What is Hypersessationism?
866-34-884. As the Holy Spirit is moving powerfully around the world, as there are well over a half billion believers who identify as Pentecostal Charismatic, the number continues to grow, the fastest growth of believers in church history taking place around the world, powerful missions movement as the Holy Spirit continues to speak and act in beautiful and wonderful ways, in full harmony with scripture to the exaltation of Jesus, it strikes me as increasingly bizarre that there would be those who would deny what the Spirit is doing, especially when the Word of God explicitly says we should expect these things. But I want to focus on an aberrant, unusual form of cessationism that is becoming more prominent today. I've thought of it as Hypersessationism. I don't know how much I've used the term publicly, but a Presbyterian pastor named Ryan Denton has written some articles that have gotten attention. Folks referred them to me and just saw a follow-up on Hypersessationism. So if you type in Ryan Denton, D-E-N-T-O-N, and Hypersessationism, you'll find his articles. I'll quote from some of them, and he links in his second article to critical responses to him. I want to interact with a video clip from Scott Aniol, another pastor.
I don't know either of these gentlemen at all, but just encountering some of what they have to say online. And I want to interact in the most constructive way that I can for the glory of God. I don't want to be insulting and mocking of positions I differ with. I want to respect the fact that these are convictions that different brothers hold to, praying themselves, studying scriptures themselves, saved by the same Lord that I'm saved by.
At the same time, there's some things that strike me as incredibly, extraordinarily off and very odd. So let me explain why I use the term hyper in some cases. It's actually to be kind and gracious.
For example, when I talk about hyper critics, what I'm trying to do is separate the worst of the critics, the most extreme of the critics, the most destructive negative of the critics from critics in general. When I wrote about hyper grace, my book on hyper grace that came out about a decade ago, of course we believe in grace. We extol grace. We live by grace. We're saved by grace. We're kept by grace.
Grace is our wonderful theme in this world and forever and ever and ever. But there's an exaggerated form that goes beyond what scripture says is destructive that I called and others have called hyper grace. In a similar way, not an exact parallel of course, but in a similar way, I will call out radical Islam recognizing that many Muslims, maybe the large majority of Muslims worldwide, do not fully embrace the ideology of say the Taliban or Al Qaeda or ISIS or extreme groups like that.
So I'll say that to be fair to other Muslims that we're talking about radical Islam. So when I'm talking about hyper cessationism, it's not to attack cessationists in general. In fact, it's to make a distinction between many cessationists in church history and a more extreme form of it today. So again, if you'd like to weigh in, if you take issue with me on any of these things, the number to call is 866-348-7884. For those of you who say, well, Dr. Brown, why not just debate one of the cessationist leaders or one you'd call hyper cessationist? I've been trying. We've offered to do it since before the Strange Fire Conference, which is over a decade ago, and not a single one who spoke at the Strange Fire Conference has been willing to debate me. Some directly invited, others indirectly, not a single one.
I did it for a smaller, recent conference, the G3 conference on cessationists because they came out with a movie as well, and not a single taker. I would do it in a heartbeat. I've even proposed, let's not have a debate. Let's have an extended multi-hour dialogue. I'll fly to you if you've got the good recording studio.
We'll pay for you to come our way. We're talking about a leader recognized in that movement, one of the speakers at the conference or someone who was on the cessationist movie. And let's have an extended dialogue, not even to win an argument, but to make sure we understand each other's points, we present each other's points, we challenge each other's points, we flesh things out and then let the viewers decide. Thus far, zero takers.
My door remains open. But here's what I observed. I tried to become a cessationist in the late 70s, early 80s for a few reasons. One was some abuses I saw in Pentecostal movement. Not a lot, but what I saw, the ones that bothered me really bothered me. Things I was expecting to see, miracles and praying for the sick and seeing certain things happen I didn't see. So I began to question things. And then as I was getting more intellectually oriented, spending less time in devotional prayer, devotional study of the word, more intellectual study of the word and very busy in good works and standing up for what was right and fight against abortion and caring for the poor and the needy and active in that. I'm going to be a Semitic scholar, a biblical scholar, teach at seminaries.
And I'm noticing that scholars, the Christian scholars, most of them are not Pentecostal, most were not charismatic and were kind of uneducated and so on. So there were various forces at work in me. I'm not attributing this to anyone else, but at work in me that helped me desire to be a cessationist and try to be a cessationist.
I couldn't. The word was just too clear. I tried to be a cessationist, but the plain sense of Scripture, and remember I'm gauging in biblical scholarship here. I'm very serious as a student of the ancient languages and the literature. It's just too clear for me to be a cessationist. I remember reading in particular Robert Gromacki's book, The Modern Tongues Movement, and of course got B.B.
