Inform Your 'Faith'

  Mothers naturally play an integral and indispensable role in the dynamics of children knowing their father. Think about it for a moment. Without the mother, upon conception, a child will not survive. Without the nurture, provision and security of the mother conceived life will not endure. Even after birth the mother's natural provision of breast milk is absolutely necessary for survival. It is only when these basic provisions of a mother are available and enjoyed that life thrives. A child, or new life, NEEDS these provisions or resources in order to live. If the mother isn't in the equation the father never will be. When a child is deprived of these resources or basic provisions, that life will not proliferate. When this happens the child will never thrive, develop or mature to a place of consciousness whereby that child will come to KNOW their father.

   Sunday morning at Sovereign Grace Church of Lagrange we considered what it ACTUALLY means to be blessed and how our understanding of blessedness impacts our life. Ephesians 1:3 reveals that Father God “has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places…”

     of God located in Christ Jesus (Ch.1-2:10). Christ as the center of salvation not

     us.

     of God” or the local church (2:11-22). The exchange of life amongst the church is essential to   

     being ALIVE.

  ~Participating in the local church by contributing to the local church according    

    to the  ‘giftedness’ that Christ has bestowed upon you. (4:7-16). This

    promotes LIFE  and WELLBEING amongst the church including yourself as part of the church.     

    When and how are you contributing to local church LIFE and WELLBEING?

    pray regularly as a way of sustaining LIFE and WELL BEING. Solving problems

    logically, as important as this is,  isn’t the same as asking God to create LIFE or

    to sustain WELL BEING.

   promotes a New manner of LIVING. We will not LIVE according to old, sinful

    customs or practices.

    and businesses/jobs.

Growth by degrees. Last Saturday at Sovereign Grace Church of Lagrange we hosted a Leadership Seminar. Aron Osborne with Metro Life Church shared with us from (2 Cor.3:18)  . Aron enlarged upon the Christian degrees of transformation that unfold as we fix our gaze upon Christ's glory. We are truly and actually being changed from one degree of glory to the next.

  The challenge germane to Christian growth or change (sanctification), often times,  is that we are susceptible to the crux of degrees. What is this crux of degrees. Well its the measure of degrees. Degrees are intrinsically variant. So often do we measure the growth, maturation, transformation et al of ourselves and others based upon greater degrees that we often overlook the growth, maturation and transformation that is actually happening. In other-words we define transformation by 10 degrees or 20 degrees. While growth by these greater degrees does occur we are well served not to overlook growth by lesser degrees.

  So how do we understand growth by degrees? Is it greater degrees or lesser degrees? Well,first things first. This is a false dichotomy. The former shouldn't be put at odds or in competition with the latter. When Paul asserts that we are being transformed from one degree to another he is speaking generally more or less, and not being person specific or relative.The point is that while growth by degrees will be active and present within all of our lives respectively, growth by degrees will vary by degree within all of our lives individually.

  There will be times or periods of life whereby we grow by greater degrees while at other times and periods of life we grow by lesser degrees. Or there may be some whose growth by greater degrees is intrinsically sporadic while another's growth by lesser degrees is intrinsically steady. This is the crux of growth by degrees. There is no standard of measuring our degrees of change or growth within ourselves outside of the standard of Christ's life. And His life in us, by way of the Holy Spirit, is changing us by degrees.

  How should we respond when realizing this? We shouldn't apply a 'uniform degrees' template to every Christian as though one person's growth by degrees will be the same. When we apply a template of this kind we eventually downplay the degrees referred to by Paul. Degrees that are again subjectively variant. We must also recognize that Paul is speaking positively about the degrees of growth. It is a promise we have in Christ whose Spirit has liberated us to be transformed according to Christ's glory. Let's not impose or force one's degree or degree's of growth onto another's degree or degree's of growth! Otherwise the promised degrees of growth promised  here in Scripture will take on oppressive overtones and thereby distort the nature of Christ's glory being worked out in us.

