Cessationism
Other cessationist assumptions & concerns
The roots of cessationism
Cessationism has failed us
There are godly, Christ-loving Christians who are cessationists. I know some personally. We, prophecy practitioners, cannot assume Christ-lovers exist only in our spiritual culture. They do not. In certain seasons of my life, the Lord has used decidedly non-prophetic Christians to teach me important lessons. I saw the same flame of Yah in their eyes that burned in mine. I felt the same brotherly warmth in their hug, witnessed the same Christlike fruits in their life, and perceived the same Spirit in their prayers.
Many Christians and churches experience the prophetic quite regularly, yet they do not realize what they are experiencing is, in fact, prophecy. Some even overtly practice it, yet employ safer and more generic terminology, resigning the term prophecy to "real" prophecy like that of Elijah or Isaiah. Since my general ministry is cross-denominational, I get a fascinating look at the various spiritual cultures in the church. Gladly, I see prophecy is very much alive and well in all of them! Whether it happens unrealized, or under a safer label, or completely underground, or overtly and openly, the Spirit of prophecy is active regardless. This makes me rejoice! Just as Proverbs 21:30 says, There is no wisdom, no insight, no plan that can succeed against the Lord. That includes cessationism.
Cessationism Cessationism is the opinion that some or all of the spiritual gifts ceased after the completion of the New Testament or the death of the apostles. This opinion splinters into four versions. Geographical cessationism suggests the miraculous gifts do not exist in evangelized areas or the mainstream church, but do manifest in unevangelized areas. Classical cessationism suggests the miraculous gifts no longer exist, however, it submits that God occasionally still works miraculously today. Full cessationism suggests no miraculous gifts exist today, nor does God work miraculously today even occasionally. Extreme cessationism suggests no miraculous gifts exist today, nor do any of the Ephesians 4:11 leadership gifts, including evangelist, pastor, and teacher (a small band within this version discharge all the gifts).
Each of these cessationist flavors contain one prevailing theme: the partial or total denial of present-day miraculous giftings, including prophecy. They suggest these gifts were allotted only for the founding of the church, as powerful "launching pads" for the new gospel message, as divine affirmations of the New Covenant system being instituted by the apostles, and to meet the spiritual needs of the baby church until the New Testament Scripture could be completed.
Cessationism's Biblical Rationale This particular opinion finds refuge in four main Scripture passages: 1Corinthians 13:8-12, Ephesians 2:20, Hebrews 2:3,4, and 2Peter 1:3,4.
1Corinthians 13:8-12 The bone of contention in this passage is the meaning of "the perfect" that does away with "the imperfect" (v10). Typical cessationist thought sees "the perfect" as the completion of the New Testament, and "the imperfect" as the miraculous gifts. Therefore, they conclude, the New Testament's inscripturation does away with certain gifts, rendering them useless and unnecessary. This view portrays the miraculous gifts as a type of "interim Scripture".
It is correct that at some point all spiritual gifts will be rendered unnecessary. The context definitely shows that spiritual gifts are "the imperfect", since Paul mentions three of them in verse 8 (prophecy, tongues, and knowledge). There are several problems, however, with declaring "the perfect" to be the completed New Testament. To keep this page moving along, and to not get distracted from this site's larger purpose, I will address only one of those problems: the "face to face" phrase (v12).
Paul said the coming of the perfect would bring about a "face to face" experience for Christians (v12). Some cessationists say this refers to a "face to face" experience with ourselves, citing James 1:23-25. They suggest the New Testament's completion gives us a perfect/complete mirror of truth to look into ("perfect law" v25), as opposed to the rusty and deficient mirror of imperfect spiritual gifts. I confess I like this line of thinking very much. Surely the completed Bible gives me a pristine face to face experience with myself...where I am strong, where I am weak, where I am Christlike, where I need to grow.
This interpretation disintegrates quickly though. However a person chooses to interpret "face to face", it must also accommodate the sister phrase, "then I will know fully as I am fully known". Paul elaborates on what "face to face" means by this second phrase. Using plural phrases to say the exact same thing is common Hebrew idiomism (2Co 1:21,22, Pr 30:2,3, Ps 127:1). Paul's second phrase can only refer to God or Christ, since only He is omniscient and can know us fully. This is confirmed earlier in 1Corinthians 8:3, where Paul says, The man who loves God is known by God. To suggest "the perfect" refers to a completed Bible, or a type of corporate maturity that discharges spiritual gifts, minimizes the "know fully-fully known" phrase that can only refer to God. It is clumsy hermeneutics to jump over Paul's own self-interpreting words in 8:3 to force James' words (Jas 1:23-25) on "face to face". "Face to face", then, can only refer to when we see Jesus face to face at His coming. John says we will see Him face to face (Rev 22:4), and that "when he appears...we shall see him as he is" (1Jn 3:2). Job says he will see Christ with his own physical eyes, literally face to face (Job 19:25-27).
The phrase, "the perfect", is the perfect knowledge we will have of Christ actualized by His coming (this also satisfies the Greek neuter gender of the phrase). We will know fully as we are so fully known by Him. Logically then, imperfect spiritual gifts would be unnecessary when this happens, but will continue until then.
To their credit, many cessationists have abandoned this passage as a basis for their views. As even they are beginning to see, trying to force New Testament inscripturation into 1Corinthians 13:8-12 is indeed difficult to impossible.
Ephesians 2:20 This passage is paramount to the discussion. Both cessationism and continuationism must accommodate it. Cessationism suggests that New Testament prophecy had to have ceased because it was part of the completed universal church's foundation mentioned in this verse. They point out that this verse cannot refer to local churches with an ongoing need for apostolic-prophetic foundation-laying, simply because Ephesians 2 and 3 is addressing the universal church-house, not local or regional ones. Therefore, since the universal church-house is up and growing (1Co 3:10, 1Pet 2:5), this means the apostle-prophet foundation is complete. To suggest the continuity of apostles or prophets is to suggest the foundation is incomplete, which is impossible since this passage pictures it as complete.