Warfield's classic, Counterfeit Miracles, and I wanted them to be right. And I met with cessationist pastors, one in particular, a real scholar, a Calvinist scholar. I became a Calvinist. I became a staunch Calvinist. I could make a far better case for Calvinism, even though I'm no longer a Calvinist, I could make a far better case for Calvinism than I can for cessationism.
I really can't make a case for it. When people have referred to Pastor Tom Pennington's new book on cessationism, reflecting a talk he gave years ago at Strange Fire but now expanding into a book as the best modern defense of it, with all respect, he may be a fine man, fine pastor with tremendous good to offer the body. I probably would agree with so much of what he preaches and teaches, but I read that book and thought, this is one of the weakest things I've ever read. So, I tried to become a cessationist, but I couldn't, based on the plain sense of scripture and then, secondarily, the work of the Spirit in my life. But that was secondary to scripture. To this moment, the primary reason I'm not a cessationist is the plain testimony of scripture. Secondarily, my experience in harmony with scripture and confirming scripture.
But what I've noticed with this more modern version of cessationism is it's gotten more extreme. I remember listening to James Dobson decades ago, focus on the family. To my knowledge, he's not charismatic, Pentecostal. And he said, you know, God's really been talking to me about this.
Okay. Billy Graham was watching a documentary about Dr. Graham the other day and he said, God really spoke to me. He was calling me to preach. Yeah, of course he speaks.
Yeah, but what's new about that? And in my days as a Calvinist, reading the Puritans and reading about people like Samuel Rutherford and the intimacy with God. Leonard Ravenhill used to quote him and the intimacy he had with God and the encounters he had with Jesus. Not like an open vision of Jesus walking in the room like he was on the earth, but these encounters with Jesus where he described them in these beatific, euphoric terms and just different ones through history.
Calvinist leaders and God spoke to them or prophetic insight or things. Yeah, I didn't know that there was a cessationism that says, no, no, no, no, that's not God. That if you say, yeah, the Lord spoke to me, don't take this job.
No, no. That's adding to the canon of the scripture. If you say that it's an authoritative revelation, if God spoke to you and it was definitely from the Lord, you're adding to scripture.
This is like a new thing the way it's emphasized on this level. Or even more extreme, the idea that you don't experience God in worship and the Lord's presence just came in the room and we're on our faces weeping. I'm not saying a cessationist doesn't weep. I'm not saying a cessationist doesn't love God. I'm not saying a cessationist doesn't believe God loves them.
But this idea that we've heard, I mean, out of the horse's mouth, I've heard it. No, it's just emotions. It's just emotions. So, you haven't experienced the presence of God coming into your room as you're praying and you're overwhelmed with the sense that he's there.
No, it's just your emotions because he's everywhere. This, to me, is something new and extreme. And let me read to you what Ryan Denton writes here. This is in his first of two articles and it is, what is a hyper cessationist or what is hyper cessationism? What is a hyper cessationist? He said, as a capital R, Reformed person, meaning Calvinist, I would call myself a cessationist. This simply means that I believe God has ceased giving in a new doctrine and a new ethics. You could also describe it as the belief that there is no more canon to be given.
It also means God will not give any more infallible revelation that has the authority of scripture itself. But for some time now, I've been deeply troubled by some of the assumptions that the term cessationist now seems to carry. Cessationism has morphed into something dark and suffocating.
It has become a thick, wet blanket used to smother anything that smacks of the supernatural. There are contemporary proponents of this type of cessationism who seem to think and teach that the term means that God has no interaction with us apart from his word, and that all miracles except for conversion have ceased. At the very least, claims of the miraculous are to be looked at with disdain and doubt. They teach that there are no more spiritual gifts, there are no more signs and wonders, but such a view is not historical cessationism.
It is a type of contemporary distortion that can only be described as hyper cessationism and its consequences cannot be more dire. Now, obviously, cessationists I've interacted with – Justin Peters, Jim Osmond, others – they would say the Spirit is powerfully at work today in conversion, in sanctifying the believer, in working out God's purposes on the earth, and that in his sovereign will, God may even heal today. So we do lay hands on the sick or pray or anoint with oil, and God in his sovereign will may heal. But they would say that gifts of healing, where healing is the norm, are not operative today, that prophecy, God speaking an authoritative way outside of Scripture, is not operative today. That other gifts that are listed in 1 Corinthians 12, like interpretation of tongues, those are not operative today. But gifts of service, gifts of preaching, teaching, gifts of mercy, administration, those are operative. They would say the Spirit is working in these different ways.
So they might say that Hester Denton overstated things a little bit. Overall, I find his description accurate. This is something new, hyper cessationism that keeps reacting against the growth of the Pentecostal Charismatic Movement worldwide. This is Michael Ellison, founder of Trivita Wellness. I want you to hear an amazing testimony from my friend James Robison, and most all of you will know of him. He and his wife Betty host the Life Today television program. Now here is James. Let me tell you about a miracle I experienced. My friend Michael Ellison, he and his wife are our 40 year plus best friends.
