The Best Arguments for Cessationism

What is the church built on?

In my previous article I attempted to provide what I thought were the best arguments for continuationism—a view that states that all or most of the spiritual gifts practiced in the New Testament continue today. While I am not finally persuaded by those arguments, I admit they are very strong. This is a difficult subject to be dogmatic about and all Christians should treat each other charitably in these discussions.

In this article I will attempt to provide what I believe to be the best arguments for cessationism—a view that states that some (not all) of the spiritual gifts have ceased.

The Case for Cessationism

The case for cessationism rests on a constellation of arguments from (1) the Bible (2) theology (3) church history, and (4) experience.

In my first draft of this, I wrote all of these arguments together, but determined that it was simply too long, so I will break it up in a series of articles and send it out over the week.

Biblical Arguments

First, the cessationist perspective begins by pointing to what the majority of continuationists already admit: at least one gift of the Holy Spirit has ceased: the gift of apostleship.¹ “Apostleship” is both an office and a gift, listed alongside other gifts in Paul’s epistles (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:8, 11). The New Testament describes an “apostle” as one meeting three specific requirements:

1. Someone who was an eyewitness to the resurrected Christ (1 Cor 9:1; 15:5-8; Acts 1:21-22).

2. Someone who was commissioned by Christ Himself (Luke 6:12-16; Acts 1:21-26; 9:1-19; Rom. 1:1).

3. Someone who manifested the miraculous “signs of an apostle” (2 Cor 12:2; Acts 2:43; Matt 10:1).

Wayne Grudem, a charismatic himself, concedes, “Since no one today can meet the qualification of having seen the risen Christ with his own eyes, there are no apostles today.”² Paul seems to allude to the fact that he was the final apostle since Jesus appeared to him, “Last of all [the apostles],” (1 Cor 15:7-8).

Some argue the term “apostle” in the gift-lists refer to a derivative kind of apostle, someone who possesses a gift that is analogous to the Twelve plus Paul, but is less authoritative. Thus, they argue, while the gift of capital-A “Apostle” may have ceased, the gift of lower-case-a “apostle” continues. D.A. Carson, also a continuationist, finds this line of reasoning unpersuasive and instead argues: “It is clear that the gift of apostleship that Paul mentions in this text [1 Cor 12:28] is not transferable to persons living in our day.”³ (see footnote for more of his reasoning)

Moreover, in Paul’s Pastoral Letters (1, 2 Timothy, Titus), written towards the end of his life, he does not mention apostolic leadership in the church. Richard Gaffin explains, “Timothy, as much as anyone, is fairly seen as Paul’s direct, personal successor (cf. Phil 2:20-22), but Paul never calls him an apostle.”⁴

Thus, many Christians across the spectrum concede that at least one spiritual gift has ceased: apostleship.

Second, Paul links together apostleship and prophecy in Ephesians 2:20, where the church is described as being “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets.”⁵ But, in what sense is the church built upon the apostles and prophets? In chapter three Paul shares about his own ministry to the Gentiles in Ephesus, how the mystery of Christ “was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly,” (Eph 3:3). Then Paul points again to his written testimony:

When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.

Eph 3:4-5

The church rests on the foundation of the apostles and prophets⁶ because they serve as the conduit of special revelation vis-a-vis the Holy Spirit. Sometimes this revelation could be accessed through an apostle’s written letters: “When you read this, you can perceive my insight.” Other times, it may have been spread orally, but not recorded in Scripture. Paul informs the Corinthians that there are “other things” he will “give directions” on when he visits them (1 Cor 11:34). We do not have access to what those additional instructions were, but they would have been just as authoritative as the letter of 1 Corinthians because the instructions came from an apostle.⁷

So, apostles and prophets are the foundation of the church because they bring God’s Word to God’s people. Remember, the early church didn’t have the New Testament—it was still being written! Thus, God gave individuals, apostles and prophets, the ability to speak His authoritative Word to them.

But does that gift carry on to today? While we have access to the writings of the “apostles and prophets” in Scripture, should we anticipate that there are individuals living today who can provide similar revelation, similar to the oral traditions of Paul referenced in 1 Cor 11:34? In other words, are there prophets today that speak with the same authority as the New Testament? If a modern day prophet declared that God’s will was for every Christian to homeschool their children or stop purchasing certain kinds of foods or predicted that some great calamity was coming, would every Christian who hears that prophecy be conscience bound to obey it? Regardless of our views in the continuation of the gift of prophecy, most churches today would clearly say, “No.” Most assume that the Bible possesses a unique deposit of revelation that bears more authority than any other kind of revelation, and that while Christians should consider what a prophet says, they are still free to prayerfully disagree. But that is not how the gift of prophecy ever functions in the Bible—to disobey a true prophet is to disobey God (Deut 18:19).

If the gift of apostleship ceased with the death of the last apostle, and it is the “apostles and prophets” who are the foundation of the church, then there is good reason to believe that the gift of prophecy would (at some point) likewise cease. The very imagery of a foundation—something laid down once and then progressively built upon—strongly suggests that prophecy, along with apostleship, were seen as initiatory gifts given at the establishing of the church, but not expected to continue once the foundation was laid. Perhaps once the canon of the New Testament was closed, the gift of prophecy was no longer given and “passed away” (1 Cor 13:8).

