introduction - agape churchagapepinson.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/0… · web...

LIBERTY THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

ARE TONGUES FOR TODAY; AN ASSESSEMENT OF THE STRENGTH OF THE

CESSATIONIST ARGUMENT.

A Term Paper Submitted to

Liberty Theological Seminary

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for completion of the course,

THEO 530

SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY

By

Chase A. Thompson / 200436

Lynchburg, Virginia

June 2006

Table of Contents

I. Introduction...................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

II. Brief History..................................................................................................................4

III. The Cessationist Argument and Rebuttal. ...............................................................6

IV. Conclusion..................................................................................................................23

Bibliography.....................................................................................................................28

Introduction

One of the most controversial and divisive theological issues that the church has

wrestled with in the last 100 years is the question of tongues; namely, is the spiritual gift

of tongues still being given by God to the church today? That there is evidence of

disagreement, even among evangelicals can be found by surveying the various definitions

given for the gift. The Anchor Bible Dictionary defines the gift of tongues as “Ecstatic

utterance associated with possession of the Holy Spirit.”1 Wayne Grudem, in his

Systematic Theology, defines speaking in tongues as, “prayer or praise spoken in

syllables not understood by the speaker.”2 S. Lewis Johnson, participating in Dallas

Theological Seminary’s Symposium on the tongues movement, defines tongues as, “the

gift of speaking in a known language for the purposes of confirming the authenticity of

the message of the apostolic church.”3 Finally, Oxford professor and Anglican Michael

Green offers this definition, “The gift of tongues is the ability to speak in language that

the speaker has not learnt, that he does not understand, and is incomprehensible to the

hearer.”4 Even with just a brief survey of the various definitions given for the gift of

tongues, it is clear that opinions vary widely.

The purpose of this paper is to attempt to answer the practical theological

question of whether God is still empowering the gift of tongues in the church today.

Issues of precise definition, practice, and function will be lightly addressed, but are 1 Freedman, D. N. The Anchor Bible Dictionary (electronic ed.). (New York: Doubleday, 1996)

2 Grudem, Wayne Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994) 1070

3 Johnson, S. Lewis. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement, Part II: The Gift of Tongues in the Book of Acts” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 480 (October, 1963), 309

4 Green, Michael I Believe in the Holy Spirit (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975) p. 161-62

somewhat beyond the scope of this project. The method of answering this most

controversial question will be to examine and assess the strength and validity of the

various cessationist arguments throughout church history and their counter arguments as

put forth by non-cessationists. The conclusion will examine the results of that analysis

and determine which argument has the most merit. The gift of tongues represents a

unique issue within the evangelical church. The normal cessationist perspective is that the

argument that they offer for the cessation of the gift of tongues is strong enough to nullify

or overturn a Pauline directive, that is, to not forbid speaking in tongues5. The core issue

dealt with in this assessment is to determine whether the cessationist argument merits the

disregard of that directive.6

Brief History

A brief survey of the history of tongues speaking in the church shows that tongues

were at least somewhat accepted up until the time of Chrysostom and Augustine7.

Writing before their time, Origen remarks on the lessening (but not absence) of the gift of

prophecy8 Following Origen, Chrysostom wrote about Spiritual gifts (including tongues,

presumably) in his Homily on First Corinthians, and seems to indicate that the more

5 1st Corinthians 14:39

6 It can be granted that this sentence and purpose statement might be a bit on the polemic side, nevertheless, I stand by the statement as defensible, that is to say, that most cessationist led churches and institutions would, in fact, forbid speaking in tongues based on their theological interpretation of non-didactic scripture.

7 This is certainly debatable, of course and will be more thoroughly documented below

8 Origen writes, “Moreover, the Holy Spirit gave signs of His presence at the beginning of Christ’s ministry, and after His ascension He gave still more; but since that time these signs have diminished, although there are still traces of His presence in a few who have had their souls purified by the Gospel, and their actions regulated by its influence.” Schaff, Philip. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. electronic ed. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

miraculous gifts had ceased in his day.9 Similarly Augustine references the gift of

tongues, suggesting that they were given in apostolic times as a token, and have since

passed away.10 Though there is not clear evidence that he ever reversed his thinking on

the issue of tongues, Augustine later in life does concede that miracles of healing, among

others were occurring in his day.11

The next major group to cover Spiritual gifts and tongues to any large degree

were the reformers, and though they did not devote much ink to the practice, both Luther

and Calvin seem to agree that tongues, and other miraculous gifts had ceased since

apostolic times.12 Commenting on 1st Corinthians 14:5, Calvin writes, “For God has

conferred nothing upon his Church in vain, and languages were of some benefit.”13 By

languages, Calvin is referring to the gift of tongues, and seems to be writing as though the

gift is in the past.14

9 His quote is, “This whole place is very obscure: but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such as then used to occur but now no longer take place. And why do they not happen now? Why look now, the cause too of the obscurity hath produced us again another question: namely, why did they then happen, and now do so no more?” Schaff, Philip. The Nicene Fathers. electronic ed. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

10 Augustine writes in his Homily 6, on First John 3. “In the earliest times, “the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they spake with tongues,” which they had not learned, “as the Spirit gave them utterance.” These were signs adapted to the time. For there behooved to be that betokening of the Holy Spirit in all tongues, to shew that the Gospel of God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done for a betokening, and it passed away. Schaff, Philip. The Nicene Fathers. electronic ed. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

11 He writes, “For even now miracles are wrought in the name of Christ, whether by His sacraments or by the prayers or relics of His saints; but they are not so brilliant and conspicuous as to cause them to be published with such glory as accompanied the former miracles.” See also, his Retractions where he gives several testimonies of healings, including one of a girl named Innocentia, healed of breast cancer.