Well, let me just say this to you. I had so much pain with what was called tennis elbow that I could hardly reach over and pick up the phone without pain, without it hurting me. I couldn't pick up something to drink, a glass of tea or anything.
It was very difficult to do anything without wearing a tight strap. And then Michael shared the Nopal cactus juice with me, Nopalaya. I began drinking about that much in the morning in the glass and that much later in the day. And in three months, I was a different person. I have now gone more than 10 years with no pain, not better. Well, I have no joint pain. I am telling you it did something to the inflammation in my body that was undeniable. Now that's just my testimony, but that's been more than 10 years with no pain.
Matter of fact, if I miss for some foolish reason, a few days, I can feel it creeping back that fast. So give it a try. See if it helps relieve your pain. I hope it does like it has mine because it worked for me.
Nopalaya is supported by clinical studies for lowering inflammation and improving mobility, flexibility, and range of emotion in the neck, back and joints for less reliance on pain medication and improved quality of life. Call 800-771-5584 and use promo code BROWN25 to receive 25% off your order. As a new customer, 100% of your order goes to support the line of fire.
Call 800-771-5584 or go online to TriVita.com. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get on the line of fire by calling 866-34-TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.
Hey friends, welcome back to the line of fire. If you listen to the broadcast regularly, you know God radically transformed my life 10 years ago, delivered me from 59 years of unhealthy eating and I just eat super healthily day and night. It has been life changing. I feel like I've been getting younger every year as I get closer to 70. I feel like I'm getting younger every year. It's amazing.
It's remarkable. Nancy too, we're just blown away by the effects of healthy eating. That's number one. We encourage you to prayerfully look into these things and then take some great daily supplements. TriVita is part of that. So you can check out their great wellness supplements at TriVita.com.
Use the code BROWN25 so you get a big discount and then 100% of your first order is donated to the line of fire. So let's think about something for a moment. In biblical days, in the Old Testament, you had bands of prophets together, schools of the prophets. Obviously there was a lot of prophecy going on, but the vast majority of it never got written down, never got put in the Bible. So God was speaking, but it was not an authoritative revelation for all people for all time. Therefore it was not put in the Bible. We know that there was much prophesying going on in New Testament times. We know Paul talking about it with the Corinthians and how to regulate it and how to discern and talking to the Thessalonians about it. We have many accounts from the early church about prophecy and even guidelines for traveling prophets. So we know there was a lot of prophecy spoken, but the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of it never got written down because it wasn't part of the New Testament canon.
So God can speak. He speaks all the time outside of Scripture, but it's not Scripture. It doesn't play the role of Scripture.
It doesn't have the authority of Scripture. So we're talking about two completely different categories, and I've heard the voice of the Spirit speaking internally to me many times. It's been life-saving. It's been life-changing.
One of my colleagues was in the mission field in Thailand. He's driving in his car or truck, whatever he had down the road, and he hears this voice shout, stop! And he's just, he's shocked, slams on the brakes. Just then a child ran in front of him. He would have killed the child.
He would have killed the child. Well that's not part of the Bible. That's not Scripture. It's not like a verse came to mind and based on thinking about that verse, he thought maybe I should look to see if—no, he heard the voice of the Lord. When God spoke to me in the summer of 1983 to quit my job and go teach at a Bible college on Long Island and miraculously open the doors and cause things to fall into place, or when he'd speak to me and change the theme I was going to preach on and direct me, no, preach from this Scripture and this message that I get up to do it, and leaders afterwards come up shocked and said, who talked to you?
Nobody talked to me. But that's the verse we've been discussing, what you talked about and some of the—it's like you overheard our conversation. It's almost just the Spirit speaking and acting. Believer friends, I have in mind, it's normal, common experience, and it's part of our relationship with God. It's part of intimacy. It's part of fellowship. But we're told, no, it can't be. It can't be that it's now adding to the Bible or threatening the uniqueness of the Bible.
It's not at all. They're two completely different categories. And through church history, you'll find examples of people hearing God's leading, hearing God's voice, even speaking prophetic words, even though they didn't believe in tongues for their day, or they didn't believe in prophets for their day, or they didn't believe in healing as the norm. When I say as the norm, meaning something that you'll see regularly over the course of time as the sick are being prayed for rather than something completely exceptional and highly unusual. Let me read something to you that Samuel Rutherford said. Spurgeon spoke incredibly highly of Rutherford, one of the most spiritual of the Puritans. Rutherford said, I have my best feast when Jesus feeds me with his presence. He hath made me to know that his love hath neither brim nor bottom. He's talking about experiencing the presence of God, something so beautiful.
