIBLICAL TESTS.

Some people, then, may be self evidently gifted, but the gifts may be misused. Here, I suggest we are touching on a test that fits within the fundamentalist framework of belief.  Gifts evidence themselves.  A gifted musician, teacher, leader, carpenter e.t.c. are self-evident. They are evident a) in the quality of work that they produce, and b) the apparent ease and relish with which the works are produced.  It is this self-evidencing quality that we need to look at with regard to spiritual gifts, and particularly the more extraordinary or supernatural gifts of revelation, inspiration and power promoted by the Charismatic and Pentecostal groups.

What Biblical tests can the fundamentalist apply to these influences then? There is not one simple test to be applied, but rather a series of factors to consider. Firstly, there is an eliminating factor concerning prophecy. A scripture writer asks, ‘How shall we know the word which the Lord has spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not   spoken, but   the prophet   shall have spoken presumptuously, thou shalt not be afraid of him.’(13). For the fundamentalist. God is truth, and does not lie, and on this basis false prophets can be identified. As a test it can be unsatisfactory in a number of ways. In the case of prophecy, action is sometimes required right away, such that evidence is required of the truth of the prophecy before its fulfilment.

Also, God’s prophecies may be conditional. Jonah’s prophecy is a fine example. When Jonah finally enters Nineveh, he proclaims ‘In forty days, Nineveh shall be overthrown’ (14). The people believe Jonah, practice repentance and hope that God will show mercy, (15), and God, on seeing their repentance, changes His mind and chooses not to destroy Nineveh, much to Jonah’s anger and displeasure. So much so that Jonah became very depressed and wanted to die. (16).  Scripture declares that Jonah’s prophecy was from the Lord, but it did not find fulfilment. I have shown also that satanic prophesies may fall out as predicted, as may predictions that arise solely from our minds. We can say though, that an unconditional prophecy that fails is not from God, and if someone has set himself or herself up as a prophet or oracle, then if such a prophecy fails, it shows them to be a false prophet.  Obviously though, other factors need to be considered as well.

Closely allied to the above factor is truthful teaching. For the fundamentalist, this is teaching which conforms to their interpretation of Scripture. As far as the fundamentalist is concerned, God is the Author of Scripture, and God is truth and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth. (17). The believer then, can look to the prophecy or utterance itself, to make sure that there is no contradiction between the utterance and the Scriptures. As Billy Bray once said, the believer needs to be as wise as a chicken. When seed is thrown to the ground for the chicken to eat, it ignores the stones, dirt and other inedible bits and pieces, and picks out the seed.  In an extraordinary influence, the imagination may add something of its own intonations to what may be seen as a genuine work of God, so the believer must ignore what is against Scripture, picking out that which is good and true. Paul declares that other prophets are to judge these influences. (18). Those who have been the subjects of such influences may be seen as particularly adept at assessing such phenomena. Also, those who are well skilled and knowledgeable in the Scriptures, such as Elders can give help and advice. Finally though, the influence must be consistent with Scripture, the fundamentalist’s one rule of faith.

Scripture makes a difference between someone who has an unusual, extraordinary influence from God, and someone who sets themselves up as a prophet for consultation and advice. When someone offers their gifts in such a capacity, then not only the gift itself, but also the teaching and beliefs that this person holds must be examined also. (19). If that teaching is, in a fundamental and basic way, contradictory to Scripture, that is, if their basic doctrines contradict Scripture, then that person is to be rejected by believers as a guide, even if their prophecy is fulfilled.

Another factor is that of self-control. This can become a difficult area in the light of some of the unusual finings that may take place. For instance, there may be a great deal of heightened emotion and or a state of altered consciousness. However, despite these possible affects, the influence is not violent and ungovernable, such that the person is wild and out of control, or doing harm to themselves.  Their reason and rationality are not suspended, and in the event of a public declaration of the influence, such as speaking forth a prophecy, the person is capable of observing the natural rules of decency and order. This is the whole point of the end section of Paul’s discourse on gifts in I Corinthians 14. From verse 26 of chapter 14, Paul outlines rules and procedures in using spiritual gifts. He says. Let all things be done for edification, (20). We find this emphasis on understanding and learning, a theme that I shall return to in the next chapter. Wait your turn, (21), says Paul, and if there is no interpreter for tongues, then keep silent, (22). Prophesy one by one, that all may learn and be encouraged, (23), because the spirit of the prophets is subject to the prophets. (24). In other words, the prophets are not forced to speak, they are not beside themselves, unable to stop speaking. There is, on the contrary, according to Scripture, a great deal of self control available during these influences, and decency and order should be maintained, (25), because God is a God of peace and not confusion. (26) So strong is Paul’s concern on this, that he says that this is a command from the Lord, and if anyone does not recognise this, than that person themselves   will be ignored. (27).  These influences are manageable, and are not overpowering dictates that take away a person’s reason, and any influence that appears to do that must be rejected.