It is true that the universal church-house's foundation is complete. There is simply no way to force a local or regional church interpretation on this verse, conveying an ongoing need for foundation-laying. Ephesians 2 and 3 do look at the church panoramically, and the picture is clear: the foundation is complete and the building has been up and running and growing for 2000 years. However, beyond this is where the cessationist assumption falters.
The cessationist assumption is that the "apostles and prophets" in this passage refer to two different groups of ministers, apostles and New Testament prophets. This is incorrect. "Apostles and prophets" do not refer to two different groups of ministers, but to one: the Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ. The original, Scripture-writing apostles. I will show you.
Remember Hebrew idiomism, that literary style that uses plural statements to refer to the same thing? See Deuteronomy 32:2; Moses said "my teaching is like rain" in four different ways. See Psalm 127:1; Solomon said "apart from God we can do nothing" in two different ways. See Proverbs 30:2,3; Agur said "I am ignorant" in four different ways. It is Hebrew literary tradition to describe the same thing with plural statements, and those plural statements might even address different facets of the same subject.
Paul does the same many times in his writings. We already looked at 1Corinthians 13:12, where he uses two different phrases to refer to same thing: "face to face" and "knowing fully". See 2Corinthians 1:21,22, where Paul refers to the one Holy Spirit in three different ways: the anointing, the seal, and the deposit (see 1Jn 2:27 and Eph 1:13,14). See Ephesians 2:12, where Paul refers to one group, Old Covenant Gentiles, in three different ways: separate from Christ, excluded from Jewish citizenship/foreigners, without hope and God. He does the same in 3:6, referring to one group, saved New Covenant Gentiles, in three different ways: heirs, members of one body, and partakers of Christ.
It is not foreign to Paul, then, to understand "apostles and prophets" in 2:20 (and 3:5) as referring to only one group, the apostle-prophets. This would be confirmed by Revelation 21:14, where only "the twelve apostles of the Lamb" are the foundation of the New Jerusalem. Ephesians 2:20 and Revelation 21:14 match exactly when "apostles and prophets" are read in light of such Hebrew idiomism (plural phrases to refer to the same thing). The twelve Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ are the foundation of the universal church-house.
(I am aware that the Greek construction of "apostles and prophets" permit the phrase to be translated "apostles also prophets" or "apostles even prophets". However, I choose to not rely heavily on this to further my point simply because this is not the typical use of the Greek conjunction kai.)
This understanding of Ephesians 2:20 raises two questions: (1) Why would Paul refer to the foundational apostles as "apostle-prophets", and, (2) Aren't there more than twelve apostles in the New Testament?
Paul referred to the foundational apostles as "apostle-prophets" to emphasize the revelatory aspect of their ministry, which he was highlighting to the Ephesian readers. Ephesians 3:2-5 hits on this directly, with Paul emphasizing that he (and the others) received the New Covenant truth by direct revelation. He does this also in Galatians 1:11,12, emphasizing the gospel truth he preached was not man-made, nor did he learn it naturally, but that he "received it by revelation from Jesus Christ". Again he does this in Romans 16:25,26, saying his gospel came by "revelation of the mystery". Put simply, Paul and the other foundational apostles had a very prophetic side to their ministry--they received all the New Covenant truth by direct revelation. Paul is highlighting this to the Ephesians by saying they are apostles AND prophets, apostles ALSO prophets, or apostle-prophets. This is similar to how we say today, "Meet my friend and co-worker." We are using different phrases to refer to the same person. (See also Ephesians 6:21, "Tychicus, the dear brother and faithful servant".)
It is true that more than twelve apostles are mentioned in the New Testament. However, there is a distinction between a foundational apostle and a functional apostle. Both fulfill the same basic functions, except the foundational ones are just that--foundational--they were unique in that they founded they universal church, delivered the New Covenant faith once for all (Ju 3), and authored the New Testament.
Revelation 21:14 says there are only twelve of these foundational apostles. How can that be with Matthias making twelve (Ac 1:26), and Paul thirteen? Surely Paul is not excluded as foundational, especially considering he is the foremost apostle in all the New Testament! Here is the answer: Matthias was not God's choice, nor was he viewed by God as part of the foundational twelve, but was the result of Peter's foolishness.
Acts 1:15-26 is the story of Matthias' selection. Luke simply records the event without any inspired commentary. As you will see, there are several problems with this event. First, the age of "casting lots" for God's will was over, and Jesus made this clear by teaching that divine guidance in the New Covenant would be obtained by the indwelling Holy Spirit. He made this point explicit several times before He died (Jn 14:16,17,26, 16:13-15). Peter's proposal to cast lots for a twelfth apostle is about as silly and out of place as his proposal to build tents and live on the Mount of Transfiguration (Lk 9:33). Second, Jesus told the apostles to wait for the Holy Spirit in Jerusalem (Lk 24:49, Ac 1:4,5). He did not say, "Select a twelfth apostle by casting lots if you get a little ansy waiting." He gave them one command and one command only, Wait for the Spirit in Jerusalem. Peter added to Christ's command of his own presumption. Third, Peter correctly interpreted the Old Testament passages referring to Judas (Ac 1:20; Ps 69:25, 109:8). However, he misapplied the second one (Ps 109:8), that another would replace him and complete the apostolic foundation. This is a classic case of correct interpretation, but faulty application. God's preordained replacement for Judas was Paul, not Matthias. Just look at the irony: Judas betrayed Christ to honor the chief priest, Paul betrayed Judaism and its chief priest to honor Christ. Peter's actions are reminiscent of the Abraham-Hagar incident. In haste and folly, both men acted out of God's will and timing. One reason Paul spent a lot of energy defending his apostleship was because Matthias was given the false spotlight of being the twelfth apostle. Could this be a deeper reason why Paul so vehemently and publicly challenged Peter (Gal 2:11)? Was he resentful? Of course there is no way to know, but one has to wonder.
Other apostles in the New Testament are functional apostles (Ac 14:14, Ro 16:7, 2Co 8:23, Php 2:25, Eph 4:11). The Ephesians 4:11 context shows they work within an ongoing leadership system with prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers to mature and equip the church. Unlike the once-for-all foundational work, the church's maturation is a need present in every generation. Functional apostles fulfill basic apostolic ministries: leadership development, church planting/development, crosscultural ministry, transdenominational ministry, broad spheres of responsibility and oversight, pioneering relevant initiatives, exuding heightened authority, and so on. These apostles are not once-for-all foundations of the universal church (Rev 21:14), nor are they adding new canonical dogmas or truths to the Bible (Rev 22:18,19) or the faith delivered once for all (Ju 3).
