Why I Am a Cessationist

[Johann]

I am not writing on this topic because I have the final answer on spiritual gifts, for the matter is difficult and Christians who love God and the Bible disagree. Readers should know that Sam Storms and I are friends. We love one another, even though we differ on a secondary or tertiary issue, while at the same time upholding the importance of truth. Over the years I’ve become convinced that some of the so-called charismatic gifts are no longer given and that they aren’t a regular feature of life in the church. I am thinking particularly of the the gifts of apostleship, prophecy, tongues, healing, and miracles (and perhaps discernment of spirits).





To put it another way, we don’t have apostles like Paul and Peter and John anymore. They gave us the authoritative teaching by which the church continues to live to this day, and that is the only teaching we will need until Jesus returns. We know that new apostles won’t appear since Paul specifically says he was the last apostle (1 Cor. 15:8). And when James the brother of John died (Acts 12:2), he wasn’t replaced. Apostles, in the technical sense, are restricted to those who have seen the risen Lord and have been commissioned by him, and no one since apostolic times fits such criteria. The apostles were uniquely appointed for the early days of the church to establish orthodox doctrine. There is no warrant, then, for saying there are still apostles today. Indeed, if anyone claims to be an apostle today we should be concerned, for such a claim opens the door to false teaching and to abuse of authority.

If the gift of apostleship has ended, then other gifts may have ceased as well, since the foundation has been laid by the apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:20). I conclude from this point that the gift of prophecy has ended also, for the prophets identified here are the same sort mentioned elsewhere (cf. 1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 3:5; 4:11). The early churches didn’t have the complete canon of Scripture for some time, and hence an authoritative and infallible prophetic ministry was needed to lay the foundation for the church in those early days.

The most significant biblical argument against what I’m saying is the claim that New Testament (NT) prophecy differs from Old Testament (OT) prophecy, for some say OT prophecy is flawless but NT prophecy is mixed with error. But the idea that NT prophets could make mistakes isn’t persuasive for several reasons. 1.) The burden of proof is on those who say prophecy in the NT is of a different nature than prophecy in the OT. Prophets in the OT were only considered prophets of God if they were infallible (Deut. 18:15-22), and the same is almost certainly true in the NT. 2.) The admonition to judge prophecies instead of prophets (1 Cor. 14:29-32; 1 Thess. 5:19-20) is often adduced to show that the gift is different in the NT. But this argument is not convincing, for the only way to judge prophets in both Testaments is by their prophecies. We only know prophets aren’t from God if their prophecies are false or if their words contradict scriptural teaching. 3.) We have no example of a NT prophet who erred. Agabus didn’t make a mistake in prophesying that Paul would be bound by the Jews and handed over to the Romans (Acts 21:10-11). To say he erred demands more precision than prophecies warrant. Furthermore, after Paul was arrested he appealed to the words of Agabus, saying he was handed over to the Romans by the Jews (Acts 28:17), so it’s clear he didn’t think Agabus made a mistake. Agabus spoke the words of the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:28; 21:11), so we have no example in the NT of prophets whose prophecies were mixed with error.

Some object that my view of prophecy is off target since there were hundreds and thousands of prophecies in NT times that never made it into the canon. That objection doesn’t convince, however, for the same was true in the OT. Most of the prophecies of Elijah and Elisha were never written down or inscripturated. Or we can think of the 100 prophets spared by Obadiah (1 Kings 18:4). Apparently none of their prophecies was inscripurated. Nevertheless, the prophecies were all completely true and unmixed with error, for otherwise they wouldn’t have been prophets (Deut. 18:15-22). The same principle applies to the prophecies of NT prophets. Their words aren’t recorded for us, but if they were truly prophets then their words were infallible.

What some people today call “prophecies” are actually impressions from God. He can use impressions to guide and lead us, but they aren’t infallible and must always be tested by Scripture. We should also consult with wise counselors before acting on such impressions. I love my charismatic brothers and sisters, but what they call “prophecy” today isn’t actually the biblical gift of prophecy. God-given impressions aren’t the same thing as prophecies.

What About Tongues?
The gift of tongues is a more difficult issue. In Acts (2:1-4; 10:44-48; 19:1-7) this gift signifies that the age of fulfillment has arrived where God’s covenant promises are being realized. First Corinthians 14:1-5 and Acts 2:17-18 also suggest that interpreted (or understood) tongues are equivalent to prophecy. It seems, then, that prophecy and tongues are closely related. If prophecy has passed away, then tongues have likely ended as well. Further, it’s clear from Acts that the gift involves speaking in foreign languages (Acts 2), and Peter emphasizes in the case of Cornelius and his friends that the Gentiles received the same gift as the Jews (Acts 11:16-17).