12 See references below.

13 Calvin, John. Calvin's Commentaries. electronic ed. electronic ed., 1 Co 14:1. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

14 However, note this next quote, which could be taken to indicate that Calvin could believe the gift of tongues still active; at the very least it is ambiguous. “Hence, although the Corinthians, by a misdirected eagerness for show, had rendered that gift partly useless and worthless, and partly even injurious, yet Paul,

As a reaction to the Pentecostal stirrings of the early twentieth centuries,

Princeton Theologian B.B. Warfield wrote what was probably the most comprehensive

and detailed treatment of the gift of tongues and other miraculous gifts in his work called

Counterfeit Miracles. In it he writes, “Because Christ is all in all, and all revelation and

redemption alike are summed up in Him, it would be inconceivable that either revelation

or its accompanying signs should continue after the completion of that great revelation

with its accrediting works.”15 Warfield is considered the father of the modern cessationist

movement and his works laid the groundwork for much of the current arguments that are

employed by cessationists against the modern day use of the gift of tongues.

The Cessationist Argument and Rebuttal

It is helpful in seeking to answer the question of modern day tongues application

to look at the many varied reasons that cessationist give for their position. Several major

cessationist arguments will be considered, and though this list does not include every

cessationist argument made, it should stand as a fairly complete arrangement of the

thought as a whole. These positions can be grouped as theological or Biblical arguments,

and historical arguments. Following each major cessationist argument, the non

cessationist rebuttal to that argument will be given, as well as a brief analysis of the

relative merits of each argument. A myriad of writers and professors have been chosen to

nevertheless, commends the use of tongues. So far is he from wishing them abolished or thrown away. At the present day, while knowledge of languages is more than simply necessary, and while God has at this time, in his wonderful kindness, brought them forward from darkness into light, there are at present great theologians, who declaim against them with furious zeal. As it is certain, that the Holy Spirit has here honored the use of tongues with never-dying praise, we may very readily gather, what is the kind of spirit that actuates those reformers, who level as many reproaches as they can against the pursuit of them.” Calvin, John. Calvin's Commentaries. electronic ed. electronic ed., 1 Co 14:1. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

15 Warfield, B.B. Counterfeit Miracles (New York: Scribners, 1918) 28

represent both sides of this argument; they represent those from a wide denominational

background and include charismatics, pentecostals, cessationists, and those who would

not identify with either of those three prior groups.

As basis for the purported lack of permanence of some Spiritual gifts, many

cessationists use the example of the cessation of the office of apostle. The line of

reasoning is that, if God originally gave the gift or office of apostle to the church, but

now no longer does, then it is possible, or even likely that other gifts fall into that

category. John Walvoord, the past president of Dallas Theological Seminary argues along

these lines.16 Similarly Zane Hodges uses this line of reasoning as the foundation for his

argument for tongues cessation, “For clearly, the apostleship was itself temporary, and, if

the principle be established, it is perfectly legitimate to inquire whether there may not be

other first century gifts which were likewise temporary.”17 The implication is quite clear,

if indeed one gift can be withdrawn, then certainly others can as well.

This argument is not frequently rebutted specifically by non-cessationists, because

it merely presents the possibility for tongues (and other gift) cessation. In addition, most

protestant, and even many charismatic scholars assert that the gift or office of the apostle

has indeed been withdrawn. Wayne Grudem, one of the top theological proponents of the

modern day ministry of tongues writes thus, “God’s purpose in the history of redemption

seems to have been to give apostles only at the beginning of the church age.”18 16 He writes, “It seems evident that other spiritual gifts, such as the gift of apostleship, the gift of prophecy, the gift of miracles…were temporary. If these gifts, so effective in establishing the church, were used in the apostolic period but seem to have faded thereafter, it would follow that the gift of tongues might have a similar withdrawal from the church.” Walvoord, John. “The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts” (Bibliotheca Sacra 143 no. 570 (April, 1986), 120

17 Hodges, Zane. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement, Part 1” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 479 (July, 1963), 227

18 Grudem, Wayne Systematic Theology, 911n

There are a few charismatic theologians that would dispute Dr. Grudem, most

evangelicals and the cessationists on this issue, among them former Dallas Theological

Seminary professor Jack Deere. Dr. Deere argues that Paul never applies the term

charisma to apostleship, that there were more New Testament apostles listed than just

Paul and the twelve (Barnabas, Jesus’ brother James, Silas, Andronicus and Junias), and

that because Paul warns against false apostles, it is possible that others could have that

designation and not be among the twelve.19 Dr. Deere does not attempt to conclusively

prove that the gift of apostle is still active, only to speculate on the possibility. He

concludes that section by positing that even if the apostle gift has ceased, then it does not

necessarily mean that the gift of tongues, or any other gift has ceased.20

Perhaps the primary argument that is given for the cessation of tongues is found in

1st Corinthians 13, where Paul writes that tongues will cease, or be stilled when

“perfection comes”.21 Many in the cessationist camp consider the perfection referred to

here as the completion of the Canon of scripture. The thrust of the argument is that

because God’s flawless revelation has been given to us in the Bible; we no longer have

need of any extra Biblical revelation. This was Warfield’s position, as noted above, and is

also held by many others in the cessationist movement. Former seminary Dean William

Bellshaw writes, “Since the New Testament was not complete, the gift was needed to

19 Deere, Jack Surprised by the Power of the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993) 242-245 In addition, Dr. Deere argues that it is possible that the gift of apostle has continued, primarily because the Bible never affirms that it has ended. He is cautious however, to distinguish between the original 12 apostles with Paul and others who might have that gift, and to note that the period of adding revelation to the scripture is closed. It is noted here that Dr. Deere’s book could be considered a popular source, but (like John MacArthur’s commentary below) is included here because Dr. Deere has the academic credentials, and is a very influential spokesman for the charismatic movement. Interestingly, this book is endorsed by: Wayne Grudem, Bruce Waltke, and Gordon Fee.

