Chapter 7.6

Guiding Revelation for Friendship

Doctrinal & Directional Truth to Love God

Table of Topics

A) The Purpose of Guiding Revelation

B) The Nature of Guiding Revelation: Doctrinal & Directional

C) The Decreasing Content of Directional Revelation

D) The Increasing Standard of Directional Revelation

E) The Increasing Content of Doctrinal Revelation

F) The Divine Authentication of Guiding Revelation

Extras & Endnotes

Primary Points

• Guiding revelation is intended to further our relationship with God after salvation and can be divided into doctrinal and directional revelation.
• Doctrinal revelation is what we are to believe and can expect from God. Directional revelation is what is to be obeyed and what God expects of us.
• Experience without doctrine does nothing to further our relationship with God because we will not properly interpret the former without the latter.
• Illustrating the importance of doctrine vs. commands, the first 11 chapters and 314 verses of Romans contain only 4 verses that give a command.
• Directional revelation enables us to be a servant of God, and doctrinal revelation enables us to have a friendship with God.
• We will obey the commands to the extent we believe the doctrines, and the doctrines will be valuable to the extent that we obey the commands.
• Directional revelation has drastically decreased in quantity from the OT, but significantly increased in its moral standard.
• God has decided to simplify His will into the basic command to love God and people in whatever you do which is the Law of Christ
• While God desires to move from detailed commands to more general ones, mega mysticism encourages the idea that God’s will is much more specific than the general commands recorded in Scripture (e.g. which job to choose) and that we need extrabiblical revelation through mental impressions and “signs” in order to know this will. Instead of allowing the decrease of specific commands and increase in freedom that God intended for the New Covenant, mega mysticism exponentially adds to the commands, and decreases our freedom, putting us in the spiritual childhood and micro-management of the Old Covenant.
• Doctrinal revelation has increased in content from the OT to the NT.
• Doctrinal & directional revelation is authenticated by the miracle-working abilities of its messengers.

A) The Purpose of Guiding Revelation

Elsewhere in KOG we have written, “The ultimate goal of a biblical covenant is a growing relationship between people and God, and it is the guiding revelation that is provided after saving revelation that builds such a relationship.” ^[1] We believe the King was teaching this very thing when He told His disciples:

Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. You are My friends if you do what I command. I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead I have called you friends, for everything I have learned from My Father I have made known to you (John 15:13-15).

The King is essentially telling the disciples how a friendship between God and humans is initiated and progresses. First, the King needed to “lay down His life for His friends” (v. 13), not only to rescue them from the sin that separated them from Him, but to initiate the friendship and demonstrate His love to them. This initiation of a rescue to begin a relationship is paralleled in the Exodus with God’s covenant people in the OT (cf. Exod 3:4-7). Accordingly, it is the rescuing sacrifice of the King that becomes the content of the saving revelation that not only saves us, but initiates our friendship with God.

However, merely accepting God’s rescue does not make a friendship. While God has certainly been a friend to us by saving us, the King says, “You are My friends if you do what I command” (v. 14). A friendship requires the love of more than one person. Therefore, in order to have a friendship, it is not enough for God to simply love us, but we must love Him as well. While God’s love is demonstrated by saving and providing for us, our love is demonstrated by obeying Him. As the King had said just a little earlier in this very discourse, “If you love Me you will obey what I command” (John 14:15; cf. vs. 23-4).

Nonetheless, while the King tells us in John 15:14 that obedience to God’s commands is certainly foundational to a friendship with Him, in the next verse He reveals that simply obeying God is not sufficient for friendship either. Obedience alone will only make us servants of God. This is a very high calling and great privilege, but God wants even more for us.

So, how would a servant become his master’s friend? When the servant’s master discloses more about his purposes, plans, and attributes. In other words, as the servant is allowed to get to know His master better, at the master’s invitation, they can form a friendship. And this we believe is what the King is communicating when he says:

I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead I have called you friends, for [gar: “because”] everything I have learned from My Father I have made known to you” (v. 15).

It is in our knowing more about God, beyond just His commands, that we go beyond being His servant, and enter a friendship with Him.

This distinction between servanthood and friendship may be reflected succinctly when David writes that God, “revealed His ways to Moses” (Ps 103:7), as opposed to perhaps merely communicating His commands to others. This transition in Moses’ relationship with God seems to be portrayed in Exodus 33-34 where we read:

Then Moses said to the LORD, “See, You say to me, ‘Bring up this people!’ But You Yourself have not let me know whom You will send with me. Moreover, You have said, ‘I have known you by name, and you have also found favor in My sight.’ “Now therefore, I pray You, if I have found favor in Your sight, let me know Your ways that I may know You, so that I may find favor in Your sight. (Exod 33:12-13 NASB)

Moses recognizes that God has initiated a friendship with Him, and Moses has been God’s servant, obeying His instructions throughout the Exodus. But now Moses wants to be more than a servant of God, and recognizes in order to do so He must know more about God, and therefore prays, “let me know Your ways that I may know You” (v. 13).

David prayed the same thing when he said, “Show me Your ways, O LORD, teach me Your paths; guide me in Your truth and teach me” (Ps 25:4-5). Likewise, we would suggest that Abraham is repeatedly called God’s friend (cf. 2 Chr 20:7; Isa 41:8; Jas 2:23), not because he simply obeyed his Master, but because God revealed to Abraham what He was about to do in Sodom (cf. Gen 18:16-21). This would seem to be a clear biblical example of what the King was talking about above regarding the revelation of our “master’s business” (John 15:14).

