Given the life (both past and present) of the average college student combined with ability to see things and the willingness to call them out, this should be a real barnburner.
The good thing is that, as he informs us, he doesn’t talk about it.
Except he did.
That’s why there’s both an audio file and a transcript.
Of course, I jest … a little.
On a serious note, and perhaps I will write more later, this “seeing things” is the reason why a solid doctrine of biblical authority is so important. And it’s why I think cessationism is the only consistent position.
Once the door is open to visions, impressions, prophecies, words of knowledge, or the like, there is little reason to stop.
Now some do stop, to be sure, but as I say, there is little reason to stop. Saying “It doesn’t pass the smell test,” puts way too much authority in your olfactory senses.
In general, I am opposed to demonstrating absurdity by being absurd. I don’t think it either wise or fair to run to the extremes to argue against a position. And it would be hard to say this example by Driscoll is anything other than extreme.
But I don’t really want to talk about Driscoll here (though someone who engages with him regularly told me recently that he thinks Driscoll is more humble and teachable now than he was five years ago).
But for those who are continuationists, how would you refute Driscoll on this one? Or do you agree with him?
I suppose you could say you are “open but cautious.” Driscoll certainly wasn’t cautious here. And your caution would cause you to stop short of this. But what biblical basis would you invoke for such caution?
I also wonder about the import of 2 Timothy 3:16-17. If everything necessary to make us adequate for every good work is found in the inspired writings, then what purpose do these visions serve? Or the impressions?
If I understand 2 Timothy 3:16-17 properly, it means that Driscoll was equipped for the good work of counseling these people by the Scriptures. The visions were unnecessary. And I think that is significant.
Furthermore, by his own admission, they are sometimes wrong. I am going to go out on a limb and say that a wrong vision will undermine your credibility as a counselor. Imagine trying to counsel a husband you have just accused of adultery based on the TV screen in your head when he knows you aren’t telling the truth.
In fact, I think this issue of “being equipped for every good work” is an undervalued piece of the discussion about cessationism and continuationism, at least in the stuff I have read. I think we cannot have a full-orbed and robust theology of revelation if you don’t reckon with these verses and their impact on ongoing revelation.
If we define “every good work” as being every thing God has called us to be and do, then we need only the Scriptures and the wisdom found in them as applied to life.
That doesn’t preclude the use of common grace wisdom in application. Nor does it preclude the involvement of the arts and sciences in daily living.
But I think more serious consideration needs to be given to 2 Timothy 3:16-17. If the inspired Scripture equips us for every good work, then it is hard to see what role these other types of sign gifts play for us.