Nor is it persuasive to say the gift in 1 Corinthians 12-14 is of a different nature (i.e., ecstatic utterances). The word tongues (glōssa) denotes a linguistic code, a structured language, not random and free vocalization. When Paul says no one understands those speaking in tongues because they utter mysteries (1 Cor. 14:2), he isn’t suggesting that the gift is different from what we find in Acts. Those hearing the tongues in Acts understood what was being said because they knew the languages the apostles were speaking. If no one knows the language, then the tongue speaker utters mysteries. Nor does 1 Corinthians 13:1 (tongues of angels) support the notion that the gift of tongues consists of ecstatic utterances. Paul engages in hyperbole in 1 Corinthians 13:1-3. He’s clearly exaggerating when referring to the gift of prophecy (1 Cor. 13:2), for no one who prophesies knows “all mysteries and all knowledge.”

I believe what’s happening in charismatic circles today regarding tongues is similar to what we saw with prophecy. The gift is redefined to include free vocalization, and then people claim to have the gift described in Scripture. In doing so they redefine the gift to accommodate contemporary experience. So are contemporary tongues demonic, then? I don’t think so. I agree with J. I. Packer that the experience is more a form of psychological relaxation.

Miracles and Healings
What about miracles and healings? First, I believe God still heals and does miraculous things today, and we should pray for such. Scripture isn’t as clear on this matter, and thus these gifts could exist today. Still, the primary function of these gifts was to accredit the gospel message, confirming that Jesus was both Lord and Christ. I doubt the gift of miracles and healings exists today, for it isn’t evident that men and women in our churches have such gifts. Certainly God can and does heal at times, but where are the people with these gifts? Claims for miracles and healings must be verified, just as the people verified the blind man’s healing in John 9. There is a kind of biblically warranted skepticism.

Now, could God in cutting-edge missionary situations grant miracles and signs and wonders to accredit the gospel as he did in apostolic times? Yes. But that’s not the same thing as having these gifts as a regular feature in the ongoing life of the church. If the signs and wonders of the apostles have returned, we should see the blind receiving their sight, the lame walking, and the dead being raised. God heals today (sometimes dramatically), but the healing of colds, the flu, TMJ, stomach, and back problems, and so forth aren’t in the same category as the healings found in the Scriptures. If people truly have the gift of healing and miracles today, they need to demonstrate such by performing the kinds of healings and miracles found in the Bible.

Doesn’t 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 Contradict Your View?
Let’s consider an objection to the notion that some of the gifts have ceased. Doesn’t 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 teach that the gifts last until Jesus comes again? Certainly this text teaches that the gifts could last until Jesus returns. There’s no definitive teaching in the Bible that they’ve ceased. We might even expect them to last until the second coming. But we see hints from Ephesians 2:20 and other texts that the gifts played a foundational role. I conclude, then, that 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 permits but doesn’t require the gifts to continue until the second coming. And the gifts as they are practiced today don’t fit with the biblical description of these gifts.

For reasons like these the Reformers and most of the Protestant tradition until the 20th century believed the gifts had ceased. I conclude that both Scripture and experience verify their judgment on the matter.

Why I Am a Cessationist

 

[Cassandra]

 

[Johann]

For or against @Cassandra

 

[Johann]

The question before us is not whether we should believe that the Holy Spirit is at work today. All Christians believe that the Holy Spirit is working today.
The question before us is not whether we should believe that the Holy Spirit is at work today. All Christians believe that the Holy Spirit is working today. Reformed Christians in particular believe that the work of the Holy Spirit is discerned especially in regeneration, when He gives us hearts to believe the gospel (John 3:1–8), and in sanctification, when He enables us to more and more die unto sin and live unto holiness (Rom. 8). We also believe that God, by His Holy Spirit, sometimes heals people in extraordinary ways when we pray for them (James 5:14–15).

That the Holy Spirit is working today, however, does not have to mean that He continues to grant the charismatic gifts of tongues, prophecy, and healing today. These gifts are associated with the giving of special revelation. As we look throughout the history of redemption in Scripture, we see that miracles, prophecy, and ecstatic utterances such as tongues were not everyday occurrences but rather were associated with particular epochs.

The era of Moses when the law was being given, the era of the old covenant prophets as instituted in the ministries of Elijah and Elisha, and the era of Jesus and the early Apostles that inaugurated the new covenant—these are the periods in biblical history when we see what we call the charismatic gifts manifested. In each of these eras, new special revelation was being given and the supernatural signs accompanied the deliverance of this revelation in order to authenticate it as from God.

However, we know now that special revelation has ceased. God has spoken decisively in His Son, and we will not have new revelation from Him until Christ returns (Heb. 1:1–4; 12:25–29). Because of that, there is no need for the charismatic gifts to authenticate the revelation. There is no new revelation being given today, so we should not expect to see the gifts of tongues, prophecy, or miracles. The foundation of the church has been laid in the work of the Apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:19–21). Apostles and prophets are the means of special revelation, and once the foundation of the church was laid, these offices and any signs that authenticate them passed away.

