Introduction to the Word and Voice of God

This post is the beginning of my attempt to focus on the question of how God speaks (or permits Himself to speak) to us today. It presents a summary of the various positions commonly held, from which discussion will proceed in later posts.

There is general agreement among Christians that God, in some sense, spoke the Creation into existence, as asserted by such scriptures as Genesis 1, John 1:1-5 and Hebrews 11:3, There is also general agreement that Jesus is himself the Word of God, come in human form and that he now sustains the whole Creation by his Word. John 1:1-14; Hebrews 1:3; Colossians 1:16. However, there are longstanding disagreements as to how, and how literally, each of these areas of general agreement should be understood. Finally, there is general agreement that God spoke, in the past, to and through Moses, the prophets and others involved in the writing of the Hebrew Scriptures, through Jesus, and to and through the Apostles and certain New Testament “prophets” mentioned therein, though, again, there is disagreement as to what it means that God “spoke” through these people and that the Bible is the “Word” of God. John 3:32-36; John 10:34-36; Acts 15:32; Romans 12:6; Ephesians 3:4-5; Colossians 1:25-26.

However, there is great disagreement about whether God still speaks to people today, other than strictly by academic study of the Bible and preaching containing the results of such study. On the one hand, there are passages in the New Testament that appear to indicate that God still and always continues to speak to his children, sometimes directly, and that his own continue to hear his voice. Mark 13:11; John 10:3-5, 14-16, 26-30; John 16:7-15; 1 Corinthians 2:9-16; Hebrews 3:13-15; Hebrews 12:25; James 1:5-8; 1 John 2:20-24. On the other hand, there are several passages that appear to say, or, at least, can–with the addition of some assumed definitions–be understood to say, that the times of the early Church, before the Canon of Scripture was completed, were just plain different from the present. See, for instance, Deuteronomy 18:15-21; Jeremiah 23:16-22; 1 Corinthians 13:8-12; Hebrews 1:1-4; 2 Peter 1:16-21; Revelation 22:6, 9-10,18-19. This second set of Scriptures is used to argue that something about God’s communications with us fundamentally changed when the Scriptures were completed. To these arguments are added arguments from collective experience, arguments based on the avoidance of “heresy,” on the maintenance of a safe “status quo,” on the need to suppress people who proclaim their own insane delusions in God’s name, and on the need to maintain the authority of established religious and political leadership (both of which were frequently challenged by the prophets of the past), to argue that God never speaks directly to individual believers in the present age. Rather, God now communicates only in writing or through the official human Church organization.

This post is the beginning of my attempt to focus on the question of how God speaks (or permits Himself to speak) to us today.  This question logically precedes the questions of

1.  the nature of my relationship with God in Christ.  A relationship in which He is allowed to speak to me directly is obviously very different from one in which He may only speak through words on a printed page, the oral preaching or teaching of a recognized leader, or not at all.
2.  the role of my own human reason in that relationship.
3. the role of human authority relationships in my relationship with God, AND
4. whether the gifts of the Holy Spirit are at work in me or anyone else presently living (i.e., the practical consequence of the Cessationism vs. Continuationism debate)

PRESUPPOSITIONS

My initial listing of all possible positions on whether and how God speaks will include a few positions that are commonly held that either deny the existence of God or His ability to speak.  Otherwise, in the posts that follow on this subject, I will assume:

1.God CAN do anything except lie.  Lying is an exception because it violates God’s nature as the truth (if God can lie, there is no such thing as truth).  Anything else–including speaking to people at any time–is something God is by nature ABLE to do.  If He is not doing it now, it is because He has chosen not to do it, not because He is unable to do it. 

2. God reserves the right to do anything He has not plainly told us He will not do. God can limit Himself by His own declaration, but such limitations should be explicit, and should not be inferred lightly.

3.  At a minimum, God inspired everything in the Bible.  Alternative answers to my question that deny this need not be further considered.

4.  The truth cannot be conclusively determined merely by pointing to one or a few “proof texts” that are said to trump all texts that have contrary implications.  Instead, everything that is written on the subject must be considered together.

5.  The truth with regard to this question is independent of Church history. It cannot be determined from looking at who won or lost military battles in Europe or the Middle East for the last 2000 years, or from looking at who won political battles in the Church or in secular states during that time.  Nor can it be determined solely by looking at the labels the victorious factions in Church history have placed on the positions of minority factions.

In naming the alternative positions below, I will try to use neutral descriptive terms. Some of these terms, though I believe them to be accurate, carry negative connotations in some circles.  These negative connotations are not intended in my usage of these terms.  In this listing, I have attempted to be complete by including positions that deny the existence of God, his ability to speak, or that he ever has spoken. In the remainder of my discussions of this subject., I will make the presuppositions I stated above, so that I will give further discussion only to alternatives number 4 through 10.