  Christ is working his glory out in us by the Holy Spirit by way of degrees. Growth by degrees is promised. It is incontrovertible. But as we are being changed from one degree of glory to another, that growth by degree will vary from person to person by degrees. Let's bare this in mind as we walk together.

  Two other complaints made during the closing remarks of the 'Strange Fire' Conference was that continuationists jettison Sola Scriptura and that tradition is on their side.  Now, my last blog interacted with the complaint that continuationists jettison Sola Scriptura so I will not do so here. I will only touch on Sola Scriptura as a stepping stool to address the role of tradition in this discussion.

   To start, Sola Scriptura as a theological category came into vogue during the medieval period of the church through the efforts of the Protestant Reformers particularly. Now, as a general truth it is clearly established in Scripture itself and it is inarguably found in the writings of the Ante-Nicene fathers such as Ignatius, Clement and the like. Sola Scriptura as a theological category simply defined and embodied what the Scripture advances and what the early church assumed as a given.

   Sola Scriptura of course has never meant Solo Scriptura. That is, Sola Scriptura was well understood to place sole authority within the framework of Scripture but that Scripture's interpretive tradition or history also lends authority to how we interpret Scripture today, albeit a subordinate authority. Solo Scriptura makes interpretation an individualistic enterprise and cuts a person off from how holy writ has traditionally been understood throughout the panorama of church history or tradition.

   Strange Fire is to be commended for appealing to the role and place of historical interpretation.  However, it certainly seems, as irony would have it, that they have succumbed to the same pitfall as the Roman Catholic Church that actually precipitated the clarion call for a return to Sola Scriptura. - although without the egregious motives as the RCC. Tradition has been elevated to a place of authority over and against the veracity and sole authority of Scripture in determining truth.

    Now, I absolutely concede that tradition dating back to the early church does ostensibly give testimony to the position that the gifts of grace have ceded. Germane to the early church, though, there is no consistent agreement among churchmen fait a compli.Agreement only becomes more pronounced much later in history.    Actually, there is far more evidence that supports the continuum of grace gifts within the first three centuries than granted by Strange Fire. Evidence Strange Fire  conspicuously overlooks or for whatever reason has failed to properly study. As noted church historian Jaroslav Pelikan has posited, "Most ORTHODOX writers in the second and even in the third century maintained that such inspiration by the Holy Spirit (he was referring to prophecy) was not only possible BUT PRESENT AND ACTIVE IN THE CHURCH."

   Clement, who was under the tutelage of Peter and Paul and succeeded them, describes the operation of the gift of the 'utterance of knowledge' (I Cor.12:8) and writes in the same letter, " let every one be subject to his neighbor, according to the special gift bestowed upon him..He who made us and fashioned us, having prepared His bountiful gifts for us before we were born" (The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians). This was in the context of the 'whole body', i.e. the church, serving one another and meeting one another's needs. What he was writing was an extrapolation of I Corinthians 12.

    Ignatius, an understudy of the apostle John who succeeded him through the early second century, describes an instance where he received revelation as the 'Spirit made an announcement to me.' (Epistle To The Philadelphians). Ignatius also wrote about a vision that Polycarp had - who was also an understudy of John. Ignatius recorded, "And while he (Polycarp) was praying, a vision presented itself to him three days before he was taken; and, behold, the pillow under his head seemed to be on fire." (The Martyrdom of Polycarp). He also makes reference to the 'gift of discernment' in his epistle to the Ephesians.

  Moving into the second century we find affirmations of a number of gifts of the Spirit -dreams, visions, prophecy, wisdom, discernment, revelation and more. Moreover, half way into the second century we find Justin Martyr using a record of Marcus Aurelius describing a supernatural miracle executed by the God of the Christians. The Christians serving in Aurelius' army prayed that God would deliver the army from thirst and famine. Aurelius records, "And simultaneously with their casting themselves on the ground, and praying to God, water poured from heaven, upon us most refreshingly cool, but upon the enemies of Rome a withering hail," (The First Apology of Justin). Justin also argued for the case of Christianity against Judaism on grounds that, "among us until now there are prophetic charismata." (Dialogue with Trypho)

   Later into the second century and early into the third Irenaeus affrims the NECESSITY of the gifts mentioned in I Corinthians 12 by quoting I Cor. 12:4-6 & 12:28-29 in order to support their ongoing validity (Irenaeus Against Heresies). In his fifth book of the same work Irenaeus records, "In like manner we do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages (tongues), and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of God." This commentary was in a chapter with the following statement as the heading, "God will bestow salvation upon the whole nature of man, consisting of body and soul in close union, since the word took it upon him, and adorned it (our soul) with gifts of the Holy Spirit..." 