Still, however, the fundamentalist is left with the question, How does a person know that the power or influence that they have is from God, and not of their own mind or satanic? Let us consider some Biblical characters for a moment, and ask the same question. When God spoke to Abraham, or Moses, or David, or Jonah, how did they know that they weren’t just imagining things or under the influence of some satanic delusion? Why did they stand out from all the magicians, sorcerers and diviners? What is it that made Abraham ready to sacrifice his only son? There must nave been powerful evidence concerning these influences.  The answer that fundamentalist theologians have proposed is that Divine revelations, inspirations and powers are self-evidencing in their content and in their manner of coming. The fundamentalist will declare, sometimes with support from other ideas that Scripture is self evidently the word of God, and in the same way. God given influences carry with them their own evidence of the fact that God is their Author. The theologian John Owen, examined this question at large, and concluded that a person does not know Scripture to be a Divine revelation because of rational argument or scientific evidence. These things may back up such a view but they do not prove the case.  They cannot prove Scripture to be of God by those means. (28).  Neither do believers think that it is highly probable that God inspired the Scripture writers, (29). Rather, they believe that the Scriptures are inspired by God because God has given believers faith to believe so. This faith rests solely on the authority and truthfulness of God, as it is recorded in the Scriptures themselves.  When the believer considers the Scriptures, they sea in them a truthfulness and an authority that distinguishes them as being of God, Who Himself is Truth and the final Authority. This truthfulness and authority, argues John Owen, distinguishes the Scriptures from all other pretended revelations.

Now the sort of faith required to believe the Scriptures is not saving faith, and therefore not limited to Christians only. In the Calvinist framework, unbelievers are capable of knowing and understanding many things about God without being saved. The devils know and understand many things about God, but they are not saved, and an unbeliever can certainly have a faith, given by God, to believe a revelation, and yet not be saved from damnation. Jonathan Edwards writes, ‘It is possible that those who are wholly without grace should have a very clear slight and a very great and affecting sense of God’s greatness. His mighty power and aweful majesty…(0n judgement day) ‘they will see His infinite greatness, and majesty and power and will be fully convinced of His omniscience, eternity and immutability, and even see everything appertaining to His Moral attributes themselves, except their beauty and amiableness. They will see and know that He is perfectly just, righteous and true, and that He is a holy God, of purer eyes than to behold evil, who cannot look upon iniquity….. nothing will be hid from their eyes except the beauty of these moral attributes.’. (30). If those who are not saved can know such things on judgement day, without finding salvation, they can know them now without finding salvation.  So, both believers and unbelievers can receive faith to believe in a revelation, inspiration or power from God, and this faith rests on the authority and truthfulness contained in that influence.

What exactly does this mean?  Scripture presents to us a situation where two people claim to have a revelation from God, but in reality, God has spoken only one of them to, whilst the other person is mistaken. How can we tell one from the other? ‘The prophet that has a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is chaff to the wheat? saith the Lord. Is not my word like a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?’(31). It is declared here, that the genuine, God given influence has a superiority and quality about it that distinguishes it from false and pretended revelations. It is like wheat compared to chaff. There is no comparison; their characteristics are so different. The false one is like the husks of the grain, which every wind will scatter, but the word of God is like wheat, a fire and a hammer, it has light and power, so much so that it reveals itself to be from God. When a light shines, it shows itself and does not require further proof for its existence. If the sun shines, it is obvious to a man that can see that it is day. Even if the light is small and weak, it evidences itself. If a man is blind, it makes no difference to the light itself, which still evidences itself. God is light, (32), and His revelations and inspirations contain light, (33), particularly the Scriptures.  Power is also self-evidencing, fire by heat, salt by its taste and wind by its force. Moral principles are also powerful, and so Scripture, because it reveals the infinite purity of God and His demands for purity from His people, is called the power of God. (34). Divine revelations, prophecy, discernment, miracles   e.t.c. are self evidencing because of the power they have to search the secrets of people, their hearts, consciences and deepest parts of the mind. They are powerful because they may judge and sentence people, convict them and conquer them. In the same way, genuine extraordinary gifts, because they are, according to the fundamentalist, Divine revelations and inspirations, and then they must also contain light, revealing the majesty, truth, holiness and authority of God in such a way as to declare that God is the Author of the influence.  For the Calvinist then, genuine influences of God therefore contain characteristics which reveal God to be their Author, and these characteristics are the qualities and characteristics of God Himself, His majesty, truth, holiness, authority and moral power e.t.c.  as  they  are  declared  in  Scripture.  These characteristics are present in the whole gift, in its content and in the manner of its coming, in such a way as to make false gifts like chaff to wheat, because, in this aspect, false gifts are wholly lacking.

