Extra-Biblical Revelation?

Introduction

“I feel that God is telling me” is a phrase commonly used by many Christians to claim an awareness of some particular direction from God. For them such direct communication is an assumed part of their relationship with God. For others, it is a phrase bringing confusion, “What do you mean? How?” and a suspicion that their experience of being Christian is somehow the poorer. The issue of extra-Biblical revelations, whether as prophecy or “words of knowledge” or some vaguer inner awareness, is a significant point of common concern and difference amongst Christians and churches.

A brief history

The Protestant Reformers asserted the catch cry “Bible alone” against Papal claims to authority. Some at the more radical end of the Reformation movement claimed prophetic authority. Still others, especially the Continental Pietist (as the have been known), developed an additional emphasis on an inner awareness of the Spirit.

The emphasis on an inner awareness of the Spirit crossed into mainstream Protestantism with the beginning of the Evangelical movement. In the months before famously reporting feeling “strangely warmed” John Wesley had come heavily under the influence of one such Pietist group. Evangelical circles have thus often identified a point of subjective awareness as conversion.

This inner awareness was mainly viewed in terms of a subjective appreciation of gospel truths as opposed to specific guidance. That is, it was regarded as the illuminating work of the Spirit in an individual as opposed to further revelation by the Spirit to the individual.

Over time, the inner awareness was extended to specific guidance. This reached its fullest development in the claims of the modern charismatic movement.

The range of opinions may be represented as extra-Biblical revelations …

1. MUST be received to be truly Christian.

2. CAN be received if certain methods and sensitivities are developed.

3. MIGHT be received and should be EXPECTED.

4. MIGHT be received but should not be EXPECTED.

5. WON’T be received.

6. CAN’T be received.

Positions 1 & 2 represent Pentecostal and Charismatic approaches. 3, 4 & 5 represent a breadth of opinions within Evangelical Christianity, ranging from a promotion of inner leadings to an assertion that revelation finished with the Apostles. 6 represents the Liberal position in which God does not intervene in the world. (Interestingly, some with a Liberal theological approach who downplay Biblical authority are nevertheless prone to claim revelation through inner awareness.)

1. Prophecy is a valid activity and gift.

The New Testament does speak of prophets and prophecy beyond the Old Testament in the life of the early church, but perhaps with surprisingly few references. [Apart from the Lord’s warnings against false prophets, Acts has 6 references (1 to a false prophet, 1 in a thematic citation of Joel), 1 Corinthians 12-14 has numerous references in a developed exploration of the place of gifts and another 4 in the rest of the Epistles.] “Words of knowledge” seems to be a Corinthian claim that Paul takes up and turns back to “the word of the cross”.

From these references it seems that, on one hand, prophecy is not to be regarded as necessarily passing away along with the apostolic age, but, on the other, it is not a dominant feature of the New Testament church.

It is also important to note that prophecy is difficult to define. It is possibly used to cover a range of intelligible speech in the Lord’s name, just as in the Old Testament there were schools of professional prophets alongside the writing Prophets. It is also important to note that there is nothing given as to the methods or means of prophesies.

2. The Apostles had a distinct, unrepeatable role.

The Apostles were (are) the foundation for the Faith.

 

They were the eye-witnesses of the Lord’s ministry [John 15:26-27; 20:30-31; Acts 1:21-22; 1 John 1:1-4] and his appointed recipients and trustees of his teaching [John 14:26; 16:12-15 and the various appointments of the 12.]. They wrote authoritatively to the churches and their writings were received as Scripture [2 Pet.3:15-16; Rev.1:3; 22:18-19; 1 Tim.5:18 quoting Luke 10:7 alongside Old Testament Scripture].

This is then reflected in Orthodox Christianity in that the Creed affirms “one holy catholic and apostolic church” and Apostolic origin was a critical criterion in the recognition of the New Testament writings – they were traceable to Apostles or their co-workers.]

Given this distinct role, Jesus’ statements to the Apostles should not automatically be extrapolated directly to believers in general. Rather than assuming wider direct application this should depend on grounds within the passage or elsewhere in the New Testament. Without such grounds such passages and statements should be applied indirectly through the distinctive role of the Apostles. This is most especially so in contexts touching on their distinctive role [e.g. John 13-17]. Context will, as always, be determinative. For example, in John 13-17 Jesus is often addressing the 12 Apostles in terms of their distinctive roles as his eye-witnesses [15:26-27] and as the appointed recipients and trustees of his teaching [14:26; 16:12-15; 17:6-8]. Note the explicit distinction between the Apostles and those who believe through them [17:6-8 with 17:20 and 20:30-31].

Prophecy in the New Testament is subservient to this Apostolic role and authority.

 

3. The Bible is authoritative.

Christ rules his Church through the Scriptures.

Apostolic truth was definitely recorded in the Apostolic writings, the New Testament. These equate to the authoritative Prophetic writings of the Old Testament [e.g. 2 Pet.1:16-21; 3:1-2].