In summary, Ephesians 2:20 refers only to the twelve foundational apostles, the eleven plus Paul, and not Matthias. It refers to them as "apostles and prophets", or "apostle-prophets", because of the revelatory aspect of their New Covenant administration. This is confirmed in Revelation 21:14, showing us the twelve foundations of the twelve apostles.
Consequently, the cessationist opinion that prophets/prophecy no longer exist based on Ephesians 2:20's completed foundation is incorrect. The foundation is complete, but New Testament prophets were never a part of it, only the twelve apostle-prophets of the Lamb.
Hebrews 2:3,4 Cessationism uses this passage to link the miraculous gifts with the foundational atmosphere and announcement of the New Covenant gospel, authenticating it as truly divine. It ties the miraculous to the foundational apostles and their immediate associates, and therefore, passing away with them as well. Is this true?
This is half true. This scripture undeniably connects the miraculous with the arrival of the New Covenant gospel and its administrators. It has underlying kinship to Mark 16:19,20. There are two points, however, that cessationism adds or assumes about this passage. First, that the miraculous gifts would pass away when their couriers did, since it was their work the gifts were validating. Second, that the miraculous gifts must not and cannot function as it did in the first-century since the gospel's inauguration was a unique event.
Both of these points are respectable. No one can deny the uniqueness of the foundational apostles. After all, only they are named on the foundation of the heavenly city. Only they and their close associates wrote Scripture. Only they ushered in the New Covenant system. As for the first-century season, how could we say it was not also unique and epochal? The introduction of grace, Gentile inclusion, outpoured Spirit, priesthood of the believer...what a historic season on redemption's calendar!
However, other considerations supply cessationism's missing half. The foundational apostles and the first-century season not only inaugurated, they instituted. They instituted an age in which every born-again Christian would possess the Holy Spirit and all His possibilities (Eph 3:20,21). Yes they inaugurated, and the inauguration indeed came with fireworks, but they also instituted an age of dunamis-power permanently indwelling the Christian. They instituted the New Covenant church age whereby every believer could enjoy the Holy Spirit's fullest graces according to his or her own calling. It is entirely superficial to separate the New Covenant age into two different periods, the first-century inauguration and the subsequent church institution. Scripture makes no such differentiation. Indeed Hebrews 2:3,4 show one side of the gifts--their inaugurating role in the first century. But other scriptures show the flipside--their ongoing role in the instituted church and her actualization (1Co 12:14-27, Eph 4:7-16/v16). This is where cessationism is near-sighted, it sees only a one-sided coin. It sees a miraculous inauguration, but not a miraculous institution.
What makes the foundational apostles and the first-century so special is not necessarily their miraculous works, but their miraculous meaning. They represented the beginning of a new age in God's program, an age that was obscured to some of the greatest righteous men of history (Mt 13:16,17, 1Pet 1:10-12). The first-century was unique in that it was the delivery room of the new age, and the foundational apostles were unique in that they were doctors who delivered it. Hebrews 2:3,4 simply show us one purpose of the miraculous gifts--to aid in the delivery--but it does not show us the only purpose.
2Peter 1:3,4 Cessationism points to this passage in defense of the "sufficiency of Scripture", that the church no longer needs miraculous gifts running alongside the written Word. ("Scriptural sufficiency" is addressed on the BIBLICAL BASIS page.) In this passage (v3), Peter says God's "divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him." This knowledge, they say, pertains to the Scriptures because the "great and precious promises" (v4) are found in Scripture. James 1:25 is also pointed to, referring to "the perfect [complete, sufficient] law", and 2Timothy 3:15-17, that the Scriptures alone save and mature the believer completely.
Who would argue that the Scriptures are not perfect, complete, and fully authoritative? Indeed it is the literal Word of God from beginning to end. However, 2Peter 1:3 is not referring to knowledge of a Book or knowledge in a Book or even knowledge through a Book. It is referring to our intimate knowledge of Christ. Granted, the Scriptures are a vehicle of this intimate knowledge, but so is the Spirit (1Jn 2:20,27), the church (Ro 15:14), and providential life circumstances (Ac 27,28, Isa 45:7). And the great and precious promises? Of course, most are found in Scripture. But what about the great and precious personal promises, promises that can only be whispered by the Holy Spirit deep within the Christian who walks intimately with Him? The Pharisees were experts in the Scriptural promises of God, yet they were rebuked for never perceiving the personal voice of the Promiser (Jn 5:37-40)!
Peter is not setting forth the doctrine of Scriptural sufficiency. Cessationism has funneled this passage into that airtight container. Rather, he is simply saying that all our needs are fully met by knowing Christ and His promises experientially--general promises in Scripture and/or personal ones indicated by the Spirit, any and all of them. Peter is unspecific.
The emphasis of this passage is our intimate, experiential knowledge of Christ, confirmed in verse 8 (underline added): For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Greek word for "knowledge" in verse 3 and 8 is epignosis, meaning "thorough, intimate knowledge". The base word is gnosis, meaning "basic, intellectual knowledge"; Peter uses gnosis in verse 5 and 6. Both terms are used fairly often in the New Testament (epignosis-20, gnosis-29), though epignosis is used to signify a fuller or experiential knowing, a knowing that is beyond simply cognitive awareness. Only a few times the two words are used interchangeably, but the pattern is as mentioned. Paul says in Romans 10:2 that the Jews had a zeal for God, but not according to full intimate knowledge (epignosis). Here's a good one...2Timothy 3:7 says the last-days lost will always be learning, but never able to come to a personal, experiential knowledge (epignosis) of the saving truth in Christ.