This view, that gifts evidence themselves to be from God is, say some Calvinist theologians, confirmed by the practice of the Apostles and prophets, who simply declared the revelation given to them, and the people were expected to receive it as a revelation from God, and to submit to its authority without the Apostles or prophets presenting back up arguments or motives as to the authorship of the phenomenon. If these revelations did not contain evidence as to their Author, then those who refused to obey or submit to those words must be excused as not guilty. They would nave had no way of knowing whether God was speaking or not and could not be blamed for not obeying. But they were not excused as innocent. They were placed under an obligation to receive, believe and obey such influences, or face Divine displeasure.  They were expected to believe on the simple declaration of the gift alone, and if this was so, the gift MUST contain the evidence and formal reason for such a belief. John Owen says, ‘I leave it to be considered whether, morally speaking, it be possible that God should, immediately, by Himself, from the eternal counsels of His will, reveal himself, His mind, the thoughts and purpose of His heart….and yet not give with it, or leave upon it any infallible token evidencing Himself to be the Author of the revelation…There is in itself that evidence of the Divine Original from the characters of Divine excellencies left upon it by its Author…. and this evidence is manifest unto the meanest and most unlearned no less  than  unto  the  wisest  philosophers.’.(35).  Consider Zechariah. The angel Gabriel appears to him, to inform him of his wife bearing   John the Baptist, and the nature of his ministry, and Zechariah says, ‘How can I be sure of this? I am an old man and my wife is well on in years.’ The angel says, ‘Now you will be silent and not able to speak until the day this happens, because you did not believe my words.’(36). There was sufficient evidence in the words and circumstances of the Angel’s message to Zechariah for him to believe, and he is temporarily punished for not believing. We have already seen how conscious Gideon was of trying the Lord in asking for a sign. More than this, we have seen that miracles were performed so that people might believe. They were given as an extra evidence and reason for belief.  They were given as an attestation, such that refusal to believe after a miracle had been performed only served to increase guilt. If they are given as an attestation, then they must contain evidence in themselves as to their divine authorship. This Jesus declares plainly. ‘The miracles that I do in my Father’s name speak for me’. (37). ‘I have a testimony weightier than that of John. For the very work that the Father has given me to finish, and which I am doing, testifies that the Father has sent me. (38). It was a refusal to believe in the face of evidence, the self-evidencing power of a miracle that incurred condemnation. ‘If I had not done among them what no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin. But now, they have seen these miracles, and yet they have hated both my Father and me. But this is to fulfil what is written in their law:  They hated me without reason’. (39).  The fact that miracles are needed at all is a sign of unbelief. ‘Unless you people see miraculous signs and wonders you will never believe’.  (40).  There is sufficient evidence in the word itself: ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead’. (41). ‘The Lord said to Moses, ‘How long will these people treat me with contempt? How long will they refuse to believe in me, in spite of all the miraculous signs I have performed among them?’’. (42).   Because miracles are an extra sign, evidence upon evidence, those that believe without seeing miracles are more blessed. Just as we have seen that it can be a sin to ask for a sign, and that it is an indication of unbelief, so the reverse is also true, that trusting in the Lord without seeing such signs is a great blessing. Whereas Zechariah was struck silent because of unbelief, Mary was blessed. ‘Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished. (43). Doubting Thomas refused to believe until he had seen and touched the Lord Jesus, and Jesus says,  ‘because you have seen me you have believed: Blessed are those who have not seen me and yet nave believed.’. (44).

As Owen points out, perceiving this evidence is not a matter of education, or rational argument, but is like seeing a light or feeling a fire.  Such perception may come suddenly and powerfully, ^hen one is in a dark room, and then a light is put on, one does not need to seek proof for the light’s existence. This is evident to the most unlearned person. So, when God tells Abraham to sacrifice his only son, he KNOWS that God is speaking and is ready to obey. (45). He did not go away and reason it out. He did not look for proofs and evidences. He did not seek out arguments from philosophy or science. As God spoke to him, the evidence was plain in the influence itself, in its content and manner of coming.

Does this then mean that all who see or hear of a communication from God must instantly and necessarily agree that God is the Author? I have already indicated that for the fundamentalist, Scripture is the highest inspired revelation that mankind has, yet not everyone that reads Scripture believes that God wrote or inspired them.  What is it then according to the fundamentalist that prevents people from seeing the light that Scripture self evidently contains?  It is mankind’s fallen nature that causes them to be blind. (46). It is not the light that is deficient. But natural man particularly is blind, and Christians see through a glass darkly, thus both require eyes of faith to see, which as I have shown, in the case of gifts, is distinct from saving faith. ‘The miracles that I do in my Father’s name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. ‘ (47)’And if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing.’. (48).

Thus, some would argue, the Holy Spirit may well give testimony and witness to the Authorship of these phenomena, by enabling people to see and perceive those evidences very clearly, and plainly, such that they may have an unspeakable assurance that God is the Author of the phenomena. This is not simply great confidence or emotionalism, but a high assurance based on a clear perception of Divine characteristics present in the influence itself. These characteristics may be perceived so plainly as to remove any doubt as to the Authorship of the influence, making a person wonder however they could have been deceived by false gifts. It may reveal false gifts to be as nothing compared to the glory, beauty, power and symmetry of an influence from God. The reaction of such a discovery of Divine grace may very from great soberness, to godly fear, to terror of judgement, to unspeakable joy, to sublime peace. It may cause altered states of consciousness, fainting, bodily weakness, and so on. According to the Calvinist, the Holy Spirit does not always provide this witness and testimony however, and God may use the influence to reveal a person’s spiritual blindness and hardness of heart. The influence still has its evidences, but a person’s natural, sinful nature may blind them, to their condemnation. (49). In all God’s works. He is revealed. (50).

