Does my title give me away? So much for being coy with my proposition. Let me say that this post is going to get me in trouble with some dear friends who preach God’s word every week. My message to them: Bear with my critique. I pray that my thoughts will be considered as “wounds from a friend”—a very fallible friend.
Here, let’s start this way. Have you ever heard someone (probably a preacher or teacher in the church) say something like this:
“I had prepared all week to teach on __________, but the Holy Spirit changed my lesson at the last minute.”
I have. Dozens of times. The idea it conveys is that the particular message that was prepared was not of God (at least at that time) and this new message was most certainly of God. In fact, the new message is miraculously of God! Why? Because I did not really prepare for it. It must have been God who prepared it. “I just step back when that happens and let God do his thing. Who am I to interrupt God?”
Can I say something? (Wait, let me hide behind something first . . .There.) That is a stupid statement!
My basic thesis is this: The type of assumptions required to adopt the occurrence of such homiletic detours is irresponsible both to yourself and to your audience and misunderstands the way God works in the life of the church.
Let me give you some characteristics that I see in such statements. They can:
Neglect the Holy Spirit. The idea that is conveyed is that the Holy Spirit is not present in the sermon/lesson preparation process. Without God’s presence and guidance in the study, does he somehow show up at the pulpit? There is no justification for such thinking. In fact, I would argue that we are in more need of the Spirit’s guidance in the study than we are when we deliver. If the Spirit is not present when you are in preparation, how can he be there when you deliver? The delivery is simply the product of your life, study, preparation, and daily walk with God. If this is true, why would God miraculously change what he has been preparing you to present? Can he not make up his mind? Did some new unforeseen circumstance arise that caused him to adjust, shift, or compensate for? Be careful.
Blame the Holy Spirit. The idea that God changes the sermon or lesson can be an attempt to discount your involvement and responsibility in what is being presented. Maybe you did not prepare and you are seeking someone to blame? Maybe you want to say something that you don’t think will gain people’s favor? Maybe you are just trying to blame the Holy Spirit?
Be manipulative. The third commandment, in principle, has nothing to do with swearing, but everything to do with protecting God’s reputation. When we claim that God miraculously changed the lesson or sermon, we may be manipulating the audience. In other words, it may be another way of saying, “This sermon is really from God.” In doing this, you are using his reputation by way of putting a “hands-off” authentication on your teaching. After all, if God changed your mind at the last minute, whatever criticism that someone might have must concede its fury; otherwise, the critics might find themselves at enmity with God himself. That type of approach is manipulative. The best we can do is prayfully hope that God has guided our lives, thoughts, and studies to qualify us to represent him when the time comes.
Arise from a gnostic bent. I think that people assume that this is a norm in the pulpit because we have the tendency to separate the mundane from the sacred. We often believe that if it is from the Lord, it will have a halo around it. Halos don’t seem to appear in studies that are filled with struggle, doubt, and, often, timidity in our conclusions. We seek the halos to rise above the mundane to sanctify us in a different way. However, we must live thoroughly converted lives, recognizing that the wall between the sacred and the “secular” is not really present, and it never was. It is no more spiritual to study than to preach.
But . . . What about . . .
I can hear it coming. What about Jude in the New Testament? I am just following in his footsteps.
“Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.” (Jud. 1:3)
Doesn’t Jude here demonstrate that he was going to write about something but the Holy Spirit led him somewhere else? Yes, but this cannot be applied to what I am speaking about. Jude is not saying that he was just about to write on the subject of salvation, but the Lord miraculously changed his lesson. He is saying that he purposed to write about salvation, but he was convicted of a greater priority instead. To put this in our current situation, it would be like me saying that I have been intending to preach on marriage, but I feel it is more important at this time for me to start a series on dealing with false doctrine due to its current influence in our culture. The reason for the change is not some last minute anointing of the Holy Spirit, but because of the expediency of the subject for the current situation. It says nothing about preparation and study. It is assumed that Jude is prepared to speak to the issue of his conviction precicely because of the presence of his conviction.
In the end, we need to be careful. From conception, preparation, to presentation, we can only hope that God is guiding it all. Can God change our sermon or lesson while we are in the pulpit? Of course. The question that you have to ask yourself is whether or not this is a model that we should expect. Your message can be further shaped, nuanced, and impassioned while you are teaching, but this is not really God changing your sermon. Preach what you prepare for and prepare for what you preach.
128 replies to ""I Was Going to Preach this, but the Holy Spirit Led Me to This" . . . And other Stupid Statements"
Preachers are to called to preach the Word, not what they hear in their ears purporting to be from God. I grew up in a very weird Pentecostal church (in distinction to the Keeners, Fees and Grudems of this world) where every sermon was a Bible verse and some “revelations” that a preacher got which held no water against the text.
Vinod’s view of God speaking makes you a captive to subjective experience, rather than the objective truth of God’s Word. Bro. Leslie made a good point earlier: No serious, time-consumed student of the Word who is known as a solid preacher these days have EVER come to that conclusion
We ought to beware a cold, mechanical sermon preparation period, but we should just as avoid the temptation to sit in the corner, hum and wait for the sermon to come down from heaven. God gave us brains, logic and reasoning faculties – let us glorify Him and make use of those faculties.
We ought to beware a cold, mechanical sermon preparation period, but we should just as avoid the temptation to sit in the corner, hum and wait for the sermon to come down from heaven. God gave us brains, logic and reasoning faculties – let us glorify Him and make use of those faculties.