20 Ibid., 252

21 1st Cor. 14:10 (NIV)

validate the message which was being preached. After the canon of the Bible was

completed, this gift was no longer necessary.”22 Bellshaw further argues that the perfect,

mentioned by Paul in 1st Corinthians 13 refers not to the coming of Christ, since the

adjective “perfect” is in the neuter gender, therefore it must refer to the completion of the

canon.23 John MacArthur, in his commentary on 1st Corinthians writes similarly,

“Revelation of God’s Word was completed, however, when the New Testament was

completed, and to that nothing is to be added or subtracted…The confirming purpose of

tongues was completed.”24 Gilbert Weaver also takes this position, using a detailed

grammatical argument positing that the Greek ek merous (“for in part”, in 1st Cor. 13:9),

“refers to the transmission of divine truth by revelation” thus to telion (“the perfect

thing”, 1st Cor. 13:10) must refer to “God’s complete revelation of truth, the entire New

Testament.”25

Because of the relative difficulty in proving that Paul was alluding to the

completion of the New Testament Canon, in 1st Corinthians 13, not all cessationists use

this as a principle argument, among them Dr. Stanley Toussaint, who argues that 1st

Corinthians 13:12 is clearly anticipating the return of Jesus, thus “The perfect thing then

is the rapture and resurrection of the church.”26 Fellow cessationist Dr. Robert Thomas

22 Bellshaw, William. “The Confusion of Tongues” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 478 (April, 1963) 151

23 Ibid., 151 (Bellshaw here is committing the false alternative logical fallacy)

24 MacArthur, John First Corinthian, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1984) I realize that MacArthur is usually considered a more popular than academic source, but his inclusion here is warranted in that he does have two earned doctorates and he is one of the modern cessationist movements’ most influential spokesman outside of D.T.S. graduates and teachers.

25 Weaver, Gilbert. “Tongues Shall Cease” (Grace Theological Journal 14 no. 1 (Winter, 1973), 20

26 Toussaint, Stanley. “First Corinthians Thirteen and the Tongues Movement” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 480 (October, 1963) 312

notes, “It seems inescapable that a reference to completed canon alone cannot satisfy the

illustration given in verse 12.”27 Thus, the possibility of 1st Corinthians 13 referring to the

cessation of tongues when the canon of scripture is complete is not agreed upon by all in

the cessationist camp.

Other cessationists argue that the perfection that Paul is referring to has to do with

the full establishment of the church. Martin Luther apparently held to this position,

writing that tongues were given as a sign, but when the church had been gathered and

confirmed by the miraculous signs, the visible sending forth of the Holy Spirit (including

tongues) was no longer necessary.28 Dr. Thomas believes similarly, that Paul is referring

to maturity in the church, and as the Body of Christ grew, at some point, continuing

revelation became no longer necessary.29

Most non cessationists argue that 1st Corinthians 13 refers to the second coming of

Jesus, thus the gifts mentioned will be theoretically operative until then. Dr. Grudem

sardonically observes the strangeness of Paul assuring the Corinthians that love is so

amazing because it will last at least 35 more years, until the canon is complete.30 His

point is that Paul is contrasting this age, with the age to come and that love will be

permanent, not simply endure beyond apostolic age. Dr Grudem also proposes that “face

to face” is a common Old Testament way of depicting a meeting with God, and thus Paul

27 Thomas, Robert. “Tongues…Will Cease” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 17 no. 2 (Spring, 1974) 83 Thomas also quotes another cessationist, S. Lewis Johnson, writing in the 1962 Wycliffe Bible Commentary, “That which is perfect cannot be a reference to the completion of the canon of scripture.”

28 Quoted from Lewis, Warren, Witnesses to the Holy Spirit (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1978), 173 – I have looked for this Luther quote elsewhere and have not found it. It might need to be removed in a future revision of this paper.

29 Thomas, Robert, “Tongues…Will Cease” 88

30 Grudem, Systematic Theology, 1038

is talking about the second coming of Jesus.31 Likewise Dr. Daniel Mitchell32 and Martyn

Lloyd Jones33 argue that this passage cannot be a reference to the completion of the canon

because it would imply that we have perfect knowledge or knowledge greater than the

apostles in this present age. This would appear to be a very persuasive argument in

general against the sense that the implication of 1st Corinthians 13 is that we are now in a

face to face position, and that we know, as we are known, if in fact it refers to the canon

completion, or some other event that has already happened. In light of the above

objections, this particular cessationist argument appears to be very difficult to sustain.

The next cessationist argument is centered on another passage of scripture,

Hebrews 2:3-4, and posits that the (sole) purpose of the spiritual gifts and miracles were

to testify to the message of salvation as given by the apostles. The implication of this

view is that these gifts are no longer necessary or functional because we now have the

message of salvation in written form as the Bible. Augustine can be considered the father

of this belief, in essence. As quoted above, he writes that tongues (as well as other signs)

were given as a “betokening” of the Holy Spirit to show that the Gospel was to go to all

tongues over the earth.34 More recently, John Walvoord writes that the purpose of the gift

31 Grudem, Systematic Theology, 1033

32 Mitchell, Dan, First Corinthians Christianity in a Hostile Culture, (Chattanooga: AMG, 2004) 190 Who seems to agree with Dr. Thomas that the passage refers to the ultimate maturing of the Body of Christ, only that we haven’t reached that yet, presumably, because Dr. Mitchell does not advocate disuse of the gift of tongues.