In the case of such spiritual blindness, unbelievers may, according to the fundamentalist, create their own philosophy, their own framework of beliefs as to what these influences are since they do not accept a Christian view. Thus, psychologists may either try to explain them according to their system, or ignore them as not existing. Other philosophies such as occultists, spiritualists, mediums, eastern mysticism and other   religions, all   develop   their   own   system   of interpretation, and I have touched on some of these alternatives throughout this study.  In the main, Scripture urges believers to leave unbelievers with such alternative belief systems alone unless they enter the pulpit at the local church and presume to preach. (51). The constant instruction of Scripture is to leave them alone and avoid them. They are blind leaders of the blind and both shall fall into the pit. (52). In scripture, many of the people who received an influence from God were certain that it was God who was speaking to them, and acted or spoke out in public with great boldness the message that they had received. I have outlined some of the Calvinist theology of this, but what are some of the factors that arise in practice. Obviously, each case is individual, but we may gain some insight from some of the examples that I have already looked at.

First of all, consider again ‘Mr. Ruskin’s children.  It is obvious that these children did not have either the time or the capacity to enter into a debate on the subject.  They were rushing about the new house, exploring, and as they rushed downstairs to the hidden, open well, they saw a vision of their dead mother waving them back.  These children were simply stopped in their tracks by the last person they expected to see, and in a gentle, loving but firm manner ware caused to return to their father and were prevented from being killed. In RETROSPECT it is easier to interpret this incident as God given. If the gift is self-evidencing, we look to the gift, it’s main character and tendency, and it could be argued that God is the Author because of its extraordinary nature, coupled with its gentleness but firmness and its aptness to the situation, and above all, its affect in SAVING THE LIVES of the children. The whole influence is one of love and mercy. It appears, the fundamentalist would argue, too extraordinary for simple psychological effect.    It appears too merciful and gentle for unclean spirits, and against their purpose. Yet this kind of reasoning is plain only AFTER the event, after the discovery of the wall. But these children reacted BEFORE, the discovery. Of course, the truth is that they reacted without thinking. It can be argued that this is the way in which the Holy Spirit often influences the unbeliever or unlearned Christian.  It may also be the way in which the Spirit influences mature Christians who are in a situation where they do not have the time to think or reason because the danger is so immediately close.  The phenomena itself produces an immediate reaction, and that reaction is the behaviour that God desires.  This vision stopped the children.  Afterwards, the cause of the phenomena may be debated. It is a technical debate as to whether this is a miraculous intervention or a gift. The nature of the influence for many fundamentalists is the same, extraordinary common grace.

This instinctive reaction does not explain the confidence exhibited by people like John Knox, John Flavel and Evan Roberts. Yet, as we look at their statements, there is nothing in the massages themselves that plainly reveal God to be the Author of them. Once again, it is easier in retrospect to see marks of Divine Authorship. Not only did the events fall out as predicted, showing the apparent truth of the gift, but also they furthered the cause of God. In the case of John Knox’s prophecy, the main tendency was to urge the Laird of Grainge to repentance. The fact that the plea was ignored only heightens the marks of Divine Authorship according to the fundamentalist, because the threatened judgement came to pass, thus revealing God’s hatred for sin. His purity. His mercy in calling for repentance and His truth in bringing the prophecy to fulfilment.  Yet John Knox was persuaded of its Divine Authorship before these events cane to pass. So too with John Flavel.  The account of the dream as we read it has little evidence of Divine Authorship on it. The authorship is revealed to people, according to some by tie fulfilment of the dream the following day, which indicates it’s apparent truth, and its main tendency to help and comfort one of God’s people, who found himself in a frightening situation.  But Flavel was persuaded that the dream was God given before the storm actually arose.

Consider also Evan Roberts. There is nothing in the words that he spoke in the crowded hall at Liverpool that reveals God to be the Author of the influence.  The marks of God can be interpreted   by the fundamentalist in retrospect, because of its accuracy, truth and tendency to put seriousness and importance on gospel matters at a time when perhaps the revival was in danger of being trifled with and the things of God belittled.  But Roberts had assurance of the truth of his statement before it was confirmed to anyone else. So great was this confidence that ha spoke out plainly to the crowd. So obviously, in these cases, there was something in addition to the words themselves that evidenced Divine Authorship to these people.