In addition to this core biblical argument that the charismatic gifts do not continue today, note that historically, the mainstream Christian church has said that these gifts ended with the death of the last Apostles. Occasionally, orthodox Christian writers in earlier eras spoke of prophecy as continuing, but by this they usually meant what we call preaching—the exposition of Scripture—and not the delivery of new revelation. Groups that have claimed that the charismatic gifts continue, such as the Montanists in the early church, usually have also held to aberrant theology. Not all modern Pentecostal and charismatic Christians have heterodox or heretical beliefs to the degree that groups from the past had, but the historical association of aberrant theology and the continuation of charismatic gifts should give one pause before accepting that these gifts continue.

Yes, the Holy Spirit works today. But there are compelling biblical and historical reasons to believe that the gifts He gives to the church in our era do not include the gifts of tongues, prophecy, or healing and miracles. Other gifts of the Spirit listed in Scripture are still present. These gifts, along with the faithful teaching of the Word, prayer, administration of the sacraments, and exercise of church discipline, are the means through which the Holy Spirit ministers to His people today.

What Are the Charismatic Gifts?

Paul tells us that the Holy Spirit has given gifts for ministry to His people, and the English word “gifts” is a translation of the Greek word charismata. There

www.ligonier.org

 

[marks]

To put it another way, we don’t have apostles like Paul and Peter and John anymore. They gave us the authoritative teaching by which the church continues to live to this day, and that is the only teaching we will need until Jesus returns.

For myself, I see a difference between the "signs and wonders"/works of an Apostle and the ministry gifts. I think God gave certain gifts to His Apostles to authenticate their ministries, as with Jesus. And I think God still gives certain gifts so we will minister according to His power.

Much love!

 

[Johann]

For myself, I see a difference between the "signs and wonders"/works of an Apostle and the ministry gifts. I think God gave certain gifts to His Apostles to authenticate their ministries, as with Jesus. And I think God still gives certain gifts so we will minister according to His power.

Much love!

What gifts? We are not Apostles.

 

[Johann]

What gifts?

If the miraculous gifts described in the New Testament were intended for the whole Church Age then we need to join and support the Charismatic movement. If those gifts pertained to the apostolic era only, then the Charismatic movement cannot be a true movement of the Holy Spirit and we need to expose the movement as unbiblical. It won’t do to allow this issue just to lapse into silence for the sake of peace or whatever.

Now, I’ll tell you plainly at the outset, I have already said this, that I believe that the Charismatic movement is an aberration, and what passes for Charismatic gifts today I believe have nothing to do with the supernatural gifts of healings, tongues, and prophesy that operated in the early apostolic era. I also want to say plainly, to balance that, that I regard Charismatics who have believed the gospel, with authentic faith, as my dear brothers and sisters in Christ. I have to this day many close friends who are Charismatics and their belief in the Charismatic gifts does not nullify our love for one another. Our doctrinal differences are no impediment to our fellowship at the most important level and I look forward to sharing purer fellowship in heaven when all of us will be in perfect agreement about everything. But in the mean time I am convinced that Charismatic practices are a hindrance and not a help to a Christian’s growth and maturity, and I think it is crucial that we deal with these things frankly.

The debate over the Charismatic movement has lapsed into near silence over the last decade, as I said, and it is not because Charismatics won the debate with persuasive Biblical arguments, but it is because non-Charismatics have been intimidated into thinking it is unkind or unspiritual to criticize the Charismatic movement. Many non-Charismatics have simply given up dealing with the issue at all because Charismatics are growing less and less tolerant of criticism and more and more aggressive of their condemnation of the critics. This began to happen in a big way during the “Toronto Blessing.” There is a website that I have linked to in my bookmarks, some of you have seen it on the web, it is called the “Toronto Blessing Page.” I have nicknamed it the “Toronto Cursing Page” because it is filled with this fellow’s curses--there is no other way to say it--against anyone who would question the legitimacy of this phenomena. Some Charismatics even claim that criticizing the Charismatic movement is tantamount to speaking against the Holy Spirit--the unpardonable sin.

I was in New Zealand when the “Toronto Blessing” arrived there and a Christian periodical there published a letter from a reader who simply reminded his brethren that we are commanded by Scripture to “examine all things carefully and compare things with Scripture to see if they are of God or not.” He was making the point that the effects of the phenomena are not the crucial issue. What we need to do is to compare this with Scripture and ask, “Does it have any Biblical basis?” And the following week several other readers responded with letters accusing that man of opposing the work of God and blaspheming the Holy Spirit. One reader in particular wrote to say, “That any one who would declare the ‘Toronto Blessing’ movement unbiblical was guilty of an unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit.” That is the kind of atmosphere that there is out there today, and as a result of it Charismatics are often free to advocate whatever they like, to make whatever prophecies they wish; to advance whatever claim they want to make and without fear of criticism, because non-Charismatics have given up the fight. They have swallowed the idea that it is uncharitable to criticize; it is uncharitable to question; it is not brotherly somehow.