By contrast, New Testament prophecy is not authoritative. Where as in the Old Testament a false prophet was to be stoned [Deut.13:5], in the New their prophecies are merely “weighed” [1 Cor.14:29] and in one case ignored or disobeyed by Paul [Acts 21:5]. Prophecies seem to be received more as a possible spiritual insight than an authoritative word.

4. The Scriptures are sufficient.

Because Christ is a full and sufficient revelation and salvation, the Apostolic writings provide a full and sufficient revelation and salvation [Heb.1:1-3; John 14:7-11; 2 Tim.3:16-17 and John 14:26 & 16:12-15 which promise the Spirit will ensure the Apostles remember Jesus’ teaching and also receive any further teaching still not given to that point.]

Although it is evident that prophecy is amongst the gifts and ministries of the Spirit, New Testament prophecy and other revelations are not necessary for the full experience of Christian godliness and service.

Not to receive a prophecy or extra-word is not to miss out on something critical.

5. Revelation is at God’s initiative.

There is no method or mechanism for gaining fresh revelations.

 

The New Testament does not present any spiritual disciplines or practices, whether prayer or praise or fasting or solitude (or any of the more exotic examples of church history) as a means of gaining prophecies or new words from God. Instead they would be given, as they always have been, at God’s sovereign gracious initiative [e.g. 1 Cor.12:11]. Indeed, of the Biblical occasions where the circumstances are described, the recipient is typically surprised by God’s initiative. Such experiences are not dependent on some developed spiritual receptivity for God, like an all-powerful transmitter, never has any trouble making himself clear when he chooses.

Not to receive a prophecy or extra-word is not a failing in a Christian’s or church’s faith or practice.

6. Conscience is not to be directly equated with the Spirit.

The inner psyche is a wonderful God-given feature of being human, with a surprising capacity for spontaneity and creativity. Sudden spontaneous creative ideas and deep convictions are a natural part of this human capacity. But this writer knows no passage that justifies especially equating these inner processes with the Spirit.

Conscience refers to the inner reflection and reaction of a person’s psyche to moral questions. It may be right or wrong in its perceptions. Its quality and reliability as a measure of moral behaviour are dependent on the degree to which it is informed by the Spirit in his authoritative revelation in the Scriptures. A mature, Biblically well-informed conscience can provide a very good intuitive response to moral questions and other options. But again, this writer knows no passage that justifies directly equating these inner processes with the Spirit. Even a mature Christian’s conscience is affected by unhelpful personal prejudices.

It is helpful here to maintain a distinction between two works of the Spirit for believers; revelation and illumination. Revelation, God speaking, is the external, objective work of the Spirit by which truths of God are given. (As argued above, God can and might give new revelations, but the authoritative and sufficient way the Spirit has done this is through the Old Testament Prophets and New Testament Apostles.) God has revealed himself, he has spoken, in the gospel and the Scriptures even if people have not noticed or listened. Illumination is the inner, subjective work of the Spirit in which he enlivens or enlightens an individual to heed revealed truth. He empowers and moves a person’s psyche and conscience to trust the gospel of Christ Jesus and to respond obediently to God’s rule and the command to love one another.

The distinction between revelation and illumination is well preserved by using the language of speaking and hearing. God speaking refers to revelation. People hearing refers to illumination, also a work of his Spirit. God has spoken in the gospel and the Scriptures even if people have not noticed or listened.

The realisation of some good thing to be done or wrong to be avoided belongs under illumination. It is the extension of a general illumination to a particular situation. The Spirit somehow moves a person to realise the implications of the gospel and the Scriptures for a particular situation. Very importantly, however, dawning awareness is not God revealing or speaking but a person realising or hearing. And it is not authoritative but is influenced by the many prejudices of the psyche and must be tested and reflected against Scripture.

Some such dawning awareness by the psyche should not be weighed by some quality in the inner process itself. That is, any such inner process is not properly measured by its intensity or depth or spontaneity. Such factors do not reflect the Spirit but a person’s own mysterious psychological working. All inner thoughts regardless of intensity or spontaneity should be weighed by the objective truth of Scripture. That is, is it loving in accordance with the truth of the gospel of Christ? If so do it. If not don’t.

7. There are false prophets and prophecies.

Christ himself warned against false prophets. There are delusions and deceits pronounced in the name of Christ.

It is not unloving but Christ respecting to carefully check claims to prophecy and other extra-Biblical revelations. Gullible and credulous believers actually bring disrespect to Christ. If believers are seen to foolishly accept pretensions, this will be extrapolated to the gospel itself.

Conclusion

Prophecy is a valid activity and gift, but whatever is meant it is not authoritative, necessary or dependent on some human practice for reception. All prophetic claims must be tested.

Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good.

[1 Thess.5:20-21]

The Scriptures, the Apostolic writings are authoritative and necessary, the measure by which all things are tested.

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. [2 Tim.3:16-17]