33 His quote, “It means that we are altogether superior even to the apostles themselves, including the apostle Paul! It means that we are now in a position in which, ‘we know, even as we are known” by God. Indeed, there is only one word to describe such a view (that this passage refers to the completion of the canon, or indeed some other thing that has already been fulfilled), it is nonsense.” Lloyd-Jones, Martyn, Prove All Things (Eastbourne: Kingsway, 1985) 32-33

34 Schaff, Philip. The Nicene Fathers. electronic ed. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

of tongues is to attest to the gospel, referencing 1st Corinthians 14:22.35 This is a general

theme found in most cessationist thought- the gift of tongues, and the other miraculous,

or “sign” gifts are for the purpose of attesting to the apostles, or attesting to the message

of the apostles, and are no longer needed. As MacArthur writes, “Tongues has ceased

because its purpose as a confirming sign of apostolic authority and doctrine ended when

the New Testament was complete.”36

Walvoord’s reference above to 1st Corinthians 14:22 adds a new twist or depth to

this particular cessationist argument. The essence of it is that because Paul says that

tongues are a sign for unbelievers, and because he references Isaiah in the previous verse,

who spoke of God judging the Israelites using men of strange languages, therefore the

gift of tongues is primarily (or solely) a gift directed at the Jews; and because we are now

in the age of Gentiles, the gift is no longer active. S. Lewis Johnson presses this point

particularly hard, noting that Jews were present in all three mentions of the use of tongues

in Acts, thus proving Paul’s “statement” that the gift of tongues was for the Jews. In

commenting on Acts 2, he writes, “The presence of Jews here confirms the words of Paul

in 1 Corinthians 14:21-22. Paul states that the gift is a sign to Jews, as prophesied in the

Old Testament.”37 Zane Hodges also fleshes this argument out. His reasoning can be set

down in a syllogism, very similar to Johnson: To determine whether tongues is intended

to be used today or not, we must determine the purpose of tongues; if the purpose is still 35 Walvoord, John. “The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts” (Bibliotheca Sacra 143 no. 570 (April, 1986), 116

36 MacArthur, John First Corinthian, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1984) (electronic ed.)

37 Johnson, S. Lewis. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement, Part II: The Gift of Tongues in the Book of Acts” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 480 (October, 1963), 310 – It should be noted here that what Johnson says is “stated” by Paul, is in fact an inference, and as such is a shaky premise to build theological doctrine on.

valid today, then tongues is valid, if the purpose is not valid today, then tongues is no

longer useful.38 He further reasons that because the gift is directed toward the Jewish

people, and because passages like Luke 21:20-24 indicate that God’s attention is now on

the gentiles, therefore the gift has ceased.39

In sum, this cessationist position on tongues (and other miraculous/sign gifts) can

be summarized thusly: Tongues were intended as a sign, or attestation to the message or

ministry of the apostles; because the message is complete we no longer have a use for the

gift of tongues, therefore their modern day use is spurious. Some would add to that

argument that tongues were meant as a sign for the Jews, and are no longer needed as

such.

The non cessationist response to this view is summed up by D.A. Carson in his

exposition on 1st Corinthians 12-14. In examining the attestation argument of

cessationists, he believes that it is provable only if it can be shown that attestation is the

only purpose of the gift of tongues/other miraculous gifts. Carson points out that the

miracles of Jesus not only attested to His message, but also to the new age He was

inaugurating. He further observes some fundamental differences in tongues as displayed

in Acts and 1st Corinthians, writing that tongues in the epistle may be used in private,

must be translated in public, and serve no apparent purpose of attestation.40 Dr. Deere, in

38 I trust this is a good summation of Dr. Hodges quote, “If the Biblically revealed purpose of this gift be an agelong purpose, it is proper to look at tongues as an agelong spiritual manifestation. If, on the other hand, the Biblically revealed purpose of the gift be temporary, we shall have reason for regarding the gift itself as temporary and will be forced to view modern claims to its possession as actually lacking in basic Biblical credibility.” I note here, that this hermeneutic is quite dangerous when applied to other doctrines. Hodges, Zane. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement, Part 1” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 479 (July, 1963), 227

39 Hodges, Zane. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement, Part 1” conclusion, pg. 229

40 Carson, D.A. Showing the Spirit, A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14, (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987) 156-157

addressing this same issue of attestation asks some interesting questions. If the only

purpose of these gifts (including tongues) is attestation of the apostles, then why do

people like Phillip and Stephen perform miracles? Why do Phillip’s daughters, and men

like Agabus prophesy? Why are unnamed people in the church given gifts of healing and

miracles?41 The attestation theory doesn’t seem to answer these questions adequately.

Another arrow in the theological quiver of the cessationist camp concerns the

relative frequency that we see tongues mentioned in the Bible. As the phenomenon is

only mentioned in two books, and these covering relatively early N.T. periods, then it

must not be particularly widespread or important. Dr. Walvoord notes that this lack of

appearance in other books indicates that tongues were not a major factor in the churches

evangelism, spiritual life, or demonstration of the power of God. He further notes, “It

(tongues) seems to have been prominent only in a church that was notoriously

unspiritual.”42 Dr. Belshaw makes note of this fact as well, noting that because tongues is

only mentioned in two New Testament books, one “should give cause for a careful

consideration of the place of tongues in the church today.”43 Finally, Dr. MacArthur also

makes this observation in his listing of evidences for the cessation of tongues, noting that

because tongues is not mentioned in the later New Testament books (James, Peter John

and Jude) it is “clear from the New Testament record itself that tongues not only ceased

to be an issue, but ceased to be practiced well before the end of the apostolic age.”44 The 41 Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Holy Spirit, 105.