Of course God’s “ways” include His commands, but they are something more, and include His character and purposes as well. Accordingly, Moses repeated his prayer to know God’s ways by simply asking, “show me Your glory” (33:18). In response, and in order to further His friendship with Moses, notice that God reveals doctrine, not commands. He tells Moses “I Myself will make all My goodness pass before you, and will proclaim the name of the LORD before you” (33:19). To have the “name of the LORD” revealed to us is to know Who God is, not just what He wants. And the “goodness” and “name” of God is doctrine to be believed, not directions to be obeyed, and believing that doctrine is a necessary part of having a friendship with God.

Accordingly, in order to increase the intimacy of the relationship, God reveals to Moses more than just His will, but rather, something of Himself when:

[T]he LORD passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The LORD, the LORD God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth; Who keeps lovingkindness for thousands, Who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations.” (Exod 34:5-7 NASB)

It was this doctrine about God that allowed Moses to know His ways, rather than just His commands, and enabled him to go from being God’s servant, to also being His friend, because now He better understood and knew the One he was serving.

Of course it is not only in doctrinal proclamations such as this one that we gain a knowledge of God’s ways. Surely we, like Moses, experience what God is like when we recognize His faithful, loving deeds in our life. However, apart from God’s revelation of His ways in Scripture (doctrine), and our belief in them, we would not know we are experiencing God in our life. We might just think like any happy unbeliever that we’ve got the world’s luck, instead of recognizing we are enjoying God’s blessing. Experience without doctrine does nothing to further our relationship with God because we will not properly interpret the former without the latter.

Finally, we will note here the incredible sufficiency of Scripture in our relationship with God. The King uses the very intimate language of friendship to describe the kind of relationship that we can have with Him. And what is necessary for such a close relationship with Christ? Simply obey His commands and understand His purposes.

And where do we find such guiding revelation for such a personal friendship with Christ? Only those in mega mysticism would suggest that we need extrabiblical revelation to know the divine commands of the King and the purposes of God. Mega mysticism is the belief that God regularly communicates to us regarding extrabiblical matters (e.g. what job to choose) through more direct and miraculous means of divine revelation such as inspired intuitions, miraculous “signs,” and mental impressions. The foundational reason that mega mysticism claims we need such guidance is because they believe that God’s will for us involves a number of amoral, extrabiblical things that we would not know apart from such direct revelations. On the contrary, everything we need to perfectly obey God is in Scripture. All of it. ^[2]

We can be absolutely confident that the King told the Apostles all of the commands and doctrines we need to be His friend, and we can be equally confident that they recorded these in Scripture. There is no other divine revelation necessary to have the most intimate of relationships with Christ this side of Heaven than the guiding revelation completely contained in Scripture.

Our brothers and sisters in mega mysticism need to ensure they fully recognize the King’s promise here. Contrary to their claims that dreams, miracles, “signs,” and a continual private inspiration of mental impressions from God are necessary for the most intimate relationship with Christ, He mentions none of this here, and points to the sufficiency of Scripture for the revelation we need to be His friend.

B) The Nature of Guiding Revelation: Doctrinal & Directional

It is because of the uniqueness and importance of both divine doctrine and commands in having a friendship with God, that in the category of guiding revelation, we have distinguished between what we call doctrinal and directional revelation. Doctrinal revelation tells us about God, and what this Person is like with Whom we have a relationship. It includes the doctrines of God’s nature, love, holiness, and purposes. We could not confidently know these things about God without Scripture, and it is therefore the supreme method by which we get to know God better.

Directional revelation is essentially the moral commands given by God within the covenant. Therefore, while doctrinal revelation tells us what we can expect of God in our covenant relationship with Him, directional revelation tells us what God expects of us. Likewise, directional revelation consists of things to obey, while doctrinal revelation involves those things we simply need to believe. Directional revelation communicates the whole will of God, is entirely moral in nature, and always a sin against God to disobey.

These different aspects of covenant revelation reflect different stages in our relationship with God. Elsewhere we have written, “saving revelation makes us a son of God, guiding revelation make us a servant, and authenticating revelation makes us sure of all of these revelations and relationships.” ^[3] Here we would expand our understanding of guiding revelation and add that directional revelation enables us to be a servant of God, and doctrinal revelation enables us to have a friendship with God (cf. John 15:15).

This distinction between doctrinal and directional revelation is not merely a theological construct we have invented for the purposes of discussion. ^[4] Rather, it is a clear and important distinction reflected throughout Scripture. This is especially the case in the structure of the Apostle Paul’s epistles to the Romans and Ephesians. There are two unique things these epistles would seem to have in common.

First, it would seem they were not written in response to some pressing specific problem in the local church, as is obviously the case with virtually all of the Apostle’s other epistles. Instead, these epistles were primarily intended to provide a geographic capitol of Apostolic Christianity (i.e. Rome and Ephesus) with a summary of the essential revelation needed for the Christian faith to thrive till the end of time.

The unique purpose of these epistles leads to another important attribute about them, namely their structure. Both epistles reflect a desire on the Apostle’s part to communicate doctrinal revelation before directional revelation. For example, in the first three chapters or 66 verses of Ephesians, you will find no commands to obey, but only doctrines to believe. The only exception is 2:11-12 where the Apostle is simply encouraging them to “remember” and understand the doctrines he is teaching. His epistle to the Romans is even more remarkable in this way. In the first 11 chapters and 314 verses we can only find 4 verses that give a command to do something (cf. 6:11-13; 8:12).

