It seems a vicious circle: the holy spirit doesn't speak today so we must rely only on the finished bible for direction. The finished bible tells us that the holy spirit has ceased speaking, so we mustn't look for guidance elsewhere.

doesn't looking only into scripture for the answer to the question 'does God lead only in scripture' assume what it sets out to prove? Unless the purpose is to clear away any potential obstacles to this idea. Blackaby? Friesen? Elliot?

Romans 12:2 [ESV] says that we are to discern the will of God by testing. What does that mean?

I think Friesen's view falls out naturally from sola scriptura and cessationism. And I think Blackaby's view falls out from...something else...I guess the Keswick Movement and Murray, etc., fwiw. It would seem to me that the Elliots followed/follow Friesen's method. The rigorous application of scipture is amazing--and I think correct. Did they miss something with the Holy Spirit? Was there something more they could've had? Hard to believe J. E. "missed it." I think he and the 9 others "got it" in the best of all possible ways--and they were counted worthy. I wept more than 6 times today when I read J. E.'s diary entries in the first chapter of Through Gates of Splendour. I did not weep loud or long, but it was soul-deep. I felt as though the core of my being was spoken to; no: what I felt was sehnsucht. Plain and simple: sehnsucht. The deepest I've felt--perhaps ever.

--
on another note: I read Bonhoeffer's chapter on The Hiddenness of Prayer in The Cost of Discipleship today and was cut down harshly, sharply, abruptly. Painfully. I felt naked and as though my heart had been laid bare and brought out from darkness into the brightest of lights--and I saw that I was naked and I was ashamed. How piercing! How terrifying...how helpful. I do not despise it, Father...

some (more) thoughts.