Let me begin, Alan, by saying how much I appreciate your 'polite' treatment of these controversial topics. It's a welcome change from the normal cadence of social media. Your well-delivered posts warrant a thoughtful response. My father used to tell a very corny joke, but I think it's relevant. He spoke of a man who claimed unequivocally that "All Indians walk in a single file.... at least the one I saw did." Ignoring the fact that the joke is politically incorrect, it does identify a mindset that tends to universalize ideas or ideologies into a one-size-fits-all box. Until your last couple of posts, I had not heard of the HVG ("Hearing the Voice of God") label. I didn't realize it was a "thing", but apparently Dallas Willard and others have put some parameters around this idea that don't set well with conservative evangelicals.
While I disagree with your position that God's written Word is His only & complete means of communication today, I would like to cite a few HVG fallacies which I believe have discredited the entire notion of God communicating with man in a personal way in our age.
1) Anyone who attempts to formularize the means by which one can "get God to speak extra-Biblically" to them is way off base. As you yourself pointed out, God has communicated in countless ways throughout the O.T. and N.T. and He will not be manipulated by any kind of methodology.
2) There is often a presumption of holiness when one claims that God has spoken to them personally. This, too, is false. When God says or does ANYTHING, it is about Him (the Messenger) and not about me (the receiver). I deserve no praise for having been the recipient of a Word from the Lord. After all, He once spoke through a donkey.
3) To suggest that the Bible is lacking without a supplemental word from God violates the canonization of Scripture as well as Biblical texts such as II Tim 3:16 and Rev 22:18-19.
To summarize, I believe God speaks when, how, where, and to whom He wills. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that it is prescriptive. Second, there is no personal glory in having heard from God (i.e. it's not about me). Lastly, if God never speaks a personal Word to me, I can rest assured that the Bible thoroughly equips me for every good work. That being said, most of your contrarians have objected to your stance based on the claim of personal experience. This is, admittedly, a weak argument. On the other hand, it has been said that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The Bible is silent on how the Holy Spirit has chosen to communicate after the formation of the early Church in Acts, so to hold that He does or does not do this or that is tenuous (so long as it doesn't violate His nature as revealed in the Text). Jesus does refer to the Holy Spirit as a parakletos (helper/counselor/advocate) in John 15 which certainly suggests that He is more than a mere bookmark into Scripture.
In your previous post on this topic, you said, "There’s no reason to believe that scripture plus prayer does not constitute meaningful communication between ourselves and our Lord." I agree. On the other hand, to hold that God does speak in personal ways today does not contradict your statement. Let me close by saying I believe I have heard God's voice on three occasions. None were audible but all were explicit enough that I could write down what was impressed on my mind verbatim. In just one of those instances, the short phrase I received was meant for one of my pastors. I have never been keen on people who go around frequently carrying a "word from the Lord" for someone else, but I was also convicted that I would be disobedient if I didn't follow through. Reluctantly, I shared the brief message with my pastor along with the caveat that "this has never happened to me before so please test what I tell you against Scripture and through prayer." His response: "You're the fourth person to share that with me this week. God is clearly trying to tell me something." Go figure...
Comments
Post a Comment