   Celsus, in the second century, acknowledged the presence and activity of 'prophets' in Palestine and Phoenicia. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage well into the third century, argued against the hyper charismatic Montanists of his day by contending that, "the church had a greater share of visions, revelations, and dreams than did they." (Epistles). Church historian, Eusebius of the third and fourth century documents, "the apostle declares that the prophetic charisma should continue to be in the entire church until the last parousia" (Ecclesiastical History). This is all curiously and notably absent from Stranger Fire's assertion that they have early church tradition on their side. Strange Fire is historically inaccurate when they claim the support of early church tradition. Historical facts alone disprove their denunciation of the continuationist position. The charismata were commonplace amongst the first four centuries of the church to such an extent that it boasted more charismata than the hyper charismatic Montanists of their day and age. 

   Strange Fire and cessationists postulate that the gifts, particularly the miraculous gifts, ceded after the apostolic era. History, AND EARLY TRADITION as it were, resoundingly shows otherwise as I have shown above. Tradition shows it was well adjudged that the gifts were understood to be an operative grace until Christ returned. 

   The question we are well served to ask is 'At what juncture in early church history did the gifts begin to accrue disapproval?' So much so that they were more or less purged from church culture. The trend to look unfavorably upon the gifts of the Spirit essentially began with the emergence of the Montanist heresy near the end of the second century. It boasted receiving Spirit inspired prophecy that was was equally reliable and authoritative as Scripture. Cyril of Jerusalem, Hippolytus among others entered into the fray and repudiated this so called "New Prophecy" as they should have. This, along with the emerging formation of an increasingly rigid polity (church governance) led to the purgation of the gifts from the culture and teaching of the church. As the church realized that Christ's return may not be as soon as they anticipated they began adapting by taking measures to organize in order to insure a their perseverance. These two dynamics coalesced. The heretical abuses of the Montanist's and the formation of the church's polity in the form of a monarchical episcopate led to the institutional rejection of the gifts of the Spirit. This is where the roots of cessationism can be traced. Cessationism was not early biblical tradition. It was an institutional tradition that emerged due to abuses. This 'tradition' ultimately has usurped Scripture and apostolic tradition relative to Strange Fire.

   Even John Calvin who was a cessationist conceded, ", “It is possible, no doubt, that the world may have been deprived of this honour (the gifts of the Spirit) through the guilt of its own ingratitude.

   Strange Fire ultimately mishandles historical/traditional evidence to support their position. Tradition well beyond the golden age of the Apostolic era attests to the continuation of the gifts.

Sola Scriptura!!! A hallmark of the Protestant Reformation.
  Strange Fire also asserts that continuationists "tacitly" deny the reformed principle of Sola Scriptura. This reformed tenet fundamentally means that scripture is the sole authority in determining what Christians hold to be true because scripture is God's revealed truth/s for us to live by. And because the bible is a closed canon, fait a compli, (i.e. collection of God's revealed Word) there will be no additions to nor subtractions from it (Rev.22:18-19). More could be said in terms of a more trenchant working definition of course. But that is beyond the scope of this evaluation.

