I’ve observed over the last several years a phenomenon that is deeply distressing—the increasing embrace of various forms of continuationism by evangelicals and even within traditionally Reformed circles. Whether it’s the full-blown charismaticism that promotes the continuation of the apostolic sign gifts or the more subtle forms of mystical subjectivism, this dangerous trend is creeping into the church.

These practices, once relegated to the fringes, are now being accepted by those who should know better, wreaking havoc on the very biblical doctrines they claim to uphold, including the sufficiency and authority of Scripture.

First, continuationism in and of itself is nothing more than a rebranding of the ancient Montanist heresy—a dangerous movement that the early church rightly rejected. Montanus, a self-proclaimed “prophet” from the second century, claimed that God was still giving fresh revelations through him and his followers.

These supposed prophecies went well beyond Scripture, leading to confusion and chaos within the fledgling church. The early church Council of Constantinople later condemned Montanism as a threat to the sufficiency and authority of God’s Word, recognizing that to accept ongoing revelation was to reject the finality of the canon of Scripture as delivered through the apostles.

And yet, today, many who claim to follow Christ have resurrected this same error, dressing it up with new terminology but advancing the same rebellion against the sufficiency of Scripture.

One of the most subtle yet pernicious forms of this error creeping into the Church is what I call a modern form of “mystical subjectivism.” The term has been used various ways throughout history, but today, it is a cancer eating away at the very heart of Christian theology. It sneaks in with whispers, cloaked in piety, convincing the undiscerning that God has more to say—directly to them—apart from His Word.

It manifests in various ways, still, but many claim to receive dreams, visions, or other personal yet specific revelations directly from God. “God told me…” to take this job … to buy that car … to start such and such ministry … to brush so and so’s hair at the airport. People like Beth Moore and Priscilla Shirer epitomize this kind of thing.

And in this seductive call of “new revelations,” “personal leadings,” and “spiritual impressions,” the very sufficiency of Scripture is abandoned, no matter how its spun. To accept continuations of divine revelation is to declare, without reservation, that the Bible is not enough. This is a dangerous and serious error.

You may think it’s really not that serious, but let’s put simple logic to it. Continuationism, at its core, demands a rejection of Scripture’s sufficiency. Think about it—how can one claim to uphold the sufficiency of God’s revealed Word while simultaneously claiming that God is still giving new, direct revelations today? It’s an oxymoron of the highest order. If the Bible is sufficient, why do we need more revelation?

Are these new revelations simply optional and unnecessary? You would have to conclude that in order to maintain the sufficiency of Scripture. And to claim that any of God’s revelations are unnecessary seems like a dangerous path to walk down, too.

The doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture stands or falls on this: is God’s revelation in the Bible complete, or isn’t it? If it is complete—and the Bible itself says it is—then any claim to new revelation is a blatant contradiction.

Paul tells us in 2 Timothy 3:16-17:

“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”

The Word of God is sufficient to make the believer “complete,” thoroughly equipped for every good work. Every good work. Not most good works, not some vague percentage, not almost every good work—every single one. There is no need, no gap, no lack. So why do continuationists insist that we still need God to speak directly today, when the very book He gave us declares that it is sufficient?

To believe that God is still speaking directly to individuals in dreams, visions, or impressions (not to be confused with the illumination of the Holy Spirit, which is biblical) is to say that the canon of Scripture is not enough. It’s to claim that there are still things God forgot to mention—truths He failed to include in His revelation to humanity. How could that be? Is the God of the universe so careless, so forgetful, so incompetent, that He neglected to give us everything we need in the Scriptures?

Of course not. The idea is absurd.

Yet this is the logical conclusion of continuationism. If God is still giving new revelations, then what He has already revealed must be incomplete. If you embrace this notion, you must—by necessity—reject the sufficiency of Scripture. And once you’ve rejected the sufficiency of Scripture, you’ve opened the door to every kind of chaos, confusion, and doctrinal error imaginable.