And yet those I would call hyper-cessationists deny that that's anything more than emotions. Rutherford said, Oh, how sweet is a fresh kiss from his holy mouth, obviously speaking metaphorically, but of a spiritual experience. His breathing that goeth forth before a kiss upon my poor soul is sweet and has no fault, but that it is too short. He was experiencing encounters with the Holy Spirit. And Spurgeon basically said his letters, they're worth their weight in gold in terms of who this man was and what he communicated.
That personally grieves me more than the denial of gifts of healing, gifts of prophecy, tongues, this denial of that intimate experience of hearing the voice of God. Alright, so let's go over to a video from Scott Anayol. I want to give him his props here.
He has PhD, Executive Vice President, Editor-in-Chief of G3 Ministries, and he's also a professor of Pastoral Theology at Grace Bible Theological Seminary in Conway, Arkansas. And I've read some of his stuff and militantly differ with it. I would love to have a public dialogue, not to win. I have no need to win the debate.
To me, the Bible's open and shut in terms of yes, the gifts and power of the Spirit as laid out in Scripture continue until today. But for the good of the body, I'd love to have a dialogue. You say, well, Brown, you're too charismatic, you're too crazy. Well then, do it with Dr. Sam Storms, or do it with Professor Craig Keener, if I'm too extreme for you. But let's listen to this clip, then I'll respond to it on the other side of the break.
Scott Anayol. Peter addresses this very issue in 2 Peter 1, where he states in verse 21, men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. Peter is discussing the nature of Spirit-inspired biblical revelation because of the false teachers who had emerged, some of whom claim to speak for God. Peter begins his argument, however, by appealing to his eyewitness status as an apostle of Jesus Christ.
We were eyewitnesses of his majesty. When he made known to the people truth about Jesus Christ, Peter argues, he did not follow cleverly devised myths. Rather, his teaching is based on what he personally witnessed as an apostle of Christ. To what is he referring in these verses? He is referring to the supernatural experience of the transfiguration of Jesus Christ in the presence of Peter, James and John on the mountain. However, notice what Peter says next in verse 19. And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed. Despite all of Peter's own experience of receiving divine revelation from God himself, Peter identifies the foundational source of God's truth, the prophetic word. Peter is saying that God revealed his truth not only through direct divine revelation, but fundamentally through his Spirit-inspired word. Peter and the other apostles did experience direct first-hand revelation from God's Spirit. Those supernatural experiences were truly ways in which God confirmed his truth to his apostles. And yet, as Peter is trying to defend God's truth, someone could very easily say, why should we take your word for it?
People experience things they can't explain all the time. Who's to say that such experiences are direct revelation from God? Peter answers that natural objection by saying, don't take my word for it, trust the sufficient word of God.
In fact, he goes even beyond that. The verse literally reads, and we have more sure the prophetic word. Yeah, so as a professor and a PhD, I was kind of shocked to hear that argument.
If you get to watch this, Dr. Anayol, no insult intended. I was kind of shocked to see that argument. I mean, first, the idea that Peter, James, Jacob, and John, always like to remind you is Jacob, as they were on the Mount of Transfiguration with Jesus and God the Father speaking out of the cloud that he's saying, even more sure that is the Bible. No, no, no, that's not what Peter's saying. And as you'll see in a moment, the best interpreters, the best scholars, even the majority of translators or best translations recognize that he wasn't saying even more certain than our experience with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration. Even more certain than that is the Bible.
No, it's the opposite. He's saying it makes even more certain. Our encounter with him makes even more certain the prophetic word that we have.
I'll demonstrate that when we come back. This is Michael Ellison, founder of Tribeta Wellness. I want you to hear an amazing testimony from my friend, James Robinson, and most all of you will know of him. He and his wife, Betty, host the Life Today television program. Now here is James. Let me tell you about a miracle I experienced. My friend, Michael Ellison, he and his wife are our 40 year plus best friends.
Well, let me just say this to you. I had so much pain with what was called tennis elbow that I could hardly reach over and pick up the phone without pain, without it hurting me. I couldn't pick up something to drink, a glass of tea or anything.
It was very difficult to do anything without wearing a tight strap. And then Michael shared the Nopal cactus juice with me, Nopalaya. I began drinking about that much in the morning in the glass and that much later in the day. And in three months, I was a different person. I have now gone more than 10 years with no pain, not better. Well, I have no joint pain. I am telling you it did something to the inflammation in my body that was undeniable. Now that's just my testimony, but that's been more than 10 years with no pain. Matter of fact, if I miss for some foolish reason, a few days, I can feel it creeping back that fast. So give it a try, see if it helps relieve your pain. I hope it does like it has mine because it worked for me.
Nopalaya is supported by clinical studies for lowering inflammation and improving mobility, flexibility, and range of emotion in the neck, back and joints for less reliance on pain medication and improved quality of life. Call 800-771-5584 and use promo code BROWN25 to receive 25% off your order. As a new customer, 100% of your order goes to support the line of fire.