Ultimately, Peter is saying that we are given everything we need for life and godliness through our intimate, experiential knowledge of Christ. Peter's self-explanation in verse 8 (2Pet 1:8), and his different uses of epignosis and gnosis in the same context, signify that he is not at all referring exclusively to the knowledge of Christ in Scripture, but to our intimate knowledge of Christ as a whole. This certainly includes Scripture, but also the Spirit (1Jn 2:20,27), the church (Ro 15:14), and providential life circumstances (Ac 27,28, Isa 45:7). It is forced upon the passage to suggest any spiritual gifts have ceased in the name of Peter's alleged pronouncement of Scriptural sufficiency based on the unspecified "great and precious promises".
"Post-first century prophecy undermines the authority and sufficiency of the Scriptures." This statement can be true, depending on how such prophecy is defined. If we define New Testament prophecy as exactly equal to Old Testament prophecy, then I agree, we have a problem. However, this is a common assumption cessationists carry, that New and Old Testament prophecy are of the exact same nature and function. Old and New prophecy are different in eight main ways, but I will address only the most pressing ones. For a comprehensive explanation, please go to the OT & NT PROPHECY page.
Old Testament prophets and prophecy had one overarching purpose: inscripturation (establish Scripture). Their purpose was to receive, report, and record the Old Testament Scriptures. The New Testament states this in hindsight (Mt 22:40, Ro 1:2, 16:25,26, 2Pet 1:19-21). It goes without saying, inscripturation was a monumental task! Consequently, God undergirded those prophets with miraculous perfection in their verbal and scribal ministry (Deu 18:18-20, 1Sam 3:19,20, 9:6, Isa 44:26). Isaiah 44:26 is key, declaring that God Himself would secure inerrancy in His true Old Testament prophesiers. Similarly, He endowed them with supreme theocratic authority to protect and validate their mission (Num 16:1-35, 1Sam 12:18, 1Ki 13:1-6, 20:35,36, 2Ki 1:10,12, 5:20-27, Jer 1:9,10, Eze 11:13). How else could we have a perfect Old Testament in our Bibles today?
The twelve foundational apostles (see Ephesians 2:20 above) are the New Testament equivalent to the Old Testament prophets. See how the New Testament equates the two groups (2Pet 3:2, Ro 1:2-5, 16:25,26, Mt 13:11,16,17). Early church history also equated them (emp added): "So then, let us serve him with all fear and all reverence, as he himself commanded us, and as did the apostles who brought us the gospel and the prophets who foretold the coming of our Lord" (Polycarp, disciple of John, died AD155, in letter to Philippians 6:3). Just like their counterparts, the foundational apostles were given the monumental task of receiving, reporting, and recording the New Testament Scriptures (1Co 2:13, 14:37, 2Th 3:10,14, 1Ti 5:18, 2Pet 3:15,16). Likewise, God undergirded them with miraculous perfection in their writing (1Co 2:13, 14:37,38, 2Co 13:3,8, 2Pet 3:15,16), and supreme authority to protect and validate their mission (Jn 20:22,23, Ac 5:1-11, 13:8-12, 1Co 14:37,38, 2Co 13:2,3, 2Th 3:10,14, Phile 8, Rev 22:18,19). How else could we have a perfect New Testament in our Bibles today?
These two epochal offices--Old Testament prophets and New Testament foundational apostles--were responsible for the colossal task of establishing Scripture, or inscripturation. Together, they received, reported, and recorded the Word of God for all generations!
New Testament prophecy is altogether different from Old Testament prophecy and New Testament (foundational) apostleship. New Testament prophecy has always had a different overarching purpose: invigoration, not inscripturation. It did not and does not give the church any new dogmatic additions to the Bible. Rather, it simply provides her with situational messages from the Spirit that edify, stimulate, and vitalize in very specific ways. Invigoration, but not inscripturation. Every single example of non-apostolic New Testament prophecy shows this (Ac 11:27-30, 13:1-3, 15:32, 21:4,10,11, 1Co 14:3,31, 1Ti 1:18, 4:14). Such prophetic messages were situational and practical, but not doctrinal, theological, or canonical. It did not contest or compete with anything apostolic, but was in subjection to it (1Co 14:37,38). (NOTE: Paul himself also practiced this situational, practical, non-canonical prophecy; 1Co 13:9, 14:6. This is distinctly different from his canonical prophesying, which introduced new biblical truth to be recorded as Scripture; Eph 3:2-5, Gal 1:11,12, Ro 16:25,26.)
Such New Testament prophecy does not undermine Scripture, since it does not present new truth or dogma whereby the listener would have to choose one or the other. It simply allows the ever-present, ever-practical, and ever-personal Holy Spirit to communicate with situational relevance and address specifics.