ALTERNATIVE POSITIONS, RANKED FROM MOST RESTRICTIVE TO LEAST RESTRICTIVE:

1. The Atheist position.  If there is no such thing as a god, of course no god can communicate with us.
2. The Pantheist position.  If God (or a collection of gods) is simply equivalent to everything that is, of course he/she/it/they don’t speak to us, except through our own human inferences drawn from the universe and our experiences in it.  These experiences possibly may include experiences of “oneness” with the universe, but not communications with/from it.
3. Totally detached God.  This is Neoplatonism’s One or Aristotle’s Prime Mover. He/she/it may once have acted to get things started but has since been totally detached from creation.  He/she/it never speaks to us—not even in the Bible—and is incapable of speaking because He/she/it is so different from us.  Anything we think we know about Him/her/it is merely a human inference from the creation, other people, our culture and our experiences with these.
4. Silent God.  The Christian version of this position posits God created all things and has since then given us the Bible, but presently doesn’t communicate with us at all except through them.  We learn what God has said by rationally studying the Bible and the Creation and in no other way.  This position goes one step farther than the traditional Protestant position by denying illumination.  It was the position of some of the Founding Fathers of the United States, most notably Thomas Jefferson, who called himself a Christian and honored the Bible but also espoused Deism.
5. “Textual” or “Biblicist”–the traditional Protestant position (Luther’s “sola Scriptura” as now generally understood, though it is not clear Luther understood it in this way).  The position that God speaks to us today only by “illuminating” the words of Scripture, that is, by giving us an intellectual (and, perhaps, also emotional) understanding of his written words.  Under this position, even human activities which might be loosely said to be a form of God speaking–e.g., teaching, preaching, counseling–are really only an organized, group form of illumination.  In matters to which the Bible does not speak, God is either indifferent to our choices or directs our path only by providentially changing our circumstances (which is, conceptually, a manifestation of his sovereignty, not a form of communication).
6. Indirect Communication Only.  I was unable to find a single-word description for this position.  This is the position that God presently only speaks to us indirectly–EITHER through illumination of the Bible OR, in matters of correction, reproof or personal guidance on which the Bible is silent, through other people who stand in an appropriate relation to us OR through circumstances.  God no longer speaks directly TO anyone.  He does not speak directly TO me about myself (or about anyone or anything else), and he does not speak directly TO you about me.  However, if you stand in an appropriate relation to me–for instance, as a person in secular or ecclesiastical authority over me, a Godly counselor from whom I have sought advice, or a Christian friend–He may speak THROUGH you TO me (although, crucially, neither of us will be aware that He is speaking).  I was first exposed to this position at Bill Gothard’s seminars. It is an extension of the traditional Protestant “Biblicist” position discussed immediately above, and adds to it only the possibility that God will speak indirectly to us through other people in matters to which the Bible doesn’t speak (though He still NEVER speaks directly since the Bible was completed).
7. Cultic.  The position that God still speaks, but only to one or a few chosen leaders, whose words must therefore be slavishly obeyed. I include this alternative only for completeness. It is logically possible that a cultic leader would insist that all of his words be consistent with the Bible, but I’m not aware that this has ever actually happened throughout the 2000-year history of the Church.
8. Strictly Ecclesiastical.  This is the position that God is still able to speak new content to us, but only through the corporate human Church organization, speaking collectively through councils or authorized members of its hierarchy. Under this position, God does not speak directly to individual church members. But he does speak through authorized clergy and church organs, producing a body of received tradition parallel to, though not equal to, Scripture. This is the position of the Catholic and Orthodox churches, with some exceptions made for truly exceptional individuals in the past, and also tends to be the approach of cults that survive past their first two or three generations (for example, the Mormons).
9. Context-Limited Spirituality (my own term).  In its Christian form, this is, essentially, the position that God still can speak directly to us, but usually does not do so except under specific corporate conditions and not unless properly invoked.  That invocation can consist of such things as individual devotions, corporate worship, prayers asking God to speak (particularly in group settings), “praying through,” fasting, abstaining from pleasure or from certain activities, self-abnegation and infliction of pain, performance of prescribed rituals, and giving.   Moreover, when God is properly invoked and does speak to a believer directly, the circumstances (e.g., being in an organized church service or event), the form and the content of the message will generally conform to certain group expectations.  Most modern Pentecostal and Charismatic practice, as opposed to theology, is most properly characterized as context-limited spirituality, in that there are definite expectations as to what must be done to move God to speak, though He retains the sovereign choice to speak or not even when properly invoked, and also in that there are definite group expectations about the circumstances, form and allowed content of His messages.  Pentecostal teaching about God speaking to us often sounds closer to the mystical alternative, but the practice is closer to the context-limited one.  For my purposes, I will also limit the this position to permitting only communications consistent with the Bible, though I recognize that some who have espoused this position have not so limited it.
10. Mysticism.  This is the position that God is generally speaking at all times, and may speak to anyone, in any way, at any time, if the person is listening.  For purposes of my analysis, I would qualify this position by stating that God does not contradict Himself, and therefore will always speak consistently with, and not in contradiction to, his Written Word. Thus, for instance, God will not give someone today new doctrines at variance with those established in the Bible.  I realize that many of the historical figures in the Church who have espoused a mystical position have not so limited it, with results that have often been tragic.  But, for my purposes, I will limit the mystical position to permitting communications consistent with the Bible.

NEXT: Some Other Issues Affected by the Question of Whether and How God Speaks