What are we to make then of times where Christians are given supernatural insight, such as the story I shared in my previous article of Charles Spurgeon? I will explain this more in a later article, but it is significant that Spurgeon, while attesting dozens of instances of this kind of insight, never once claimed to possess the gift of prophecy and was himself a cessationist. In other words, there may be other explanations for how the Holy Spirit gives impressions to people that do not constitute the gift of prophecy.

Three, if it is granted that the gift of apostleship and prophecy have ceased, then there may be good reason to believe that the gift of tongues have ceased. This argument is less strong than the previous two, but is worth considering. In 1 Corinthians and the book of Acts, when tongues are spoken and then translated, they are then described as prophecy (see Acts 2:4-21; 1 Cor 14:5-25). When Pentecost takes place, Peter cites Joel 2:28-29 to explain what is happening. But Joel nowhere mentions “tongues” as the sign of the Spirit being poured out, but “prophecy.”⁸

Of course, God is free to grant anyone the ability to speak a language that is previously unknown, particularly if one was in a cutting-edge missionary situation and is in need. But whether or not speaking in tongues should be a normative part of the church, particularly in corporate worship appears to be a moot point. On the one hand, if translated-tongues function as a form of special-revelation (prophecy), but prophecy is part of the foundational era of the church and not expected to continue, then we should not expect this to continue today. But, on the other hand, if there is no one there to translate, then Paul plainly teaches that the individual must “keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God,” (1 Cor 14:28).⁹

Conclusion

While different cessationists disagree over which gifts have ceased, the clearest case from the New Testament is that the gifts of apostleship and prophecy have ceased. If one concedes that translated-tongues are a form of prophecy, then there is a case for the gift of tongues to also cease. No cessationist, however, believes that all spiritual gifts have ceased.

In my next article I will examine some additional arguments for the cessation of the gifts.

1. While there are a minority of Christians in Pentecostal church that believe the gift of apostleship continues today (New Apostolic Reformation), the majority of continuationist disagree.

2. Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, p. 941

3. D.A. Carson, Showing the Spirit, p. 117. Advocates of this position will point out that at times the word “apostle” is used to describe individuals outside of Paul and the Twelve (Phil 2:25; 2 Cor 8:22-23; possibly Rom 16:7), therefore perhaps the “apostle” listed in 1 Cor 12:28 or Eph 4:11 is like this. However, Carson demonstrates that this is unlikely and reminds us of two things: (1) the word “apostle” (Gk. apostolos) was a word frequently used to describe a messenger, so it does not mean that every instance of it bears the connotation of a special office, but (2) Jesus goes out of his way to specially designate the twelve as “apostles”, “he called his disciples and chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles,” (Luke 6:13). This requires sophisticated nuance as we interpret the usage of apostolos in the NT. Carson argues, “Of course, the word apostle can extend beyond the Twelve plus Paul; but “Lord” can extend beyond Jesus, “elders” and “deacons” can extend beyond ecclesiastical office/functions, and so forth. The primary reason is obvious: nascent Christianity had to use the vocabulary into which it was born, and its own specialized use of certain terms did not immediately displace the larger semantic range of the terms employed. As a result, attempts to establish what apostleship means for Paul by simply appealing to the full semantic range of the word as it is found in his writings is deeply flawed at the methodological level,” (Ibid. p. 115).

4. Richard Gaffin, “A Cessationist Perspective” Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views, p. 48. Surprisingly, aside from two oblique references to the prophecies made about Timothy (1 Tim 1:18; 4:14), there is an absence of any teaching on spiritual gifts in Paul’s final letters to the young pastors. Rather, the focus is on elders and deacons leading the church as they seek to protect the apostolic deposit of faith entrusted to them (2 Tim 1:13-14; 1 Tim 6:20).

5. The identity of these prophets is sometimes mistakenly assumed to be referring to Old Testament prophets—so that “apostles and prophets” becomes a kind of shorthand for the Old and New Testament. But this is certainly wrong, since Paul goes on to explain that men in previous generations were unable to discern the “mystery of Christ” but it “has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit,” (Eph 3:5). What was once concealed (prior to the new age of the Spirit) has now been revealed. Thus, these prophets are individuals of the age of the New Covenant.

6. Interestingly, in the two gift-lists that “apostles” and “prophets” are listed, they are always listed together (see 1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11).

7. There is no reason to assume that the content of that further instruction would be any less binding or authoritative just because it was not recorded in Scripture. See “And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers,” (1 Thess 2:13).

8. In fact, the gift of tongues is never mentioned in the Old Testament.

9. Whether or not glossolalia is strictly referring to known human languages, or ecstatic utterances (“tongues of angels”), doesn’t seem to matter too much. In either case, a Christian is told that unless there is someone who is able to interpret the tongue, they must remain silent in church. But Paul’s admonition for them to “speak to himself and to God” in 14:28 seems to open up the door to praying in tongues as a private prayer language.