Driscoll vs. Calvin, Doctrine vs. the Spirit

In Driscoll’s latest hit, he warns against the supposed consequences of elevating doctrine over the Holy Spirit with statements such as: “You don’t need to pray much anymore, because you have a theology that tells you what to do. You don’t have to listen to the Holy Spirit anymore, because you have a theology that directs all your steps. I’m not saying we avoid our doctrinal clarity, but we still need to be filled with the Holy Spirit.” He proposes that “cessationism…[is] a clever way of saying, we don’t need him [the Holy Spirit] like we used to.” One of the repercussions of cessationism, he says, is that “Christianity goes from a relationship we enjoy to a belief system we adhere to.”
Whatever cessationism is, it’s anything but these things (see Nate Busenitz’s article here for helpful clarification on what cessationism is not).
But more to the point: Can doctrine be elevated over the Spirit? It’s a charged issue, no doubt. Much could be said in response to the quotes above, but the bottom line is this: to say, “Don’t elevate doctrine above the Holy Spirit,” is to make a boogeyman distinction. It’s a non-existent dichotomy that sounds catchy, but is false through and through, and needs to be laid to rest.


…the office of the Spirit promised to us, is not to form new and unheard-of revelations, or to coin a new form of doctrine, by which we may be led away from the received doctrine of the gospel, but to seal on our minds the very doctrine which the gospel recommends. Hence it is easy to understand that we must give diligent heed both to the reading and hearing of Scripture, if we would obtain any benefit from the Spirit of God…and, on the contrary, that any spirit which passes by the wisdom of God’s Word, and suggests any other doctrine, is deservedly suspected of vanity and falsehood…what authority can the Spirit have with us if he be not ascertained by an infallible mark? (Institutes 1.9.1)
What is that infallible mark? It is not subjective human impressions, or, for example, inner promptings, dreams, verbal words, and so on, but Scripture and the Spirit-breathed doctrines therein which, by the illumination of the Spirit, set forth all things for life and godliness.
Calvin continues:
And assuredly he [the Spirit] is pointed out to us by the Lord with sufficient clearness…they [some in his day who proposed a similar idea] seek the Spirit from themselves rather than from Him. But they say that it is insulting to subject the Spirit, to whom all things are to be subject, to the Scripture: as if it were disgraceful to the Holy Spirit to maintain a perfect resemblance throughout, and be in all respects without variation consistent with himself. True, if he were subjected to a human, an angelical, or to any foreign standard, it might be thought that he was rendered subordinate, or, if you will, brought into bondage, but so long as he is compared with himself, and considered in himself, how can it be said that he is thereby injured? I admit that he is brought to a test, but the very test by which it has pleased him that his majesty should be confirmed…he wishes us to recognise him by the image which he has stamped on the Scriptures. The author of the Scriptures cannot vary, and change his likeness. Such as he there appeared at first, such he will perpetually remain. There is nothing contumelious to him in this, unless we are to think it would be honourable for him to degenerate, and revolt against himself. (Institutes 1.9.2)

But biblical doctrine is not subjective and neither is the illuminating work of the Spirit. The latter works in unity with the former. The Spirit is given to spotlight the knowledge of God from Scripture, not to illuminate additional revelation. So then, to say, “Don’t elevate doctrine above the Holy Spirit,” is like saying, “Don’t elevate God’s attributes over God.” God cannot be separated from his attributes anymore than the Holy Spirit from what he has spoken.
Think of it this way: it’s like saying, “Some are more about the word, but others are more about the Spirit,” which makes the same non-existent dichotomy. To “be about the word” is synonymous to being “about the Spirit.” We know this, for example, from biblically parallel passages like Ephesians 5:18-6:9 and Colossians 3:16-4:1, which demonstrate the equivalence. The results of being filled with the Spirit in the Ephesians passage are identical to those of being filled with the word in Colossians. For example, to be filled with the Spirit, or have the word richly dwelling within, both look like a thankful heart that sings psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph 5:18-19, Col 3:16-17). To be filled with the Spirit is synonymous to having the word dwell richly in us. Since biblical doctrine is the summation of the Spirit-breathed word, being filled with the Spirit is to be filled with biblical doctrine. So then, the saying suggests a nonsensical idea, namely, that knowledge, relationship, and worship of God can be divorced from special revelation.
More could be said, but key to the issue is that the colloquialism, “Don’t elevate doctrine above the Holy Spirit,” is to divide the Spirit against himself, or God against God. But there is no such division. The Spirit spoke Scripture and subsequently, in the hearts of the regenerate, performs an accompanying and unifying work of illumination so that we elevate God through the objective knowledge of him in his word. What this means, as Calvin said, is that “we owe to the Scripture the same reverence which we owe to God; because it has proceeded from him alone, and has nothing belonging to man mixed with it” (Calvin’s Commentary, 2 Tim. 3:16). Therefore, elevating doctrine and God are one in the same act of worship. Objective biblical doctrine is traction for relationship with, and worship of, God through the work of the Spirit. And that illuminating and unifying work of the Spirit is the means of the glorious, joyful relationship we enjoy with God. In other words, as we meditate on biblical doctrine, which the Spirit has spoken (2 Pet 1:20-21), he grants illumination to both comprehend and rejoice in what he has said about God, thereby fueling our worship of God (Ps 1:3).
So then, part of the reason Scripture warns us against the neglect of doctrine, for example (i.e. 2 Tim 1:13-14), is because it’s precisely through the work of the indwelling Spirit, that we experience fellowship with and conformity to Jesus Christ. The Spirit works to elevate Christ through the knowledge of his word to produce all God wishes to do for our completion in Christ. Thus, to caution against elevating doctrine above the Spirit is an impossible dichotomy.
In a future post, I will address another issue this brings up, namely, the function of the Holy Spirit in our lives and how we live/walk by the Spirit.
No comments:
Post a Comment