THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES George Warnock Preface “In the beginning GOD ” So it was that in the spring of God came forth in answer to the prayer. Feast of Tabernacles from a spiritual standpoint. Excellent read. Be Blessed. The Feast of Tabernacles by George Warnock is one of the seminal books of the Charismatic movement. He was a key figure in the Latter Rain.
|Published (Last):||27 August 2017|
|PDF File Size:||7.69 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.70 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
It is definitely one of the seminal books of the Charismatic movement, although very few contemporary Charismatics have heard of it. The Feast of Tabernacles is contains an elaborate and fascinating set of typologies. Feeast because of this, and because of the climate during the 20 off century which was hostile to typology he includes a section in the book where he explains and defends its use. So that leaves me with a question — what was it that was good about the Latter Rain that we should keep, and what was bad that caused the problems?
The Feast of Tabernacles by George Warnock | Kingdom Change
So reading the Feast of Tabernacles is part of going to back to the source. The basic theory of the book is simple.
There are three biblical feasts: Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacles. Passover and Pentecost are explicitly fulfilled in the New Testament which leaves an open question about the Feast of Tabernacles. That fulfillment is coming at the end of age — now — through the people of God. The first part of the book is spent laying the backdrop of the other two feasts and seems fairly straightforward.
It begins to get interesting as he moves deeper into the Tabernacles concept and seeks Biblical justification in a variety of places.
Warnock looks at the various celebrations of the Feast of Tabernacles in the Bible as each showing us something about a final eschatological Feast of Tabernacles in the Church: First, let me deal with places where I had issues or disagreed. My main and most consistent of the book is the thinly veiled elitism it contains.
This same kind of elitism continues today in some heirs of the Tabernnacles Rain. In addition the idea of rallying around a feasf is derided, while at the same time new doctrines are advanced. I definitely see the point that during a special revival visitation of Christ, doctrine becomes less important as the true people of God are called out from every place and called together, yet during the rest of time doctrine is an important part of building together.
George Warnock has an unusual idea of there being different groups within the church. Here again is a problem. Although he does not develop the idea here, others did, and it led to serious elitism.
Sixty years later the scholarly community seems to be slowly moving to the place where Warnock already was by revelation. The Hermeneutical principles he lays out are:. We see George Warnock applying these hermeneutics throughout the book.
The idea is that now in the post-Christendom era, we are frast the same place Spiritually as when Christ came the first taberhacles and he is preparing the house for his return.
This pattern may be more of a stretch, but it is interesting. He then spends a chapter examining the restoration of the temple by Zerubabbel, Nehemiah, comparing their task of restoration of the Temple to our task of restoring the church. He uses numerous other types and symbols as well. He shows the significance of the number 2. He looks briefly at the concept of redigging of wells, which was such a big deal recently in the Charismatic movement. Different Charismatic groups have built different eschatologies, but they all differ from the traditional Pentecostal dispensationalism, and this is due directly to the influence of the Latter Rain.
He has a big vision for georgw is possible in God. In fact, you could say that his vision was very similar to that of the original Pentecostals. He talks about speaking in foreign tongues xenolaliabeing translated, and doing all kinds of exploits.
This is a part of the Spirit filled promise that we should never lay aside. In some ways that was what the Feast of Tabernacles book was all about —— a kind of trumpet call to the church saying that we are entering and end time phase of history where as Christ begins to tabernacle more with his church, we shall increasingly reflect the glory and power of Christ. I believe both of those things. He acknowledges a Great Tribulation, but he sees these overcomers as having remarkable authority in the midst of it, including warnockk that cut it short, and in general a ministry to those who are oppressed and persecuted during it.
The concept here is of a deep intimacy with God and protection during the judgment taberjacles Noah was protected in the Ark. I disagree with geogge unrestrained manner Warnock and Hawtin employed typology in their hermeneutic. We need only take a look back at the early Alexandrian church to see how unrestrained typology crosses over into allegorical interpretation, and just how unorthodox the conclusions can become as a result.
The only seeming guideliness for Warnock and Hawtin typology was their imagination and cleverness in presentation. Contemporary books on hermeneutics all seem to keep typology within safe boundaries by providing guidelines. Much New Testament typology is considered a function of inspiration and not illumination. With this kind of contemporary consensus, I think one needs to engage the arguments of people like Gordon Fee if they are to expect to have their typology taken seriously.