  First of all, I applaud the uncompromising stance to doggedly defend the authority of Scripture as every Christian should. This certainly is a Christian virtue well espoused by the Strange Fire Conference. The church should ceaselessly strive to be a "Bibliocracy," to borrow a word from the Reformer Huldrych Zwingli. To view Scripture as inadequate, in terms of its revelatory content as as sufficient truth, IS condemnable. To knowingly and deliberately substitute the sufficiency of Scripture as the sole source of verifiable and authentic revealed truth IS the work of the "spirit of error" or the "spirit of the antichrist," (I John 4:1-6).  We should all heartily be in agreement with this emphasis of Strange Fire. Their intentions here are beyond cavil. Beyond this, though, they do egregiously err. Perhaps, unwittingly.

  Strange Fire asserts that continuationists tacitly deny Sola Scriptura on grounds that they advocate "extra-biblical" revelation. Revelation for them (Strange Fire), of course, being strictly defined as the infallible revealed truths of Scripture. If continuationist's were promoting the validity of ongoing revelation on par with Scripture, than Strange Fire would have a point. However, that is not what continuationists mean. (There are many Pentecostals and Charismatics that would practice that and they should be called on to repent.)   Revelation for Strange Fire, according to their argumentation, is a misnomer. They are offering a critique of something that isn't being said or practiced by sound continuationists, as well as, confusing biblical categories (see "Strange Fire" Eval.#2). Scripture does affirm a category of revelation beyond the canon though not tantamount to the canon and of course subject or subordinate to the canon (again see "Strange Fire" Eval.#2). This revelation would of course be subject to the Analogy of Faith.

  Now, it does appear that Strange Fire, in their explicit denial of the gift of prophecy and ongoing miraculous gifts et al, are actually the ones culpable of denying Sola Scriptura - not tacitly, but explicitly. I'm not suggesting this applies to all who are cessationist and working through the implications. I am applying this to Strange Fire explicitly. Their primary arguments are framed from historical tradition - or the voices of tradition - at the expense of the Vox Dei, the voice of God in Scripture. What I mean is that Strange Fire proponents read the voices of history into the texts of the bible. (This is also a violation of  Reformed hermeneutics. I will touch on this in "Strange Fire" Eval.#5).  

  Ironically, this very practice was what motivated the Reformers and Protestant Reformers to recapture and herald the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. The Roman Catholic Church had abandoned the sole authority of Scripture by subordinating the bible to the authority of the Pope and the authority of Roman Catholic tradition.  Inevitably, this led to the "canonization" of the extra-biblical Apocrypha. Interestingly, the Roman Catholic Church of course claimed to have "historical tradition" on their side just as Strange Fire does by enlisting the position of Reformed ministers and early church fathers to support their case. However, they prove to misrepresent the early church fathers on this point. I will touch on this in "Strange Fire" Eval.#4.

  The principle of Sola Scriptura does involve the role of tradition and creed.. However, it does not do so in a way that locates primary authority within tradition or creed. Sacred Writ alone carries that weight.
  When the Reformers were fighting for Sola Scriptura they also realized the necessity of historical interpretations of Scripture and historical church culture as a guide of sorts for understanding Scripture, albeit, not infallible. This was heralded by the medieval humanist phrase "ad fontes" - or return to the fountain or sources. By this was meant that it was incumbent upon the church to cull from the history of the early church (particularly the Patriarchs) as a way to learn how Scripture and church culture was understood then as a guide to how understand them now.
   Nevertheless, tradition was and is to be treated as "regulae doctrinae" or the rule of doctrine while Scripture was and is to be treated as "regulae fidei" or the  rule of faith. The Reformers resoundingly subscribed to this.
   Strange Fire has elevated tradition (Even though the early church fathers do not posthumously support their position as they would postulate they do. Some certainly do of course. Again, I will touch on this in "Strange Fire" Eval.#4) over the veracity of Scripture. This is clear from the pronounced lack of biblical support for their position and their clear reliance on traditional voices above and beyond the clear truths of biblical nomenclature. Where the plain sense of Scripture is in discord with tradition reject tradition not the plain sense of Scripture (sensus literalis).
  Continuationists actually hold to Sola Scriptura more consistently than does the "Strange Fire" position. The ongoing gifts of the Spirit serve to actually promote Sola Scriptura by enlarging our understanding of Scripture or illuminating the truths of Scripture to our perpetually renewed minds (Rom.12:2; Eph.4:22-24; Col.3:9-10). Neither experience nor historical antecedents supersede the clear and plain sense of Scripture or the authority of Scripture.
    Scripture is clear (as are the early church fathers on the gifts of the Spirit...This is developed in "Strange Fire" Eval.#4) that the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and, yes, even gifts of healing and prophecy continue in perpetuity until Christ's return, as the Sovereign Spirit "apportions" (I Cor.12:4-11) regardless of what much later "tradition" maintains based upon REDACTED early church tradition, (see Charles Hodge I Corinthians, pg.30; John Chrysostom, Homilies on First Corinthians, p.6-7, 4th century A.D.; and, yes, John MacArthur himself  I Corinthians, pg.18-20, 363-366; to name a few).
    If Sola Scriptura is consistently adhered to, without existential, subjective or experiential bias, then the only conclusion to come to is that the gifts of the Spirit continue to be relevant, as the Spirit sovereignly distributes, the return of Christ when the "perfect" has come (I Cor. 1:4-8,12-14( esp.13:8-12); Eph.4:11-16; I Thess.5:20; I Peter 4:7-11).