Again, doctrinal revelation can be defined as simply the things we need to understand and believe about God. Rather than being a call for us to do something for God, doctrines are designed to do something to us, to educate, edify, and subsequently transform the people of God. We are not supposed to obey, nor can you obey a statement like, “He predestined us to be adopted as His sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with His pleasure and will” (Eph 1:5). There is nothing here to obey, but rather “sound doctrine” “that . . . can encourage others” (Tit 1:9), and that we simply need to study, meditate on, understand, and enjoy, as it changes our life.

Directional revelation, on the other hand, communicates things God wants us to do, as the Apostle commences to communicate at Ephesians 4:1 when he writes, “As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received” (cf. Rom 12:1). This is not a statement that only requires our belief, but also our obedience. While doctrinal revelation tells us what we can expect of God, directional revelation communicates what God expects of us, informing God’s people of all they need to know to obey and please Him.

The distinction then between directional and doctrinal revelation is reflected in Scripture, and both are essential in their own way for accomplishing God’s goal of friendship. We cannot have a friendship with a God we do not know (i.e. doctrine), nor be a friend of God if we do not follow Him (i.e. commands). We will only obey the commands to the extent we believe the doctrines, and the doctrines will only be valuable to the extent that we obey the commands. Therefore, both the doctrinal revelation of God’s love for us, and the directional revelation for us to love Him and others, are essence of the guiding revelation necessary to have a friendship with God.

C) The Decreasing Content of Directional Revelation

The Old and New Covenants, and the divine revelation contained in them, reveal a progression of how God desires to interact with His people, treating those in the former primarily as beloved, but immature children, and those in the latter more like empowered adults. ^[5]

Accordingly, one of the most striking differences between the OT and the NT is how God micromanaged the lives of His people in the former. In the OT God told His people what food to eat, how to eat it, and even how to prepare it (cf. Lev 11:1-12; Exod 12:8-11, 15). Accordingly, you could eat beef, but it was sin against God to eat rabbit or camel meat, or to cook a young goat in its mother’s milk (cf. Lev 11:4, 6; Exod 23:19). God instructed them on what to wear, prohibiting them from clothes made from two different kinds of fabric, and insisting that everybody’s clothing had tassels attached to its four corners (cf. Lev 19:19; Deut 22:12).

God also told them when to wash their clothes (cf. Exod 19:10; Lev 11:24) and bodies (Lev 5:15). God told them when and how to celebrate holidays (cf. Exod 23:14-17). He dictated what tribes were to own what land and it was not up to the Israelites to even decide the order they would march out of camp, but God gave detailed instructions on this as well (cf. Deut 3:12; Num 2). God told the Israelites when to travel, how far to go, and when and where to stop (cf. Num 19:17-23). God told them exactly what and how much they were to give Him at the temple (cf. Lev 12:6-8).

It was sin against God to touch a dead animal or human excrement (cf. Lev 5:2-3). God required all houses to be built with a parapet on the roof (cf. Deut 22:8). God even prescribed how His people were to cut their hair and trim their beards (cf. Lev 19:27). And we haven’t even touched on the many chapters of intricate laws concerning the temple, sacrifices, and the priesthood. As Martin Luther wrote in his introduction to the Old Testament: “It is to be observed, in the first place, that Moses provides so exactly for the organization of the people under laws as to leave human reason no room to choose a single work of its own.” ^[6]

God’s attitude toward the infantile religion of Israel is expressed when He says, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son. . . . It was I who taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by the arms” (Hos 11:1, 3).

However, with the inauguration of the New Covenant, the quantity of specific divine commands decreased drastically. We are no longer under the law of Moses, but of Christ (cf. Rom 6:14-15; 7:1-6; 1 Cor 9:21; Gal 3:10-13, 24-25; 5:18; 6:2;). Accordingly, while the Law of Moses included hundreds of specific instructions, the Law of Christ can essentially be summed up in the command to love God and others (cf. Matt 7:12; Gal 6:2; Rom 13:8-10; 1 Cor 9:21).

Accordingly, the vast majority of OT laws have no authority over us. Even one of the Ten Commandments (the Sabbath) has been rescinded as a law for the Christian (cf. Col 3:16-17; cf. Rom 14:5-6).

Rather than minutely dictating direction for virtually every aspect of our life as a loving father would do for his little child, God now interacts with His people as empowered adults, indwelled with His Holy Spirit. This indwelling is manifested in our New Nature, which is, “the new [moral] self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness” (Eph 4:24), and in essence “pre-programmed” with the will of God because it is God. ^[7]

The promise of such an inward revelation of God’s will was originally given to the Israelites when the Prophet Jeremiah wrote:

“The time is coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt . . . “This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,” declares the LORD. “I will put My law in their minds and write it on their hearts. (Jer 31:31-33)

Likewise, the Prophet Ezekiel wrote:

I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put My Spirit in you and move you to follow My decrees and be careful to keep My laws. (Ezek 36:26-27)

While the nation of Israel as a whole has not yet experienced the fulfillment of the promises in the New Covenant, the Church has. ^[8] By virtue of the indwelling Holy Spirit we not only have God’s “law” in Scripture as the Jews did, but He has also “put” it in our “minds” and written “it on” our “hearts.” This means more than just the earlier provision made to memorize written Scripture (cf. Deut 6:6-9), but suggests that we possess the moral “law of Christ” (Gal 6:2) in ourselves by virtue of our New Nature. God’s Word lives in us because God lives in us. ^[9]

The transition from spiritual childhood to adulthood in the covenants is also reflected in the increased emphasis on conscience in the NT. Accordingly, one NT scholar writes:

While the idea of conscience was obviously present in the Old Testament, Hebrew had no special word to describe it. Greek supplied the word syneidēsis and in the inter-testamental period it occurs where previously only the general term lēb [“heart”] could have been used. The term is therefore an innovation, but the idea was implicit in lēb. The use of syneidēsis was not common in Judaism. Paul, who uses the word twenty times, probably understood it better than any of his race. It is very likely that he introduced the term to Christianity.