42 Walvoord, John. “The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts” (Bibliotheca Sacra 143 no. 570 (April, 1986), 118

43 Bellshaw, William. “The Confusion of Tongues” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 478 (April, 1963) 151

44 MacArthur, John First Corinthian, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1984) (electronic ed.) It should be noted that this is an argument from silence, and represents another somewhat questionable and dangerous hermeneutic approach to the Bible.

argument offered here is not a primary cessationist argument, but merely used to add

weight the other arguments; in sum, the cessationist are arguing for the relative

unimportance of tongues based on it appearing in only two New Testament works.

Dr. Lloyd Jones offers an answer as to why the issue of tongues may not have

appeared in many New Testament epistles, and his answer is the church at Corinth is

unique in its manifestation of multiple charisms (the reason for which, he seems to be

implying is that the members were baptized in the Holy Spirit.) Dr. Jones argues that

then, as now, there are few churches that are overly spiritual like the Corinthians,

therefore the issue did not arise as frequently.45 Perhaps a better answer to this argument

is to point out that it is simply an argument from silence, and in and of itself does not

prove whether the gift of tongues has ceased or not.

Similar to the argument above, cessationist often argue that tongues, and the other

sign/miraculous gifts were already on their way to ceasing even in the apostolic age. Dr.

MacArthur, referencing 1st Corinthians 13:8 writes, “The unique and isolated purpose of

the gift of tongues is seen in the fact that…it did not exist either before or after the

apostolic era. As far as his discussion of love is concerned, Paul considers tongues to

already to have stopped, because that gift is not mentioned after verse 8.”46 Dr. Gary

Derickson follows a similar tact, concerning all of the miraculous gifts. He points to the

lack of obvious mention of miracles in Paul’s later epistles (Ephesians, Philippians,

Colossians, Philemon, Timothy and Titus) as evidence of the ongoing process of gift

45 Lloyd Jones, Martyn, Joy Unspeakable, Power and Renewal in the Holy Spirit, (Wheaton: Harold Shaw, 1984) 36-37


withdrawing.47 Further buttressing his case, (specifically regarding healing, though

tongues are implicated as well), Dr. Derickson points out that there are three men

mentioned in Paul’s later epistles that were not healed: Timothy, Epaphroditus and

Trophimus. 48 Dr. Derickson concludes that this at least implies that Paul has lost his

healing ability. 49

Dr. Norman Geisler follows this line of reasoning as well, positing the loss of

healing power in Paul similar to Dr. Derickson above. Dr. Geisler also attempts to make a

case that Paul can no longer cast out demons, as he had earlier in his ministry. He writes,

“The same apostle who exorcised a demon on command, could only hope for repentance

that Hymeneaus and Philetus would escape from the trap of the Devil.” 50 The summary

of this argument is simply that the miraculous is not mentioned nearly as much in the

later New Testament books, therefore it was not occurring as much; this apparent

lessening in frequency is an indication that the gifts were being withdrawn.

Dr. Deere answers this line of reasoning with two questions designed to bring out

the holes in this cessationist argument. Does the fact that the latter epistles fail to mention

Paul’s gift of celibacy evidence that he had lost it? Does Paul’s lack of mentioning

personal evangelism in those same later epistles indicate that his evangelism gift had

faded? The answer to both questions, is of course no.51 Deere further points out that we

have no way of knowing whether the situation with Hymeneaus and Philetus had 47 Derickson, Gary. “The Cessation of Healing Miracles in Paul’s Ministry” (Bibliotheca Sacra 155 no. 618 (April, 1998) 307

48 Ibid., 309-312

49 Ibid., 311

50 Geisler, Norman, Signs and Wonders, (Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1988) 136-137

51 Deere, Surprised By the Power of the Holy Spirit, 239

anything to do with demon possession or not and thus proves nothing.52 Deere further

notes that because several of the later epistles were written from prison, they might well

be expected to be less filled with miracles than the others, and finally posits that it is

possible that Paul’s associates were not healed simply because God did not desire for

them to be healed. He questions why God might withdraw Paul’s healing gifts, and leave

his prophetic gifts intact, and where any scripture might imply the possibility of such a

thing. Dr. Deere also includes a warning against contrasting narrative portions of the

Bible with Didactic portions, and against building doctrine on mere observation as

opposed to what the Bible actually says.53

In the scope of this project, the above theological arguments form the major

framework for the cessationist theory. Certainly, there are other arguments that are

brought to bear against the modern day use of tongues and other miraculous gifts.

Warfield contends that the view of miraculous spiritual gifts as permanent is a Roman

Catholic tendency54, and likewise Dr. George Dollar notes that Shakers and Mormons

should be given credit for early appearances of tongues.55 The implication here is that

tongues are the domain for fringe and false religious groups. Likewise, Dr. Millard

Erickson points out that the gift of tongues has been denigrated in the past because it was

practiced by other religious groups, including the Oracle of Delphi.56 That heretics and

questionable groups like the Montanists, Mormons and others make use of something 52 Ibid., 238

53 Ibid., 238

54 Warfield, B.B., Miracles Yesterday and Today. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1918) 127

55 Dollar, George. “Church History and The Tongues Movement” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 480 (October, 1963), 316

56 Erickson, Millard, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998) 894

similar to the gift of tongues does not necessarily mean that the gift is now invalid;

certainly fringe groups make use of practices that are similar to the gifts of evangelism

and teaching as well.