Call 800-771-5584 or go online to TriVita.com. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get on the line of fire by calling 866-34-TRUTH.
Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Thanks, friends, for joining us on the line of fire. Are you getting my monthly frontline newsletter? We just sent the last one out.
We'll send it to you immediately. It's about the church and the elections. It's about priorities. It's about how we fight our battles. Some great testimonies in there as well.
Hebrew word study on the word rachamim, compassion. Just a lot of great content for you. So if you're not getting it, it's free. It's digital. It's beautifully produced.
I'm blown away by what a good job our team does. Go to the line of fire.org. The line of fire.org. Click subscribe. It's free.
As soon as you do, go check in your junk folder, your spam folder, see the email there, and then make sure you get them in your inbox after that. All right, so let's break down 2 Peter 1.19. So we'll read what comes before it. Beginning verse 16. For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power.
But we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the majestic glory saying, This is my son, whom I love, with whom I am well pleased. We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with Him on the sacred mountain. Verse 19. We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable. And you will do well to pay attention to it as to a light shining in a dark place until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
And it is the Greek word bebai ataron that is the question, what does it mean? Does it mean that the prophetic word is even more sure, even more reliable than what we encountered? We're not talking about which is more sure, the Bible or an encounter I have today saying the Holy Spirit spoke to me. There's a question, the Bible, the Bible, which is more reliable?
This is the authoritative word for everyone, period. Any experience I have has to be tested by that authoritative revelation of Scripture and then by the fruit it produces, among other things, in terms of testing. But is Peter saying our experience with the Lord Himself, the Son of God incarnate, walking on this planet and God Himself speaking from heaven and saying this is my son, that even more sure than that is the Bible?
I think Peter would look at you like, what in the world are you talking about? We were with Jesus. We were with the Word made flesh. So let's take a look, for example, at just different translations. Good way to do it, go to Bible Gateway and you just type in 2 Peter 1.19, whatever version you like, and then scroll down a little and you'll see click for all the versions.
So let's look at some different versions. 2 Peter 1.19 in the CEB. In addition, we have a most reliable prophetic word or the CSB. We also have the prophetic word strongly confirmed. In other words, what happened on the Mount of Transfiguration confirms the word.
The CJB. Yes, we have the prophetic word made very certain. So our experience with Jesus further confirms that word. The ESV. And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed. I could go on with translation after translation.
The ICB. This makes us more sure about the message the prophets gave. The ISV, therefore we regard the message of the prophets as confirmed beyond doubt.
In other words, our experience with Jesus on the mountain confirms it. Now, here's another thing anyone can do online. Go to netbible.org. So netbible, netbible, new translation, netbible.org. Type in 2 Peter 1.19, just a little menu, you can do it. And then when you get to the words altogether reliable, we go over and we click on note number 60. So anybody can do this.
All right. The comparative adjective by Beba Ataran is the complement to the object tan propheticon logon, the prophetic word. As such, the construction almost certainly has the force. The prophetic word is more certain altogether certain.
And this is something that we all have. Many scholars prefer to read the construction saying we have the prophetic word made more sure, but such a nuance is unparalleled in object complement constructions. When the construction has this force, the meaning as construed in the translation is that the Bible, in this case, the old Testament that these believers had in their hands was a thoroughly reliable God guide, whether it was more certain than was even Peter's experience on the Mount of Transfiguration depends on whether the adjective should be taken as a true comparative, more certain, or as an elative, very certain, altogether certain. Some would categorically object to any experience functioning as a confirmation of the scriptures and hence would tend to give the adjective the comparative force, yet the author labors to show that his gospel is trustworthy precisely because he was an eyewitness of this great event. Further, to say that the Old Testament scriptures, the most likely meaning of the prophetic word, were more trustworthy in authority than an apostle's own experience of Christ is both to misconstrue how prophecy took place in the Old Testament, did not the prophets have visions or other experiences, and to deny the final revelation of God in Christ, he was one too. In sum, since syntactically the meaning that we have confirmed the prophetic word by experience is improbable, and since contextually the meaning that we have something that is a more reliable authority than experience in the Bible is unlikely, we're left with the meaning we have a very reliable authority, the Old Testament, as a witness to Christ's return. So, you can read it, as I'm saying, that the apostle said what we experience confirms the word even more, if you want to read it in a comparative way. I do not believe there's any possible way it means the Bible is even more certain than our experience, or you can simply read it as this is a more reliable God. Alright, let's look at a couple of the top commentators on 2 Peter.
