Why I am a cessationist - by Jesse Johnson

Found here. Our comments in bold.
------------------------------

Another installment in our quest for the biblical argument for cessationism. Again, we are not interested in arguments derived from the failures of contemporary charismatics, arguments from silence, or arguments based on post-biblical history. We want the BIBLICAL case. 

But the author will not do this. In this long, speculative, undocumented screed the author manages to quote only a single Scripture. One. That's it. Astounding.

This may be one of the worst defenses of cessationism we have ever read. Yes, it's that bad.
---------------------------

Yesterday I explained that spiritual gifts were God’s way of uniting believers in the church and advancing the gospel through the church. Every believer uses their spiritual gifts when they serve the church for the purpose of building up each other (1 Cor 10:23-24, 1 Cor 12:7).

But there is an obvious exception to these principles: the sign gifts. (emphasis added.) By sign gifts I mean the gift of languages, interpretation, the gift of healing, the gift of apostleship, and the gift of miracles. These gifts were not merely examples of people serving the church, but instead they had a much more immediate role: they validated the ministry of the Apostles. This is exactly why Paul called them “sign” gifts (2 Cor 12:12). (Let's actually quote the verse:

The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works. 

The author creates an exclusive category out of thin air, something he calls the "sign gifts." This artificial delineation [apparently, some gifts are special "sign" gifts and some are not. However, every spiritual gift is a supernatural endowment. The author makes a false distinction.] is the fundamental premise of the author. His entire case rests on this. However, we reject the characterization absent a biblical presentation of the teaching of this concept. The author will not do this, leaving his Bible closed on his desk.

He will continue to employ this artificial category of "sign gifts" throughout his presentation. We will bold and italicize the 17 instances of this manipulative tactic.

So, let's requote the Scripture: "The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works." Note that this Scripture doesn't mention a single claim of the author's. It

1. does not use the phrase "sign gifts,"
2. does not describe spiritual gifts or mention the word "gifts," 
3. does not establish the idea that authentication of apostleship their purpose, 
4. does not imply that they would cease at some point, and
5. does not say that only the apostles did these things.

What is Paul referring to here? He is not listing apostolic qualifications, he is defending his own apostleship to this church. Let's read the previous verse:

2Co. 12:11 I have made a fool of myself, but you drove me to it. I ought to have been commended by you, for I am not in the least inferior to the “super-apostles”, even though I am nothing.

Notice that the Corinthians accused Paul of being an inferior apostle. He denies this, saying, "The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works." Let's paraphrase: "I am not inferior, because I do the very same things the other "superior" apostles do."

This is a far cry from establishing any sort of "sign gift" idea.

In addition, compare the list offered by the author ["the gift of languages, interpretation, the gift of healing, the gift of apostleship, and the gift of miracles."] to Paul's statement ["signs and wonders and mighty works."] There is some passing connection between the two lists, but we don't have to assume that Paul regards them as synonymous just because the author equates them. 

In fact, one must enter the equation with the particular presupposition that signs and wonders are the same as the gifts of the Spirit, and that there was something unique about the apostles that allowed them to perform them. However, this isn't evident to the neutral observer.

In addition, the author never actually supplies us with documentation, an argument, or any Scripture at all that this is the case.)  

Most Christians globally would say that those gifts all continue today, exactly like they did in Acts. I disagree. I think those gifts were given for a period of time and have since ceased—in fact, I believe they ceased before the NT was even completed. This view is called cessationism, and here I want to lay out my case for it. (Oh, good. He's going to lay out his case. From the Bible we hope? We wait with bated breath.)

Before I do so: I know this topic has been beaten to death recently—this isn’t even the first time our blog has done a post like this. Yet some how it keeps getting resurrected (score one for the miracles side, I suppose). ("Somehow?" He doesn't know why the debate continues? Perhaps the reason is these cessationists have yet to make a convincing biblical case for cessationism?)

Let the coroner’s report indicate that the time of death for this horse was 9 pm on October 1, 2014, and bear with me as I lay out the four reasons I am a cessationist: (Yes, four reasons. Bible reasons, perhaps?

The author's arrogance is unseemly. He is going to put the issue to death once and for all, he says. But we will find that he administers the coup de grace with an unloaded gun.)

1) Because the sign gifts have ceased

My strongest argument is also the most circular, so I might as well get it out of the way at the front. I believe the sign gifts have ceased, because they are not around anymore. (This is his strongest argument, a tautology? It's not even an argument. And he leads with this?)

In the NT, people with the gift of healing healed everyone. (No Scriptural reference supplied for this assertion. No wonder, since it is false. Ac. 5:16 says all were healed: 

Crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by evil spirits, and all of them were healed.