So, modern Charismatic phenomena have begun to become more and more outlandish all the time. We have gone from healings and tongues to prophecies and holy laughter, to drunkenness in the Spirit, and now, watch Benny Hinn, if you want to see the worst kinds of nonsense. It is really hard to imagine what will be next, but you can guarantee it’s going to become more and more outlandish, because it has to be in order to capture the attention of the people who are intoxicated by these things. Meanwhile the Biblical command to “examine all things critically and hold fast to that which is good” is largely forgotten. Those of us who hold the view that the Charismatic movement is steering the Church in an unbiblical direction are being pushed further and further towards the fringe of evangelicalism.

Too often the debate about the Charismatic movement focuses on personalities and secondary issues, and I want to try to bring your thinking back this afternoon to some foundational issues; some basic questions:

1. Does God expect every Christian to be a miracle worker?

2. Does He want us all to speak in tongues and prophesy?

3. What was the role of the Charismatic gifts in the early Church?

4. Are the modern phenomena that Charismatics refer to as “tongues and healings”--are these the same kind of gifts that operated in the apostolic era?

Combating Charismatic Theology -- Phil Johnson

 

[Cassandra]

Oh, me?
I do not wish to offend my brothers and sisters here, but I do believe this though. It is enough to make me stay away from those.
Matt 24:24


And this one: It says the spirits are like frogs. I think that is interesting. How do frogs catch their prey?Even if it is still a gift, not all have it. that right there tells you something for those folk who think you have to speak in tongues.:

 

[Johann]

First Corinthians 12-14 implies that the early church was only too inclined toward such gifts rather than against them. In almost every religion men have been inclined toward the miraculous rather than toward rejecting obvious miracles. And yet some argue that miracles ceased or nearly so in the early church—an era when belief in the supernatural was rampant and when the signs and wonders actually occurred—because of disbelief in miracles! Yet it is claimed that in the most rationalistic of ages, when no miracles were occurring, 19- and 20th-century Christians believed to the extent that the gifts reoccurred, and reoccurred on the scale of today's claims. Since modern Christians are so receptive to signs and wonders and modern man is so willing to believe the charismatic claims, on what basis can one assume that the early Christians would refuse to do so? Those willing to believe religious miracles are always plentiful. To claim that this "miraculous infusion" of the Spirit gives joy, purpose, power for service, and revitalization of the church, and at the same time claim that such a tremendous working was ignored, rejected, and allowed to drop out of the early church which experienced it, is illogical. The only reasonable explanation for the lack of these gifts in church history is that God did not give them. If He had given them, they would have occurred.

Since these gifts and signs did cease, the burden of proof is entirely on the charismatics to prove their validity. Too long Christians have assumed that the noncharismatic must produce incontestable biblical evidence that the miraculous sign gifts did cease. However, noncharismatics have no burden to prove this, since it has already been proved by history. It is an irrefutable fact admitted by many Pentecostals. Therefore the charismatics must prove biblically that the sign gifts will start up again during the Church Age and that today's phenomena are this reoccurrence. In other words they must prove that their experiences are the reoccurrence of gifts that have not occurred for almost 1,900 years.

"Latter day" Explanations are Inadequate.

Many Pentecostals hold that the sign gifts did cease and that they have reoccurred in these "latter days." This must be demonstrated from Scripture, however. There is no biblical evidence that there will be a reoccurrence in the church of the sign gifts or that believers will work miracles near the end of the Church Age. However, there is ample evidence that near the end of the age there will be false prophets who perform miracles, prophesy, and cast out demons in Jesus' name (cf. Matt. 7:22-23; 24:11, 24; 2 Thess. 2:9-12).

During the Church Age there will be false leaders who fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness (2 Cor. 11:13-15). During the Tribulation period, there is no indication that believers, other than the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3-12, will perform miracles. Those performed by the two witnesses are exceptional, and their actions are comparable to those of Old Testament prophets rather than to those of the apostles. The two witnesses are not part of the church, and if they were, they could hardly be considered typical of the church.

The "latter rain" arguments are incorrectly based on verses that actually are referring to seasonal rainfall in Israel. Hosea 6:3 and Joel 2:23, for example, refer not to some unusual outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the last days of the Church Age. They refer instead to spring rains, in contrast to early rains in the fall.