More importantly, He gave us His breathed out word. I think this is why expository preaching is so powerful because it is highlighting what the text says and just letting it say what it says. It is inspired by God so just reading it out to work wonders. I am reminded of Israel’s response when Josiah recovered the books of the Law and just began reading them to the people. Oh what repentance that invoked. Same with Ezra after the temple was rebuilt.
Sadly, I have heard some preachers dismiss expository teaching as if it were cold and dead. I’m like, how can God’s word be cold and dead?
Hi Lisa,
Good answer that God spoke to you when you read Matthew. I am not sure if you know that devil also speaks so how you can be sure that God spoke?
Don’t get me wrong I refering to.
Mat 4:5 Then the devil took Him up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple,
Mat 4:6 and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written: ‘He shall give His angels charge over you,’ and, ‘In their hands they shall bear you up, Lest you dash your foot against a stone.'”
That is Ps 91:11,12 quoted by devil. Was Ps 91:11,12 wrong? Was it not God’s Word? It is God’s Word and it did happen just after devil left.
Mat 4:11 Then the devil left Him, and behold, angels came and ministered to Him.
Problem was devil was trying to use it for his purpose.
If only God was speaking then every single person who read the Bible would have understood it exactly the same because God is not a God of confusion.
You wrote:
“Regarding the passages you cited in John – CONTEXT! Jesus was talking to his apostles, as these are the ones who will carry his testimony with authority. How could he bring me into remembrance of things when I wasn’t there?”
Paul was not present but Holy Spirit did bring every thing to rememberance. Do you know why you used context here? Because you don’t want to believe that verse. Every time you don’t want to believe you try to hide behind context.
Gal 1:11 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man.
Gal 1:12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Throughout Bible God has been revealing. Paul was a theologian and his studies could not bring revealation. He sincerely believed the wrong thing until the revelation came. When revelation came he belived the right thing. Then he got all the further revelation directly from God.
Good question why would Jesus consult anybody. If Jesus doesn’t consult why would you and I? Should we not consult only the Word of God?
When rich man pleaded with Abraham. Abraham didn’t tell him to consult commentary instead he said “They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them”.
Luke 16:28 ‘for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’
Luke 16:29 “Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’
God speaks through His Word and He speaks directly too. Problem with you is that you don’t believe that God can speak directly.
Paul was not present? Read Acts 9. And thanks for pointing out my problem. Appreciate it
Hi Douglas,
You wrote:
“Preachers are to called to preach the Word, not what they hear in their ears purporting to be from God.”
Where do you get that? Every single person who wrote the Bible heard what you call “in their ears purporting to be from God”. Every single one of them. Why you consider it as unaceptable method?
Can you find one single person in the Bible who sat down and did his study and prepared a sermon like that? Give me one single example.
You guys teach what is not in the Bible. You do what God hates.
Jer 23:30 “Therefore behold, I am against the prophets,” says the LORD, “who steal My words every one from his neighbor.
Jer 23:31 “Behold, I am against the prophets,” says the LORD, “who use their tongues and say, ‘He says.’
Jer 23:32 “Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” says the LORD, “and tell them, and cause My people to err by their lies and by their recklessness. Yet I did not send them or command them; therefore they shall not profit this people at all,” says the LORD.
If you did your study go and tell that you prepared it with your own brain and did not hear from God specifically. Why go and tell it is Word of God after adding and substracting and changing the meaning?
God still speaks directly. God still speaks through dreams. God still speaks through visions. He has done it throughout Bible and He doesn’t change.
For me, it is sad that we live in such an age where the Holy Ghost has so been either reduced to a non-tangible position or misrepresented to be the source of all that we do. If we Pentecostals have, in many ways, usurped His identity, then let it also be acknowledged that many others have deified the Book and turned it into a totem. In the fifth chapter of John’s gospel, Jesus, at one point, tells the Pharisees, those “men of the church” who studied and parsed and edited the written Law, that they have not “heard His voice” at any time nor did they have “His word abiding in them”. In his “The Cost of Discipleship”, Dietrich Bonhoeffer asks “Which is our final authority: Christ or the Law?” and then states that “The law is not itself God, nor is God the law. It was the error of Israel to put the law in God;s place, to make the law their God and their God a law. The disciples were confronted with the opposite danger of denying the law its divinity altogether and divorcing God from His law. Both errors lead to the same result.” If what the brother, here, is saying is simply that we need to be careful as to how much authorship of our efforts we attribute to the Spirit, I enthusiastically say “Amen!”, but let it apply to our preparation as well as our deliverance. The Holy Ghost, even as Jesus stated, is well able to testify of Himself.
Hi lisa,
What you want me to read in Acts 9? That just confirms what I said Paul was not present when Jesus walked on the surface of this earth.
Paul got everything through revelation later. So what you want to tell from Acts 9?
“God still speaks directly. God still speaks through dreams. God still speaks through visions. He has done it throughout Bible and He doesn’t change.
Vinod, I would encourage you to read Hebrews 1:1-3 regarding how God speaks now versus how God spoke prior to Christ.
I would also encourage you to read the blog rules. Your accusatory and condemning tone is not only in violation of said rules but completely unproductive for fruitful discussion.
If we are so uninformed and wrong, then why on earth do you bother to interact here?
Yes Vinod, Paul received a revelation of Christ which authenticates his apostleship. He wrote under apostolic authority to bear the testimony of Christ. Your verses in Galatians affirm this fact.