It has been suggested that, after the eclipse of the Law in Christianity, conscience became more important than ever, and there is more than a grain of truth in the idea. One of the most important passages for syneidēsis is I Cor. 10, concerning the eating of idol meat. The Christian has to be guided by his conscience. The Jew, however, had a tradition, attributed to Moses, which gave precise details on how food was to be slaughtered, and who should slaughter it. For the pious Jew, the problem of I Cor. 10 was no problem at all. It may well be that the replacement of the Law by a religion of personal relationship made it necessary for Paul to enlarge on a word that previously had little currency in Judaism. ^[10]

The Law of Moses was external in the OT, and the Law of Christ has been internalized in our very nature, fulfilling God’s “new covenant” promise to His people when He said, “I will put My law in their minds and write it on their hearts” (Jer 31:31, 33). The Apostle put it this way to the Galatians: “if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law” (Gal 5:18). Martin Luther (1483–1546) wrote: “When Christ comes the law ceases, especially the Levitical law which makes sins of things that in their nature are not sins.” ^[11] Which, by the way, is an important criteria for discerning what aspects of the OT Law still have authority over the Christian.

Accordingly, it was not a steady stream of extrabiblical divine inspirations being made to us that the Apostle Paul was referring to when he wrote of being, “led by the Spirit,” (cf. Rom 8:12-14; Gal 5:16-18), but rather he was describing the “pre-programmed” moral New Nature in us. ^[12] Instead of specifics, God has decided to simplify all of His will into the basic command to love God and people in whatever you do (cf. Matt 22:37-40). This is the Law of Christ that we are now under (cf. Gal 6:2). Accordingly, the King said, “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” (Matt 7:12). Is it possible that the reason both the King and the Apostle Paul viewed the OT law as such an oppressive burden was not only because of its unattainable requirements, but its excessive specificity?

While God would appear to desire to move from detailed commands to more general ones, mega mysticism, in particular, promotes the opposite because it encourages the idea that God’s will is much more specific than the general commands recorded in Scripture and that we need extrabiblical revelation in order to know this will. In other words, instead of allowing the decrease of specific commands and increase in freedom that God intended for the New Covenant, mega mysticism exponentially adds to the commands, and decreases our freedom, suggesting that God has a specific will for virtually every area of our life like OT times. It encourages us to enter again a covenant of spiritual childhood, rather than one of adulthood in which our Father has given us general instruction on what He wants and expects us to use the decision-making tools He has given us to make “the most of every opportunity” (Eph 5:16). And as addressed elsewhere, God, like any good Father, often wants us to simply follow the free will desires of our own heart if they are not sinful or otherwise foolish. ^[13]

While we have discussed this point elsewhere, we will briefly quote here:

[M]ega mysticism promotes the idea that God desires to micromanage our lives like small children, giving us detailed, extrabiblical guidance about virtually every aspect of our life. It is children, both spiritually and physically speaking, that need to be told everything. Those with more maturity know what their Father wants. While mega mysticism suggests that it is the more mature Christian who will experience a continual “conversation” with God, we would respectfully suggest it may be a more immature Christian who would need one. ^[14]

The mega mystics who claim they are especially spiritual because God is continually telling them what to do, need to take note of the progress of directional revelation. The Father’s OT people were spiritual toddlers, needing God to dictate detailed direction for virtually every aspect of their life. However, because we possess the “last will and testament” of our Father in Scripture, and God’s entire will is moral in nature, and the indwelling Spirit in the New Nature instinctively knows that moral will, NT believers are spiritual adults and the Father treats them as such. He essentially tells us to live in the Spirit, exercising His fruits, love others, and use our Spirit-liberated reason to make decisions. ^[15] Who would argue that the divine micromanaging way of life in the OT is more spiritual? Only the mega mystic.

An apparent lack of value for the covenant of spiritual adulthood we live in would seem to also be reflected by Dr. Gordon T. Smith, Dean of Regent College, when he writes:

While I am sympathetic in many ways to the wisdom approach to guidance [which emphasizes the importance of Scripture, the new moral nature, reason, conscience, and freedom in decision making] and grant that we have much to learn from this perspective about what it means to grow in wisdom and exercise wisdom with sanctified minds before God, certain questions must be asked. I have reservations about the conclusions of the wisdom school.