Commenting on I Corinthians 13:8-12:
  "It is no part of the apostle's purpose to unsettle our confidence in what God now communicates by his (R.C Sproul, What is Reformed Theology; Keith A. Mathison, the Shape of Sola Scriptura; Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers; Alister E. McGrath, Reformation Thourght; Heiko Oberman, The Dawn of the Reformation; et al).

Inform your faith!

    2 other concluding thoughts or judgments offered at the end of the "Strange Fire" Conference  in regard to continuationists that need evaluation are:

    A.) Continuationists distract from the Holy Spirit's true ministry by enticing people to buy into a false ministry. A hazardous distinction to make by the way (Matt.12:22-32). According to this reasoning, advocating the ongoing activity of the Spirit by way of the perpetuity of charisms/gifts somehow suggests a view of the Spirit's insufficiency. Consequently, it is false. This is maintained on the grounds that the Spirit's work/s of regeneration, sanctification, conviction, filling, and sealing are the primary works of the Spirit. Well to those specifics of the Spirit's ministry continuationists would say an unabashed amen. However, we would actually propound a more robust activity of the Spirit that brings those about. Strange Fire's characterization of the gifts as false evinces a fundamental misapprehension of the nature of the gifts as biblically delineated. See below.

    B.)  Continuationists wrongly or erroneously advance the gift of Prophecy and special revelation. The two of course are interrelated. This objection relates to the above A.). For "Strange Fire" Prophecy and revelation must be on par with O.T. Prophecy. They treat the two as if they have to be understood in terms of being "inspired" in the sense of the Bible being "inspired" and "infallible." Again, this misunderstands and confuses the biblical categories. See below.

   Continuationsists actually advocate a biblical sufficiency of the work of the Spirit and a robust, biblically grounded pneumotology (doctrine of the Holy Spirit) that cessationists degrade. Now, "Strange Fire" is correct to denounce much of the hyper-Charismatic and Word of Faith doctrines and practices as degrading the ministry of the Spirit. Although, to generalize as they did is just dishonest. In the end, after honest biblical interpretation, it is possible that they are actually pointing the proverbial finger at themselves with concern. A.). A concern that is more or less existential or experiential in nature than biblical or theological. And this existential or experiential dilemma is the base of THEIR objection/s allayed against charismatics...while lumping continuationists into the mix. While Scripture undoubtedly affirms the work of the Spirit they acknowledge, Scripture also undoubtedly affirms the work of the Spirit continuationsts acknowledge. Actually, continuationists maintain that the ongoing activity of the gifts that are commonplace within the N.T. community and regularly promoted (Rom.12:3-8; I Cor.12:1-30; Eph. 4:8-16; I Peter 4:7-11) serve to promote regeneration, sanctification, conviction, filling and sealing that the "Strange Fire" cessationists primarily affirm. "Strange Fire," in denouncing the gifts/charisms, shortchanges the Spirit's work though. 