I realize many persons are claiming new authoritative truth and dogma. This is NOT the brand of prophecy I am suggesting or supporting, it is NOT the model of New Testament prophecy displayed in Acts and beyond, and I insist that this undermines God's Word. However, if it is the brand similar to that of Agabus and his situational predictions (Ac 11:27-30, 21:10,11), or that of Judas and Silas and their corporate Spirit-guided encouragement (15:32), or the personal prophecies spoken to Timothy about his ministry (1Ti 1:18, 4:14), this I submit to you as authentic New Testament prophecy. This does not undermine the Scripture, it celebrates the Spirit and stimulates the Body in situation-specific ways. "Doesn't this create an issue, then, of multiple authorities in the church, as in the Roman Catholic system?" Once again, if we mistakenly view New Testament prophecy as identical to Old Testament prophecy, then yes, a major problem of plural authority is created. Prophets, in this sense, would function similar to the pope, who speaks ex cathedra (absolute authority equal to or greater than Scripture). However, if we understand New Testament prophecy by its New Testament pattern, we see a ministry of practical messaging from the Spirit, and no competitive authority is created. Such prophesying is still subject to the Scripture (1Co 14:37,38), is not doctrinal or theological in nature, and does not seek to add canonical truth or dogma to the Bible/church/New Covenant faith. Those who practice or suggest an Old Testament ex cathedra form of contemporary prophecy aggrandize it beyond its New Testament model. Obviously, some practitioners and their constituents will do this. Some do it deliberately for power and wealth, some do it unintentionally through ignorance and immaturity. Herein is where prophetic Christians can help prophecy's cause: by continually educating their constituency on the true nature and function of New Testament prophecy, by balancing their prophesying with sound teaching from Scripture, and championing Scripture in the midst of their celebration of prophecy. We cannot allow the abuse to diminish the use. There will always be abusers of not only prophecy, but also teaching, evangelism, pastoring, and just about anything spiritual to elevate themselves to a popish status. Rather than a cut-n-run despising of prophecy (1Th 5:20), we should win our people over to this marvelous gift through excellent teaching, responsible prophesying, and overall healthy ministry. "Doesn't this create an unhealthy appetite in Christians for prophecy and its intoxicating effects, instead of a hunger for Scripture?" The reality is, less mature believers usually go through phases where they are enchanted by some exciting spiritual topic. I knew a young lady who became enthralled with demonology. She seemed to be more concerned with demons than anything else in kingdom life. For her, at this phase in her life, everything was a "spirit". She became clouded in a haze of demon-this and demon-that. However, as most faithful Christians do, she eventually grew beyond it and balanced out. My point? There will always be less mature Christians (and leaders) that become enchanted with some high-voltage topic over Scripture. Be it prophecy or demonology or the Antichrist or Song of Songs. Once again, we can never let the abuse exterminate the use. Rather, through good shepherding and teaching, we must gently steer these topical zealots into a more mature and balanced spirituality. We must educate them concerning the role of New Testament prophecy in relation to the Scriptures. We must disciple them, not excommunicate prophecy. For many, it is simply easier to get rid of prophecy, versus learning complex prophetic idiosyncrasies, and God forbid, being challenged to perceive the Spirit's voice themselves. "What about Mark 16:17,18? Why aren't all continuationists also handling snakes and drinking deadly poison? It's all or nothing right?" First of all, when Jesus says, "And these signs will accompany those who believe", He is referring to the collective body of believers, not every single individual. Therefore, not every individual Christian will be a demon-remover, tongues-speaker, snake-handler, poison-drinker, and body-healer. This fits perfectly with what Paul said in 1Corinthians 12:29,30, that not every individual Christian possesses every gift or ministry. Jesus is simply naming a few evidences of the faith community as a whole. As for the snake-handling and poison-drinking. In some way, at some point, this verse will be relevant to some Christian, somewhere, like Paul in Acts 28:1-6. I am emphatically not suggesting anyone be so foolish and test God by stroking a rattler while preaching, or by having an arsenic cocktail during a church supper. This is presumption and folly. What I am saying is that Jesus was omniscient enough to know that some of His faithful servants, some day, somewhere, would find themselves in an uncontrollable situation whereby they would have to miraculously defy a deadly snake or ingested poison. In other words, these evidences are declaratives, not imperatives; they are predictives, not directives. In fact, all five of these statements by Jesus are declaratives, not imperatives. They happen by the Spirit's own will and determination based on situational needs (1Co 12:11). Not every one of them is relevant to every Christian, every day, every locale. Obviously, defying a deadly snake or poison are not constant threats for American Christians. But in locales where things might not be as safe and sanitary, well, this verse may be just what the Doctor ordered. This is easy for some international missionaries to understand, since they work in remote areas where venemous snakes are rampant, or where drinking anything is a dice-roll with toxicity. In summary, all of Mark 16:17,18 is real and operational today, along with prophecy and all the other gifts. However, each of them are workings of the Spirit's own will based on situational needs. Jesus is not suggesting every individual Christian indiscriminately pursue these manifestations, just as Paul is not suggesting that every individual Christian seek to be a prophet. "If Acts 2:17,18 are really suggesting prophecy is for the entire New Testament age, then where are the 'blood, fire, and smoke' of verse 19?" This question is similar to the Mark 16 question. In essence, it is saying that if we are going to validate parts of these verses, then we need to be consistent and validate their entirety. Well said. So where is the blood, fire, smoke, darkened sun, and bloody moon of Acts 2:19,20? First off, "last days" here refers to the entire New Covenant age, as Hebrews 1:2 confirms. Peter quotes Joel 2:28-32, saying all servants of God will now possess the Spirit, not just predominantly male judges, prophets, priests, and kings as in the Old system. Pentecost was the glorious fulfillment of several Old Testament promises (Num 11:29, Isa 44:3, Eze 36:27). For this reason Peter says, "This is what was spoken by the prophet Joel" (Ac 2:16). So we know this passage is rightly placed in the New Covenant age, the present time. The following statements--blood, fire, smoke, darkened sun, and bloody moon before the day of the Lord--also refer to the New Covenant age, but the very end of it. We can use Jesus' words in Matthew 24 to interpret Peter's. He said the age would not end until these things happened (24:3). "Blood, fire, and smoke" in Peter's quotation refer to the overwhelming bloodshed and military destruction that will take place during the final days' perilous times. Jesus said there will be "wars and rumors of wars...nation will rise against nation" (v6,7) and that there will be "great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world...never to be equaled again" (v21). That is an overwhelming statement, considering some of the large-scale