Some Thoughts On Charismatic-Cessationist Debate
If you're familiar with the going-ons in the Reformed blogosphere, then you'll know there has been a slight debate about the Gift of Tongues between Dan Phillips of Team Pyro and Adrian Warnock.
It is not in my interest to make a contribution of any sort for either side, but I have some thoughts about Charismatic-Cessationist debate.
It is almost impossible to (especially when discussing the issue of spiritual gifts) "debate" one side into accepting your view. When both sides of either view (Charismatic and Cessationist) are willing to debate each other, it already goes to show their absolutely firm convictions in this regard.
The arguments presented will almost always appeal to those who have leanings towards a certain side. But it helps to seriously evaluate the arguments given, and not just dismiss them as "nope, just won't fit with my beliefs".
Logical and exegetical accuracy and lucidity must prevail. Also, it is very important not to ask questions or present arguments that have already been answered or responded to. Even if the response or answer might not have been convincing; if so do offer an appropriate rejoinder.
What I notice is that some have been asking questions and presenting arguments that have been dealt with over and over again by both sides as if those arguments/questions have never really been dealt with at all!
Well, that's it. Feel free to take issue with me on anything above here. I'm certainly far from being as knowledgeable as many people in this debate.
And where does my allegiance lie? Hehe, that's hard to say. My views have been changing quite a bit since I wrote my "Plea to Charismatics" and my response to John Piper (see the Index of Posts). I still do stand by most of what I've wrote, though.
My views can be best summarized like this:
People like Gaffin et. al. I think, stretches it a bit exegetically (or it could be my ignorance- I'm still learning!). On the other hand, people like Grudem et. al. are not convincing when they advocate their view of "fallible prophecy" or other related things. I still hold to cessationist definitions of spiritual gifts. As to whether the gifts have ceased, I am still undecided.
Call me open but very cautious.
It is not in my interest to make a contribution of any sort for either side, but I have some thoughts about Charismatic-Cessationist debate.
- Both sides ought to realize that both are members of the Body of Christ, and as such ought to know that they are united in bigger things while keeping in mind that they are divided in the smaller ones.
- Both sides would do a service to each other to be always charitable and not overly argumentative. (Forgive the bold words, but I think it's important to emphasize the two).
- Charismatic-Cessationist debate is not futile. Everyone should know that! Such debate needs to bring into open the arguments of both sides and let discerning Christians (who have or have not chosen a side) decide which is the most biblical.
- Both sides should know when to stop. Especially if the discussion is going in circles. One side will have to take the initiative, however.
- Both sides have bad arguments and both sides have good arguments. But only one side can be right!
It is almost impossible to (especially when discussing the issue of spiritual gifts) "debate" one side into accepting your view. When both sides of either view (Charismatic and Cessationist) are willing to debate each other, it already goes to show their absolutely firm convictions in this regard.
The arguments presented will almost always appeal to those who have leanings towards a certain side. But it helps to seriously evaluate the arguments given, and not just dismiss them as "nope, just won't fit with my beliefs".
Logical and exegetical accuracy and lucidity must prevail. Also, it is very important not to ask questions or present arguments that have already been answered or responded to. Even if the response or answer might not have been convincing; if so do offer an appropriate rejoinder.
What I notice is that some have been asking questions and presenting arguments that have been dealt with over and over again by both sides as if those arguments/questions have never really been dealt with at all!
Well, that's it. Feel free to take issue with me on anything above here. I'm certainly far from being as knowledgeable as many people in this debate.
And where does my allegiance lie? Hehe, that's hard to say. My views have been changing quite a bit since I wrote my "Plea to Charismatics" and my response to John Piper (see the Index of Posts). I still do stand by most of what I've wrote, though.
My views can be best summarized like this:
People like Gaffin et. al. I think, stretches it a bit exegetically (or it could be my ignorance- I'm still learning!). On the other hand, people like Grudem et. al. are not convincing when they advocate their view of "fallible prophecy" or other related things. I still hold to cessationist definitions of spiritual gifts. As to whether the gifts have ceased, I am still undecided.
Call me open but very cautious.
This entry was posted
on Sunday, July 30, 2006 at 4:23 PM.
|