The fundamentalist may suggest that this evidence is in the manner in which the influence arises. The way in which the influence comes is itself distinctive from the workings of the sub conscious, or emotionalism or the work of unclean spirits. It is a powerful influence, yet has gentleness, such that the person is not subjected to soma overpowering dictate.  In addition, if public declaration were required, there would be a powerful feeling or burden as regards the need to openly declare the influence.  It is not that the person is in a trance, or forced to speak against their will, but rather a deep sense of the urgency and need to speak out. This feeling, or burden may be against the person’s natural inclinations, that is, they may be shy or introverted, or not like speaking in public, yet the burden of the message may outweigh such considerations.   The person always retains their reason and will, and may choose to hold back the declaration, but they will find a burning inside, as did Jeremiah. (53). This burden or weighing down is not frightening or violent but powerful and yet mixed with the gentle love of God.  Fear and doubt is removed primarily by the testimony of the Holy Spirit to the person’s mind of the Divine qualities of the gift. As the person perceives clearly the marks and tokens of God’s character on the influence, as immediately presented to them by the Spirit, their fears diminish. This experience of immediate knowledge and perception of these characteristics is intensely personal and intimate, as indicated by Knox’s words: ‘so God has assured me’, and the fact that Flavel was convinced of trouble on the ship though his friends could see no such indication. What is this witnessing and testifying of the Spirit?  A witness declares the truth, the facts of an incident as they have seen them.  They point out pieces of information to back up a particular case. So too, according to the fundamentalist, the Holy Spirit points out facets of the influence which reveal it plainly to be from God. These facts the Holy Spirit presents to the mind enabling the mind to perceive them clearly, and unlike fallible human witnesses, the Spirit is infallible. When He is a witness to the believer’s salvation, he points out those characteristic feelings, hopes, fears, joys, sorrows, pains and pleasures that are distinctive to a believer. When he is a witness to the gift, he points out marks and tokens of God’s character on the influence itself. For example the Spirit might show the powerful yet gentle nature of the influence, or its suitability and appropriateness, or its symmetry and harmony, or its tendency to help the church, or make war with sin, or glorify God. There may coma a powerful perception of God’s love, or patience or forbearance or majesty, or sovereignty. The person may see these kinds of things so clearly as to be absolutely certain that the influence is God given, and thus speak or act with confidence. To the recipient it is as if a veil is removed from their mind, and they can see spiritual things clearly and entirely consistently with Scripture. It is this God given perception that can be the cause of assurance of Divine authorship. It is as wheat compared to the chaff of false experiences, which are wholly lacking in these things. If all that one has experienced in one’s life is the different grades of the chaff of false influences, it is impossible to conceive the nature of the genuine wheat of such Divine communications. It is outside such a person’s experience. It is like trying to describe the nature of the experience of light to a blind person, or the nature of the experience of sound to one that is deaf. If that person however is suddenly given eyes to see and ears to hear, they need no proof of the experience of seeing and hearing, but are immediately persuaded. When a person finally tastes wheat, they wonder however they were deceived by the chaff. Not only do false experiences not have this testimony but also the Spirit may actually testify against such false experiences, to believers particularly.  That still, small voice may reveal errors and contradictions to the Scriptures, or give an apprehensiveness and mistrust of the influence, such that we are inclined to treat it with caution. The fundamentalist will argue that people can carry over with them into the Christian life natural or worldly ideas of religion.  Sometimes believers may expect booming voices, or angels with wings, just like on Christmas cards.  They may expect Jesus to look handsome and tall and so on. The Calvinist may argue that these impressions do not occur with this sort of imagery, and that believers should not be thrown by these natural ideas inherited from the world.

The depth of Scriptural teaching and knowledge that a person has, together with their experience of God, is another factor to consider for the fundamentalist.  The greater a person’s understanding of fundamentalist interpretation of Scripture and experience, the less likely they are to fall into an error, which is why Paul urges prophets to judge prophesies. (54). Even so, Christians of little knowledge and experience may quickly discern the works of God. Howell Harris had only been a Christian for a short time when, according to some fundamentalists, God gave him ability to preach by inspiration.   He perceived the value of the influence immediately, for he spoke as the words were given, and could distinguish them from his own thoughts. God’s sheep know the voice of the Shepherd. (55).

Other considerations can be found as the gift of tongues is considered.  This gift is by far the most prevalent in Pentecostal and charismatic circles. The Apostle Paul spends some time on considering this gift and its purpose in I Corinthians 14 v 1-23. His main aim in this section is to show how important understanding and edification is. He shows that someone who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets. He says that there is no point in someone coming in to the church and speaking in tongues without an interpretation. There is no benefit. Why? Because there is no edification, revelation, knowledge or teaching. (56). No one knows what is said. (57). Such a person is speaking to the air. The Apostle says, ‘If you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, then strive to EXCEL IN BUILDING UP THE CHURCH (58). He then goes on to stress the importance of the mind, of edification of others, and concludes that he would rather speak five words with, his mind, in order to instruct others, then ten thousand words in a tongue that is meaningless to others. (59). He then shows the absurd position of a church full of believers, all praying in a tongue that is meaningless to other believers, and says that an unbeliever entering the church would consider them mad. (60).  His conclusion? ‘Let all things be done for edification’ (61). The whole purpose of these types of influences is edification, upbuilding, enlightenment, encouragement and consolation. The gift of tongues is primarily a sign to unbelievers, where they hear the word of God in their own tongues, as at Pentecost, (62). In the church meeting they are of less value, and if there is no interpreter, then the person is to keep silent in the meeting, using silent communication to God. The influence is governable and they are able to do this. A person is not forced to speak. (63)

Much of this, of course, runs contrary to that which takes place in many charismatic and Pentecostal meetings.  The maintaining of the idea that these tongues are a heavenly, ecstatic language makes them, of course, difficult to test for the average believer. It is interesting, therefore, that this is the most widely exhibited influence. A gift spoken in a foreign earthly language is obviously easier to test and examine, because, hopefully one can identify the language. This is not sufficient in itself however, because there is nothing in that influence which is beyond the power of evil spirits according to the fundamentalist who would expect other considerations to apply, such as truth being spoken in accordance with Scripture, an ability to control the gift, use of reason, discipline and order. Most importantly, what is the main tendency of the gift? What is its main thrust? Does it support the gospel and work of God? Does it make war with sin and godlessness? Does it genuinely glorify the Scriptural Christ?  Does it promote humility and self-emptiness? Does it promote repentance, awaken the conscience properly, assist evangelism or help God’s people? If, for example, a person is given an extraordinary ability to promote the gospel in the Asian or Pakistani language to Asians and Pakistanis now living in our British society, than I can see an immediate superiority of such an influence over someone speaking in heavenly tongues or in Latin or New Testament Greek. The first displays a purpose, whereas the others, whilst being mystical, extraordinary, sensational and powerful are without purpose, other than to perhaps distract people from the gospel to the influences themselves. This purposelessness, this pointlessness and self-attraction are, for many fundamentalists, the main problem with many modern day ‘gifts’. There is much hysteria and emotion, but where is the purpose? Often, interpretations of tongues are so vague as to be open to many interpretations themselves, in the same sense that daily newspaper horoscopes can have many interpretations and apparent meanings. But the Calvinist would regard this as a very poor conception of genuine influences from God.