First, I doubt that God is so removed from our life situations. The wisdom approach has been called a practical deism: God sets us on our way, gives us a Bible by which to live and then wishes us bon voyage, leaving us on our own. Klaus Bockmuehl has made an apt observation: as Christians we must deny the principle of self rule, even when that rule is carried out in accordance with Scripture. Christ himself clearly lived by the Spirit in submission to the Father-a relationship that was intimate and dynamic. ^[16]

Several responses are in order. First, what Dr. Smith gives the rather derogatory label of “practical deism,” we would refer to as the relationship between a father and his mature son, and what is meant by the historical perspective on the great sufficiency of Scripture. Call it deism if you want, but it is God’s way of ruling His Universe. While many Christians assume that God intends to constantly and supernaturally interject direct guidance to them, God is much more apt to implement more consistent, reliable means to govern His people.

For example, He initially and miraculously set all of Creation in motion, giving it what it needed to thrive, purposely making miraculous interventions usually unnecessary. The fact that God does not constantly and personally intervene in the created order does not mean that He cares less for it. On the contrary, He took exceptional pains at the outset to provide Creation with all the laws and power it would need to fulfill its purpose. Such is the same with the divine guidance of our lives. God has provided Scripture to teach us how to live, and a New Nature to live by. He has also given us a mind to think wisely, and the freedom to have desires apart from any manipulation of His own.

Secondly, Dr. Smith’s definition of “self rule” as a life lived in obedience to Scripture, but apparently lacking continual, miraculous guidance, is a rather strong statement. Not only does it seem absurd, but it completely ignores the fact that people who claim to be living by direct, private inspiration from God are commonly the best examples of a presumptuous and human-centered “self rule” themselves.

Also, is there a sense of maturity reflected in a proper idea of “self-rule”? If God truly desires to treat us more like adults than little children, then He is content to give us the general outline of what He wants in Scripture, and have us decide the specifics which He rarely cares about anyway. ^[17]

Finally, as we argue elsewhere under the title, “Let Us Dare Not Compare Ourselves with God the Son,” it is neither reasonable, biblical, nor humble, to think that the way in which God on Earth interacted with God in Heaven is what we are to expect or imitate ourselves. ^[18]

On the issue of God’s desired progression in divine revelation as it regards the spiritual maturity of His people, Gary Friesen and J. Maxon are worth the following rather lengthy quote from their book, Decision Making and the Will of God. Under the subtitle “Less Is Best . . . in Specific Guidance” they write:

God’s guidance in the Old Testament reached down into the details of daily life while His guidance in the New Testament is expressed in more general commands and principles. . . . It is instructive to compare more closely the nature of God’s guidance in the Old and New Testaments respectively. The first thing we observe is how much more specific the Old Testament directives were. . . .

God’s provisions for guidance in the Church Age are of a different character. Most of the specific regulations that constituted God’s moral will for the Israelites have been moved into the “area of freedom” for Christians. We are free and responsible to decide for ourselves what to eat, what to wear, where we will live, which church we will attend, and so on. And all decisions are to be governed by the general commands that comprise God’s moral will as [completely] revealed in the New Testament. . . .

So we see that God’s provisions for our guidance are less specific and less empirical (oriented to our physical senses) than the guidance that He gave to Israel. Does that mean that God has become less effective in His guidance? Does it mean that He has lost interest in His people? Does it mean that God has withdrawn and become “less personal” than He used to be? No. No. No.

In His wisdom, God saw fit to guide Old Testament saints as “immature children” who had a limited understanding of His nature and will. But those who have the benefit of receiving the revelation of Jesus Christ and the empowerment of His Spirit, God treats as “grown-up children.” New Testament believers are equipped to relate to their Father on an “adult” level without requiring the kind of detailed parental supervision that was appropriate to childhood (cf. Galatians 4:1-7).

The fact that God guides Christians as a father guides his sons is proof of His personal concern for us. This is demonstrated at the level of human relationships. In my own case, as I was growing up, my parents were training me so that I could learn to make decisions for myself. They taught me to distinguish right from wrong; they taught me biblical values and principles that I could apply to specific decisions. The older I got, the less they told me what to do. . . .

Were my parents withholding guidance? No. For nearly twenty years they had provided guidance that I could appropriate for . . . decision [making]. Were they unloving, disinterested, or impersonal? Quite the contrary. Their insistence that I come to my own conclusion was evidence of their love. In making their wisdom available to me, they were personally involved. In a similar manner, our Heavenly Father personally guides His children. ^[19]

Pastoral Practices

• In our teaching we must be careful not to add to the commands of God. We can do this by adding OT commands (i.e. food laws) to what God expects of His people today. We can add to God’s commands our own legalistic rules and traditions. And finally, we can promote mega mysticism and the idea that God has a multitude of extra biblical, amoral direction for us that He expects us to “catch” and obey. Do we truly believe that everything God wants to communicate regarding His will for our lives is in Scripture? And do we teach that? For further discussion on these issues see appropriate sections of KOG. ^[20]

D) The Increasing Standard of Directional Revelation

This transition from spiritual childhood to adulthood is also reflected by the fact that the difficulty of the directional revelation increased in the covenants as well. For example, adultery under the Old Covenant was defined and understood as a physical act. However, the King changed the directional revelation of how God views adultery, and therefore increasing our understanding of it as something that can occur in the mind with simply looking at a woman in the wrong way (cf. Matt 5:27-28). Likewise, in the OT the sin of murder brought great judgment, but now the same judgment is meted out to those who are merely angry with someone (cf. Matt 5:21). Before, one could divorce his wife with a simple certificate. Now such a thing is permissible only if she is unfaithful (cf. Matt 5:31-32; 19:3-10). Before you could treat an enemy like your enemy and take an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth because, mere justice was the most God could expect from unregenerated people (cf. Exod 21:23). Now God expects His people to love and forgive both enemies and offenders because He has indwelled us with His Holy Spirit (cf. Matt 5:43-47).