Hi lisa,
Heb 1:1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;
Heb 1:3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
That talks about Jesus’s life on this earth. What happens after “Sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high”?
John 16:7 “Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.
Heb 1:1-3 doesn’t say that God has changed his methods of speaking.
Hi Lisa,
Blog rules? You have accused me of being arrogant and so many other things. So that is ok for you but not ok for me to tell you the truth?
Hi Lisa
You wrote:
“Yes Vinod, Paul received a revelation of Christ which authenticates his apostleship. He wrote under apostolic authority to bear the testimony of Christ. Your verses in Galatians affirm this fact.”
Where does Bible say that Jesus gave revelation to atuhenticate his apostleship? God doesn’t give revelation to authenticate apstelships, He gives reverlations to convey His message.
Hi Jim,
God still speaks directly. But a person hearing God’s voice needs to make sure that he is really hearing from God. If God is speaking He will speak in confirmation to the Word.
If anything comes in contradiction to the Word then it is possible that source is different.
Hi Vinod,
I very much agree, but would tell you that Christianity is split into many factions which do not all agree as to what the Word tells us. Therefore I suggest that the best we get in this is an inner anchor-line whom we refer to as the Holy Ghost (Spirit), the Bible, and a boot-in-the-but (His rod and His staff) as we take the next step in an attempt to know the Third Member of the Trinity. It remains a stumble any way one looks at it and the best we can try to do is give Him the glory, since our ego is usually in there somewhere…
Vinod, here is where you have to step back and consider how God revealed Himself progressively. This goes back to the passages you cited in John 14-16. Jesus was speaking to His witness who would bear his testimony and proclaimed to them how he would In Acts 1:8, he affirms that these men would be his witness but that they should wait for empowerment to do so.
Paul’s apostleship is significant as one who would testify to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15-16).
Yes, God gives revelation to convey his message, but He does so through prophetic and apostolic authority.(2 Peter 1:20-21; Ephesians 2:20). This is the foundation for providing God’s breathed out word, which is Scripture. If God speaks in His son, and Christ sat down, it means the quest for authoritative revelation can end. But we have the written transcript of His revelation.
It does not deny the on-going and permanent presence of the Spirit in the life of the believer who should bear upon our conscience continually and especially as we read His word.
Hi Lisa,
Every thing you wrote is just adding extra text to what is written.
Bible doesn’t say anywhere that revelation will end. It doesn’t say that revelation ended either. For your information I have heard God’s voice since 1984 when He filled me with His Holy Spirit and gave me ability to speak in tongues.
In fact Bible says that Holy Spirit will be poured out in last days. Prophesy, dreams and visions will be given as well.
Joel 2:28 “And it shall come to pass afterward That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams, Your young men shall see visions.
Joel 2:29 And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days.
Also revelation Paul got was after Jesus sat down on the throne. So if revelation had to end we would not see any books from Acts till book of revelation.
Also Joel 2:28 is very clear “all flesh” that means these things are not limited to prophets or apostles.
Why you want to believe that revelation ended because you don’t want to believe on most of the Bible passages. You don’t want to hear God’s voice.
If revelation ended then that will mean God doesn’t speak any more not even through His Word. Do you have any passage in the Bible that says God will continue to speak through Word when revelation ends? First of all there is no passage that tells revelation ends so there is no way you can find one.
Yes I agree Jim,
Unless Holy Spirit reveals things one can not comprehend the Word of God.
Holy Spirit is the author that’s why we have Word of God that is non contradictory. If Holy Spirit was not inspiring and speaking to 40 authors of Bible we would have had the same confusion and debate over what is right and what is wrong.
Those who studied with their own mind had such debate even at the time of Jesus. Pharisees believed in resurrection and Sadducees did not.
Vinod,
Here’s one rebuke:
“You guys teach what is not in the Bible. You do what God hates.”
One thing I promise not to do to you: If you and I disagree about some part of Christianity & theology & the way God works & what the Bible teaches, I promise that I will only argue, “You are misunderstanding what the Bible says.”
If I think you get the Bible wrong, I will not simply conclude that you are being a false prophet and doing what God hates. I will assume that you are sincerely attempting to understand the Word, and just getting it wrong–unless you gave me reason to think that you didn’t actually care what the Bible says (and no, you haven’t done that)–and I will try to show you how you are wrong about God’s Word. (And I will listen to your attempt to show me that I’m getting it wrong.)
Please return the favor. Don’t respond to a disagreement by posting a list of verses that say, “Don’t put words in God’s mouth”–as though you think that you have to prove it. As though you think Lisa & Douglas aren’t sincere in their belief that they are presenting what God’s Word says.
Either they are right about what God has taught us, or you are. (Or you’re both partially right & partially wrong.) Disagreement doesn’t mean that you aren’t all trying to honor God’s Word.
Suppose you stood in front of Isaiah while he prophesied, and you asked God to help you understand it correctly. Then suppose you went to your home town and proclaimed the word of God to your community. You didn’t “hear from God specifically”, but you are proclaiming the Word, right?
In Neh. 8:1-8, when they opened the Law and explained its meaning, they were proclaiming the Word, right? It wasn’t a new specific revelation, but it was the proclamation of revelation already given, right?
If a pastor today preaches from the Bible—praying for God’s help to understand while reading the text carefully and using Greek & Hebrew resources and discerningly considering what other Christians have said in the past in commentaries as they studied the text—would you call that “preparing it with your own brain”?
I certainly agree that it’s possible to use your brain to study without depending on God. But don’t you think we should be using our brains while depending on God to illuminate?