The arguments based on the expression "in the last days" in Acts 2:16-21 are also invalid. If the "last days" referred to in Acts 2:17 includes the day of Pentecost, the beginning of the Church Age, and "if this is that" (v. 16) includes Pentecost, then it cannot mean at the same time the "last days"of this Church Age. On the other hand if the "last days" do not include Pentecost, then Pentecost was not a fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, and Acts 2:16-21 refers specifically to Israel and is still future. Either way this passage gives no evidence for a reoccurrence of miraculous gifts during the "last (latter) days" of the church. The present charismatic movement is characterized by phenomena that began in the church about 100 years ago, which apart from any historical connection or evidence are claimed to be the same as the miracles performed in the apostolic age. It is simply naive to accept this claim without some direct historical link or solid biblical evidence that these present phenomena are the same as those in the days of the apostles. The most reliable evidence would be a direct historical link with the apostolic gifts due to their continuity in the church. However, as already argued, history testifies to the contrary. The gifts ceased and there is no reason to expect their presence or reoccurrence today.

Lack Of Similarity With The New Testament

For any phenomena to make credible claim to be the same as the gifts and miracles of the apostolic age there must be great similarity between the two. Any phenomena can be intentionally duplicated or copied. Therefore similarity alone cannot prove the modern phenomena are genuine. Conversely a lack of similarity is definitely evidence against the claim that they are the same as the New Testament gifts and miracles.

An examination of the New Testament reveals that the modern charismatic phenomena are not sufficiently similar to those of the apostolic age. Where are the tongues of fire and the rushing of a mighty wind as on the day of Pentecost? Do missionaries blind their opponents as Paul did? Do church leaders discern hypocrisy and pronounce the immediate death of members as in Acts 5:1-11? Do evangelists amaze an entire city with miracles as did Philip (8:5-8)? Are they then taken to another place of ministry by the Holy Spirit (vv. 39-40)? Are entire multitudes healed by merely being in the shadow of the healer (5:15)? Do prophets give specific prophecies which come to pass soon after (11:27-28)?

The miracles and signs of the apostolic age were clearly and overtly miraculous. Even the opponents of the gospel could not refute the miracles of the apostolic age. But today's "signs and wonders" cannot be verified even by those who are neutral or friendly to the movement. A detailed comparison with specific individual gifts shows an amazing lack of similarity between the New Testament gifts and the modern "charismatic" gifts.

The gift of healing. The New Testament gift of healing is a specific gift to an individual enabling him to heal. It is not to be confused with healing performed by God in answer to prayer. New Testament healings include those with verifiable afflictions and handicaps such as the man who was crippled from birth (Acts 3:1-10). The healings were instantaneous, complete, and obvious to all. The man crippled from birth had never walked, but he was instantly able to walk and jump. The healings in the apostolic age never failed regardless of the faith of the recipient. They did not depend on direct physical contact (5:15). There were no preliminaries, healing meetings, or incantations. The healer merely stated to the individual, even when the individual was unaware of the intention to heal (3:1-10), something equivalent to the words, "In Jesus' name, stand up and walk." The healings were usually in public, performed on unbelievers, and often en masse.

The modern charismatic movement made little impact on the basis of speaking in tongues alone. It was not until "healing" was added that the movement began to grow in significant numbers.

Today's healers admittedly often fail. This is blamed on the lack of faith of the sick rather than on the healer. The alleged healings are seldom instantaneous or complete. They usually are not healings of objectively verifiable illnesses; they often pertain to internal disorders such as "emotional healing." Rather than being irrefutable, they are unverified or even denied by those neutral. They involve healing meetings, preliminaries, incantations, and usually repeated visits. They are not performed in the streets, en masse, or at a distance. In a crowd they are usually performed on only a select few. They are never performed on those who are not aware of the "healer" or his intention to "heal."

Continue--

 

[Johann]

When Paul wrote that all gifts were given to the church (1 Cor. 1:7) and benefited the church, he did not mean that all believers were apostles or performed miracles, but that the apostolic, miraculous ministry was experienced by and benefited the Corinthian church. Paul wrote in Ephesians 2:20 that the apostles and prophets are the foundation for the universal church. This at least implies that they were only for the beginning, and this accords with the other specifics mentioned above. Since "apostle" in the full sense of the gift was only a temporary gift and did not continue in the church, the biblical precedent is established that some gifts given in the apostolic age did not continue and were only temporary. It is contrary to Scripture to assume that all gifts and all happenings of the apostolic church are to continue and to be expected in today's church.