Let's look first at Richard Balcom. His commentary on 2 Peter and Jude in the Word Biblical Commentary series is, in my view, the best that's been done, alright? And many scholars agree that it's the best. Look at what Balcom says, 2 Peter 1.19. Moreover, we place very firm reliance on the prophetic word, to which you would do well to attend, as you would to a lamp shining in a murky place until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
So now he's going to explain what this means in Greek. Moreover, we place very firm reliance on the prophetic word. Commentators have usually given, by utterance, its proper comparative force, more certain, more reliable, but have then been divided as to its significance, something that prophecy is said to be a more solid argument for the parousia, for the appearance of Jesus, than the transfiguration is.
That's what Scott Aneol is arguing. But this would be a rather surprising argument in the context, since it appears to relativize the value of the apostolic eyewitness testimony, which has been so stressed in verses 16 to 18. It is true that the rabbis held prophetic scripture to be more reliable than a bat kol, a heavenly voice, literally daughter of a voice, but the transfiguration was more than a voice from heaven. It was the visible investiture of Jesus with his kingly glory, the beginning of the fulfillment of scriptural prophecy. In view of this, the majority opinion of scholars takes this verse to be saying that the transfiguration has confirmed Old Testament prophecy.
As an anticipatory fulfillment of prophecy, the transfiguration makes the still awaited future fulfillment at the parousia yet more certain. Hence the translation, we have the prophetic word made more sure in the RSV. However, this is not a very natural meaning of the Greek.
The expression in Greek normally means to have a firm hold on something. The phrase does not use the bias in the legal sense of confirmed. And this phrase, the comparative but by other on is used either as a true comparative or superlative or lative meaning. It is best to adopt the latter sense here. No comparison need be intended.
Now, I would say that the comparison is rightly given. In other words, that now we know this word that we had, it's been confirmed to us even more. I mean, how many times has something happened in the Bible saying, now we know. Now we know. We've heard of it. Now we experience it like the Samaritans in John 4. Yeah, you told us, the Samaritan, you told us, but now we've heard for ourselves.
Now we know. That's why John, in 1 John, writes about being eyewitnesses. We were there. We touched him. We were there.
We saw him. We're eyewitnesses to his death, to his resurrection. That's why that was a qualification to replace Judas as one of the 12 apostles. They had to be eyewitnesses to the ministry of Jesus, to his death, and to his resurrection. That was a qualification, that eyewitness category.
So I do believe a case can be made for that. We have the prophetic word. It's even more certain to us now than it ever was because of our experience. Look to that word. That word's an infallible God. Look to that word. That word is absolute, enduring, unchanging truth. Look to that word. We have further confirmation.
You weren't there. So trust our testimony and trust what's written. Trust what's written. Or you could argue, as Baucom did and NET did, that it should be understood just in this superlative meaning as we have this firm, reliable God. So we have both.
Both and not one superior to the other. Let me read one other commentator to you. This would be Thomas Schreiner.
Thomas Schreiner himself, a cessationist. He said, another difficult question relates to the meaning of the term, baba ataran, made more certain. Some suggest that the written prophecies of the Old Testament are more certain than an event like the Transfiguration because the Transfiguration was subjectively experienced. It should be in harmony with Dr. Anial. It is difficult to believe that Peter would say this.
Absolutely difficult to believe it. According to this interpretation, Peter would be put in the Transfiguration against the Scriptures, arguing that the latter are more certain than the former. But this would subvert the argument in verses 16 to 18. For Peter then would be suggesting that his appeal to the Transfiguration is not quite convincing, so he needed something better, namely the Old Testament Scriptures. But verses 16 to 18 demonstrate that Peter believed the Transfiguration was decisive proof for his view, not questionable in the least. He was not suggesting its deficiency in contrast to the Old Testament Scriptures, but was simply giving another argument for the validity of his view. It is preferable to conclude that the Transfiguration renders more certain the interpretation of the prophetic word.
And that, again, is my view. The word baba ataran should be taken in context as signifying a comparison so that the Transfiguration provides confirmation of the interpretation of the prophetic word, the Transfiguration that is not conceived as more or less reliable in the prophetic word. It provides a confirmatory interpretation of that word, and this interpretation was granted to Peter and the other apostles. Look, they didn't get it that he had to die or rise.
After he did, he opened their minds, they could understand the Scriptures. There it is. It's written.
It's both and. Hey, when you got born again, when you got born again, that confirmed to you the reality of Scripture. Wow, he's a real God.
He really saves. I got born again. I mean, I heard the gospel. I knew about the Bible. Now I got born again, child of God. There it is. It's written.
So my experience is subjective. The word of God is its ultimate authority that stands by itself. But when you experience divine healing, when you experience divine leading, when you experience God speaking and acting the way He promised, it confirms what's written. This is Michael Ellison, founder of Tributa Wellness. I want you to hear an amazing testimony from my friend, James Robison, and most all of you will know of him. He and his wife, Betty, host the Life Today television program. Now here is James. Let me tell you about a miracle I experienced. My friend, Michael Ellison, he and his wife are our 40 year plus best friends.