Hi Jugulum,
I do feel lack of sincearity because I have not heard back on many of the questions. Many of the Bible verse I gave were ignored constantly.
How can I believe that somebody respects Word of God when they ignore Bible passages.
P.S. On commentaries. If I read a commentary, it is not any different from if I read one of your comments here, where you point to a passage and say something about what it teaches us, and why.
It would be foolish of me to assume that you get it right. I have to read your comments with discernment. But it helps me to understand the Word more, if I read what you write, and what Lisa writes, and what Michael writes, and what other people write. I’ll have to weigh what you all say against the text of God’s Word, asking for his help to do so.
I don’t want to just read it by myself—I want to draw on the help that the Holy Spirit has given to all of you, also. I want to start by reading it by myself, and prayerfully seeking to understand. But then I want to listen to the rest of the Spirit-filled Body of Christ, too.
Hi Jugulum,
You wrote:
“Suppose you stood in front of Isaiah while he prophesied, and you asked God to help you understand it correctly. Then suppose you went to your home town and proclaimed the word of God to your community. You didn’t “hear from God specifically”, but you are proclaiming the Word, right?”
If they proclaim word to word exactly same yea it will be Word of God. But if they alter it or add or substract then it will not.
If pastor is expanding on the Word of God and adding illustrations etc what ever extra he is adding will not be Word of God. God has not spoken it pastor has added them up.
But yes if pastor specifically hears from God then only it becomes Word of God. Every thought that runs through my and your mind is not Word of God.
Hi Jugulum,
You wrote: “It would be foolish of me to assume that you get it right. ”
Yes you are 100% on target. You should have exact same thing when you read the commentaries and anything that explains the Word of God.
But when you read Word of God you should be open to trust it with all your heart. Anything other than Word of God can have mistakes and falacies. That includes my explanations.
Don’t really have time to reply right now, but here’s a quick expansion of where I was going:
When people talk about using commentaries, that’s often–typically–what they have in mind. That’s definitely how Lisa was referring to them. Discerningly drawing on other believers’ exploration of God’s Word, as part of the studying process.
(Sidenote: And the theologians/scholars who I hear talking about commentaries also give this advice: Start with the passage, don’t start with the commentaries (or with the notes in study Bibles). Because that makes it more likely that you’ll just assume it means what the commentator thinks. Start by reading the passage, and struggling with it. Do your best to understand it, first. Then read commentaries or study notes to get more help & ideas.)
So be careful about how you talk about people who use them, and don’t dismiss their usefulness in your own Bible study. Don’t assume that people who use them aren’t relying on the Spirit. Don’t set up a hostility between using our minds and depending on the Spirit; don’t assume that people who talk about the importance of study & preparation are contradicting dependence on the Spirit.
Don’t say that a sermon coming from prayerful study of God’s Word (using all the helps we have) is just coming from the pastor’s mind.
Hi Jugulum,
It is one thing to depend on Holy Spirit and it is another thing to really hear from Holy Spirit.
If sombody is using commentary that tells me that they are depending on commentary. I am not against using commentary. I have used them and some times they are good and some times they contradict the Word of God.
So I use them with discernment. But will I use them to shape my theology? answer is no. I will shape my theology from the Word of God not from somebody’s interpretation of the Word of God.
My response was to the original topic here. So far I have found that most of the preachers don’t listen to the Holy Spirit. They only study from commentaries and preach. Commentary is a food prepared by somebody else and you do not know if they heard from the Holy Spirit or not.
When I got saved I was just copying somebody’s message and preaching it. It was in late 1980’s my cousin told me that I should try to ask the Lord what He wants me to preach. I tried it and the first message I had to preach was in a Church. When I prayed Holy Spirit asked to speak about the gifts of Holy Spirit and specifically about tongues. He asked me to warn the members that when they speak against the gift of tongue they are insulting Holy Spirit.
I was not ready to preach that. Why because this was my first chance to preach. I wanted to please the pastor and congregation. So I argued with the Lord and said give me another message. He said to me If you do not want to say what I asked you to say you can leave the ministry. I was stunned and I realized that after all it is His work not mine. And that I definately needed to obey Him.
How can I trust someone who claims it was the Holy Spirit who told him to preach on a certain topic? How do I know if he is lying or not?
If the Holy Spirit gives exact messages to preacher/teachers to preach/teach, do we then put the Bible aside?
Vinod,
First of all, you’re talking to a former Charismatic – words from the Lord, tongues, miracles, you name it – I was in over my head, so do not assume you are some exalted Christian who has a greater spiritual life because supposedly God spoke to you.
Now to your comments,
Hi Douglas,
You wrote:
“Preachers are to called to preach the Word, not what they hear in their ears purporting to be from God.”
Where do you get that?
From the Bible, of course (2 Tim 3:16-4:4)
Every single person who wrote the Bible heard what you call “in their ears purporting to be from God”. Every single one of them. Why you consider it as unaceptable method?
Because in the process, you are pitting the Word of God against the Word of God. The Bible is God’s Word – if you claim a word from God and it contradicts the Bible, give me one reason I should listen to you? Who would you trust, Vinod?
Can you find one single person in the Bible who sat down and did his study and prepared a sermon like that? Give me one single example.
Stupid argument to be honest – you are not writing Scripture to expect the same experience they did. When you write book 67 of the Bible, e-mail me a copy. I’ll be glad to staple it to the rest of my Bible.