Since the ones who performed the miracles were only in the beginning church, it is logical that the miracles themselves were only for the apostolic age. Since the ability to perform such miracles was evidence of apostleship (2 Cor. 12:12), then with rare exceptions others could not have performed such signs and wonders, and they would not continue when the apostles ceased. In addition to this implication the temporary nature of miracles is directly supported by Scripture. Mark wrote that the apostles went forth in accord with the Lord's instructions and preached (aorist tense) everywhere and the Lord confirmed their word with signs. This is all placed in the past at the time of Mark's writing (Mark 16:20; the time of the present participle is relative to the past tense of the main verb). The same is true in Hebrews 2:3-4, which says miracles were performed by eyewitnesses of the Lord (apostles), and were performed by God to confirm the word of the eyewitnesses. All this was past at the time Hebrews was written (the main verb is past tense and the participle is relative in time to the main verb "was confirmed"). In both cases the signs, wonders, and miracles are referred to as being in the past at the time of writing; they were not referred to as occurring at that time. In both passages miracles were performed by the apostles (eyewitnesses) and are described as intended by God as evidence to authenticate the apostles' preaching.

James 5:14 does not instruct the sick to look for a healer or for someone with the ability to heal. Rather it instructs the sick to call for the elders and they are to pray for him. This is basically in accord with the procedure in noncharismatic churches, but is in direct contrast to what would be expected if the gift of healing were available for believers. Either the gift was not to be used to heal believers, or the only other option is that it had ceased.

Conclusion. There is ample biblical evidence that the miraculous gifts ceased with the apostolic age. To assume that such gifts are permanent is contrary to the Scriptures in general and to the biblical precedent that some gifts such as full apostles of the Lord definitely ceased. History is against the charismatic claims. The dissimilarity between the New Testament gifts and the alleged gifts of the charismatics also contradicts their claims. The assumption that because these gifts existed in the apostolic age they should also exist today is a gratuitous assumption contrary to objective evidence. It is also an assumption contrary to scriptural principles and specific biblical evidence. There is no teaching in Scripture that the church should look for such miraculous gifts, nor are they referred to in the passages discussing the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23), spiritual warfare (Eph. 6:10-18), the life of faith (Eph. 5:18; Col. 3:12-17), and requirements for church leaders (1 Tim. 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9) as necessary for the believer to lead a spiritual life.

Characteristics That Refute Charismatic Claims

Various present-day forms of the charismatic movement are offshoots of Pentecostalism. All have the same basic ideology and all have arisen because of the modern Pentecostal movement. The primary focus for the individual, no matter how their theologians may describe it, is experiential. Many people in the charismatic movement emphasize the miraculous nature of this experience seemingly for personal benefit more than service to others.

Theological Associations

In Pentecostalism the doctrine of Christian perfectionism assumed a specific form in the inaccurate concept of a postconversion crisis experience, a "second blessing." This teaching with its concept of an effusion of power from the Holy Spirit resulted in the expectancy of and search to obtain overt "power" as described in Acts.

The movement crosses all theological boundaries. Speaking in tongues is present in non-Christian religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism, and in cults such as Mormonism. Healing, miracles, and exorcisms are also common in non-Christian religions. In conventional Christian circles the charismatic movement includes Protestants and Roman Catholics, liberals and conservatives, and individuals in many denominations. Those who believe in the inspiration of the Bible, justification by faith, and many other doctrines—as well as those who do not—are also involved.

Questionable Theology

The concept of the "second blessing" or "baptism or fullness of the Spirit" presupposes that while Jesus' death on the cross paid for sin, it is insufficient to empower for service, to enable one to be spiritual, or to give effectiveness in prayer. This differs drastically from the teaching of the New Testament. The view that only those who speak in tongues have real communication with God is contrary to the biblical teaching that all believers have full access to God. Romans 8:26 states that all believers are helped in prayer by the Spirit with inaudible, non-uttered, internal groanings.

The tongues movement presupposes that communication with the spiritual realm is more direct when it is apart from the mind. Such a concept, though found in various religions, is contrary to biblical Christianity. This emphasis on a level of communication that bypasses the mind and is not direct communication from the believer to God is a dangerous teaching. This interest in "supernatural" events, not primarily as convincing signs but as the daily experience of believers that supposedly places them in contact with the supernatural, is dangerous. This middle-level, spirit realm, called the "excluded middle," is an area of charismatic emphasis.

The emphasis on experience, particularly in this level above the rational, often results in emphasizing "experience" over Scripture. In a recent nationally televised program on the subject of televangelism several charismatically oriented evangelists appealed to the "call" as the license for a sinning preacher to continue his ministry. They made no appeal to the Scriptures.

Similarities To Non-Christian Religions

The modern-day charismatic movement is disturbingly similar to practices common in paganism, while at the same time it lacks correspondence to biblical miracles. Trancelike states and communications on a level apart from the mind are common in paganism. An emphasis on physical healing and exorcism for the benefit of adherents is common. The experience of a power or force "overcoming" the participants is similar to pagan practice. The bizarre and often wild practices of early Pentecostalism seem similar to pagan religion.