Very often, the God that is portrayed in charismatic fellowships is an imbalanced or distorted view of God according to Calvinists, where emphasis is on experience, emotion, joy, love and triumphalism. There is little talk of God’s justice, His holiness, His moral law, the need for personal holiness and discipline. There is little talk of being a soldier in Christ’s army, and the need to fight. Rather the talk is of surrender, let go and let God. There is often little desire to test the influences and no fear of being deceived. But who can argue with a person who truly believes, week after week that God himself is speaking directly to them? These ‘gifts’ distract people from the weightier natters of Scripture, having in many cases, the opposite effect of some of the influences I have considered.  The puritans believed in what they called  ‘the economy of grace’. They believed that God does not throw miracles around as though they are of little value. Each drop of grace cost Divine blood!  So if God intervenes in an extraordinary way, it is for some special purpose. In fact they are never without purpose, and are not trinkets, sensationalist attractions or weekly spiritual uplifts.

There are two interesting experiences that I have had which I think are worth relating: – The first concerns my wife.  It was about three o’clock in the morning and I was woken up by my wife speaking aloud. At first I thought that she was asking me a question, and that because I was half asleep I had not quite heard what she had said. So I asked her to repeat the question. Out of her mouth came complete mumbo jumbo. She was in fact talking in her sleep, but she was not talking any known language. It was completely incoherent. The interesting thing was the intonation in her voice, which sounded as though she was asking a question. So I decided to answer this apparent question, and said ‘I don’t know.’. She made another incoherent reply, the intonation of her voice indicating that she was responding to my statement. So I said, ‘He didn’t do he?’. She replied again in complete gibberish, but the intonation of her voice indicated that she was answering my question. It was as if she was saying ‘He certainly did!’. This continued for two or three minutes after which she began to wake up. The nature of the language was exactly the same as that which goes under the name of heavenly tongue speaking today. I could tell no difference, and am certain that someone would have interpreted if this had taken place in some religious meetings!  Though extraordinary, it was pointless, had no evidence of grace and the Holy Spirit did not witness to it.

The second experience goes back to the few years that I spent in a Pentecostal church some time ago. It was their custom to have an open worship style service around the Lord’s Table each Sunday morning. There would be a set hymn and then a time of prayer during which anyone in the congregation could pray, lead a chorus or hymn, speak in tongues, prophesy, e.t.c. It was a regular thing for people to speak in ecstatic or heavenly tongues every weak, and it was usually the Minister who gave an interpretation. One week, a man stood up and began to pray in another tongue. It was immediately evident that this was of a superior quality of language, from all the rest.  I then realised that this gentleman was in fact speaking in Italian. There was an Italian family present, and this gentlemen, somewhat moved and emotional, obviously felt more at ease praying in his native tongue that in broken English. My first point is, that this has already distinguished itself as a superior tongue.  It was like a language compared to mumbo jumbo. I became most interested as to whether there would be an interpretation, so that I could compare this with the translation of the Italian himself.  As it turned out, no interpretation followed. Never, in my three years attendance had an interpretation failed to follow ecstatic tongue speaking. This was the only case where interpretation did not follow, and the only case where it was testable.

All this applies to gifts of extraordinary power also. Miracles for the Calvinist must have a plain purpose, as they always did with Christ. Miracles were never done for sensationalism, but to authenticate the gospel, assist God’s purposes and glorify Him. Modern day claims of turning water into wine are very suspect as far as the Calvinist is concerned. They have an appearance pf authenticity because Christ performed a similar miracle, but for most of us today, the miracle is pointless. At the time, Christ was filling a NEED and pointing to His authority as the Son of God. In the general course of things today, for the fundamentalist, the Scriptures alone are sufficient testimony to the authority and purpose of Christ. (64).’Miracles must fill a need when no other means will do, as well as meet the other qualifications mentioned. ‘But’ argues Henderson,  ‘the miracles recorded of Moses and Christ are of a very different character. None of them are represented as wrought on trivial occasions. The writers who mention them were eyewitnesses of the facts, which they affirm to have been performed publicly, in attestation of the truth of their respective systems.  They are, indeed, so incorporated with these systems, that the miracles cannot be separated from the doctrines. ‘ (65)

I nave already mentioned healing, and indicated that the Apostles did not know beforehand that they were going to heal someone. Calvinists do not therefore feel that Scripture justifies large healing rallies. It was not the practice of the Apostles to organise such meetings, which, they would argue, in most cases produce psychological benefits for some, and a hardening to the gospel in those not helped. In all cases, general, normal medical advice should be sought after and followed.