You guys teach what is not in the Bible. You do what God hates.
Jer 23:30 “Therefore behold, I am against the prophets,” says the LORD, “who steal My words every one from his neighbor.
Jer 23:31 “Behold, I am against the prophets,” says the LORD, “who use their tongues and say, ‘He says.’
Jer 23:32 “Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” says the LORD, “and tell them, and cause My people to err by their lies and by their recklessness. Yet I did not send them or command them; therefore they shall not profit this people at all,” says the LORD.
Before I respond to this point, a brief word about context. When you read your newspaper, do you lift a paragraph here or there and randomly apply it here and there? No – you read it in the knowledge that unless it is clearly addressed to you, it doesn’t apply to you.
Jeremiah 23 is speaking of those who claim prophecies from the Lord when He had not spoken, not of those who go to his Word, the Bible, which He did speak and seek to make that vision plain for God’s people.
If you did your study go and tell that you prepared it with your own brain and did not hear from God specifically. Why go and tell it is Word of God after adding and substracting and changing the meaning?
I would, if I didn’t have the Holy Ghost dwelling with me as a Christian, but I do and this argument is nonsense.
God still speaks directly. God still speaks through dreams. God still speaks through visions. He has done it throughout Bible and He doesn’t change
Again, go read Hebrews 1:1-3 – God clearly changed His means of communicating with the people of old…
By the way,
God still speaks directly. God still speaks through dreams. God still speaks through visions. He has done it throughout Bible and He doesn’t change.
God also used to demand sacrifices of bulls and goats from people – you own a slaughterhouse at all?
God used to demand that when a firstborn child is born, you offer him to the Lord as a servant? You done with your firstborn child yet?
God used to demand that you observe seven yearly Sabbaths – you been to the Feast of Tabernacles yet in Jerusalem?
No? Why not? God did all those things in the Bible too…
“So I use them with discernment. But will I use them to shape my theology? I will shape my theology from the Word of God not from somebody’s interpretation of the Word of God.”
Vinod, do you see that this was redundant?
Using commentaries with discernment means not treating them as the Word of God. It means listening to what other Christians have said about it, considering, and evaluating. It means not just trusting their opinion, but checking it against the Word.
Using a commentary means you think that it could be helpful. That is all. Yes, some people misuse them.
But using it doesn’t mean you’re over-using it! It doesn’t mean you’re taking the commentator as Gospel Truth. If that’s what you’re saying, then that’s nonsense.
Jugulum:
I don’t know you, but reading your comments, I know for certain that you are a VERY patient person!
Leslie,
Heh. Thanks. Only in written format. (That’s why I prefer internet-based discussions. If it’s a conversation, I can easily get worked up/passionate/pushy/offensive.) And only sometimes, even online. I could link you to another recent-ish discussion where I got very annoyed and unjustifiably snarky. (A friend of mine described it as “horrifically inappropriate”.)
Hi Douglas,
Thanks for giving me passage that says preach the word. I don’t find in that passage that tells, “not what they hear in their ears purporting to be from God”
You were supposed to give me verse that tells me that part. Is that a new addition I have to add to 2 Tim 3:16-4:4?
What do you mean by “it contradicts the Bible”? I am the one who said that the following in a reply to Jim.
God still speaks directly. But a person hearing God’s voice needs to make sure that he is really hearing from God. If God is speaking He will speak in confirmation to the Word.
You wrote:
“Stupid argument to be honest – you are not writing Scripture to expect the same experience they did. When you write book 67 of the Bible, e-mail me a copy. I’ll be glad to staple it to the rest of my Bible.”
Who told you that God speaks only to write Bible? Also Who told you that there are only 66 books that are inspired?
Read Josh 10:13, 2 Sam 1:18, 1 King 11:41, 1 Chr 29:29, 2 Chr 2:29, 2 Chr 12:15, 2 Chr 20:34, Jude 1:14
According to Bible to me it looks those books are inspired and where are those books?
Also there are many things Jesus said that is not recorded in the Bible. So somehow to think that God speaks to write scriptures is baseless.
Again you quote Hebrew 1:1-3. I already replied to Lisa about it. It doesn’t say anything about end of revelation.
I gave Lisa a question what happens after “Jesus sat down on the throne”. She replied revelation ends.
I gave her John 16:7 that talks about after Jesus goes away.
John 16:7 “Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.
She ignored that verse.
I gave her Joel 2:28 and she ignored that as well.
Leslie,
You wrote:
“How can I trust someone who claims it was the Holy Spirit who told him to preach on a certain topic? How do I know if he is lying or not?”
That’s your choice to believe or not believe. I can’t make you believe but what I wrote is truth.
You also wrote:
“If the Holy Spirit gives exact messages to preacher/teachers to preach/teach, do we then put the Bible aside?”
Answer is no. Because Holy Spirit will testify of Jesus and He will take the words of Jesus and declare them. God doesn’t replace or override the Word that He has already spoken.
John 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.
John 16:13 “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.
John 16:14 “He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.
Hi Jugulum,
You wrote:
“But using it doesn’t mean you’re over-using it! It doesn’t mean you’re taking the commentator as Gospel Truth. If that’s what you’re saying, then that’s nonsense.”
But that is what I see happening here. For anything I ask Bible verse they refer me to somebody’s writing or commentary. They don’t have a single Bible verse all they have is somebody twisted the Bible passages.
Right now also I am still waiting for a single Bible verse that says revelation ended or ends. I can’t believe how people can get brain washed and read things that are not there as though they are there.