In examining a few other cessationist arguments, Dr. MacArthur points out that

one of the reasons tongues ceased is that it is inferior to prophecy as a means of

revelation.57 Dr.Walvoord suggests that tongues today are not legitimate because their

validity cannot be scientifically measured.58 And finally, several suggest that Tongues are

not valid today because many tongues speakers do not follow Paul’s instructions as to

their practice.59

Most of these arguments are not central to the main issues of cessationism, and

none taken in and of themselves prove that the gift of tongues has ceased. They are

included so as to present a moderately comprehensive picture of cessationist thought. It

can be agreed by both sides that the minor arguments, taken by themselves, do not

disprove the modern day use of tongues, but add weight to the major arguments if they

are found to be valid.

The second major category of cessationist argument proposes that the writings

and experiences of the early church fathers, and that all of church history in general bears

out their proposition that tongues ceased . Warfield suggests that the only people who

57 His quote is, “Tongues ceased because they were an inferior means of edification. When properly interpreted, tongues had the ability to edify in a limited way.” MacArthur, John First Corinthian, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1984) (electronic ed.) The question of why an inferior gift like tongues might be given by God in the first place is not really addressed.

58 Walvoord, John. “The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts” (Bibliotheca Sacra 143 no. 570 (April, 1986), 115, 120

59 This is pointed out by Dr. Grudem, Systematic Theology, 1076; Dr. Bellshaw, The Confusion of Tongues, 153, and Dr. Erickson, Christian Theology, 894-896. This would be a good topic to explore on a deeper level. It is certainly one of the most legitimate of all critique’s of the charismatic movement.

performed miraculous deeds, or used miraculous gifts were those who had the apostles

lay hands on them.60 Dr. George Dollar quotes a study that showed “In the ancient

church, there was not one well attested instance of any person who exercised speaking in

tongues, or even pretended to exercise it.”61 Dr. MacArthur goes so far as to write two

blanket statements, “The gift of tongues is nowhere alluded to or found in any writings of

the church fathers.”62 And “The historians and theologians of the early church

unanimously maintained that tongues ceased to exist after the time of the apostles.”63 If

all of these statements are in fact true, then they constitute a powerful argument for the

cessationist cause. Is it true then that the early church fathers report no instances of

tongues?

A close examination of the writings of the early church fathers shows that the

above cessationist argument is in fact not accurate. Irenaeus, acknowledged as an early

church, (non-Montanist) father by all writes, “In like manner we do also hear many

brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all

kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men,

and declare the mysteries of God”64 Dr. Gary Shogren points out that recent manuscript

60 Warfield, Counterfeit Miracles, 24-25




64 Schaff, Philip. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. electronic ed. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

discoveries indicate that Irenaeus was not merely writing about hear-say, but something

he had actually witnessed himself.65 Another telling quote by Irenaeus:

“Wherefore, also, those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform [miracles], so as to promote the welfare of other men, according to the gift which each one has received from Him. For some do certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed from evil spirits frequently both believe [in Christ], and join themselves to the Church. Others have foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years. And what shall I more say? It is not possible to name the number of the gifts which the Church, [scattered] throughout the whole world, has received from God, in the name of Jesus Christ.”66

Clearly then, there is at least one early church father who speaks of the

miraculous gifts still being active in his day. Justin Martyr, though not speaking of

tongues per se, does seem to affirm the existence of the prophetic gift in his Dialogue

With Trypho, “For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to the present time. And

hence you ought to understand that [the gifts] formerly among your nation have been

transferred to us.”67 Tertullian, writing before his assumed conversion to Montanism

mentions the gift of tongues, writing “When he mentions the fact that ”it is written in the

law,” how that the Creator would speak with other tongues and other lips, whilst

confirming indeed the gift of tongues by such a mention”68 Novatian also writes of the

65 Shogren, Gary Steven., “Christian Prophecy and Canon in the Second Century” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40 no. 4 (December, 1997) 62266 Schaff, Philip. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. electronic ed. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

67 Schaff, Philip. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. electronic ed. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000. It is true, that Martyr leaves tongues off of one of his gift lists, but an attempt to explain this omission is credibly offered by Hunter, Harold., “Tongues-Speech, A Patristic Analysis” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no. 2 (June, 1980) 126-127


modern day presence of tongues, “This is He who places prophets in the Church, instructs

teachers, directs tongues, gives powers and healings, does wonderful works, often

discrimination of spirits, affords powers of government, suggests counsels, and orders

and arranges whatever other gifts there are of charismata; and thus makes the Lord’s

Church everywhere, and in all, perfected and completed.”69 There are several other early

church mentions of the gift of tongues as evidenced in recent articles by Harold Hunter70,

Gary Shogren, and Paul Elbert71. As noted above, however, from the perspective of

Augustine and Chrysostom, the gift appears to have faded by their day. In light of these

church father quotes, which indicate clear activity of tongues and miracles in the early,

post apostolic church, it is fair to question the conclusions of many cessationists. When

Dr. MacArthur writes that the gift of tongues is not found or even alluded to in any of the

writings of the early church fathers, is he merely mistaken due to lack of research? It

appears that the historical argument of cessationism, is given serious difficulty due to the

multiple references to tongues and miraculous gifts found among the early church

father’s writings.

