1. By and large, God only did miracles during periods. First was about 65 years (Moses to Joshua), then Elijah and Elisha, 860-795 BC (about 65 years); then Christ and apostles, about 30-100 (once again, about 65-70 years). There were occasional interventions (i.e. during the ministries of Isaiah and Daniel), but only about 200 years total. Moreover, these miracles were given to validate spokesmen for God. Only prophets performed miracles in the OT, because miracles were their credentials. Miracles also attested Jesus; they weren’t for evangelism per se, as Jesus noted explicitly and emphatically in the parable of rich man and Lazarus. See also Acts 14:3 [and many other similar, search “wonders”], and Heb 2:1-4.Note: While I found this searching for a "biblical case for cessationism", this is not the same thing. Some Bible is in there, but it is a case for -- not purely a biblical case for -- cessationism. So, while I found this argument of some use, I set out to find a biblical defense of cessationism.
2. The gift of Apostleship had a terminus ad quem1. We see in 1 Cor. 12:28. and Eph. 4:7ff. that every office was a gift, though not vice-versa. The very qualifications of apostle make clear that this can’t be a continuing office. That gift ceased without a clear NT statement that it would cease. This is precedent-setting. (See also Waldron's development of this argument.)
3. The gifts of apostles and prophets were foundational (Eph. 2:20). A building has only one foundation.
4. Nature of the miraculous gifts. If modern phenomena were legitimate, they’d be the same as the NT gifts. Manifestly modern tongues and prophecy are so clearly not the same as NT gifts that the best case that can be made is the now-debunked "analogy" argument, which is an explicit confession of non-identity. If they're not the same (and they aren't), we're done here. As I've said to everyone who asks for a single "kill-verse" to counter Charismaticism: every Biblical description of genuine revelatory/attesting gifts is a "kill-verse" for modern imitations.
5. Church history. In my opinion, it is better to say "Continuationists' 1900-year failure to deliver on anything vaguely resembling 'continuation.'"
6. Sufficiency of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16-17). He was moving pretty quickly here, understandably. I have made the argument (in print and in preaching) that, if Scripture is what it says it is, it's awfully hard to understand what supplements are needed today. "Fully equipped" is "fully equipped," no?
7. NT rules laid down for miraculous gifts (1 Cor 14:26-32). Pennington notes that most Charismatics ignore these rules. As a preacher I heard ~30 years ago noted, when 500 people in a church meeting are speaking in tongues, at least 497 of them are out of God's will.
Richard B. Gaffin, Jr. offered a defense of the position with lots of Scripture. That's good. What does he say? Gaffin argues from Ephesians 2 that there is one foundation (Eph 2:11-22) and that it doesn't get laid twice. He backs that up with 1 Cor 3:11 which states, "No one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid" ... except that this verse continues with "which is Jesus Christ." Okay. Well, still, the notion is there. He also points to Heb 1:1-2 that indicates that "in these last days He (God) has spoken to us by His Son." Thus, "in these last days" God's method of communication (which was "by the prophets") has changed. Thus, if the "gifts of the Spirit" include, among others, "the apostles" and "the prophets" (Eph 4:11) and the Bible is clear (as are most continuationists and even charismatics) that these are no longer in play, then it appears from Scripture that something has changed ("cessation").
Gaffin argues from 1 Cor 14 that prophecy and tongues (two of the classic "sign gifts") are no more. Paul contrasts these two, clearly representing prophecy as superior to tongues (not my opinion -- it's in there). Tongues are only edifying when interpreted, so they fall short of prophecy. The function of these two gifts was special revelation from God. So once the Scriptures are established, no further revelation is required. (Note: This is not in the text. It is an inference from the argument of the sufficiency of Scripture. I would guess that the Pentecostal who argues for ongoing revelation from God would deny the sufficiency of Scripture.)
I should point out that Gaffin's last argument from 1 Cor 13 doesn't actually support the view, but proposes a problem with the non-cessationist view. And it is only a problem for continuationists or charismatics who argue that Apostles no longer exist. So you'll have to examine that one on your own and decide if it is compelling. Saying "Their argument is a problem" is not actually a biblical defense of your own. It's a point to consider, but not what I'm ultimately looking for.
Over at Bible.org, Charles Powell presents both sides. On cessationism he offers a few things. First, he gives us "The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works" (2 Cor 12:12) as proof that "true apostle" had a meaning and it was verified by "signs and wonders and mighty works", suggesting that these should stop with "true apostles". He points to Eph 2:20 as others have. Other arguments are primarily from silence (or, perhaps, "extreme quiet"?). In the New Testament, for instance, there are only two prophets mentioned. One, obviously, is Christ. The other is Agabus (Acts 21:10-14). Further, there is a radical decline in anything "sign"-like in the New Testament, beginning with a bang at Pentecost until it is completely unheard of after 1 Corinthians. Interestingly, 1 Corinthians comes early chronologically in the time that the New Testament was written. In later lists of spiritual gifts (Rom 12:6-8 and Eph 4:11), no mention is made of either tongues or healing. (And the mentions in 1 Corinthians appear to be primarily to curb an overexuberance for tongues, not encourage it.) So, either silence or a decline in mention suggests a decline in these gifts. He also offers Heb 2:1-4 that warns the reader to "pay much closer attention to what we have heard". Here the author of Hebrews argues that we can know that "what we have heard" came from God because of the signs and wonders that accompanied it, and we can know that this no longer occurs because the text is written in the past tense.
These are the primary arguments used to support the view that the miraculous "sign" gifts of the New Testament are no longer in effect in the Church today. These do not deny that there are still "messengers" (the literal meaning of "apostles") -- but these messengers are Scripture-driven, not "divinely inspired" -- that God can and does heal, or that miracles can still occur. The denial of the cessationist view is that specifically the gifts of prophecy and tongues -- gifts primarily designed to give special revelation from God to His people -- are no longer in use because we have a sufficient Scripture and prophecy, tongues, and healing -- gifts designed to supernaturally demonstrate that the ones using them are divinely inspired messengers -- are no longer in use because we have the Scriptures now. So you can decide for yourself whether or not this is a sufficient biblical argument.
________
1 A terminus ad quem is a goal, a finishing point, a final limit in time.
No comments:
Post a Comment