Some Comments on Cessationism
Posted by Vincent Cheung on May 4, 2007When asserting any proposition that is not a first principle of a system, the assertion is either arbitrary, or supported by premises that are stated or assumed. Thus when I make any significant assertion in my writing and teaching, I often refer to the basis for the assertion as well. In an ideal situation, I would set forth this basis as I make the assertion, or I will have already produced an exposition of it elsewhere, so that the basis can be assumed, and perhaps referenced in a footnote. This approach should be acceptable to any reasonable reader.
However, it is often inconvenient or impossible to attain the ideal, in which case I require myself to at least have in mind the reasons for making the assertion as I make it, so that I could present them if necessary. That is, I should at least be satisfied within myself and before God that the statement or position in question is biblical and rational, and that it serves to advance the faith and edify the church to assert it at this time. Then, in cases where I cannot assume for an assertion a basis previously explained and defended because I have yet to set it forth, it is still possible to assume it if it has been produced by others.
When it comes to the manifestations of the Spirit, I have yet to produce a substantial statement of my position and the biblical basis for it. And thus although I have made it clear that I affirm the continuation of the spiritual gifts, and that I in fact regard some cessationists as practical deists, so far I have refrained from making significant theological assertions and applications that assume the continuation of the spiritual gifts. One may consider my Biblical Healing an exception; however, the careful reader will see that there I do not in fact assert my position regarding healing on the assumption of the continuation of the spiritual gifts. Rather, the major assumption there is the absolute sovereignty of God, a doctrine that I have explained and defended at length in a number of places.
I have not invested the time and effort to produce my own exposition on the subject because other projects have taken priority over it. But it is not that I regard it as of secondary importance. In fact, without relegating it to the level of heresy, I consider cessationism a shameful, dangerous, and crippling false doctrine. It has inflicted tremendous damage to the cause of Christ, and contributed to the dismal condition of some sectors of the church through history and in the present day. In their own ways, the charismatics and cessationists commit the same basic error, and that is to reject or ignore the application of genuine spiritual manifestations. Contrary to how some people would like to see the debate, neither side is entirely sincere. Just as some charismatics have unbiblical motives for wanting the spiritual gifts to continue, many cessationists hold their position for self-serving motives as well. Is it truly hard to believe that some cessationists prefer their position because of fear and unbelief? There are those who think we should leave such questions out of the debate, but we are investigating the topic as Christians, not as detached academics. Motives must be included in the discussion.
Some (but not all) cessationists have taken extreme abberations as test cases for charismatic teachings and practices. But it certainly does not contribute to sober discussion to use the likes of Benny Hinn and Kenneth Copeland to determine whether Scripture teaches the continuation of the spiritual gifts. The charismatics might as well use atheists to represent the cessationists, in which case they would win the debate immediately. Instead, there are a number of scholarly resources that refute cessationism, and it is against them that the cessationists must respond. Some examples include Jon Ruthven's On the Cessation of the Charismata, a major part of which is a refutation of Warfield's fantastical arguments, and D. A. Carson's Showing the Spirit, which is an exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14. Carson is to be commended for his courage in departing from the traditional but obviously anti-biblical exegesis commonly adopted by his colleagues. These works include extensive bibliographies. One may also pursue the works of J. Rodman Williams, Stanley Horton, William Menzies, and so on, but these and other authors are so diverse that I cannot offer a broad endorsement here.
A work that closely resembles my own position, that presents in its own way some of the points that I would raise, and that does this in an accessible format, is Sola Scriptura and the Revelatory Gifts by Don Codling, a graduate of Westminster Theological Seminary and a Presbyterian pastor. If you are going to get only two of the books that I name in this article, get Codling and Ruthven. If you are going to get only one, get Codling. It is not the most substantial work, but all things considered, it is one of the best options for one who cannot afford to read several crates of books on the subject. It shows that not only is there no exegetical basis for cessationism, and that there are biblical reasons to expect the spiritual gifts to continue, but it also brings up what ought to be an obvious point, that the sufficiency of Scripture and the completion of the Canon in fact sustain no necessary connection to the cessation or continuation of the spiritual gifts in the first place. This work serves as an adequate basis to assume the continuation of the spiritual gifts (although there are many others to reinforce it), upon which we may construct other propositions and proposals regarding Christian doctrine and practice. Note that this work does not espouse Grudem's position on prophecy. Indeed, when dealing with false prophecies, it makes a serious and effective use of the power of excommuncation, the kind of stance (regarding excommunication itself, and not just as it applies to false prophets) that I have always asserted, but seldom seen in another writer.