Feast of Tabernacles – George Warnock
If Fee if others are wrong, just how have they erred? If they are wrong, how do you propose we keep from straying into allegorism? I think it waenock interesting to note that many of the unorthodox, Latter Rain doctrines such as the manifest sons teaching were largely argued from out-of-bounds typology. By the way, if you know of any fully informative books on LRM history, I would be interested to know about them.
Also, I think your diagram showing a straight line from the LRM to modern charismaticism is a bit simplistic. Where would you oof the Calvary Chapel movement on your chart? I see no place for it and some other movements that came out of the charismatic and the Jesus movements. Thank you for your comment.
My personal opinion and experience is that Calvary Chapel especially as it has evolvedregardless of how it self-identifies, is not properly called Charismatic. It aligns much better as a kind of evangelical even slightly-fundamentalist movement. This was evident even in the late 70s when the Vineyard split off as a more Spirit-oriented variant. I stick with my contention, though, that the basic sensibilities of the contemporary Charismatic church stem from a sort of Latter Rain-lite.
Part of that is the hermeneutics. Part of that is the hyper-Spirit orientation. Part of it is personal prophecy. Part of it is the worship style. I think the work of Greg Beale and others in the Biblical Theology movement have definitively answered the evangelical-critical hermeneutics of Fee and others in the majority.
We should be exegeting in the same way the apostles did, not exalting our modern higher-critical inspired methods as superior to theirs.
Full text of “Feast Of Tabernacles By George Warnock”
At one point, I had maintained a pretty extensive page on the Wikipedia before someone came and destroyed it and I lost the will to fight them. The myriad of cults and strange movements to emerge, I think will simply never fully be cataloged tavernacles remembered, and perhaps that is best anyway. I learned my lesson about Wikipedia years ago. I worked very hard on an article only to have it utterly destroyed by biased editors who outnumbered warnoc. I think it is vitally important to realize that the Apostles clearly went far beyond the bounds of exegesis by inspiration.
Illumination must be limited to authorial intent or we have no boundaries outside of our own creativity and we have no clear, established meaning in Scripture by which to discern true from false teaching.
If we use apostolic inspiration as a model for Christian exegesis we are confusing categories and not exegeting at all. In such a case, anything goes. Nothing is true or false inherently, only fdast for me or true for you — which fits well in postmodernism and Derridean philosophy if that is where one wishes to go.
David, I understand this concern, and it was oft-repeated during my seminary training. It is certainly the case that a lot of what passes for Biblical interpretation in Charismatic circles has no particular Biblical warrant to tabrnacles point that a doctrine can seem true just because it is novel.
What I would suggest are the following: The Georgge used a discernible hermeneutic, they were not simply inspired. They were following a typological redemptive-historical method. Typology is deeply ingrained in the Bible itself, and in church history. I have a difficult type arrogating a modern method over that which has been standard in history 3.
Typology differs from allegory in that it is based on accepting the factual veracity of the Bible, and that the application of the type corresponds tot he type itself.
We should follow the method of the apostles, not dismiss it. These points are all very solid and backed up by the scholarly material and school of interpretation I mentioned before. As a Pentecostal I add the following more controversial point: The Spirit has the ability to shine light on a passage to bring an apparently novel but valid interpretation to light, which may not be evident from a plain reading of the text.
This is exactly how the Old and New Testaments relate. Without the key of Christ, all of the OT was unclear, but with the additional revelation of Christ, it is easy to see how Christ is manifest throughout. He accurately traces several streams of the charismatic movement that are unrelated to the Latter Rain Movement that started in Battleford — http: As to church history, many people have erred at times throughout the centuries.
Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and Spurgeon were all cessationists. Should I agree with them on that point or should I search the Bible to see what it says? Tabernackes you refer to as the Evangelical-critical method has at least as much historical grounding tabernaccles unbounded typology. Additionally, I have read just about everything by Spurgeon and found no tabernaclss typology in his writings.
I have read some of Luther and found none there either. I no of no one who suggests that no typology is legitimate. Most of us would merely suggest that the canon is closed and we are now limited to principles of legitimate interpretation of the canon. Paul was inspired in a way that we are not. I have been a Pentecostal over about 40 years. I have pastored churches and taught at a Bible College.
I would strongly urge you as a brother to reconsider what you have said in your last point.