Well, let me just say this to you. I had so much pain with what was called tennis elbow that I could hardly reach over and pick up the phone without pain, without it hurting me. I couldn't pick up something to drink, a glass of tea or anything.
It was very difficult to do anything without wearing a tight strap. And then Michael shared the nopal cactus juice with me, nopalaya. I began drinking about that much in the morning in the glass and that much later in the day. And in three months, I was a different person. I have now gone more than 10 years with no pain, not better. Well, I have no joint pain. I am telling you, it did something to the inflammation in my body that was undeniable. That's just my testimony. But that's been more than 10 years with no pain.
Matter of fact, if I miss for some foolish reason, a few days, I can feel it creeping back that fast. So give it a try. See if it helps relieve your pain. I hope it does like it has mine because it worked for me.
Nopalaya is supported by clinical studies for lowering inflammation and improving mobility, flexibility and range of emotion in the neck, back and joints for less reliance on pain medication and improved quality of life. Call 800-771-5584 and use promo code BROWN25 to receive 25% off your order. As a new customer, 100% of your order goes to support the line of fire.
Call 800-771-5584 or go online to TriVita.com. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get on the line of fire by calling 866-34-TRUTH.
Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. How do you know you're born again? Experience is real. How do you know it?
You say, well, God promised things in the Bible. How do you know it's real? How do you know he didn't make it up?
How do you know it's not just emotionalism? We say, well, it's written in the Bible and Jesus changed my life. It's not just it's written in the Bible and I believed it, but he changed my life. If there's no evidence of new life, you have to question whether there's been a new birth. If there's no evidence that your sins have been forgiven, if there's no evidence that you have a new heart, if there's no evidence that your desires have changed, if there's no evidence that God is your Father, if there's no evidence of a witness of the Spirit in your own life, if there's no evidence of the character of Jesus in you whatsoever, you say, where is the new birth?
Because the new birth is something that actually happens. And as it happens, then that confirms to you the reality of God. So the Word is true whether we believe it or not. But now we experience his goodness. We see he's promised certain things and we take him at his word and he does what he promised that further confirms, wow, it's true. He's real.
I knew it, but I was struggling with these questions. Now, praise God, he's so faithful. Well, in an overwhelming way, in a whole different category, a whole different category than our experiences, Peter and two of the other apostles were with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration. He is transfigured.
This is the Son of God. Are you going to tell me, well, the Bible's more reliable than Jesus? Who would think that? What believer on the planet would—there's not a cessationist in the world that would say that the Bible is more reliable than Jesus himself. Obviously not.
It's both and, not either or. But that's ultimately what a cessationist is saying when they use that wrong argument about, say, computer 119. That's why it's right to call that hyper-cessationism because it is so separating experience from scripture that even when it's the apostles with Jesus and God himself speaking from heaven and Jesus being transfigured, yeah, but it's not as reliable as the Bible.
Not as sure as the Bible. Again, it's a very bizarre way of thinking and it completely undermines Peter's whole point as other scholars and commentators and translators have indicated in verses 16 to 18. And to not even lay that out upfront to say, of course, the view I'm holding to is a minority view among scholars and we have to deal with textual issues and we have to deal with other issues about being eyewitnesses of his majesty, etc., it underscores to me the—I hate to say bankruptcy because I don't mean to say that hyper-cessations have no relationship with God. I don't mean to say that they don't know the Lord or love the Lord or experience his love in some way. I don't mean that.
But it's a very bizarre position. And I agree with Pastor Denton when he talked about this attitude, you have to disparage the miraculous. You know, when there is this brother who's had a word about assassination attempt on Trump and the bullet whizzing by his ear and so on and wow, did this happen? Was this a true prophecy? I was watching one video and the cessationist leader said that all these guys were like, they're contacting him, they're kind of in a panic. Like, how do we explain this away?
Because we don't believe in it. My only concern was, is the guy reliable? And what about the rest of what he had to say?
Is that reliable? What's his track record? Some have done—I haven't looked into it, it just was a passing thing on an issue to me—some have looked into it and said he had all kinds of other prophecies that didn't come to pass and wacky teachings. So to me, the big thing I was looking for, okay, he's supposed to have a transformation. Trump is going to become a transformed man. That obviously hasn't happened yet. And he'll be re-elected, okay, we don't know about that yet. Then there's going to be a horrific economic crisis, what, like the depression or worse?
And then good coming out of it. So thus far we haven't seen the second element that we're supposed to see, which is the transformation of Trump. So to me, the word may have just had some coincidental parts that were accurate, and the rest not accurate. We dismiss it. Or he may have had a bad track record in the past, in which case we put a giant question mark over what he's saying.