Accordingly, under the New Covenant the King said, “unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law [who meticulously obeyed the hundreds of OT laws and added hundreds more to them], you will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matt 5:20), and “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (v. 48). The reason that our righteousness can now surpass that of the Pharisees and even be like God’s righteousness, is again, because God now lives in us (cf. Eph 4:24).

As God had promised us through the prophet Ezekiel:

I will give you a new heart with new and right desires, and I will put a new spirit in you. I will take out your stony heart of sin and give you a new, obedient heart. And I will put My Spirit in you so you will obey My laws and do whatever I command. (Ezek 36:26-27 NLT)

Therefore, God not only increased the standard of righteousness communicated in the directional revelation of the NT, but proportionately increased our power to obey it. All of this, again, reflects a desire to treat His children more like empowered adults in the New Covenant rather than immature children as in the old one. ^[21]

We might add here that not only has the standard of directional revelation increased over time, but its spirituality as well. For example, the command to the first of God’s people was to physically “be fruitful and increase in number” (Gen 1:28), and this was how the Old Covenant people were primarily to increase their own numbers. However, under the New Covenant, we are to seek spiritual children (cf. 1 Tim 1:2; Matt 28:19-20), and even forsake physical child-bearing if we can (cf. 1 Cor 7:1, 6-7).

E) The Increasing Content of Doctrinal Revelation

Finally, we also see in Scripture an increase in the content of doctrinal revelation. Even a cursory reading of the Scriptures reveal that the majority of the revelation in the OT is directional while the majority in the NT is doctrinal. Even within the Old Covenant itself an increase in doctrinal revelation is implied when we read in Exodus, “God also said to Moses, “I am the LORD [Yahweh]. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty [El Shaddai], but by My name the LORD [Yahweh] I did not make Myself known to them” (Exod 6:2-3).

However, the increase of the content of doctrinal revelation is best illustrated by surveying the primary sources of Scripture: Prophets, the King, and Apostles. The OT Prophets revealed God as the Creator, and therefore the Authority of all the Creation. We learn from them that He is in sovereign control of His Creation, including the historical and political events that occur within it. God makes it obvious through the OT Prophets that He is holy, pure, all-powerful, all-knowing, and infinitely superior to humans in every way. God reveals His standard of conduct for His people, the Law, and His hatred of those who rebel against it. We also learn some foundational things about God’s grace and the nature of His relationship with people. A relationship is always initiated by Him.

The OT Prophets also laid the groundwork for an understanding that sin costs, separates, and ruins, and that forgiveness is obtained through the substitutionary sacrifice of an innocent other. The Prophets reveal God’s over riding desire for His glory, whether it be through demonstrating His mercy or wrath. We learn that there are angels, good and bad, Michael and satan. We see that the human body is mortal and his soul immortal. Both the first and second comings of Christ are predicted by the Prophets and we are given some description of the ultimate, eternal Kingdom of God on a new Earth.

Although it could be said that Christ’s primary purpose in His first coming was to die, not to teach, His teaching is a great gift to us. Although it primarily centered on directional revelation in terms of ethics like the OT Prophets, the King did enhance and introduce some critical doctrines as well. For example, He made a point of being clear on His deity, thus establishing the doctrine of the Trinity beyond that revealed in the OT (cf. John 8:58; 10:30; 14:9). Perhaps the most unique piece of doctrinal revelation we receive from the King is His introduction of the Church (cf. Matt 16:18). His Olivet Discourse (cf. Matt 24-25) revealed much more detail concerning His second “coming and . . . the end of the age” (Matt 24:3), making it clear that He was elaborating on the OT Prophets and particularly Daniel (Matt 24:15). The King understandably speaks much of the Kingdom of God, revealing that it was inaugurated in the hearts of people by His first coming (Luke 17:20-21; cf. John 18:36) and will be consummated on the Earth with His second coming (Matt 25:31-34).

The Gospels, however, add a striking revelation of the fact the currently in this Age, satan is the ruler of the world (cf. Matt 4:8-9; John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11). This is in rather stark contrast to the view point of the OT which portrays God as the Creator and Master of Creation. The King, however, reveals more information about the spiritual realm, recognizing the authority that has temporarily been given to satan.

Christ echoed the OT doctrine of election, but reveals its expanding parameters in the Great Commission when He commands us to “make disciples of all nations” (Matt 28:19), not just the Jewish one. The King confirmed the OT teaching that salvation is not of works, and introduces the fact that eternal life comes through a supernatural rebirth and a saving faith that comes from Him and is solely in Him (Matt 11:25-27; 16:15-17; John 3:1-8; 6:44; 14:6).

The Apostolic Church was clearly a very unique and exciting time of revelation from God. All of the enduring doctrines introduced by the OT Prophets and the King’s teaching ministry were more fully developed during this time. The Trinity, the person and ministry of the Holy Spirit, the New Covenant and New Birth, the inclusion of all races of men in God’s chosen people, the ultimate purpose of the OT Law, the ultimate meaning of the OT Prophets, salvation by grace through faith from God alone, the nature of the Church and its relationship to the Jews, the spiritual authority of satan, and details concerning the substance and sequence of events surrounding the Second Coming of Christ are all foundational doctrines that had been introduced by the OT Prophets, but are expanded considerably by the King’s Apostles in the early Church.