The idea of contact and interest in the spirit world, the "excluded middle" between God and man, is also common to pagan religions.

The Cessation of the Sign Gifts by Prof. Thomas R. Edgar

Cessationism and the Tongues Movement

www.the-highway.com

 

[Johann]

Oh, me?
I do not wish to offend my brothers and sisters here, but I do believe this though. It is enough to make me stay away from those.
Matt 24:24
View attachment 46624

And this one: It says the spirits are like frogs. I think that is interesting. How do frogs catch their prey?Even if it is still a gift, not all have it. that right there tells you something for those folk who think you have to speak in tongues.:
View attachment 46625

Agree-I think we need to come to the "nitty gritty" re signs, wonders, healings, blabbering in "tongues" dreams, visions and IF we should dare to speak out against the Charismatic Movement, Word of Faith, Pentecostals it is us that "sin against the Holy Spirit" and Scripture is not sufficient enough.
Like you I don't want to offend anyone.
J.

 

[Behold]

Much of the confusion end

Like you I don't want to offend anyone.
J.

So, when you teach that particular concept.... just show the reader this..

"The ACTS of the APOSTLES"... are not the daily deeds of the CHRISTIAN..

And the "christian denominations" that dont understand this, are those you are referring to.... as they try to do the "Acts of the Apostles" and that is why it is all a complete "Flesh Opera".. a "Religious Theater of Pretense".

 

[Wick Stick]

Over the years I’ve become convinced that some of the so-called charismatic gifts are no longer given and that they aren’t a regular feature of life in the church. I am thinking particularly of the the gifts of apostleship, prophecy, tongues, healing, and miracles (and perhaps discernment of spirits).

I disagree.

I view Cessationism as an extreme position. It's one thing to observe that certain offices and gifts are rare, perhaps even so rare that's you've never seen it. It's another thing to say they DON'T or CAN'T happen at all. The latter view rules out the possibility, and I think that's a bad thing. With God all things are possible... so let's not try to put limitations on God.

To put it another way, we don’t have apostles like Paul and Peter and John anymore.

Are you quite sure of that? Jesus only made 13 or 14 apostles for the whole of the world. Are you sure there aren't a dozen such individuals on earth today? If there are, they probably wouldn't be in Christian nations.

They gave us the authoritative teaching by which the church continues to live to this day, and that is the only teaching we will need until Jesus returns. We know that new apostles won’t appear since Paul specifically says he was the last apostle (1 Cor. 15:8). And when James the brother of John died (Acts 12:2), he wasn’t replaced. Apostles, in the technical sense, are restricted to those who have seen the risen Lord and have been commissioned by him, and no one since apostolic times fits such criteria.

Apostles can't just be replaced by the church, because, as you correctly point out, the office requires a commission from the risen Lord.

However, you're wrong on the bolded bit. Every year there are some number of people to whom Jesus appears. If Paul can be commissioned on the Damascus road, there's no reason that anybody today couldn't be as well.

The apostles were uniquely appointed for the early days of the church to establish orthodox doctrine. There is no warrant, then, for saying there are still apostles today. Indeed, if anyone claims to be an apostle today we should be concerned, for such a claim opens the door to false teaching and to abuse of authority.

Your post is long, and my time is short, so I will keep it brief.

I'll acknowledge that most of what happens in charismatic churches is nonsense. Most claiming offices of apostle or prophet are shysters there to defraud or feed their ego by exercising power and influence. Prudence is a good thing. Skepticism is warranted.

But dismissing the possibility altogether is a bridge too far. I've seen the authentic thing a few times. I could relate those experiences to you... but they'd just be second-hand and anecdotal for your part.

Perhaps some day you'll encounter it for yourself. But then again... with that disbelief... perhaps not.

 

[Johann]

Much of the confusion end


So, when you teach that particular concept.... just show the reader this..

"The ACTS of the APOSTLES"... are not the daily deeds of the CHRISTIAN..

And the "christian denominations" that dont understand this, are those you are referring to.... as they try to do the "Acts of the Apostles" and that is why it is all a complete "Flesh Opera".. a "Religious Theater of Pretense".

Thanks @Behold
J.

 

[Johann]

Are you quite sure of that? Jesus only made 13 or 14 apostles for the whole of the world. Are you sure there aren't a dozen such individuals on earth today? If there are, they probably wouldn't be in Christian nations.

There are no more Apostles on planet earth and we have the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit and Christ Jesus and the Father.

 

[Johann]

I disagree.

I view Cessationism as an extreme position. It's one thing to observe that certain offices and gifts are rare, perhaps even so rare that's you've never seen it. It's another thing to say they DON'T or CAN'T happen at all. The latter view rules out the possibility, and I think that's a bad thing. With God all things are possible... so let's not try to put limitations on God.


