That's the next question, isn't it? Could this be real, or am I delusional; am I hallucinating it all? Could I be schizophrenic or psychotic?
Let's address the latter first: I actually talked to my psychiatrist (the one who treats me for depression & PTSD) about this. After all, I wanted to be certain that I
wasn't imagining it all. He is very intelligent and very accomplished: he's both a psychiatrist and a physician (don't even know how many years of school that was). He's a Christian (sort of--an Episcopalian anyway), and has known and treated me for eight years. So this is not a light or frivolous opinion. His answer to my question was that it was not possible, as I have none of the other characteristics and exhibit none of the other symptoms of schizophrenia or psychosis (that is, other than the "hallucinations", if that's what they were). Also, that the fact that I can rationally ask and consider that question is counterindicative of psychosis: crazy people don't know they're crazy. So, no, I'm not hallucinating God's presence and work in my life.
So then, what? The real question is, what do you believe? For someone who doesn't believe in God at all, rationalizations will obviously be found. Just as they do with everything. When people die and see God, and come back, it's just neurons firing randomly in the brain. When someone is healed of cancer, it's "spontaneous remission". When Jesus rises from the dead, it's that his disciples stole the body and made up a story. These people are like the dwarfs in the stable at the end of C.S. Lewis's
The Last Battle; they are blind because they refuse to see, even when the reality is right before their faces.
But there is another philosophy out there, too, and that among Christians. It says that all supernatural works of God ceased at the close of the Apostolic age, including His supernatural leading and intervention in our lives, and that everything we need now is contained in the Bible. That he only leads us through His written word, and not through (they usually add derisively) "inner voices and mystical experiences". This doctrine is called Cessationism, and is one of the most malignant and pernicious lies ever to infect the Church. I am of the opinion that it is the work of none other than Screwtape and his ilk. It's the cleverest and most--if you'll excuse me--diabolical thing they came up with until one of them had the brilliant idea to pretend that they don't exist altogether (which is really an extension of this idea). It robs the Christian and the Church of all power to resist them, and places them firmly under their control. The Devil is perfectly at home in many churches; he doesn't mind religion one bit, as long as it's devoid of the power of God. In fact, he rather likes it--"the form of godliness, but denying the power thereof" (2 Tim 3:5)
The story that the miraculous ceased at the end of the Apostolic era can be simply and easily proven false by a quick and cursory search of the Church Fathers. Miracles, healings, prophecy, and yes, even tongues, are recorded as still occurring throughout the first few centuries of the Christian era. I won't waste space citing them here: a quick Google search will prove my point, if you doubt me.
A variant of this doctrine says that, rather than ending with the death of St. John, (the last Apostle), miracles ended with the "closing of the canon" of Scripture in the fourth century. An event, incidentally, which never actually happened: there is nothing in the canons of the Council of Nicea, nor any other ecumenical council, formalizing or even listing the canon of the Bible. The Council of Laodicea did discuss the issue of the canon, or which books should be read in churches, but did not specify which ones those were, just that only canonical books should be read. There is a spurious later additional document which pretends to be connected to that council, and contains a list, but a) it is obviously a late forgery, as it is absent from almost all the manuscripts, and b) it is a very different list from what we now know; for instance it forbids Philippians, Ephesians, and Revelation. The canon of Scripture was not formalized until 692 in the East at the second Council of Trullan, and in the West not until the Council of Trent in 1552. And of course, neither of these was ecumenical.
I have issues with the originators and purveyors of this doctrine, in whatever form. But as regards most of those who believe it, they are for the most part sincerely believing and well-meaning people who are just mistaken. Either because they have been taught wrong, or because they have been disappointed in their spiritual lives and that has made them vulnerable to being deceived. When things don't work out, the human tendency is to say, "Well, I guess that doesn't work" and to create a theology to fit one's experience. I was one of those latter for a long time. I never formally held the doctrine of Cessationism, but I adopted a philosophy that God more or less left us to our own devices; because I had experienced so much failure and defeat in my spiritual life (due to my own fault). These people are well-represented by Lewis's character Mr. Macphee, in
That Hideous Strength, who, although all these miraculous occurrences are happening all around him, stodgily sticks to his philosophy that it's all superstition and hogwash. But he's still basically a decent man, in spite of his error.