So we see that God did not reveal all that He intended for us to believe all at one time. Rather, over a considerable period of time, God revealed more doctrinal revelation, such that NT saints can understand more about God and His ways than their OT counterparts. ^[22] We would suggest this is one more reflection of God’s desire to progress from a covenant of spiritual childhood in the OT to a covenant of spiritual adulthood in the NT. Young children are expected to obey the commands of their Father without knowing the reasons behind them. However, as people mature, they want and have a greater need to know and understand the reasons behind the commands.

While directional revelation tells us what God wants us to do, doctrinal revelation tells us why we should do it, and as Christians mature, the latter will become increasingly important. It is typical of both young Christians and young Christian movements to simply focus on the commands of Scripture and what our Father wants us to do. This is absolutely necessary for a fruitful Christian life. But in time, God also desires for us to know the “master’s business” which gives us a broader perspective of the plans and purposes of the master than just “slaves” have with a simple knowledge of the master’s commands (cf. John 15:15).

F) The Divine Authentication of Guiding Revelation

The guiding revelation of God’s covenants with humanity has entirely come through Prophets and Apostles and is likewise wholly recorded in Scripture. How has this guiding revelation been authenticated? By the miracle-working abilities of God’s Prophets and Apostles. God has ordained that God-like deeds are the required authentication of anyone or anything claiming God-like authority. While we will illustrate this perspective further, here we will summarize this perspective by quoting a previous section of KOG where it was introduced:

[Jesus Christ] did not expect someone to grant Him God-like authority [or recognize Him as a source of divine revelation] without believing He had done God-like deeds. . . . The first Christians believed that Christ’s God-like deeds authenticated His God-like authority, as demonstrated when the Apostle Peter says, “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited [apodedeiumenon: “proven”] by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through Him, as you yourselves know” (Acts 2:22; [cf. John 14:10; Acts 4:30; 5:12; 2 Cor. 12:12; Heb. 3:4]). . . .

How then do we know that this same authority was passed on to the Apostles as they claim? Once again, God authenticated their God-like authority [and possession of divine revelation] by giving them the ability to perform God-like deeds. . . .

For example, Luke records that, “Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there [in Iconium], speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the [divine and revolutionary] message of His grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders” (Acts 14:3; cf. Acts 19:10-12).

The writer to the Hebrews summarizes our view when we read:

This [authoritative revelation of the New Covenant] salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard Him. God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and [sign] gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to His will (Heb 2:3-4).

It is the God-like authentication of the Prophets and Apostles that grants their writings in the Scriptures God-like authority [as a divine revelation]. We are not expected to give such authority to documents written merely by good men. ^[23]

Along these lines, Christian philosopher J. P. Moreland writes:

In Scripture, God does not call people to trust in him or some truth he reveals without first revealing himself to those people or providing tests for the truth he reveals (e.g., fulfilled prophecy, a public manifestation of his power, or a manifestation of his presence in New Testament times and subsequently up to the present). In this way, God provides knowledge of himself and attesting credentials for revealed truth. ^[24]

Another way we wish to communicate the inseparable relationship between divine revelation and divine authentication, as it particularly pertains to guiding revelation, is to say that Scripture gifts are always accompanied by sign gifts. Scripture gifts are those means of miraculous revelation such as prophecy and divine knowledge and wisdom which the Apostles uniquely possessed in order to receive divinely authoritative revelation from God. ^[25] Such authority needs to be divinely authenticated and therefore such men also possessed sign gifts such as the ability to predict the future and heal people on command. These supernatural abilities possessed by messengers of authoritative extra-biblical divine revelation were God’s signature on such revelation.

This divine method of miraculous authentication is especially important for doctrinal revelation. This is because our New Nature by virtue of the indwelling Holy Spirit through our regeneration is also a powerful source of divine authentication regarding the moral directional revelation in Scripture. However, how could we be assured that, for example, God the Father:

chose us in Him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in His sight. In love He predestined us to be adopted as His sons . . . having been predestined according to the plan of Him Who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of His will. (Eph 1:4-5, 11)

While we could know we are saved through the Gospel by its supernatural effects in our lives, we still would not know we got saved because God “chose us” and “predestined us” to be so. These are incredibly weighty truths, and the only reason we can know that they are from God is because the Apostle Paul who penned them was a man of both supernatural virtue and power to perform miracles.

This is why, in Scripture, you will not find a single divine miracle worker who was not also a messenger of new extra-biblical divine revelation that must be believed and obeyed by all. ^[26] You will find men who prayed for miracles and received them (e.g. Joshua, Gideon, Hezekiah). You will find divine messengers who were apparently not authenticated with miracles (e.g. John the Baptist). But you will not find a divine miracle worker in Scripture who did not also receive and communicate extra-biblical direct revelation from God, authoritative for all people, that had to be unconditionally believed and obeyed like Scripture.