Finally, we may ask, if miracles are an assistance to belief, if they are extra evidence, why are they not more prevalent? It may be argued that those miracles of long ago are no longer evidence to us of the truth of Scripture. If there were many miracles all through the age, then their purpose would be defeated. They are signs and wonders because they cannot be explained by known laws, and are not frequent.  It is this twofold unusualness that causes them to draw attention to themselves.   Frequently repeated miracles would, have no authority, because it would become difficult to distinguish them from natural, normal events. But the testimony of those recorded in Scripture is not valueless. They “lave an indirect effect upon us. We read of the events, and the fundamentalist argues that we see that they were well attested to and so on, and to the thoughtful person, they are still convincing evidences of God’s work. ‘The Christian miracles do not lose their value as evidence in the process of ages. The loftier the structure of Christian life and doctrine, the greater need that its foundation is secure. The authority of Christ as a teacher of supernatural truth [is attested to by] His miracles and especially upon the miracle of His resurrection.’ (65). ‘Jews demand miraculous signs, and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified.’(67).  ‘We live by faith not by sight.’ (63).  ‘Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.’ (69).

I have deliberately concentrated on the Calvinist idea that extraordinary or supernatural gifts of revelation and power are self-evidencing. In a similar way, many would suggest that the more ordinary gifts are also self-evidencing. It soon becomes obvious whether a person is a gifted teacher or not. It is obvious whether a man is a gifted musician or not. They appear effortless and natural to the person, and the tasks are performed well. This is how ordinary gifts evidence themselves. Like the Corinthian gifts, they can be misused.  The fundamentalist Christian has a responsibility to draw out and use their gifts when appropriate for the Lord, for the edification and assistance of the church, in a decent and orderly way whereas unbelievers are seen by fundamentalists as wasting their gifts on self and sin, and that they will no doubt have to give an account to God.

We have seen that that Paul emphasises edification and understanding.  Many charismatics and Pentecostals emphasise feelings, emotions and experiences… feeling the closeness of God… experiencing His power… being filled with a sense of love, wonder or power, we have seen that many deliberately surrender their mind as it were to the ‘control of the Spirit’, that is they suspend their normal analytical thought processes, in order to be sensitive to the moving of the Spirit. Their level of consciousness is altered, and more attention is paid to internal pictures, sounds and feelings which enter the mind at this level. In response to this imbalance, many Calvinists emphasise the importance of the mind. If it does not edify, if it does not build up or instruct in spiritual things, they say, than it is of no value. The mind is the most important thing, they say, we must use our faculties of thought, judgement and analysis, we must be instructed and taught from the Scriptures, we must learn from the Bible, anything other than that is valueless. I suggest that both positions are wrong. Scripture emphasises the whole person, mind, heart, soul, spirit, body, conscience and so on.   Just as there are Pentecostal and charismatic movements that have no depth of teaching, and seek only experiences, so there are Evangelical Reformed churches that nave teaching and nothing else…they are cold, formal, legalistic perhaps, joyless and with little or no expression of emotion from the body. Both are poor witnesses to God. I suggest that Scripture declares that the whole person is to be involved in worship and service, nut I suggest also that our faculties are used in a certain order, and that order is, mind, heart and will.   Sinful   man   usually   puts   this   in a different order…heart, mind and will…they desire something, then contrive how to get it, and then choose the way that is most likely to be successful, but Scripture stresses a different order. Our understanding brings forth emotions which together help determine actions.   The fundamentalist learns from Scripture about God and His purposes and works and dealings with us, and His requirements from us. For the Calvinist, our understandings and perceptions, our reasoning and meditations affect our heart. They cause certain feelings and emotions to arise as the result of our thoughts. Having understood some ‘truths’ about God and His hatred of sin, the Calvinist argues that the believer begins to have an aversion for sin and affection for God and the things He approves of. Then, the believer’s understanding and emotions incline them to behave in a given direction…one that pleases God and is in conformity to His word.

Does this mean then that the intellectual, the academic, the mentally astute are at an advantage?  Are those who suffer mental illness or brain damage at a disadvantage in serving and pleasing God? No not at all. First of all, a man may have great knowledge, but his life may be very poor. Holiness does not automatically follow from intelligence. Secondly, these things are spiritually discerned. Spiritual matters are not a matter of intelligence, but of the Holy Spirit revealing truth and applying it to us. Thirdly, gifts vary from person to person. Some are given an astute mind, others are given great patience and tolerance, others are skilled craftsmen, and others are humble and so on. Who is to say which is the greatest gift of these? Without love, all are nothing as we have seen. Fourthly, not every Christian is expected to excel in matters of the mind. Not all Christians so to university or prove to be the cleverest student or pupil. The believer is asked to use his faculties to the full.

In our journey through this chapter, we have seen that for the Calvinist, and to some extent all fundamentalists, the works of God are self-evidencing, and that this is one of the chief evidences as to the authorship of Scripture. He sees reflected in them the character of God, His holiness, majesty, power and knowledge, and this distinctively evidences Scripture to be of Divine origin.  It is perhaps the main reason why they are considered to be inspired by God.  But there are also supplementary reasons for the fundamentalist believing that they are divinely inspired, and here I shall merely list some of these considerations.