horrors our world has already witnessed. Blood, fire, and smoke are among the last-days "signs on the earth" Peter refers to (Ac 2:19). The darkened sun and bloody moon are the "wonders in the heaven" he mentions. Jesus said He would return again ("the day of the Lord") when the sun and moon were darkened (Mt 24:29,30). Thus, the blood, fire, smoke, darkened sun, and bloody moon constitute the wonders and signs of the closing New Covenant age, pleading with mankind to call on the Lord and be saved. ("Signs and wonders" not only refer to positive healings and miracles, they can also refer to negative divine judgments. Deu 4:34, Ac 7:36) Interestingly, Peter mentions that Jesus' miracles were a type of fulfillment of this "signs and wonders" statement (see 2:22). Peter is subtly equating Jesus' signs and wonders with the final days' signs and wonders--both signify the closing of an age. Jesus' signs and wonders signified the soon closure of the Old Covenant age; the blood, fire, and so on signify the soon closure of the New Covenant age. The outpoured Spirit at Pentecost opened a new era. The signs and wonders and resulting day of the Lord will close that very same era. Peter is referring to the same era, one that includes prophecy throughout and incredible events at the closing. "If New Testament prophecy is fallible and inferior to Scripture, then why would an omnipotent God give a revelation, yet not ensure its accurate reception and delivery as He did in the Old Testament? After all, what good is an inaccurate or partially inaccurate prophetic word?" I love this question, and it is an intelligent one. Old Testament prophets had the unparalleled responsibility to receive, report, and record revelation as Scripture. Because of this, God ensured the transmission of that revelation from Heaven to prophet was unmistakable, obvious, direct, and crystal clear. Put simply, the revelation He gave them was super-easy to not mess up. How did He do this? Through external revelations. In other words, He spoke to them mainly through their five senses, especially their physical seeing and physical hearing (see Jn 5:37). For example, He spoke to them in a direct audible voice. He spoke through dramatic physical visions and dreams, simply telling them to write exactly what they saw. He spoke through angels appearing and dictating the message. Sometimes He even showed up Himself and spoke as two friends would. Though He did inspire Scripture in a few other ways (guided observation, subconscious influence, etc.), external revelation was the main transmissional method of Old Testament revelation. It was straightforward and hard to mess up. The prophets did not always understand the meaning of what they were seeing and hearing (Dan 8:27, Lk 10:24, 1Pet 1:10-12), but what they did see and hear was clear enough to pass on without errors. How else could we have a perfect Old Testament in our Bibles today? Deuteronomy 18:20 says the standard of Old Testament prophetic ministry was perfection. God would never demand such a standard without also providing a unmistakable revelatory transmission to fulfill it. It was like when I used to coach soccer. If the players were totally inexperienced, I would tell them what to do in the absolute clearest and direct ways. This way they could not "mess up" what I said. And they didn't. They duplicated exactly what I said, though they did not always understand the soccer meaning or relevance. Old Testament prophecy functioned like this. The task of writing Scripture was too eternally important. Therefore, God made it simple for those prophets--He spoke to them mainly through their five senses in ways that were incredibly clear and easily reproducible. With New Testament prophecy though, the main transmissional method from Heaven to prophet is internal, coming to the prophetic Christian in less direct ways from within. Prophetic messages come to them mainly through impressions (sudden sense or understanding), compulsions (persistent convictions or "burdens"), intrusive phrases (internal sentence formation), dreams, or visions (can be internal or external). Actually, the New Testament displays these communicative methods as being experienced by all Christians: impressions (Ac 15:28, Ro 8:15,16, 1Co 2:16; Lk 24:45), compulsions (Php 2:13, 2Co 8:16, Col 1:29, 1Ti 3:1, 1Co 15:10), intrusive phrases (Ac 8:29, 10:19,20, 13:2, 21:10,11), dreams & visions (Ac 2:17,18, 9:10). Because the Spirit now dwells inside the believer, He therefore communicates with them mainly internally. Anyone with a birds-eye understanding of both Testaments can see the major shift in revelatory methods from Old to New: external to internal. Ephesians 1:17,18 is an important scripture along these lines. It is by the indwelling Spirit of wisdom and revelation that the Christian, prophetic and non, is illumined to the knowledge of Christ. New Testament prophesiers perceive the Spirit no differently than the average Christian, since they too are indwelt by the Spirit of wisdom and revelation. The only difference between personal and prophetic messaging is the content and intent. The average Christian receives divine messages mainly for themselves, while prophetic Christians receive a mixture of both, messages for themselves and messages for others. Whether it be personal or prophetic, it is nonetheless the Spirit within revealing from within. (NOTE: Of course, this is not to say the Lord cannot or does not speak externally. He can and He occasionally does. Paul is simply saying in Ephesians 1:17,18 that divine messaging from within is the general operation in the New Covenant, effected by an indwelling Spirit of wisdom and revelation.) So what about the original question? "If New Testament prophecy is fallible and inferior to Scripture, then why would an omnipotent God give a revelation, yet not ensure its accurate reception and delivery as He did in the Old Testament?" Because the New Testament prophet possesses greater ownership in the prophetic process. Since New Testament prophetic insight originates internally, it involves more of the prophet's emotions and mind. This places a much higher demand on his/her spiritual preparedness. In other words, the prophesier must live in a constant state of heightened spiritual preparedness, purity, objectivity, obedience, emotional wellness, mental clarity, worship, fasting, and so on (more so than the average Christian). With greater human ownership in the prophetic process comes the potential for fallibility. The revelation's reception and delivery, in the New Covenant, depends largely on the prophesier's spiritual preparedness and maturity level. Romans 12:6 acknowledges this, saying prophesiers are to prophesy "according to their faith", or spiritual level. But why would God allow this? Why would He risk prophetic precision by changing transmissional methods, thus giving the prophet greater ownership? Friendship. Christ inaugurated the New Testament age of friendship with God (Lk 12:4, Jn 15:15, 21:5) and partnering with Him (Mk 16:20, 2Co 5:18-20). This is because the curse has been removed, thus allowing God to dwell inside the Christian (Ro 8:15,16, 1Co 6:17). The New Covenant not only gave us access to God, it also gave God access to us. In the Old Testament age, only a few select servants experienced the privilege of anointed partnership with God. Not so today. Every born-again Christian is a close friend and partner with God because He lives inside them forever! The result? We are more involved, and more responsible, in the work of God upon the earth. God chose this potential fallibility in exchange for greater relational intimacy. Amazing. "How can the receiver be certain of the 'revelation'? Who is the final arbiter? The receiver? The listener? The elders? The discerners? Other prophets?" A New Testament prophesier certifies a possible prophetic message the same way