What’s next? “God told me this, God told me that.” And who’s to say otherwise? When personal revelation becomes the standard, truth becomes relative. It’s a theological free-for-all, where anyone can claim God’s voice to justify their whims, and who can argue with “God told me”?

It’s spiritual anarchy.

Continuationists like to sugarcoat their insurgency against the Scriptures by saying that their personal revelations don’t contradict Scripture. But even that statement is a sleight of hand. If their revelations don’t contradict Scripture, then why are they necessary? If everything they claim to hear directly from God aligns perfectly with Scripture, then their so-called revelations add nothing new, then they are not revelations and are therefore redundant—meaningless.

And if these revelations do add anything new, they are, by definition, in conflict with Scripture’s claim to sufficiency. It’s a lose-lose scenario, a theological dead end.

But what about John 21:25? Continuationists love to point to this verse as if it somehow justifies their belief in ongoing revelation. The verse reads,

“Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.”

But this argument completely misses the point of the text. John is not suggesting that there is additional divine revelation waiting to be delivered outside of Scripture. He’s simply making a hyperbolic statement about the vastness of Jesus’ works, emphasizing the greatness of Christ’s ministry.

It’s actually kind of a low blow to twist this into an argument for new revelations. The Bible, as we’ve already discussed, contains everything necessary for life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3), and John 21:25 doesn’t leave the door open for further revelation—it highlights the significance of what has already been revealed. In reality, this verse demonstrates the power and magnitude of what’s already recorded, not the need for more. Continuationists, in attempting to exploit this passage, end up distorting its clear meaning and undermining the finality of God’s Word.

Revelation is not a playground for human emotions, subjective feelings, or mystical fantasies. It is the definitive, unchangeable, and complete declaration of God’s will to His people, delivered once for all. Jude 1:3 calls us to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.” Notice the language: once for all. Not progressively. Not in bits and pieces. How can we contend for something that was delivered once for all if it’s still being delivered?

God has spoken. He has finished speaking. There is no need for more.

The prophets and apostles laid the foundation of the Church, as Ephesians 2:20 clearly teaches: “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone.” Foundations are not built multiple times. The Church doesn’t need new revelations, new prophecies, or new foundations. Christ is the cornerstone—He is enough and his word endures forever.

The apostles and prophets completed their work. To claim that God is still speaking today, giving new revelations, is to imply that the foundation is still under construction and that God’s Church is somehow incomplete.

And here is where continuationism becomes truly insidious. By claiming that the foundation is still being laid through ongoing revelation, they undermine the authority of the entire Church. If God is still speaking today in the same way He spoke to the apostles, then Scripture itself is demoted to just one of many sources of authority over the bride of Christ. In that case, the Bible is nothing more than a supplement to the spiritual fancies of those who claim to hear God’s voice directly.

Do you see the danger? Once you allow for ongoing revelation, you allow for ongoing error. If God’s voice can be heard outside of Scripture, then any charlatan, any false teacher, any Beth Moore, Kenneth Copeland, or Todd White, or any other self-proclaimed prophet can hijack the Church by claiming to speak on God’s behalf.

And many have. It’s no wonder that every heretical movement throughout Church history has been fueled by so-called “new revelations” from God. From the Montanists to the modern-day charismatics, the pattern is always the same—reject the sufficiency of Scripture, embrace mystical subjectivism, and watch the doctrinal walls crumble.

There’s a reason God gave us a completed canon. He knew full well the havoc that ongoing revelation would wreak. He knew that sinful men would twist His words to for personal gain, that false prophets would rise up claiming to speak in His name. That’s why He closed the book. That’s why He gave us His Word, sufficient and complete, and warned us not to add to it (Revelation 22:18-19).

So let’s call continuationism what it is, a rejection of the very doctrine that guards the Church against error and preserves the purity of the gospel. Continuationism isn’t just a harmless theological peculiarity—taken to its logical conclusion, it’s a full-scale assault on the sufficiency of Scripture. It elevates subjective experience above the objective truth of God’s Word. It distorts the nature of divine revelation. It perverts the gospel. It opens the floodgates to heresy.

And that is why it must be rejected—utterly and unapologetically.

God has spoken!