The contents are so transcendently sublime and mysterious that they could never be the product of human invention or discovery: It declares a Trinity in the Deity, it describes the Person of Christ, the corruption of man, the plan of salvation, the law of God, and comprehends a universal, history of the world, past, ore sent and future.

It is very old, yet still very relevant, when other ancient writers have lost their application to us, or have been superseded by new ideas.

They are written in an inimitable style, with authority, yet through a number of writers, over a considerable length of time.

They nave a character of holiness which is infused within the writings, condemning sin and extolling purity.

They have a harmony and symmetry, an agreement and consent, maintained despite the time span of writings and variety of authors.

Its prophecies have been fulfilled accurately.

Miracles and signs confirmed its doctrine.

These writings nave survived many attempts to eradicate them by both men and Satan.

These then are some of the reasons given for accenting Scripture as a Divine revelation. The whole idea of Scripture as an inerrant, infallible, God given revelation will be examined shortly, and with it will come implications for the evidence for gifts that we have just discussed. But now I must go on to consider the normal means that the Calvinist declares should be ideally used to guide and influence the believer’s behaviour.   If, as   the   Calvinist   maintains, miracles, prophesies, tongues, healings and so on have ceased or greatly diminished, and if one cannot use other means of guidance such as mediums, astrology, Tarot cards and so on, and if we are surrounded by unclean spirits ready to deceive and lead the believer astray, then what is the normal way in which the believer can obtain guidance from God?

CHAPTER SIX REFERENCES

1) I Thessalonians 5 v 21

2) I John 4 v 1

3) Matthew 4 v 1,5,6. with Psalm 91 v 11,12

4) Romans 8 v 14

5) Galatians 5 v 18

5) Romans 12 v 2

7) EDWARDS, J. (1974) ‘On the religious affections’ Works Vol. i Banner of Truth Trust p272

8) VAUGHAN, C. P. (1975) ‘Gifts of the Holy Spirit’. Banner of Truth Trust p.299-300.

9) Matthew 9 v 12

    Matthew 3 v 7,8.

    John 3 v 21

10) Mark 2 v 12

      Matthew 9 v 8

11) Isaiah 66 v 5

12) EDWARDS. J. (1974) ‘On the religious affections’ Works vol. i Banner of Truth Trust

13) Deuteronomy 13 v 21,22

14) Jonah 3 v 4

15) Jonah 3 v 5-9

16) Jonan 3 v 10- Ch 4 v 11

17) John 16 v 3

18) I Corinthians 14 v 29

19) Deuteronomy 13 v 1-5

20) I Corinthians 14 v 26

21) I Corinthians 14 v 27

22) I Corinthians 14 v 28

23) I Corinthians 14 v 31

24) I Corinthians 14 v 32

25) I Corinthians 14 v 40

26) I Corinthians 14 v 33

27) I Corinthians 14 v 38

28) I Corinthians 2 v 9-16

29) I Thessalonians 2 v 13

30) EDWARDS. J. (1974) ‘On the religious affections’ Works vol. ii Banner of Truth Trust p 281

31) Jeremiah 23 v 28,29

32) I John 1 v 5

33) Psalm 43 v 3

      Psalm 119 v 105,130.

      Proverbs 6 v 23

      Isaiah 9 v 2

      Matthew 4 v 16

      Matthew 5 v 14

      John 3 v 21

34) Romans 1 v 16

      I Corinthians 1 v 18

      I Thessalonians 1 v 5

      Psalm 110 v 2

35) OWEN, J. ‘The reason of faith’. Works vol. 4 Banner of Truth Trust p 91-93

36) Luke 1 v 18, 20.

37) John 10 v 25.

38) John 5 v 36.

39) John 15 v 24.

40) John 4 v 48.

41) Luke 16 v 31.

42) Numbers 14 v 11.

43) Luke I v 45.

44) John 20 v 29.

45) Genesis 22 v 1-19

46) Matthew 15 v 14

      Mark 8 v 17,18

47) John 10 v 25, 26.

48) II Corinthians 4 v 3.

49) Exodus 7 v 19-23

50) Psalm 145 v 10

      Romans I v 18- 20

51) Galatians I v 8,9.

      Matthew 21 v 12,13.

52) Matthew 15 v 14

      Matthew 23 v 16

      I Corinthians 2 v 14

53) Jeremiah 20 v 9

54) I Corinthians 14 v 29

55) John 10 v 4

56) I Corinthians 14 v 6

57) I Corinthians 14 v 9

58) I Corinthians 14 v 12

59) I Corinthians 14 v 19

60) I Corinthians 14 v 23

61) I Corinthians 14 v 26

62) Acts 2 v 5-13

      I Corinthians 14 v 20-22

63) I Corinthians 14 v 28

64) Luke 16 v 27-31

65) HENDERSON, E. (1841) ‘Buck’s theological dictionary’. p.506. Thomas Tegg. London.

66) STRONG. A.H. (1956) ‘Systematic Theology’ p.130 (My parenthesis) Pickering and Inglis.

67) I Corinthians 1 v 22

68) II Corinthians 5 v 7

69) Hebrews 11 v 1