an ordinary Christian would certify a possible personal message. A five-step test works well: Scripture--preparedness--timeliness--maturity--confirmation. Scripture...Does it agree and rhyme with Scripture? Does it possess the spirit and demeanor of Scripture? Since prophetic communication is highly practical and situational, it is often that Scripture does not directly address the content. Other tests usually have to be applied. Preparedness...How spiritually prepared is the receiver at this moment? Have they been diligent in daily prayer, worship, Bible study, and fasting? Have they been daily engaging His presence? Are they emotionally and mentally objective? Are they (and the listeners) currently open to the Spirit in every way possible to the best of their knowledge? If the state of spiritual preparedness is excellent and heightened, the chances are high the perception is basically accurate. Timeliness...A hallmark of prophetic speech is timeliness (Isa 50:4 NKJV). Does the revelation/word "fit" the context and circumstances (Pr 25:11)? Even if the word pertains to a later season, does it still edify in the present in some way? At times, futuristic prophetic words have an emotional neutrality about them, and only their fulfillment will release the edificational qualities. Maturity...Is the receiver humble and honest with themselves concerning their maturity level and perceptive level? Are they prophesying "in proportion to their faith" (Ro 12:6)? Confirmation...Has God confirmed this same message in different ways? Has this been prayed through with other intercessors or spiritually perceptive Christians? Is there confirmation from one or two other sources (1Co 14:29, 2Co 13:1)? These certifications can be applied to daily Christian life as well as prophetic ministry. They can even be modified for leaders weighing prophecies spoken publicly. When these five steps have been rigorously processed, it usually becomes clear whether the message was genuine or not. And the final arbiter? Who ultimately declares the word's authenticity or not? There are two arbiters, one personal and the other ecclesial. Personal...Since every born-again Christian is a priest unto God via the indwelling Holy Spirit, each individual is responsible for testing every prophecy themselves. We are not in a dispensation anymore whereby we obey without question an authoritative prophetic dictation. Period. Scripture commands every individual to prove all prophetic words personally (1Co 14:29, 1Th 5:19-21), in fact, to prove anything and everything (Php 1:10). Each individual Christian can and must exercise their priesthood and referee prophecies for themselves, no matter who they come from. Ecclesial...Within the church, the elder body/recognized leadership should validate or invalidate the word, since they are the established local church governors (Ac 20:28, 1Co 16:15,16, Php 1:1, Heb 13:17, 1Pet 5:2). At times, certain prophecies are instantly validated by the Spirit deep within the hearts of the hearers/leaders, as seems to be the case in Acts 13:1-3 and 21:10,11. Whether instantly or progressively, the recognized church leaders are responsible for verifying prophecy. If their consensus is favorable, they are responsible for applying it to the congregation. This does not at all imply that the leadership does the thinking for the congregation. This simply says that if a word is given that pertains to church operations, or given publicly, then the leaders are responsible for refereeing such words and their fate. In summary, we test and referee prophecy the same way we test possible personal messages from God. We evaluate it with Scripture, we check our spiritual state of preparedness and saturation, we evaluate its timeliness, we humbly and honestly assess our maturity level and perceptive level, and we comb our environment for confirmation. "The later books of the New Testament do not mention the miraculous gifts, therefore we can conclude that the apostles expected their use to disappear." I have often found this objection somewhat elementary. Why? Because any common-sense reader can see that later New Testament books are simply a narrowed focus on preserving sound Christianity: the gospel truth (1John-3John), pure doctrine (Titus 1,2, 2Peter 2, Jude), the law's obsoletion (Hebrews), basic church structure and protocol (1Timothy-Titus), love and obedience (1John-3John), and eschatology (2Peter 3, Jude, Revelation). Consider it, if you were a foundational apostle or close associate, and you were nearing the end of your life and ministry, what would you say to the first-century church? I think most of us would do the same: narrow our focus and pinpoint our words on preserving sound Christianity. This narrowed focus in the latter New Testament says absolutely nothing about the fate or fading of the miraculous gifts.
Paul mentions prophecy twice to Timothy (1Ti 1:18, 4:14), reminding him of his very supernatural ordination experience (4:14). Peter mentions "speaking gifts" and "serving gifts", but he does not, cessationism suggests, mention "sign gifts", the miraculous ones (1Pet 4:10,11). The first problem with this sneaky spin on Peter's words is that it arbitrarily separates the miraculous gifts from the mundane ones, a separation Peter does not make, nor any other canonical writer. It is raw assumption to put words in Peter's mouth and make him say the miraculous "sign" gifts are separate from the mundane "serving" gifts. I certainly refuse to indoctrinate based on assumption, and I urge others to do likewise. Secondly, and more importantly, Paul combined the "miraculous" and "mundane" gifts. In 1Corinthians 12:28 he clumps them together, sandwiching the gift of helps and administration between healings and tongues! There is no superficial separation with Paul. He does it again in Romans 12:6-8, listing prophecy along with the most "mundane" of gifts. Stephen is shown to have a service gift and miracle-working gift in the exact same context (Ac 6:5,8).
Sign gifts are serving gifts; they are a subset of the set. Healing someone supernaturally is just as serving-oriented as mowing their lawn. Granted, one is more spectacular and mystical, nonetheless they both still have a serving nature. It is incorrect to think a miraculous gift is somehow "non-serving" just because it is spectacular or had an epochal use (signaling the New Covenant's arrival). The only clear gift distinction that can be made is the one Peter made: speaking and serving, serving including the miraculous subset, as Paul showed. Peter is not setting forth "two out of three" gift-categories, being silent about the fading third one. His overall purpose anyway is to urge us to be completely divinely-empowered in whatever gift we possess, not set forth some imaginary cessationist doctrine.
We should view the latter New Testament as it is, a reinforcement of basic Christianity, not a silent implication that certain gifts would soon fade out.
There are more cessationist objections that I have not addressed. I've tried to hit the most common ones, while the fullness of this site will hopefully cover the rest. We will go on to keep this page moving.
One root of cessationism is fear. Fear of undermining Scripture. Fear of false doctrine. Fear of cults emerging. Fear of charismatic chaos. Fear of embarassment. Fear of failure. Fear of feeling "not there" and having to learn and grow. Fear of the unknown. Fear of the unpredictable. Fear of losing control. Fear of something that transcends safe denominational programming. Fear of God being too close. Fear of experiencing God outside rationalism, PhD's, and Greek lexicons. Fear, fear, fear. The opposite of a spirit of fear is a sound mind. I am certainly not saying cessationists do not have overall sound minds, but I am saying that their thinking is not solid in this particular area. Some cessationists are fear-driven.