One other thing should be noticed in an assessment of the cessationist argument: a

common, if not quite universal disdain toward the gift of tongues. It is odd, though

somewhat understandable if one has seen the abuse of tongues speaking, to dislike and

disdain a gift that comes from God. Dr. Johnson compares those looking into the modern


70 Hunter, Harold., “Tongues-Speech, A Patristic Analysis” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no. 2 (June, 1980) 126-127

71 Elbert, Paul. “Calvin and the Spiritual Gifts” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 22 no. 3 (September, 1979)

day tongues movement with interest to Elymas and Simon Magus.72 Dr. Hodges remarks

that the gift of tongues has only limited evangelist results because only 3,000 were

converted on Pentecost, many others in the city weren’t!73 Dr. Dollar, in covering the

supposed lack of tongues in the history of the early church, does find an instance of the

gift being used among some monks and hermits in the middle ages. Dr. Dollar remarks

that one of the monks who spoke in tongues had the gift authenticated by Pope Urban

VIII who “had the time to lend ecclesiastical auspices to the event while overlooking the

horrors and wickedness of the Inquisition.”74 This seems to be a somewhat mean-spirited

quote that adds nothing to the theological issue at hand. Dr. Weaver, after citing a

sweeping survey that found no instance of tongues speaking in the early church, writes

that modern day Christians claiming to speak in tongues must have some explanation

other than it is a continuation of the New Testament practice of the gift.75 Finally, in Dr.

MacArthur’s commentary on 1st Corinthians, Paul’s statement that he wished that all in

the Corinthian church spoke in tongues is examined. Dr MacArthur wonders why Paul

would want everybody to have the gift of tongues, thus compounding the “problem.” He

concludes that Paul’s statement means, “If the Holy Spirit choose to endow you all with

the gift of tongues, that would be fine with me.”76 There does not appear to be any

72 Johnson, S. Lewis. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement, Part I: Intoduction” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 479 (July, 1963), 225

73 Hodges, Zane. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement, Part 1” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 479 (July, 1963), 227 - Here it must be noted that it doesn’t appear that the tongues in Acts 2 had much part to play in the evangelism – the people were converted after Peter’s proclamation of the gospel. I include this quote here because it seems telling of a general cessationist dislike towards tongues.


75 Weaver, Gilbert. “Tongues Shall Cease” (Grace Theological Journal 14 no. 1 (Winter, 1973), 22


justification for turning this statement of desire to into a neutral, “whatever” statement,

and it seems to indicate an underlying bias that should not be there.

Conclusion

Based on the above arrangement of cessationist thought and rebuttal from non-

cessationists, it appears that there is not one single point brought up by the cessationist

movement that is not accurately and Biblically answered by the non-cessationists.77

Church history clearly allows for a non apostolic age function of tongues and other gifts,

though it is granted that there might be some ebb and flow in the distribution of these

gifts. Scriptural arguments for the cessation of the gifts are at best inconclusive, and at

worst simply wrong.

Dr. Bellshaw concludes his cessationist article on the confusion of tongues with

an exhortation to the reader to let the final authority on the tongues issue be what the

Bible says. He suggests that this be the primary standard by which the tongues movement

is judged.78 This seems to be a great suggestion, and an excellent starting point to assess

whether the gift of tongues is for today. In 1st Corinthians 14:39, Paul writes, “Do not

forbid speaking in tongues” (NIV). As noted above, it is remarkable, and perhaps

77 The two possible exceptions to this are the issue of charismatics not following Paul’s directives in the use of the gift of tongues, and scientific assessment of the gift. The first issue is serious, and should be dealt with, but has little bearing on whether the gift is active today, or not. False apostles did not nullify real apostles during New Testament times, false teaching does not nullify the real teaching gift today, so false application of tongues does not cause necessarily mean that it has ceased. The second issue is not a fair criticism, and is built solely on the supposition that tongues always correspond to a known language. D.A. Carson has argued convincingly against this, as listed above. The question might also be asked, how do we scientifically measure any spiritual gift?

78 Bellshaw, William. “The Confusion of Tongues” (Bibliotheca Sacra 120 no. 478 (April, 1963) 153 Please remember that this is not a paper concerned with the modern day practice of tongues, but whether it is a genuine gift. Much can be written about the abuse of the gift in some places; this does not rule out its existence.

unparalleled79 in the evangelical tradition for an entire school of thought to be devoted (at

least in part) to the practice of countermanding a clear imperative of Paul. Often in

cessationist writings, though certainly not always, this passage of Scripture is glossed

over, or not mentioned at all. It seems difficult to believe that Paul, knowing the gift of

tongues would pass away in a short period, might urge the Corinthians to not forbid

its use without adding some sort of qualifying statement. It is also of note that, even

given the obvious problems the Corinthians were experiencing with tongues, he still

concludes his teaching with the directive that they not be forbidden, but done in a fitting

and orderly way. The reason for devoting so much of this article to an outline of the

cessationist argument is because it needs to be fairly and honestly assessed, particularly

to determine if it is strong enough to provide a reason why a scriptural directive should be

overturned. In this case, it is clear that no cessationist argument is clear enough, or strong

enough to warrant the setting aside of even one small command of scripture.

Very often in this debate between cessationists, and non cessationists, the issue of

burden of proof comes up. If it could be conclusively shown that there were no legitimate

instances of tongues speaking, or other miraculous gifts in the post apostolic age, then

perhaps it could be argued that the burden of proof for their continued existence should

lie with the non-cessationists. In light of the substantial (though not overwhelming)

mentions of this gift in the early post apostolic age, and indeed peppered throughout

church history80, it would seem fair to say the burden of proving the cessationism of

79 The one exception I can think of concerns women in authority and/or women teaching in church. Perhaps there are others that escape me now.

