Discourse passages in the book of Acts in Relation to the Charismatic gifts of Prophecy

Discourse passages in the book of Acts and Charismatic gifts of prophecy and tongues

Even as I write this thread the Charismatic movement has just produced yet another book on how to use your miraculous spiritual gifts (this includes all gifts: tongues, prophecy, healing, etc...).  Each area of the Charismatic movement needs to continuously addressed.  We'll continue with what are discourse passages.  As New Evangelicalism continues to modify their outreach (including coolness, trendiness, and music), Fundamentalism must continue to respond with objective biblical truth to counter the ever growing (I had an experience) subjective focused movement.  To make the claim that today in the year 2017 we have access to all the miraculous sign gifts (just as practiced in the NT) is a claim that is neither defensible from scripture nor actually practicable today (that is, according to NT standards--not new standards to help justify their practice today).

What's a discourse passage?  What in the world is that?  You've used this term before probably without noticing it.  When you read Matthew 24-25, what is this commonly called?  The Olivet __________.  You got it.  Olivet Discourse.  From a simple grammar standpoint, discourse passages occur in two basic types: direct and indirect discourse.  You've seen this in you Bible before probably without noticing it.  Direct discourse appears as one person reporting what another said word for word such as, "David said, "We should sit in the chair.'"  Indirect discourse appears as the formula, "David said that we should sit in the chair."  Both can be identified (but not necessarily) with appropriate prepositions to identify verbal content conveyed.  I would suggest it is much easier to identify content clauses marked with appropriate preposition (just a side note).

Now within the book of Acts there are multiple discourse sections in which the Holy Ghost (Spirit) actually gives verbal content to a hearing audience.  It is no mysterious speech or utterances.  The point being, actual words (content) is delivered and preserved on the pages of scripture.  Every time the Holy Spirit speaks to believers in the book of Acts it is breathed out Scripture.  Logically, every time the Spirit speaks it is scripture.  Question: When people today claim (or believe) the Holy Spirit is speaking to them do they put it on the same level as scripture?  Do they give it another personal or individual authority for themselves alone?  Be careful how you answer this.  Vast denominations claim God is speaking to them today.  Howbeit via different means and of course with a different standard of authenticity.  So when we evaluate from the basis of scripture, does the modern day Charismatic claims of prophecy, tongues, and Spirit led content stand up to the paradigm of scripture?

Let's sample some of these passages in the book of Acts.  You (yourself) evaluate what the scriptures record the Holy Spirit said.  Again, you evaluate is the Holy Spirit functioning this exact same way today?  If not, why the different standard today?  Remember this question is not, are churches being planted, gospel content delivered, unbelievers converted, but is it happening the exact same way.  All these things can happen without the mysterious miracle claims by the Charismatic movement.  In the end, the Charismatic movement will reinterpret all texts based on personal experience.  All texts must be made to fit their subjective experience paradigm.  And don't forget all categories (including Bible) must be redefined to fit these experiences.  Prophecy not working.  Easy, just redefine what prophecy is so it fits your experiences.

Let's look at some text explicitly mentioning the Holy Spirit speaking verbally with understandable content to actual believers in an understandable language (we'll get to Pentecost later).

Acts 10:19-20, "While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.  Arise, therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them."

Acts 11:12, "And the Spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting."  No explicit verbal content described but notice the recipient of the message had no doubt as to what the Spirit required.

Acts 13:2, "As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them."

Acts 15: 28, "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;"

Acts 16:6-7, "Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia, After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not."

Acts 21:11, "Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles."

Note from all these passages we have in scripture the following: first, every time we have verbal content from the Holy Spirit spoken to a believer it became scripture (not a different level of authority).  Charismatics don't like this concept of inspiration and discourse.  Why again?  Two standards and redefinition or prophecy needed.  Second, the Holy Spirit always (in every text) when speaking directly to the believers, it was in a language they understood.  No ecstatic tongues or closet prayers or visions.  Lastly, in all the available data we have in scripture, when multiple people were present, they all understood the exact content that was given.  

So is what you just read being practiced to biblical standard and proportion?  I would suggest no.  This is part of why I am a Cessationist. 


Again, comments as always encouraged.

Music in the Old Testament: Sometimes they call it Prophecy.

Music in the Old Testament. 

Apart from terms such as praise, psalm, and other related terms, one that stands out as special in relation to music is prophecy.  For our consideration of this topic we should briefly overview First Chronicles 25.  Several points emerge from the text which can be useful when wading through the water of the current music and worship war debate.

This text is not new to the issue of music.  It will no doubt be championed by some and ignored by others.  Our main concepts for viewing this passage are two-fold: first, the appearance of the term prophecy, and second, how this term is used and abused in the context of music and worship.

Leadership and Selection

First, leadership was involved in the selection of musicians.  Notice in verse one that the sons of three men Asaph, Heman and Jeduthun were "separated" out for this purpose.  For what were they selected out?  Prophecy.  Is this foretelling the future or adding to an already completed collection of scripture?  This verse defines prophecy (at least in this context) as music with instrumental accompaniment. This musical understanding of the term is repeated in verse three.  As a side note for future articles, the musical writings (at least as has been preserved for us) by these three men have been recorded for us in the book of Psalms.  For example, note Psalm 73, "A Psalm of Asaph."  Taking into consideration that these three authors wrote Psalms (for musical accompaniment) at a minimum implies that the Psalms were meant to be sung with musical accompaniment.  This is further encouraged based on the fact that many Psalms include a specific tune for which to sing that particular Psalm. 