For others, the motivating root is false intellectualism, or intellect-idolatry, which elevates the mind over all else. The Pharisees did this (Jn 5:39,40), and missed God's practical voice (v37,38). The Greeks also did this (1Co 1:20-23, Ac 17:21,32). Many in our scientific and technological age do this. Some cessationists has fallen into this idolatry. Though our minds help us understand and apply truth, it is insufficient to perceive all truth. Paul said there are some spiritual realities that simply do not fit in or agree with our minds (Eph 3:19, Php 4:7, 1Co 2:9,10). Cessationism though, seeks to minimize non-rational, highly subjective experiences with God. In extreme cases, it seeks to snuff it out and demonize it entirely. At times, it may even vilify our emotions (which God gave us, and which God also has). It is a heady philosophy, cherishing logic and pragmatism over all else. It is the Christian version of positivistic empiricism, paying homage at an intellectual shrine. At last, it uses "biblical knowledge" and "biblical sufficiency"--noble and true concepts--as a disguise for the very hyper-rationalism Paul chastised in 1Corinthians 1-3. Spirito-emotional insecurities and hesitations often find refuge in the over-active intellect. Paul said our mind is to be captive to Christ, not Christ captive to our minds!
Another root of cessationism is lack of experience. Cessationism declares that "charismania" is totally experience-driven. I agree wholeheartedly. Such continuationist extremes and excesses can be rightly labeled as experience-idolatry, sensationalism, emotionalism, seeking signs and wonders, and so on. JDM rejects charismania just as equally as it rejects cessationism. However, it is true that cessationism is also experience-driven, but a lack of it. Many have snuggled with cessationism to justify the supernatural deficiency in their own life, ministry, church, or generation. Bible saints in certain generations also struggled with this (1Sam 3:1, Ps 74:9, 77:5-14, Lam 2:9). Their solution was not to form foolish doctrines and explanations with their carnal mind, but to cry out to God for a revival of His power (Ps 77:11-14, Lam 2:18,19, 5:21, Hab 3:2)! Cessationism is a truce with mediocrity. My God have mercy on us, and renew your strong arm in our day!
A more malevolent root of cessationism is Satan. Does the enemy want powerful prophetic words that glorify Christ? Does he want genuine miracles that awe and convince the unbelieving? Of course not! Religious spirits have always opposed the immediate voice and power of God. Just as Peter's thinking was influenced by a satanic suggestion (Mt 16:22,23), so also cessationism has been so influenced. Keep in mind saints, the enemy does not always need raving madmen to cause destruction; brilliant Christian minds shy to the power of God also serve as capable tools. If the enemy cannot pollute a Christian, he'll seek to make them so "smart" that they become unspiritual and dry! Cessationists need to recognize this, and find their warmth not in mediocre doctrines, but in the ever-present God they have so much head knowledge about. When Christians are closed off to aspects of God, they open up to aspects of the enemy--even if those aspects are intellectually polished. They make themselves vulnerable to his opinions and ideas. Ultimately, cessationism is a creation of the father of lies.
Finally, and perhaps most important, a root of cessationism is Bible-attitude. Everyone superimposes a certain attitude on the Bible. That attitude will color every single scripture that is read. The polar opposite Bible attitudes are newspaper and map. Cessationism, to differing degrees, approaches the Bible as a "newspaper"--most or all of what is written therein is either history or future. The Bible is read as a description, less as a prescription. JDM, and millions of other Christians, read the Bible as a "map"--all of what is written therein is not only historical or futuristic, but just as equally instructional and experiential, how to go and enjoy the same. Any exceptions are stated or obvious to the common-sense reader (EX: obsoletion of animal sacrifices, situational genocide, etc...). Jesus said it all in Matthew 9:29: According to your faith will it be done to you. The Bible is our map!
Needless to say, cessationism has failed the church. It fails to form a conclusive Scriptural construct that any of the gifts have truly been laid to rest. Of course, cessationists would argue differently, pleading their case through equivocal hermeneutical acrobatics. Cessationism has failed to account for the profound testimonies of multitudes of Bible-believing, Christ-loving Christians experiencing prophetic phenomena, sometimes even apart from any teaching or social influence. Cessationism has failed to strike a harmonious balance between truth and spirit (Jn 4:23,24), Scripture and Spirit, exegesis and experience. Rather, it casts upon its followers an overbearing on truth, yet wanting for spirit. Cessationism has failed the church by furthering its opinion at the expense of its Charismatic brothers. Granted, charismania has written cessationism a blank check. Many wounded Charismatic brethren, and outside Christian observers, often see cessationism as the only other alternative to charismatic abuse. Cessationism has not provided an answer though, but has simply substituted one pole for another.
Safe Christianity...tamed & domesticated Cessationism has sought to "tame" Christianity. Like a caged animal in a zoo, cessationism corrals and confines the God who so often presents Himself as an untamable lion or boundless eagle. Like animal-tamers do, God-tamers clip the wings of the Almighty, limiting His active presence in their mind and midst. But you know why, and so do I. Somehow the active presence of God discovers our fears and shortcomings, bringing them to light. We come face to face with our Goliaths within. By domesticating our spiritual experience though, we can leave our fears and dependencies intact and out of touch. Cessationism tells us God will speak to us, but not too much. It says God's power is available, but not too much. Formulas are much safer. Predictable outcomes and controllable experiences are much more secure. This is so-called "safe Christianity"...tamed and domesticated. Riskless. This is cessationism.
But God cannot be tamed, neither can His kingdom! Hallelujah! God will play along and remain tame--for a while. He will relate with cessationists according to their opinion, for "according to your faith will it be done to you" (Mt 9:29). But in these days the Lion is roaring and the Eagle is soaring! Isn't it interesting that both the lion and the eagle, neither of which can be tamed, are symbols of the prophetic (Am 3:8, Hos 8:1)? The Spirit of prophecy is just beginning to re-roar and re-soar, brood and behoove, prompt and prod, manifest and move...and He cannot be stopped! Like King Asa said, man will not prevail against God (2Chr 14:11). Like Solomon said, no wisdom, insight, or plan can succeed against the Lord (Pr 21:30).
I invite you, in the name of Jesus, beyond cessationism, beyond so-called "safe Christianity", beyond God-taming. I invite you into all that Scripture includes in your New Covenant package, a carnival of kingdom realities, dimensions, and privileges. I invite you into the limitless banquet hall of truth and Spirit whereby all things are possible. These are the types God is searching for. Is this what you are searching for?