Contrary then to super-supernaturalism, Scripture and sign gifts are inseparable in God’s plan of divine revelation, because their purposes are interdependent. It is unfortunately very common in this movement to have “miracle workers” who do not possess Scripture-quality new divine revelation from God, or to have those who claim to be receiving such revelation, but do not perform miracles to authenticate themselves. There are no biblical examples of either case. Perhaps, then, we can be forgiven one verse out of context when we say, “Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate” (Matt 19:6), including divine revelation and divine authentication. ^[27]

Finally, the miraculous authentication of Christianity’s guiding revelation distinguishes it from all other religions in the world. Neither Mormonism, Buddhism, or Islam claims to be authenticated by miracle working messengers of divine revelation. For example, regarding the latter, Norman Geisler writes:

Muhammad’s unwillingness (and apparent inability) to perform miraculous feats of nature, when he knew that the prophets before him could and did perform them, sounds like a cop-out to thinking non-Muslims. They will ask, “If God confirmed other prophets by such things, then why did he not do the same for Muhammad and remove all doubt?” In Muhammad’s own words (from the Quran), “They [will] say: ‘Why is not a Sign sent down to him from his Lord?”‘ since even Muhammad admitted that “God hath certainly Power to send down a Sign” (sura 6:37). Muhammad simply offered his own sign (the Qur’an) and said their reason for rejecting him was unbelief, not his inability to do miracles. ^[28]

Extras & Endnotes

A Devotion to Dad

Father, we thank You that You so desire a relationship with us. Praise you for Your word that tells us of Your love for us and how we may love you so that we can have a friendship with You. Wow. A friendship with God. What could be better than that?

Gauging Your Grasp

1. What is the purpose of the type of revelation we refer to as guiding revelation?
2. How have we defined doctrinal and directional revelation? What would be some examples?
3. What do we mean by mega mysticism and what are its characteristics? Do you agree or disagree with our view of it?
4. What do we suggest are the primary sources for guiding revelation?
5. What has been the change in the nature of directional revelation from the OT to the NT? What are some examples?
6. What has been the change in the nature of doctrinal revelation from the OT to the NT? What are some examples?
7. How is directional and doctrinal revelation authenticated?

Publications & Particulars

1. Quoted from section 7.2.C. ↑

2. For further discussion of mega mysticism see Book 14. Regarding the sufficiency of Scripture see chapters 7.8-10. ↑

3. Quoted from section 7.2.C ↑

4. The distinction we are making here between doctrinal and directional revelation is essentially the same one traditionally made between “theology” and “ethics.” Accordingly, the popular Evangelical theologian Wayne Grudem writes, “Theology tells us how we should think while ethics tells us how we should live.” (Systematic Theology, [Zondervan, 1994], 26). Nonetheless, we would readily admit that the term “sound doctrine” used throughout the Pastoral Epistles includes both what we have defined as doctrine and commands as well. ↑

5. For further discussion see section 7.3.E. ↑

6. Martin Luther, “Introduction to the Old Testament”; available online at

   http://www.godrules.net/library/luther/NEW1luther_f8.htm. ↑

7. For further discussion of our new nature as a source of divine revelation see chapter 7.12. ↑

8. The fact that Christians have already inherited the spiritual promises of the OT is the whole point of the Epistle to the Hebrews. See F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, NICNT (Eerdmans, 1990) 189-90. ↑

9. For further discussion of our new nature as a source of divine revelation see chapter 7.12. ↑

10. W. D. Stacey, The Pauline View of Man (MacMillan, 1956), 206. ↑

11. Martin Luther, “Preface to the Old Testament,” Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, Timothy F. Lull ed. (Augsburg Fortress, 2005), 119. ↑

12. For further discussion of the biblical meaning of being “led by the Spirit” see section 14.15.A. For further discussion on how we are led by the Spirit through our New Nature see chapter 7.12. ↑

13. For further discussion of God’s permissive will see section 7.15.B.3. ↑

14. Excerpt from section section 7.3.E. ↑

15. For further discussion on the concept of Spirit-liberated reason see chapters 4.15-16. On decision making see sections 4.4.A and chapter 7.15. ↑

16. Gordon T. Smith, Listening to God in Times of Choice (InterVarsity, 1997), 101. ↑

17. For further discussion of the great freedom involved in God’s will see section 7.15.B.3. ↑

18. For further discussion of how the relationship between Christ and the Father relates to us in the context of personal guidance see chapter 14.12. ↑

19. Gary Friesen and J. Maxon, Decision Making and the Will of God (Multnomah, 1980), 244-6. ↑

20. For further discussion of the sufficiency of Scripture for knowing God’s will see chapter 7.9. Regarding knowing God’s will see chapter 7.15. For an explanation and critique of mega mysticism see Book 14. ↑

21. For further discussion on the increasing spiritual maturity reflected in the covenants see section 7.3.E. ↑

22. By speaking of “progressive revelation,” we do not mean the liberal idea used to demean what is considered less than divine inspiration in the OT. For a fuller discussion of this error see J. I. Packer, Honoring the Written Word of God: The Collected Shorter Writings of J. I. Packer, Vol. 3 (Paternoster, 1999), 83 ff. ↑

23. Excerpt from section 3.1.D ↑

24. J. P. Moreland and Klaus Issler, In Search of a Confident Faith (Intervarsity, 2008), 18-19. ↑

25. For further discussion of the gift of prophecy see Book 9: God’s Prophets. Regarding the gift of divine knowledge and wisdom see chapter 8.2. ↑

26. For further discussion of the definition and purpose of sign gifts see sections 7.1.B.5; 10.5.A.3; 7.6.F; 8.4.B.1; 8.6.A; 11.1.F; 12.3.B. ↑

27. For further discussion of the unbiblical nature of Charismaticism’s view of miracle working see chapters 10.13; and virtually all of Book 11: Human Miracle Working ↑

28. Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (BECA) (Baker, 1999), 513-14. ↑