God has spoken throughout Bible and somebody makes a statement that revelation ended and no body verifies it from Bible and just believes it without thinking. It is horrible.
Think about it all they gave was Heb 1:1-3 that doesn’t say revelation ends or ended. All it says is how God spoke before and how God spoke through Jesus that’s all nothing else. How they go one step further and declare that revelation eded? Something that is not there in the Bible.
Vinod,
Something about sermons. I’m going to ask you to approach this comment with fresh eyes. (Don’t assume I’m saying exactly the same thing as CMP, or anyone else here.)
People do sermons to fulfill the “preaching & teaching” part of church life. Preaching the Word of God. Like when Paul told Timothy to preach the Word in season & out of season.
And I assume that “preach the Word” didn’t mean “stand up and read aloud from the Bible for a while, then sit down”. Anyone who can read can quote. Teaching includes explaining. (Our teaching of the Word is never infallible–we’re apt to get things wrong–but we are called to teach.)
That’s what I understand a sermon to be. Not a prophecy. Rather, something like Neh. 8:1-8, or one of Peter’s sermons in Acts (where he explains some Old Testament passages, and how they point to Christ, and he calls people to repentance & the Gospel in light of that).
We have to depend on God’s Spirit in every kind of ministry, and we should pray that God will give us all the insight & understanding that we need. Teaching is a spiritual gift; it’s a manifestation of the Spirit’s work.
What you’re trying to say, on the other hand, is that every sermon should have an element of prophecy prophecy. We should have a revelation from God about the topic. Preaching the Word should come from a specific word from God, given for the circumstance.
Problem is, I don’t see Paul telling that to Timothy, when he explains to his apprentice how he should minister. 1 & 2 Timothy are great letters–letters from an apostle to his protege, his pastor/elder/leader-in-training. Paul gives a lot of advice about how to run a church, and what Timothy’s responsibilities are. And Paul says to preach the Word, but he doesn’t say, “Preaching means letting God tell you directly what you should talk about, and then talking about that.”
You seem to be saying, “Unless you’ve gotten a specific message, you’re not preaching the Word.” And I don’t see that in the Bible at all.
It’s as though you would criticize Timothy, if he responded to Paul’s letter by intensely studying the Scriptures, and preaching the Word, reproving, rebuking, and exhorting, with complete patience and teaching–without having particular instructions from God, “This week, talk about this topic.”
In your mind, that’s a required element of sermon preparation. But I haven’t seen it in our sufficient guide–the Bible–at all.
Vinod,
Firstly, is God so useless as to inspire other books and they not make it into the Bible? Those books were meant to be in the Bible. Same with the words of Jesus not in Bible – they were not necessary. These are written that we might believe – John 20:28-31, 2 Tim 3:16-17, 2 Peter 1:19-21
Secondly, go read 2 Tim 3:16-4:4 – the Word there is the Scriptures.
Thirdly, your view of the Bible is digusting and frankly, very dishonoring to God. Men died to get that book into your hands and you dishonour it by placing your menial revelation on a par with it.
Fourthly, unless you are the apostles, promises of continuing revelation don’t apply to you.
I’m done with this conversation – much more beneficial things to do with my time than to converse with foolhardy persons such as yourself.
Vinod,
So, if people refer you to someone else’s commentary instead of taking the time to write out a brand-new explanation of exactly the same thing just for you, then they’re over-using commentaries?
If people don’t take the time to give you brand-new compositions, you think you’re justified in deciding that they don’t think for themselves?
If people are convinced by arguments that don’t convince you, you think you get to accuse them of trusting commentaries over the Word of God?
When people do point you to the verses that they think teach what they’re arguing, and you’re not convinced by it, you feel comfortable saying that they’re just brainwashed and they haven’t given you any verses?
Even though people have argued their position from Scripture–and posted comments that actually didn’t refer to any commentaries–you think you get to say, “For anything I ask Bible verse they refer me to somebody’s writing or commentary”, just because you think they’re wrong about the passage?
Vinod, everyone gets things wrong, sometimes. Everyone has the experience of finding out that a verse actually doesn’t teach something that they thought was obvious. Everyone has the experience of finding out that a verse does teach something that they didn’t see at first. Everyone makes mistakes, misreading things for all sorts of reasons. And every time you see someone supposedly misusing a verse, the flaw might be in you. (Hopefully. Some people make mistakes, but go for their whole lives pridefully confident that if they don’t see it, the other person must be brainwashed.)
I haven’t interacted much with you, in your recent comment threads. I don’t have time. Sometimes I’ve (at least partially) agreed with you, other times I’ve disagreed. And I have definitely disagreed with some of your attempts to support your ideas with Bible references. You have pointed to passages, and I’ve thought, “It doesn’t say that at all!” I’ve been as unimpressed as you were with Hebrews 1:1-3.
I expect that on some of those, you really were wrong–and I also expect that on others, I have something to learn.
But I haven’t decided that you’re insincere, or that you don’t think. I understand how it can happen that you would be blind, or see something (in all sincerity) that isn’t there. And I understand how I can be wrong in the same way.
—
I read what other people write about the Bible because I know that I have blind spots & misunderstandings. I know that the Word is richer than I have yet seen. I know that I have seen things that aren’t there. And considering the counsel of the rest of the Body of Christ is a fantastic help in finding out.
P.S. The point is, everyone has blind spots. Sometimes we get them from accepting bad arguments, in a blog post or comment thread or commentary. Sometimes we get them from our own heads.