    The above indictment (A.) at the closing of the conference either indicates that they are:
1) unfamiliar with continuationist doctrine (and meaning), 2) ignoring what they do know and are familiar with and arguing a "straw man" anyway (a logical fallacy where another's position is misrepresented) or 3) unfamiliar with how Scripture represents the gifts/charism's of the Spirit and thus the role and activity of the Spirit. I cannot say without being in immediate dialogue with them. Speculative conclusions and inferences can only be teased out from their literature.

    Instead of offering a rational critique on grounds of logic (or experience) I would rather turn to Scripture to define the role of the Spirit; which is a biblical logic. Something the concluding thoughts from the "Strange Fire Conference" sorely lacked. The conference by and large was inadequate in providing a comprehensive biblical warrant.

   Let's begin with a record of Christ's description of the economy (activity or ministry) of the Spirit. Here are quotes from the Johannine gospel: John 14:16, "And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, to be with you FOREVER, even the Spirit of Truth...You know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you." - Christ is here promising "another Helper" (advocate, counselor) that will indwell the disciples and His flock, by extension. The other Helper was Christ. This Helper, while a distinct person of the Godhead as the Holy Spirit, isn't altogether different in economy or function -  John 14:26, "the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you," (cf.16:12-13). - The Spirit is identified here as He who will imbue the disciples with remembrance of Christ's teaching (this teaching is in the context of the Last Supper John 13 where the disciples were with Christ). This, the Holy Spirit did, as I am quoting from a fulfillment of that verse. The Holy Spirit did accomplish this as the remembrance produced in John is confirmed by this record of it in inspired Scripture. The New Testament was canonized by writers who were inspired and taught by the Holy Spirit just as Christ promised (II Tim. 3:16; II Peter 1:19-21). Interestingly, John, who quoted Christ as teaching the above, (John 14:26) applied this to the Christians at Ephesus near the end of his life. - I John 2:26-27, "But the anointing (i.e. the Holy Spirit that all born again Christians have been given and not some secondary experience) that you received from Him (Christ) abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you...." - John is maintaining that what was true for them (the Apostles/disciples in John 14:26) is true for all who have been born of God. 
   Now, there is a distinction that needs to be made. The Holy Spirit taught/reminded the Apostles of the teachings of Christ...the same teachings the apostles like John promulgated to the nascent church. For the Christians at Ephesus, to whom John is writing in I John, the oral tradition (primarily - although some letters were written by then) John and others had taught them, as the Spirit was bringing the teachings of Christ to their remembrance (John 14:26) was the same teaching the "anointing" or Spirit would confirm within every born again believer. The point is that the same Spirit in the Apostles, who taught and reminded them (the apostles) of the teachings of Christ is the same Spirit at work in all believers now, who teaches us and reminds us of the teachings of Christ as recorded in Scripture or, in other-words, as taught by the Apostles (I John 4:6).
       The aforementioned establishes that the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, guides Christians into all truth. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth. This does not mean that the Holy Spirit will reveal NEW propositional truths not previously revealed in Scripture. Nor is that what John means in I John 2:26-27. The canon of Scripture is closed. There will be no additions nor subtractions. The Bible is the ONLY infallible and propositionaly authoritative revelation of God.
    That is not the end of the matter though as "Strange Fire" would like the church to believe. The "true" ministry of the Spirit WILL enable us to recognize and believe the revealed truths of Scripture. The continuationist ethos and praxis of the Spirit's ongoing activity serves to promote the "true" ministry as defined by cessationists.
    The gifts of grace that the Spirit sovereignly, "apportions to each one individually as He wills," (I Cor. 12:11) serves to insure the perpetuity of the Spirit inspired truths of biblical nomenclature. The gifts of "the utterance of wisdom," "the utterance of knowledge," "teaching," "exhortation" and "prophecy," are given to promote an understanding of that which has been revealed in Scripture by the same Spirit of Truth that endows Christians with these gifts, (I Cor. 12:4-11, 14:26,29-32; Rom.12:6-8; I Peter 4:11).
