Thoughts - Reflections on Cessationism

Strange Fire?

There has recently been a lot of controversy in the US over cessationism, caused by the John McArthur’s Strange Fire Conference. Let me make it clear that this post is not about the Strange Fire conference itself as I have not listened to the talks, rather it is about cessationism in general. From what I gather the conference was motivated by a concern for many of the excesses of the Charismatic world, such as so-called prosperity teachers etc. If you want to see more of a response to the conference itself (from a Charismatic perspective) then I can recommend Dr Michael Brown and his Line of Fire podcasts, and from a UK perspective, Adrian Warnock.

The reason for writing this blog is that as a result of the furore I have listened to a couple of debates between sensible charismatics and reasonable cessationists, between Michael Brown and Sam Waldron  and between Adrian Warnock and Doug Wilson. I have never seen any Biblical support for cessationism and have paid little attention to the topic. However, listening to these debates has at least helped me understand the issue a little better, and I am even more firmly convinced that there are no Biblical grounds for cessationism.

Cessationism

Cessationism is the belief that the charismatic gifts ceased after the time of the apostles. It is important to realise that it does not mean they don’t believe in the active role of the Holy Spirit in the church, nor does it mean they don’t believe in miracles.

So what are there grounds for saying the gifts ceased at the end of the apostolic era? Essentially it is that the primary purpose of the gifts was to authenticate the apostolic ministry. First let me say a few words about apostleship for the term apostle is a little controversial today and is misused.

Cessationsim & Apostleship

The term apostle is used in two ways in the New Testament. First there are what most people think of as apostles, namely Peter, John, etc and Paul. There are no apostles like these now and never have been since Peter, John etc. These apostles had been with Jesus and were physical witnesses to the resurrection (Acts 1:21,22), with Paul being one “abnormally born” (1 Cor 15:8). They had special authority and established the foundations for the church, in particular the New Testament. However, the term apostle is also used in a more general sense.

Now to apostles and the gifts of the Spirit, and it is the Peter type apostles we are talking about. The argument of the cessationists is that the primary purpose of the charismatic gifts was to back up the authority of the apostles. Now it is true that signs and wonders were one of the signs of an apostle. However, the gifts, particularly those spoken of in 1 Corinthians are not there purely or even primarily as signs of apostleship. Let’s take tongues. First we need to realise there seem to be two types of tongues. There is the instance in Acts 2 where the disciples spoke in human languages that people who were visiting Jerusalem could understand. Then there is the tongues that Paul speaks about in 1 Corinthians 12 & 14, and which seems to be the more common, where the main purpose is the edification of the individual, and need not be a human language. From my reading of the New Testament, tongues seems to have precious little to do with apostleship. The only possible argument could be taken from the Samaritans who received the Holy Spirit through Peter, but that seems to be reading too much into it.

Cessationism & Prophecy

One of the themes that cropped up in the two debates noted above is the seeming insistence of cessationists that all prophecy must be inerrant. They seem to rely on there being only one model of prophecy, namely what most Christians will think of when we talk about a prophet, ie an Isaiah or a Jeremiah or an Amos. But this does not seem to be supported by the Bible. This will be only the briefest of comments here. For a much more detailed study of the matter I would refer you to Wayne Grudem’s book, The Gift of Prophecy.

Consider Elijah and Elisha. No one doubts that these are prophets of God, but how much scripture did they contribute (in the sense that Isaiah etc did)? Virtually nothing. They are known for two main things: (i) confronting power with truth; and (ii) performing various miracles. Then there are prophets Nathan, who was a prophet to David. He got it wrong when he told David to go ahead and build a temple. God quickly corrected him. In Chronicles it says that David appointed prophets. In the Old Testament there were numerous prophets and types of prophets, including, of course, false prophets.

Now turn to the New Testament. There are no prophets of the Isaiah mould. There is no record in the New Testament of prophecy playing any part in the laying down of Scripture. Again, there is an example of a prophet getting it wrong in the strict sense when Paul was warned against going to Jerusalem. Moreover, the words of Paul in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 seem to speak of a gift that is for general application in the church.

There are many other arguments against cessationism. Adrian Warnock’s blog contains some very useful comments.

In short, I have never been able to see any Biblical support for cessationism and the Strange Fire furore has only confirmed that view. However, to those of you who are charismatics, do not write off cessationists. They may well be wrong on this matter, but many of them are spirit filled servants of Christ doing a great work. Conversely, in the Charismatic world we have a good selection of loonies and charlatans and need to use discernment.