But it was immaterial to me, if it's real, then it's material to me. In other words, if he has a transformative experience, becomes a different person, really comes to know the Lord, a real born-again experience, then he gets re-elected. And then we hit that economic crisis, like, okay, this was predicted, this is meaningful, God's preparing us, but good's going to come out of it, revival's going to come out of it. Otherwise, okay, it's just, it was a wrong word with a coincidental part that was accurate, and end of subject, dismiss it. But this brother was talking about like almost people in a panic, like, okay, what do we do with this?
Why do you have to explain it in a way? God speaks prophetically all the time. Not so much about just predicting the future on national events and things like that. I would think that's out of the norm, out of the main purpose of New Testament prophecy, which is we're going to be on individual levels and for edification, exhortation, sometimes to reveal sin. But I got a direct message from Pastor David Berman, Jewish believing pastor in New England, I believe. He said this to me. Yes, Adonai, the Lord still speaks to and through us.
Two months ago, I was sitting in my house. The Holy Spirit spoke to me, told me to contact a man I've witnessed too many times and rejected me. The Spirit said specifically, tell him this is his last chance and he rejected the Lord, the Lord's servant David. Repent now, this is your last chance. So he's saying the Lord spoke to him very specifically, right? So I immediately contacted him and told him. He freaked out and told me he had a gun to his head about to pull the trigger and kill himself when he saw my message just before he would pull the trigger. He is alive and repentant.
What was that? The devil with these men said did not hear from God. What sort of relationship do they have with Adonai where he does not communicate in communion with them?
I don't understand. That's that's what pains me that the idea of this happening, you have to explain away or a book like Craig Keener's Miracles Today, which is different than it overlaps with but different from his two-volume study. It was award-winning study, two-volume hardcover Miracles. This Miracles Today does go through some of the philosophical objections to miraculous but then just documents miracle after miracle after miracle after miracle.
I mean documented details, medical information and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on. I mean it's massive even even if only 10% of it was accurate and I put it the other way. I'd say Craig being a careful scholar maybe you could argue with a tiny percent of things but but it's accurate it's documented okay so overwhelmingly accurate information.
I have to explain the way I rejoice praise God for what he's doing in abundant and glorious and beautiful ways around the world. Some modest cessationists, hyper cessationists don't believe in people being delivered from demons today. I've seen it front of my own eyes. When our first team went from the Browns Revival School of Ministry to Nigeria this would have been 97 or 98 that they went into one outlying village and a demonized man who did not speak any English started jumping up and down shouting oh no the fire people are here.
Oh no the fire people are here. How'd that happen? Who was involved with that? And then you see people miraculously delivered and they're set free and next thing they're changed and they're loving Jesus and glorifying him and living by the word. Who who did that?
Who did that? The the missionaries that we've sent out this week amazingly we're celebrating our 25th annual anniversary annual missions conference for Fire International which was formed out of the Browns Revival out of the Browns Revival School of Ministry to cover our missionaries that were going out around the world. Many of them got transformed at the revival. Some got saved at the revival encountered the Lord his miraculous power they were set free they were transformed. I was reading cessationists mocking and attacking the revival day and night the flood of criticism was extraordinary it's just emotionless and just flopping on the ground and acting crazy and there's nothing to it it's it's the flesh or it's demonic. Well I'd say well you know people are coming to Jesus well which Jesus is it another Jesus as well the the Jesus of the Bible the second person of the Trinity the Word made flesh the Son of God the virgin-born Savior the only Savior of all human beings the one who died on the cross and rose from the dead and ascended to heaven is returning that Jesus they're coming to him and they're reading the Bible day and night and they're turning from sin and they're leading holy lives who did that Satan can't cast out Satan who did that well it was emotionalism it won't last okay they've been on the mission field now for 25 years their kids are on fire for God some of their kids we've now sent out there the second generation the the oldest daughter of our missionaries in the Philippines that have been there for 25 years came out briefly during COVID different times but they've been there 25 years and and their oldest daughter we just commissioned as a missionary to Japan that's not emotionalism friends that's God and and it's this hyper cessationism that denies that the Holy Spirit is still speaking through dreams and visions that denies that the Holy Spirit may have yelled stop in the years of my colleague who gave me the first-hand report when he suddenly startled by their voice hits the brakes and doesn't kill that kid that came running out on the street the thing is if you get a thousand of us in the room we'll give you 5,000 stories of what we've experienced or 10,000 stories of what we've experienced firsthand and in some cases everyone if you give them time will give you a hundred experiences that they've had and it's never dawned on any of us that this competes with the Bible or takes the place of the Bible the Bible is the one and only authoritative and errant infallible Word of God that rules over us and we submit to and is God's authoritative revelation for all human beings but you better believe he's speaking and acting and many many wonderful beautiful ways yes I'm a continuation of charismatic Pentecostal so I embrace all of this but many who are cessationists are not hyper cessationists and I just pray that they'd be open to the Word of God and receive everything the Holy Spirit has for them that's my prayer that's my heart.