But let us leave aside, for the purposes of this discussion, the other questions of Cessationism; that is, the continued occurrence of signs and wonders, healings, tongues, prophecies, and the like, and focus only on whether God actively speaks to and leads us or not. Because, really, it is not necessary to believe in the former in order to accept the latter. Indeed, that was the position of all the the historic churches until the advent of the charismatic renewal caused them to take either one side or the other. The Roman Catholics, for instance, have
always accepted the existence of miracles, apparitions, mysticism, etc.; but they did not formally acknowledge the validity of the continued
charismata from around the time of Augustine and Chrysostom until Vatican II. It was only in the Calvinist churches and those heavily influenced by Reformed theology that the aversion to "superstition" was held as a formal doctrine. And then later, when the "Enlightenment" decided that nothing existed beyond the material, its poison seeped into the Church, as such venomous philosophies of the world, sadly, always do. Anyway, let us examine the question, then, in that light.
First of all, I have
very serious reservations about any doctrine or theology that did not exist in the Church until fifteen hundred years after its founding. And this one did not. Calvin claimed that he based his doctrine of cessation on Augustine. But that's not what Augustine said. What he wrote, was that tongues no longer occurred as a matter of course when hands were laid on young people and new believers at confirmation.
‘In the earliest times, “the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they spake with tongues,” which they had not learned, “as the Spirit gave them utterance.” These were signs adapted to the time. For there behooved to be that betokening of the Holy Spirit in all tongues, to shew that the Gospel of God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done for a betokening, and it passed away.’ (Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John. Homily VI, 10)
But elsewhere he wrote about the great number of miracles, especially healings, which had taken place in his time, many of which he had witnessed personally.
The other Church Father cited by Cessationists is Chrystostom, in whose writing is found a passage where he questions why some things happened in the early Church, but no longer did in his own time; specifically, in regard to the spiritual gifts in 1 Cor. 12.
‘This whole place is very obscure: but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such as then used to occur but now no longer take place. And why do they not happen now? Why look now, the cause too of the obscurity hath produced us again another question: namely, why did they then happen, and now do so no more?’ (Homilies on First Corinthians. Homily XXIX, 1)
But again, Chrysostom himself, in other writings, reported miraculous healings that he had personally witnessed, as well as discussing various means for the casting out of demons.
So again, while it is true that the
charismata, as such, as specifically practiced by the early Church and enumerated by St. Paul in his epistles, seem to have either died out or at least become far less common as the centuries passed, the cessation of all supernatural or miraculous acts of God among His people was never taught, until Calvin had to explain, in response to Catholic criticisms, why his reformation movement lacked any miracles to confirm that it was a true move of God. I tend to agree with the Catholics on this one. "For the Kingdom of God is not a matter of words, but of power." -- 1 Cor 4:20. But Calvin's new religion was exactly that: a matter of words, and not of power.
This is a very telling point, and is the same thing that has been done on both an individual and corporate level over and over again. That is, churches and individual believers create a doctrine
in response to their own observations and experiences, to explain why their lives differ from the Christian life as depicted in the Bible; why there is no spiritual power in their lives. Then they go back to the Bible, to the Church Fathers, and to Church history, and try to justify that doctrine. This is called eisegesis, and is bad theology. It means reading into the Bible a belief that one already holds, and is the primary reason for the multitude of vehement and vicious divisions that plague the Church. This is in contrast to exegesis, or extracting the meaning from the text and adopting it as one's own belief system, which is good theology.
So, then to what is really the most important point: what does the Bible say on this subject? After all, those who hold to Cessationism claim that the Bible is all-sufficient, containing everything that is needed for the Christian life. So let's see what it actually contains.
Psalm 16:7: I bless the LORD who gives me counsel; in the night also my heart instructs me.
Psalm 25:9: He leads the humble in what is right, and teaches the humble his way.
Psalm 32:8: I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will counsel you with my eye upon you.
Psalm 37:23: The steps of a man are established by the LORD, when he delights in his way; though he fall, he shall not be cast headlong, for the LORD upholds his hand.
Psalm 48:14: This God is our God for ever and ever; he will be our guide even unto death.
Psalm 73:23-24: Nevertheless, I am continually with you; you hold my right hand. You guide me with your counsel, and afterward you will receive me to glory.
Proverbs 3:5-6: Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.
Proverbs 16:9: The heart of man plans his way, but the LORD establishes his steps.
Job 33:14-18: For God speaks in one way, and in two, though man does not perceive it. In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falls on men, while they slumber on their beds, then he opens the ears of men and terrifies them with warnings, that he may turn man aside from his deed and conceal pride from a man; he keeps back his soul from the pit, his life from perishing by the sword.