Regarding the baptism of the Holy Spirit, I will not say much here, except to point out two common but unacceptable arguments against the Pentecostal doctrine:
The first one alleges that if the baptism is a blessing or experience separate from regeneration, then this would create two classes of Christians. Grudem's Systematic Theology presents one example of this argument. He correctly points out some illegitimate distinctions, such as the distinction between "disciples" and "believers." But whereas there is solid biblical basis to affirm that all believers are disciples, or they are not believers at all, Grudem presents no satisfactory biblical basis to refute the distinction between those who have and have not been "Spirit-baptized." Putting it next to several false distinctions on a chart does not make this distinction false as well. The argument says that the baptism cannot be a second blessing, since if it is, then there would be two classes of Christians, and we know that there are not two classes of Christians. But this begs the question. Either one must show that there are not two classes of Christians, or the possibility remains that this doctrine proves that there are two classes of Christians. Adding to this the fact that Pentecostals usually teach that this baptism is available to every believer, the objection is rendered almost pointless. Here I do not side with or against the Pentecostal doctrine. I am merely pointing out a bad argument. See Howard Erwin's Spirit Baptism: A Biblical Investigation for a presentation of the Pentecostal doctrine. Another one is Spirit and Power by William and Robert Menzies. Of course, it is possible to affirm the continuation of the spiritual gifts but not the Pentecostal doctrine regarding the baptism. These are related but distinguishable issues.
The second argument against the Pentecostal doctrine is very common and significant, and pertains to a broad heremeneutical principle that extends beyond this debate. And that is, to varying degrees, it is asserted that doctrines are established only by the didactic portions of Scripture and not the narrative portions. But this principle is without biblical warrant and in fact contradicts how the didactic portions in Scripture themselves employ the narrative portions of Scripture. It is one thing to say that it might be more difficult to accurately establish a doctrine based on biblical narratives, so that much more care is required, and another thing altogether to forbid certain uses for these narrative portions, even in the face of contrary biblical examples. For more on this, see Roger Stronstad's The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke. He rightly argues that this hermeneutical principle is an implicit denial of the authority of Scripture, or at least some portions of it, and also creates a canon within the Canon. Again, here I am warning against a bad argument rather than siding with either position of the debate on the baptism.
Now, we seek to please God and not men, and it is to him and not men that we are accountable for our beliefs and practices. Under God, there is indeed a relative accountability to men, and so we do explain ourselves and debate the issues. However, this does not mean that we must persuade them before we can decisively hold to our position and apply them in our lives. There are all kinds of reasons why people are not convinced of a true position, such as intellectual deficiencies, self-serving motives, or sometimes just a lack of information. Once a proper biblical basis is established, we must no longer be paralyzed by a persistent disagreement from the other side, but we must follow through with our convictions. In this case, this would mean a full-scale implementation of the spiritual gifts in our lives, churches, and ministries. And thus we must go where they will not follow, as we pray with the early disciples, "Now, Lord, consider their threats and enable your servants to speak your word with great boldness. Stretch out your hand to heal and perform miraculous signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus" (Acts 4:29-30).
Recommended
Don Codling, Sola Scriptura and the Revelatory Gifts
Jon Ruthven, On the Cessation of the Charismata
D. A. Carson, Showing the Spirit
Vincent Cheung, Biblical Healing
D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preaching and Preachers
Charles H. Spurgeon, An All-Round Ministry
Tony Sargent, The Sacred Anointing: The Preaching of Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones
**