(Michael Patton)
The following is part of a discussion (not debate) between two friends, Sam Storms and C. Michael Patton, about the charismatic gifts of the Spirit. Sam is a Charismatic. Michael is not. If you have come in late, you can access the entire series here.
BTW: After Sam and I respond to each other’s post on history, we both have a short conclusion then this series is tetelestai!
Sam, I have often admitted how important personal experience is to my understanding of this issue about the continuation of the spiritual gifts in question. I try not to hide behind some presumption of objectivity, as if I can read the Scriptures and ignore my own experiences. The best I can hope to do is recognize and harness their influence on me. However, I don’t think I am, even in an ideal world, expected to ignore them. Ronald Nash talked about this in his work Life’s Ultimate Questions. He gives four tests by which we must evaluate a proposed worldview. One of these tests is the test of “practice.” In what he calls “the laboratory of life,” a given worldview must be evaluated by this question: “can people who profess that worldview live consistently in harmony with the system they profess?” (28). As Scripture is my ultimate guide and I remain unconvinced that it speaks clearly to this issue, I have to ask myself this question: If I were to convince myself that the gifts of tongues, prophecy, and healings were continuing and normative (or “normal” as you , Sam, would rather put it) in the church today, does my experience affirm or deny this belief? At this point, as you know, I have not had a definite experience of these gifts, much less in any normative way. Therefore, I would be forced to live in a bit of cognitive dissonance were I to become charismatic. My said beliefs would play tug-a-war with my experience and greatly weaken the reality of such beliefs. MORE
No comments:
Post a Comment