Content and Focus

Second, the content and focus of their music is also made known.  It was for the purpose of giving thanks and praise.  The distinct focus of the music was the LORD (Yahweh).  If this is truly a faithful means for viewing song content then the content of the Psalms should be of utmost importance to us (death, suffering, pain, praise, sorrow, history, righteousness, wickedness, sin).  There is much content in the Psalms for which we can meditate upon.  We do have 150 to occupy our singing.  Seems rather strange that most church don't sing them at all.  I think I can safely say (without refutation) that the vast majority of evangelical denominations sing songs (music) on a weekly basis (without singing one Psalm).  I would guess you would be hard pressed to find more than a handful of Psalms in your local church hymnal.

Training and Dedication

Third (and lastly), these were well-trained men.  Even the well-intended need to take note here.  Yes, lets take for granted not everyone will be able to sing well (I'd be happy if people just sang period).  Anyone who has put forth effort to produce music knows that time and effort has been put forth.  My children every week practice piano.  We pay for lessons and they practice (through much pain, suffering and woe--well, not always).  There must be something to this because God specifically mentions, "all these were under the hands of their father for song" and later "their brethren that were instructed in the songs of the LORD."

If this last one sounds kind of harsh or too restrictive, try to remember which of the twelve tribes were able to participate.  Don't forget the other eleven were not selected.  Remember this when people in 2016 squabble about gender participation and music leading.  Take note of the trends in current new evangelicalism.  Just try to apply a consistent form of regulative principle to Christian music today on the gender issue.  Are you forced to appeal to a historical narrative by desperation?  Any actual prescriptive exhortations?  1 Cor 14?  Mary?  Anna?  Deborah?  

If the text actually matters then we have some weighty ideas to consider.  From here well will turn to the ark of the covenant and the relation it has to worship and music in local churches.  Does God give actual commands and precepts for worship?  What happens when we refuse to listen?  What happens when we decide to do it our own way (even if we had good intentions)?

Hope this helps some.  Comments (as always) encouraged.

Thoughts on Christmas and Biblical Prophecy: Part One

Christmas is almost upon us once again.  Many of us have large evergreen shaped objects standing in one room of our houses, lights hanging up, wreaths, and wallets perhaps a little smaller than they were a month ago.  School is out and the kids are home (whatever the age).  With all this in mind, I would like to provide some thoughts on this season from Scripture.  I wish to provide an article on Christmas and prophecy and then a follow up article on Christmas and Providence.

Immediately upon opening up your English NT the first scene involving this Christmas season is Matthew chapter one.  The narrative flow is fairly simple: an angel appears to Joseph in a dream, relays verbal content about the Messiah's birth (including OT quotation), he wakes up, time lapse, he names his son Jesus. (End chapter one).

Our concern in this narrative discussion is the verse quoted in 22-23, where the angel quotes a prophecy first penned by Isaiah the prophet.  Several facts are worth noting for our encouragement this Christmas season.

First, verse 22 records, "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet."  This formula, "that it might be fulfilled" is repeated multiple times in the gospel of Matthew at least sixteen times (multiple times from this same prophet).  Repeatedly Matthew displays to his Jewish audience the fulfillment of their own scriptures in the Messiah.

Second, this same verse records the same mysterious dual authorship concept "spoken of the Lord by the prophet."  We could add in other scriptural texts to flesh out a full theology of scripture but put simply, God revealed the information to the human author and the human author wrote down this information in his own language.  These two verses alone include the concepts of revelation, inspiration and preservation. 

Third, verse 23 is a quotation of the LXX (a Greek translation of the OT Hebrew text).  Note the following from the underlying Greek text from Matthew 1:23:

Ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ,

Note the LXX translation in parallel from Isaiah 7:14:

ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Εμμανουηλ,

The only difference is the parsing of the verb "to call" (the verb marked with a red font).  In Mt 1 the verb is a future active indicative third person plural.  In Isa 14 the verb is a future active indicative second person singular.   Check out the surrounding context of each.  See if you can figure out which subject(s) might be singular and which plural? (I realize some will be able to read the text and others will not).  Note the audience and pronouns.

Fourth, concerning the OT quotation, the LXX helps to remove any confusion.  This is not just a young maiden but a virgin who "shall conceive."  Study this out on your own, Hebrew, Greek and English.  For those of you using the RSV take note here and the follow up changes found in the ESV.  (Please don't take this as a warning or endorsement of either English translation).

Lastly, we shall consider the name "Immanuel."  Matt 1:23 explains for the reader the identification of this child, "God with us."  This is one of many defining doctrines of Biblical Christianity.  This child was not just a man, a good man, a good teacher, a perfect man only, or simply "a" god, but this is the second person of the Trinity coming to earth, God in flesh (Jn 1:14) "and the word became flesh and dwelt among us."  And don't forget this child had a mission, "for he shall save his people from their sins" (Matt 1:21).

There are many more jewels in this text.  I provided only a few.  This is real prophecy fulfilled in scriptural terms.  Mine out the details with a pick and shovel and make them yours.  Don't forget this research was done in seconds with Logos 6.  You could do likewise with Bibleworks, Accordance, or a freebie called E-Sword.

Merry Christmas everyone!!!

---