     These Gifts of the Spirit exist to illuminate the truths of Scripture that have already been revealed through Christ, His Gospel and the "remembrance" that the Spirit enabled the Apostles and other inspired N.T. writers to have...now recorded in the 66 books of the Bible. These CONTINUING gifts serve to "reveal" a fuller understanding of Scripture that was otherwise not apprehended or understood by Christians. These gifts provide further "revelation" in relation to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and His teaching relayed to all Christians, by way of the writers of the N.T. as they were moved by the Spirit of Truth, throughout time until Christ returns.
    Prophecy and revelation are not to be understood as new revelations beyond Scripture or fresh propositional truths revealed beyond the revealed truths recorded in the Bible as the "Strange Fire" proponents inaccurately and falsely allege.
     This is in accord with the Pauline understanding of the continuation of prophecy and revelation. The continuing activity of prophecy and revelation, as the Spirit continues to sovereignly distribute, serves to enlarge the Christian's clarity or understanding of what has been revealed through Christ and His teaching. Teaching that was preserved by the apostolic community as the Spirit brought to their remembrance the things of Christ. (We should agree, though, that many in the Pentecostal/Charismatic camps do promote a Montanist "new prophecy" doctrine whereby prophecy reveals new truths beyond the truths of Scripture in terms of propositional truths.)
    "Strange Fire" makes many exegetical, categorical and contextual missteps when evaluating the continuationist position and the biblical evidence provided germane to prophecy and revelation. (See D.A. Carson, Showing the Spirit, pp. 119-121, 132-133,163 for instance). Space will not permit a more trenchant treatment and I am already pushing the envelope in terms of a blog so the following will have to suffice.
    Paul relates "revelation" to "prophecy" in I Cor. 14:29-33. He also places limitations on both thus affirming that they are not infallible expressions of grace. "Strange Fire" suggests this is impossible by relating N.T. prophecy/revelation to O.T. prophecy and inspired revelation. Paul clearly does not reason the way they do. If prophecy/revelation is tantamount to infallible prophecy and revelation on par with Scripture (as "Strange Fire" maintains it should be understood) Paul is a blasphemer...denying the infallible word of God from being pronounced as he would be doing in I Cor.14:29-33. This is an absurdity.
   The ongoing gifts/charisms of prophecy and revelation that continue to be operative within the Church serve to reveal a fuller understanding of those truths revealed in Scripture. In other words, a prophecy or revelation is a gift given by the Spirit (I Cor.12:11) in order to enlarge the Church's comprehension of the teachings of Christ, recorded in Scripture, as the Spirit inspired its writers, so that the Church can continue to mature in making application in our present life until Christ returns. Paul prayed this much (Col.1:9-12 for instance).
  Moreover, Paul taught the Philippians that he trusted that God would "reveal" a teaching of his to them when they at the time might not have understood or received it (Phil. 3:12-15). Elsewhere Paul prayed, "that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened...," (Eph.1:16-18a). As D.A. Carson notes, "Apparently, at least some of this revelation came through a quiet divine disclosure, part of the Christian's growing grasp of spiritual realities - a growing grasp that can come only by revelation, which is to say it comes by grace."
  These are congruous with the Spirit's gifts of the "utternace of wisdom" (I Cor.12:8) and "prophecy/revelation" (I Cor.12:10;14:29-30).  These supernatural gifts of grace continue in perpetuity until Christ returns (I Cor.1:7-8;13:8-12) for the building of Christ's church...aka regeneration, sanctification, conviction et al.

    "Stange Fire" fails to be convincing from a biblical and exegetical/hermenuetical standpoint. "Strange Fire" is simply redefining the sufficiency and ministry of the Spirit as outlined in Scripture. By and large they appear to be working with an "axe to grind" interpretive template more than a biblical template. At least John Calvin, while taking the cessationist position, was honest about it in saying, “It is possible, no doubt, that the world may have been deprived of this honour (the continuation of the gifts) through the guilt of its own ingratitude.”

+Inform your faith