Isaiah 30:21: And your ears shall hear a word behind you, saying, “This is the way, walk in it,” when you turn to the right or when you turn to the left.
Isaiah 8:19-20: And when they say to you, “Inquire of the mediums and the necromancers who chirp and mutter,” should not a people inquire of their God? Should they inquire of the dead on behalf of the living?
Matthew 7:7-8: Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened.
Matthew 28:20: And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.
Luke 12:11-12: And when they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities, do not be anxious about how you should defend yourself or what you should say, for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.
John 14:12: Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.
James 1:5: If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.
This is just a sampling. There are more, throughout the entirety of Scripture. Remember, for instance, though I'm not going to provide all the verses, how in the Old Testament the people actively and continually sought the Lord's will, either through the prophets or through the Urim and Thummim of the priest, or the casting of lots as it is called. And in the New Testament, especially in the Acts of the Apostles, it is always, "the Holy Spirit led us", or "the Holy Spirit forbade us". Or how God continually spoke to them through prophets, like when Paul was warned in every city that bonds awaited him in Jerusalem. There is even at least one instance of the casting of lots to seek God's will in the New Testament: in the selection of Matthias to replace Judas.
Now, here is the Scriptural case for Cessationism:
1 Cor 13:8: Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.
That's it. One verse. Taken completely out of context, and given a
highly dubious interpretation, which contradicts itself and is in no way justified by the text.
First of all, this verse is found in a chapter about love, and not about how one received guidance, instruction on church discipline, the exercise of the gifts of the Spirit, or anything of the sort. It's about how love is the greatest of the Christian virtues, and the gifts are mentioned as a means of comparison. He also mentions martyrdom and works of charity as comparisons, but they have not ceased.
Secondly, look at the context; here is the next verse, and those following:
1 Cor 13:9-12: For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.
So, if Paul is saying that the supernatural works of God and the mystical life of the Christian are going to cease, either with the death of the Apostles or the completion of the New Testament, then since that event, whichever it was, we should have been able to see God clearly, face to face, and to know Him fully, even as we are known by Him. Do we? Most especially, do those Christians who don't accept that He speaks to them and guides them? And, looking back at the first verse, has knowledge ceased? If tongues and prophecy were to cease at a certain point in Church history based on that passage, then knowledge should have too.
Then, there's the issue that the last part of the passage is written in the first person. If "becoming a man," "knowing in full," and "seeing face to face" somehow mean, "having the full revelation of God in the completed canon of Scripture", and that was to occur at some point after the death of all the apostles, how could Paul have spoken of it as something that he, himself, was going to experience? Obviously, this was not what he meant: he was talking about when he (and we) are going to behold God directly in the next life. But even if Paul is referring to something that we can experience here on earth, and not what is to come in the next world, it sounds an
awful lot like a mystical experience that he's talking about: seeing God face-to-face, and knowing him personally, intimately. Like I said, self-contradictory.
But here is yet another perspective from which to consider the question: Logically; rationally; why would God spend the
entirety of the Bible teaching us that the way to know Him and follow Him is directly to seek his guidance, and then completely change that as soon as the Bible is "finished". And only give us
one verse, obscurely hidden and very unclear as to its meaning, to let us know that He really didn't mean everything He'd said previously--that it was only for the guys who wrote the Bible, and now He's leaving us on our own, because we've got a book to go by? It's perverse. It's illogical. It's capricious. It's insane. "Live by this book. Except, don't, because the things it says don't apply to you."
So, to sum up: The case for Cessationism is one Bible verse and two paragraphs from the Church Fathers, all taken out of context. Whereas the case for the continuance of God's activity in the life of the Church and the believer is the entirety of the Bible, the Fathers, and Church history, with the exception of certain specific post-Reformation and post-Enlightenment sects and denominations. I choose to believe the former. And, as it coincides perfectly with my own experience, I take it as confirmation that I am not, in fact, crazy or delusional, but am living the normal Christian life, as God intended.
"I believe in miracles here and now. . . .We ought all of us to be ashamed of not performing miracles and we do not feel this shame enough. We regard our own state as normal and theurgy as exceptional, whereas we ought to regard the worker of miracles, however rare, as the true Christian norm and ourselves as spiritual cripples."
-- C.S. Lewis, Petitionary Prayer