The only thing that concerns me more than people over-using commentaries is under-using them. The only thing that concerns me more than people easily accepting other’s bad arguments is easily accepting their own bad arguments. Remaining invincible in their conclusions–or approaching every disagreement as though the other guy is brainwashed.
Jugulum, you’re absolutely correct that we should wrestle with the word first. That has always been my practice. Observe, observe, observe. See connections. Follow the flow of thought. Prayerfully ask for illumination. Then consult commentaries to see what others say. Of course, in my case I get to consult the greek text and wrestle with it. There is something about studying the word in the original language that really draws out is being communicated and helps to understand His word better.
I also think your comments highlight 2 important facts:
1) God gave teachers to the body so the body can be grow up in Him (Ephesians 4:11). Now a teacher is one who explains things and help us understand the word better. I can’t imagine relying on a teacher that has not engaged in significant study of God’s word. Maybe that’s why James tells us that not all should be teachers as they bear the stricter judgment. But what significant is the difference between the teacher you learn from in your congregation and the teacher that has written a book or commentary? Isn’t this the purpose that God gave this gift, so we can learn? When we reject them, perhaps we are rejecting what God gave us.
2) We were created for community, to serve one another, learn from one another, support one another, and exhort one another. Hebrews 3:13 indicates this is needed lest we be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. Those that have trusted in Christ drink of the same spirit and we all have something to contribute. Ignoring the contribution of others, even dead ones that have written books, accomplishes the purpose for which we have been placed in community. I think we can get quite hardened when we refuse to learn from others.
Finally, yes we must be able to recognize when we have not been seeing something correctly. I have said that I was wrong about how I have read some passages more times than I can count. And here too, is the value of community.
I have a question for all of you that have stated that Heb. 1 proves that God doesn’t speak any more through dreams, visions, etc. (I hope I am not confusing long threads here–I think I am on the right one!)
How do you reconcile that with Peter’s statement in Acts regarding the prophecy in Joel of what would happen “in the last days”? If what was happening then was in the last days, how much more must we be in the last days now! So I simply can’t see how the Heb. verses negate the fact that dreams and visions etc. can still happen today.
Saying that, I want to say for everyone that may not know, that I was a part of a hyper charismatic church for some years and came to see many problems there and subsequently left. However, I still believe that the gifts of the Spirit, etc. are for today–just not the horrendous abuses I saw there.
Cheryl, I think that’s a great question. I am personally fascinated by the issue of divine speech, how God has spoken revealed progressively throughout Scripture and how can be expect God to speak today.
To be honest, I have not fully reconciled Peter’s statement concerning dreams and visions in the last days and what exactly is he talking about. But here is where I am leaning:
The prophecy comes from Joel 2:28-29. Judah is being quite idolatrous, as is their northern neighbors, and Joel is telling them to come back to God. What is interesting is that he says after this, so it begs the question ‘after what?’ Previous to this statement, it is indicative of Israel’s repentance, which suggests a near fulfillment. However, God speaks of restoration of land, which they were already occupying. So starting with vs 21, it could be indicative of an eschatalogical fulfillment for Israel.
I think this can be supported by what follows our passage in question. God will display signs and wonders on the earth, describing the state such that is compatible with the tribulation period as described in Revelation 14-16.
So back to Peter in Acts 2. He was addressing Israel and the question becomes does his statement mean it is a then fulfillment OR is he reminding them of a yet future fulfillment. I am leaning towards the latter. Just because he is making the statement does not necessarily mean it is being fulfilled then.
So I think the statement ‘in those days, the Spirit will pour out on all flesh’ is compatible with a future fulfillment. Assuming a pre-tribulation rapture, where the church is removed from the equation and thus the Spirit with them, God pouring out His Spirit to usher in His judgment and eventual reign of Christ makes sense.
Cheryl, interestingly I’ll be taking the Prophets this fall, which is a Bible exposition class covering Isaiah-Malachi. We have 6 papers and can choose from 30 topics. Discussing the various interpretations of Joel 2:28-29 is one of them so I think that should definitely be one of my 6.
Lisa,
But Peter said, in answer to questions by the people asking for an explanation of what was going on, that what they were seeing was a fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy. At least that is the only way I can understand what he said by reading it. If that is the case, how do you see it as being a future only thing? Or are you saying that the Spirit was poured out at that time but the rest is for the future? And if so, that still doesn’t explain the discrepancy betwwen that and the Heb. 1 verses if they indeed mean that no such things will happen after Jesus came.
Cheryl, yes that is something to consider. However, it could be the significance is this is the start of how people would relate to God through the Holy Spirit. So he could be reminding them of a yet to be fulfilled prophecy BUT indicating that it has to start somewhere. If that makes any sense. I dunno, gotta do some more study on it.
Regarding Heb 1:1-3, it does beg the question, what does it mean that God speaks in his son? Certainly, He is God incarnate as vs. 3 indicates and displayed in the gospels. So God speaking in his son, points to His revelation in Christ. I believe this is where the apostles come in to bear testimony to the risen Christ. Clearly, there were miraculous signs and wonders being performed in the early church but I believe this was to authenticate the gospel message. It was not about the signs, dreams or visions but about Christ. I think its important to note that all was there were OT Scripture. Letters were being circulated for sure, that would eventually be recognized as Scripture but not so much in the early church. The whole point was to convey God’s revelation in Christ as Scripture, as pointed out in John 20:31.