80 Is it inconsistent to remark on the light treatment the subject of tongues receives in the Bible, and then be surprised that it receives a similar treatment in the writings of the church fathers? That is to say, the issue is neither ignored, nor emphasized in the New Testament Epistles, and similarly the early church fathers. It is quite clear that the modern day church has blown the debate quite out of proportion to the treatment it receives in Scripture.

tongues should lie with the cessationist camp. When the further issue of Paul’s directive

in 1st Corinthians 14:39 to not forbid is brought into the discussion, it becomes clearer

that the burden of proof should be squarely on the cessationist camp. After this

examination of cessationist arguments, it would appear that this burden of proof has not

been met.

Sound Biblical hermeneutics requires that theology and doctrine come from clear

theological passages, and rarely (if ever) be pulled from narrative or mere observation

(i.e. The conjecture that Paul doesn’t heal Timothy or Epaphroditus, therefore his healing

gift doesn’t work anymore is based on observation.). It is usually the best practice to go

with the plain sense of scripture, and clearly in Paul’s teaching on tongues the plain

meaning is that it should not be forbidden, thus, the gift of tongues should not be

forbidden today. This does not quite answer the question of whether the gift of tongues is

for today or not. As Dr. Erickson points out, no matter how church history validates the

gift of tongues as having happened (or not happened) throughout the ages does not bear

on whether it will be active in the day we are living in today.81 Clearly the Holy Spirit

“gives them [gifts] to each one, just as he determines.” (1st Cor 14:11, NIV) It is certainly

possible, likely even, that the Spirit is giving that gift in some places, and withholding it

in some places; as it is to Him to determine when, who and where. Therefore a clear,

objective, Biblical answer to this question is not definitively possible, though it can be

said that there is no clear Biblical basis to suppose that the gift of tongues is not currently

active.

Paul’s command to not forbid tongues and his restrictions on their use represent

clear didactic teaching. Charismatics who ignore Paul’s direction and restrictions on

81 Erickson, Millard, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998) 896

tongues use, and cessationists who deftly exegete their way around his commands do so

at some degree of risk. We all do well to remember that we are united around a person, a

personal being, Jesus Christ, and not a doctrine. Paul’s directives to “excel in gifts that

build up the church” (1st Cor. 14:12, NIV) and to “let all things be done in love” (1st Cor.

16:14, NIV) ring particularly true here. May we put aside acrimonious and unhealthy

debates and seek to excel in building the church up in love.

Note: Use F.F. Bruce quote on Prophecy, Josephus for next installation of

this paper. Page 33 “The Canon of Scripture”

Bibliography

Bellshaw, William G. “The Confusion of Tongues.” Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (April, 1963):

146-153.

Calvin, John. Calvin's Commentaries. electronic ed., Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

Carson, D.A. Showing the Spirit, A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1987

Deere, Jack Surprised by the Power of the Holy Spirit. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,1993

Derickson, Gary W. “The Cessation of Healing Miracles in Paul’s Ministry.” Bibliotheca Sacra 155 (April, 1998): 299-315

Dollar, George W. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement. Part II: Church History and the Tongues Movement.” Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (October, 1963): 316-321

Elbert, Paul. “Calvin and the Spiritual Gifts.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 22 (September, 1979): 235-256

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology, Second Edition. Grand Rapids: BakerBooks, 2003

Freedman, David Noel. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Electronic Ed. New York: Doubleday, 1996.

Geisler, Norman. Signs and Wonders. Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1988.

Green, Michael. I Believe in the Holy Spirit. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975

Grudem, Wayne Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994

Hodges, Zane C. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement. Part I: The Principle of Temporary Gift.” Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (July, 1963): 226-233

Hunter, Harold. “Tongues Speech: A Patristic Analysis.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 (June, 1980): 125-137

Johnson, S. Lewis. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement. Part I: Introduction.” Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (July, 1963): 224-226

________. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement. Part II: The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts.” Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (October, 1963): 309-311

Jones, Martyn Lloyd Prove all Things. Eastbourne: Kingsway, 1985

________. Joy Unspeakable, Power and Renewal in the Holy Spirit. Wheaton: Harold Shaw, 1984

Lewis, Warren, Witnesses to the Holy Spirit. Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1978

MacArthur, John. First Corinthians, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. Electronic Ed. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1984

Mitchell, Dan. First Corinthians, Christianity in a Hostile Culture Chattanooga: AMG Publishing, 2004

Schaff, Philip. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. electronic ed. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

________. The Nicene Fathers. electronic ed. Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000.

Shogren, Gary Stephen. “Christian Prophecy and Canon in the Second Century: a Response to B.B. Warfield.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40 (December, 1997) 610-622

Thomas, Robert L. “Tongues…Will Cease.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 17 (Spring, 1974): 81-91

Tousssaint, Stanley D. “A Symposium on the Tongues Movement. Part II: First Corinthians Thirteen and the Tongues Question.” Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (October, 1963): 311-315

Warfield, B.B. Counterfeit Miracles. New York: Charles Scribners, 1918.

Warfield, B.B. Miracles Yesterday and Today. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953.

Walvoord, John F. “The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts.” Bibliotheca Sacra 143 (April, 1986): 109-121

Weaver, Gilbert. “Tongues Shall Cease.” Grace Theological Journal 14 (Winter, 1973): 12-23

introduction - agape churchagapepinson.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/0… · web...

Documents