What Continues Today from Eras of Miracles? Thoughts on the Non-Charismatic Continuationism

When someone uses the word "continues" like I have in the title of today's post, he does refer to a theological ideology called "continuationism."  It brings the question, should we expect the same occurrences today that we read during eras of miracles?  When I say "eras of miracles," I'm saying the times when God intervened with miracles to confirm His Word to Israel.  They were signs and wonders performed by either prophets or apostles for the purpose of authentication of His message to the Jewish nation.  These eras include Moses and Joshua, Elijah and Elisha, Jesus, and then the Apostles.  One more era remains, the time of the Tribulation on earth.  Again then it will be Jews and again as confirmation of the Word of God.

The miracles of the era of miracles had a particular purpose for a particular people.  They were for Jews.  They were for validation.  They did not result in faith, because signs and wonders don't produce faith.  The Word of God produces faith.

Continuationism would bring those miracles, signs and wonders, into a non-era of miracles, not for confirmation of God's Words, and not for Jews, but for Gentiles.  If they are signs and wonders, they also have certain characteristics that fit the profile of miracles and signs and wonders during those eras of miracles.  A Lazarus is raised from the dead.  Astronomical events occur.  A blind man can see.  Jesus reattaches the ear of Malchus.  When people are healed, everyone is healed, regardless of faith.

The Charismatic movement does not fit the people, the purpose, or the profile for a continuation of the eras of miracles.  In other words, it is a fraud.  It's a lie.  It just isn't true.  The Father seeks those who would worship Him in truth.  The Charismatic movement is a lie, so it is false worship, not the actual worship of God.  It's a total impostor.  This evaluation is not intended out of unkindness, but out of a loving warning.

Some today would say that they are not Charismatic, but they are still continuationists.  Charismatics themselves reveal a less than biblical magnitude of signs.  They don't meet the scriptural test of a sign and wonder.  They are false.  The idea with the professing non-Charismatics is that they are in fact not Charismatics, and how you know this is because they have an even lesser significant stature of sign and wonder than the Charismatics.  This is what is supposed to make them legitimate.  Why? What is the point?

The obvious point today is that since men seek signs, those who give them signs will benefit in the short term from the impersonation of them.   Many times this does not take much manipulation. Emotion or lust stirring music very often is enough to fool people that something is happening.  To give people the impression that God is working in their midst, that they have special touch from or favor with God, they contrive a seen or event or scenario that looks like something supernatural occurred.  Sometimes something supernatural may have happened.  When they do these things, this also confirms, albeit in a phony way, that people should join with a group so obviously conjoined to God.  All the continuationism is about satisfying the appetite for signs.

On the other hand, the yearning for signs conveys a dissatisfaction with the sufficiency of the Word of God.  The Bible isn't good enough for the sign seekers.  I'm quite sure almost all of them would say God's Word is number one and really, really most important.  When 2 Timothy 3:16 says that it throughly furnishes anyone to every good work, it really does mean that.  The Bible is sufficient, but it also doesn't work like many people want it to.  They want more than what scripture either promises or actually does in people's lives.

God's Word is sufficient, but so is God's providence.  God's providence is hardly mentioned in my experience among independent Baptists or even unaffiliated Baptists, again, that I have heard.  If you are reading this, and you regularly mention providence, this isn't you, but consider whether it is you.  God works through His providence and it is supernatural, but He works those supernatural works through ordinary means.  God is good.  He heals.  He doesn't heal.  He does what He does and we need to trust Him.  God is doing so many good things at any given time, thousands, that should be good enough.  While we still sin, God keeps saving us.  During this non-era of miracles, we should trust His providence.  He's working.

The Charismatics have their prophetic utterances, where God reveals messages to them directly. There are their tongues of angels, where God speaks directly.  God also talks to non-Charismatic continuationists with the "still small voice" or the "divine call" among other means.  I've heard some say that God gave them an idea or "God told me" or "God gave me this message."  Sometimes when you are reading the passage they are preaching and you see that what they are preaching isn't in the passage, you understand what they mean when they say that God gave them that message.  I've heard that called, "Holy Spirit preaching."  You can't question Holy Spirit preaching because it is close to the level of divine inspiration.   God tells someone who to marry that is part of the "individual will of God."  I'm only mentioning these that I have written, but I've heard others. One of these revelations is very overt and claims Charismatic involvement, but the other doesn't want that association, even though it is continuing to receive revelation from God.  Both are continuationist in the same doctrinal category.

The Charismatics have their divine healings through faith and their healers.  The non-Charismatic continuationists have their prayers for healing that aren't often of the instantaneous variety, but are supernatural healing, that when it occurs, affords a significance that someone has some power or very powerful influence.  The when and how they occur have some strong similarities to Charismatic healings.  They are differentiated by very little from a healing sign or healing miracle.

The Charismatics have their variety of miracles, often very strange.  Some of them have to do with money in the realm of prosperity theology.  God gives incredible amounts of money for extravagant purchases.  The non-Charismatic continuationists have those too.  They very often have stories that might start with God telling someone to do something, he doesn't have money for it, God says He's going to give the money, and the person follows through without the money.  The money comes in, and it's all credited as supernatural.

The Charismatics have something they call power evangelism.  The non-Charismatic continuationists have their sort of power evangelism.  They either pray for evangelistic power or unction or just straight out pray that person or a crowd of people are saved.  This is akin to the Day of Pentecost.  Very often a crowd is gathered not through mysterious power, but the very understandable power of marketing and promotion, combined with a big event.  People pray for the big event that a large number of salvations might occur.  An emotional message is delivered and great numbers of professions are made through easy prayers.  It is chalked up to Holy Spirit power that is Pentecostal in nature.

One will not see the same sort of continuationism of the previous paragraph in every branch of continuationism, but it is common in many places to various degrees.  People have called the event or events described, revival.  These events might occur to varied degrees with some of the same qualities, again of assorted amount and intensity.  Just because someone is doing it less doesn't mean he's not doing it.  It's still there.

Just because someone doesn't participate in the Charismatic movement doesn't mean he's not a continuationist.  Both the Charismatic and the non-Charismatic continuationists are continuationists. Both are perverting biblical sanctification and Christian growth and the will of God.  Someone might say the Charismatic is worse, so the non-Charismatic is acceptable.  No.  Both are unacceptable.  Both are  a lie.  If this is going to change, we have to see and then admit that these are in essence the same.  We can't accept either.