I honestly have not closed the door on the miraculous, where needed. But we have God’s authoritative word bound in the 66 books of our Bible. Christ sat down means there is nothing further in the way of God’s revelation to say. That is my take anyway. I do believe that in more remote parts of the world, in the absence of Bibles as well as communication and worldview disconnects, that God can and does work through the miraculous. But that is to convey what we have written.
Again, I will emphasize this in no way negates the living and active presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer that bears on the believer’s conscience as an emblem of God’s presence who leads and guides us as we allow (significance of yielding to the Spirit).
Thanks for your clarification Lisa.
Cheryl, I found this question about Joel’s prophecy intriguing so I started a discussion topic about it on Theologica, if you’re interested.
Here http://theologica.ning.com/forum/topics/thoughts-on-joel-22832
Thanks again Lisa. I may get in on that conversation. However, as I have mentioned in another thread, I have been and continue to be extremely busy–my summer has been an absolute “zoo”! So getting involved in long conversations right now is not something I really have time for. “Quickie” comments here and there is about all I have time for right now!
Hi Douglas ,
You wrote:
“Firstly, is God so useless as to inspire other books and they not make it into the Bible? ”
Answer is no your theology of 66 books is useless. I will trust the Word of God which says there are other books too. I can’t imagine that a person will go low to defend his theology that he will call God useless. If you read those verses it is clear that those books were inspired.
Jude 1:14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints,
You wrote:
“Those books were meant to be in the Bible. Same with the words of Jesus not in Bible – they were not necessary. These are written that we might believe – John 20:28-31, 2 Tim 3:16-17, 2 Peter 1:19-21”
If you read Jude 1:14 you would have known that Jude believes that Enoch’s prophecies were inspired. Also I can’t understand how can a person say that something God spoke was not necessary or of no value. It all because somebody thoroughly brain washed saying 66 books is the only inspired Word of God. All the passages I gave contradict it very clearly.
You wrote:
“Secondly, go read 2 Tim 3:16-4:4 – the Word there is the Scriptures.”
For your information Timothy had only first 39 books as scriptures. That time New testament was not available. So are the only 39 inspired?
You wrote:
“Thirdly, your view of the Bible is digusting and frankly, very dishonoring to God. Men died to get that book into your hands and you dishonour it by placing your menial revelation on a par with it. ”
My view? What are you talking about? Have you read your Bible? God has been speaking to people through the Bible. And no where it says God stopped talking or will stop talking.
You didn’t give me a single verse in the Bible to support your theology and you tell me that something else. Actually your views are not in the Bible are so disgusting that they rot.
You wrote:
“Fourthly, unless you are the apostles, promises of continuing revelation don’t apply to you.”
You are wrong again and a clear effect of brain washing. Joel 2:28,29 is very clear that it is not limited to aposteles and prophets.
Joel 2:28 “And it shall come to pass afterward That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams, Your young men shall see visions.
Joel 2:29 And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days.
Even in old testament God’s voice was not limited to prophets and apostles.
Gen 16:13 Lord spoke to Hagar and Hagar was not prophetess.
Also it looks you do not know there were other prophets who heard from God and these prophets didn’t write any book. 2 Ki 2:3 sons of the prophets at Bethel, 2 ki 2:5 sons of the prophets at Jericho, 1 Sam 10:5 group of prophets. So your thinking that God speaks only to write scripture is wrong.
Hi Jugulum,
You wrote: “And I assume that “preach the Word” didn’t mean “stand up and read aloud from the Bible for a while, then sit down”. Anyone who can read can quote. Teaching includes explaining. (Our teaching of the Word is never infallible–we’re apt to get things wrong–but we are called to teach.)”
Preach the Word means preach the Word. More than 90% of what is preached today in the World is twisted and manipulated version of the God’s Word.
Any time you add or change what is written in the Word it is no more Word of God. Also if a person did not hear from the Lord what he needs to preach that is not word from the Lord either. For example if a blind man is shouting “Jesus the Son of God have mercy on me”. And Jesus goes and tells him you need to repent of your sins other wise you will not make it to heaven. Will that be Word from the Lord for that person? Answer is no. Word from the Lord was “What do you want Me to do for you?” and “Go your way; your faith has made you well.”
So today 99% of what is preached today is not what God wants them to speak, instead what preacher thinks is right for the congregation.
Lisa,
You wrote:
“Just because he is making the statement does not necessarily mean it is being fulfilled then.”
That’s interesting. Acts 2:16 is crystal clear that what was happening at that moment was fulfillment of Joel 2:28
Acts 2:15 “For these are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day.
Acts 2:16 “But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:
You don’t trust Acts 2:16 because you are again using your theology as template instead of Word of God being template. You should have trusted Word of God over your theology.
Not only Joel 2:28 was fulfilled there it fulfilled continously.
Problem of Corinth congregation was too much speaking of tongues from pulpit.
They had gifts of Holy Spirit operating without shortage.
1 Cor 1:4 I thank my God always concerning you for the grace of God which was given to you by Christ Jesus,
1 Cor 1:5 that you were enriched in everything by Him in all utterance and all knowledge,
1 Cor 1:6 even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you,
1 Cor 1:7 so that you come short in no gift, eagerly waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ,
1 Cor 1:8 who will also confirm you to the end, that you may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
That again proves that God doesn’t give revelations to only write Scriptures.
I am still waiting for one single Bible verse that tells God stopped talking or revelations ended or ends. I am only asking for one. I give you a lot of them and you don’t believe in them. I am just asking for one.