Are you quite sure of that? Jesus only made 13 or 14 apostles for the whole of the world. Are you sure there aren't a dozen such individuals on earth today? If there are, they probably wouldn't be in Christian nations.


Apostles can't just be replaced by the church, because, as you correctly point out, the office requires a commission from the risen Lord.

However, you're wrong on the bolded bit. Every year there are some number of people to whom Jesus appears. If Paul can be commissioned on the Damascus road, there's no reason that anybody today couldn't be as well.


Your post is long, and my time is short, so I will keep it brief.

I'll acknowledge that most of what happens in charismatic churches is nonsense. Most claiming offices of apostle or prophet are shysters there to defraud or feed their ego by exercising power and influence. Prudence is a good thing. Skepticism is warranted.

But dismissing the possibility altogether is a bridge too far. I've seen the authentic thing a few times. I could relate those experiences to you... but they'd just be second-hand and anecdotal for your part.

Perhaps some day you'll encounter it for yourself. But then again... with that disbelief... perhaps not.

Cheers.
J.

 

[Wick Stick]

There are no more Apostles on planet earth and we have the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit and Christ Jesus and the Father.

That... isn't an argument. It's a re-statement of what you already said. Perhaps I've asked the wrong question. Let me try again. How can you be so sure of that?

To be fair, I've said the same thing before. Even preached it from a pulpit. And then I met one...

 

[Cassandra]

That... isn't an argument. It's a re-statement of what you already said. Perhaps I've asked the wrong question. Let me try again. How can you be so sure of that?

To be fair, I've said the same thing before. Even preached it from a pulpit. And then I met one...

May I hear the story and why you believe it?

 

[Johann]

That... isn't an argument. It's a re-statement of what you already said. Perhaps I've asked the wrong question. Let me try again. How can you be so sure of that?

To be fair, I've said the same thing before. Even preached it from a pulpit. And then I met one...

Really? What signs and miracles did he perform? Did he/she heal all the sick in your Church?

Early Church Context: In the early Christian church, the apostles were foundational figures who played a crucial role in spreading the gospel and establishing churches. They received special authority and guidance from Jesus Christ, often accompanied by signs and wonders to authenticate their ministry (Acts 2:43; 2 Corinthians 12:12).

Prophetic Activity: The apostles, along with other believers, participated in prophetic activities such as speaking words of encouragement, edification, and exhortation (1 Corinthians 14:3). This prophetic ministry was aimed at building up the church and guiding believers in their faith.

Examples from Scripture:

Peter: On the day of Pentecost, Peter proclaimed a powerful message under the influence of the Holy Spirit, leading many to repentance and baptism (Acts 2:14-41).

Paul: Paul, though not one of the original twelve apostles, was also considered an apostle by virtue of his encounter with Christ and commissioning (Acts 9:1-19). He engaged extensively in prophetic ministry, teaching, and planting churches throughout the Roman Empire.

John: John, the apostle and author of several New Testament books, including Revelation, received visions and prophecies that he recorded in Scripture.

Role in Establishing Doctrine: The apostles also played a critical role in establishing foundational doctrines of the Christian faith, often through their letters (epistles) that became part of the New Testament canon. These writings continue to guide Christian theology and practice today.

In summary, the apostles were not only witnesses to Christ's resurrection and messengers of the gospel but also active participants in prophetic ministry, proclaiming God's truth and guidance under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Their prophetic role was integral to the early church's formation and continues to inform Christian belief and practice.

Was the "Apostle" a direct witness of the risen Lord Jesus Christ?

 

[Wick Stick]

May I hear the story and why you believe it?

Was the "Apostle" a direct witness of the risen Lord Jesus Christ?

I can answer these together.

Yes. That was his testimony. He was the founder of several churches in Nepal, and was traveling through America at someone's invitation. His testimony was that He had been a leader in another religion, and that He had converted to Christianity when the risen Jesus appeared to him in his locked room one night, showed him his nail-pierced wrists, and told him that he would now be following a new religion and starting churches.

Really? What signs and miracles did he perform? Did he/she heal all the sick in your Church?

He didn't attend my church. He stayed a night at a friend's house. He was passing through and needed a place to stay for a night. They had an extra room and a common acquaintance. We had the privilege of dinner, and conversation which mostly revolved around the happenings at the latest church he had founded. The sick there were healed, even the dead raised. We got to see his camera roll. He wondered why this did not happen at the churches here in America. In his country, he was... pursued... by the government there, which is not friendly to Christianity, or missionaries.

A point of interest - at no point did he ever call himself "apostle" or "prophet" or any title other than pastor. It wasn't until a day later when I was talking with my friend that we both tentatively raised the same point and agreed that he met all the criteria to be an apostle - that is, he had received a commission from the risen Lord to go start churches. I think it was you that correctly gave this as the definition of an apostle in this topic.