However, in Ac. 8:7 we read, 

With shrieks, evil spirits came out of many, and many paralytics and cripples were healed. 

Many, not all.

With an irony of which he seems unaware, the author will later claim that the supposed increasing incidents of unhealed people is an indicator that the signs and wonders were diminishing even before the Apostles' deaths. 

Thus he wants to have it both ways. "The apostles healed everyone" except when "the ability to heal was fading.")

They drove illness out of the cities they were in. You could touch their handkerchief and be healed (Acts 19:12). Their shadow would do the trick if their hanky was taken (Acts 5:15).

This is not what we see today. (Which isn't relevant to the biblical case.)

Today we see those with the “gift of healing” charging for their time, lying about the results, and staying far away from hospitals. The poor are robed, (sic) the desperate are exploited, and the sick die.(The author appeals to certain contemporary expressions, and then only a narrow focus of those who are charlatans, as if they represent everyone who heals. But we want the biblical case.) 

Today, if you are sick, you are supposed to ask for others to pray for you, and God may heal you through prayer. (Why is the author so reluctant to quote Scripture? Ja. 5:14: 

Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15 And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. 

The author commits three errors in a single sentence. 

• James does not say "others," he says "elders."
• James does not say "may,' he says "will."
• James does not say just to pray, he includes anointing with oil.

We are not far into the author's presentation, and our confidence in his ability as a Bible teacher is wavering.)

That is worlds apart from the handkerchief/shadow method seen in Acts. If someone had the gift of healing today, they really should go to the hospital, clean it out, and preach the gospel while they are at it. Start in the nations with Ebola. (Again the author appeals to contemporary activities, with a snide comment offered as the cherry on top. But we want the biblical case.)

The same is true for the other sign gifts as well.

Bata-longa-sota does not count as the gift of languages. (Another appeal to contemporary practices. We the author ever get to the biblical case?)

When someone once tried to teach me how to speak in tongues, they told me to just let go of my thoughts and repeat the same words over and over again until muscle reflex kicked in. Then I’d be off to the glossia races. Let’s just say, that’s not exactly the gift of languages in Acts 2, 10, and 19. (An appeal to contemporary expressions. And by the way, the Tongues of Acts are not describing spiritual gifts.)

And of miracles? Apostleship? Even CJ Mahaney walked away from claiming that gift. (An Appeal to Authority.)

Look around the world—I know we all wish it looked more like it did in Acts (minus the beheadings), but the sign gifts that we see in the early church simply are not still in the world today. (This is still not the biblical case.)

In other words, I am a cessationist because the sign gifts are not still here—and their half-hearted prosperity-preaching step-sisters don’t count. (Note here that the only possible evidence allowed by the author is pejoratively ascribed to prosperity teachers.)

The sign gifts simply are not here anymore.

(The author has now presented what he called his best argument. Wow. And he has yet to quote a Scripture.)

2) Because the function of the sign gifts was to establish the early church

Why did God give the sign gifts to the church in Acts? Because it was a world without elders (False. There were elders in every church:

Ac. 11:30 This they did, sending their gift to the elders by Barnabas and Saul.

Ac. 14:23 Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, committed them to the Lord, in whom they had put their trust.

Ac. 15:2 So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 

Ac. 20:17 From Miletus, Paul sent to Ephesus for the elders of the church.

Ac. 21:18 The next day Paul and the rest of us went to see James, and all the elders were present. 

Reason one, not documented with Scripture, and false. We continue to hope the author's presentation will improve to include the biblical case. So far, we have only had unbiblical theories.)

and a world without the New Testament. (False. Letters exchanged between churches represented authoritative teaching early on:

Col. 4:16 After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea.

1Th. 5:27 I charge you before the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers.

2Pe. 3:16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand...

2Th. 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

Remember, the author is giving us reasons why the "sign gifts" were needed. So far, he thinks the "sign gifts" compensated for there being no elders and no New Testament. The author never bothers to tell us why these are connected, or how this process works, where this is found in the Bible, or even, how it applies to cessationism.)

Imagine how unhealthy a church would be if it didn’t have elders, and if it didn’t have a NT. (Why should we imagine? Churches today have elders and the NT, but are unhealthy. 

But the early church had the apostles.

There is no causation here. There is nothing relevant at all in the author's statements. He's simply speculating.)

This is exactly the situation in Jerusalem, then Corinth, and everywhere the gospel went in those first few decades of missions. (The author is not making sense. It seems that he thinks the "sign gifts" substituted for elders and the Bible, but offers no evidence whatsoever that this is true. He thinks the "sign gifts" ensured the churches would be healthy. Whaaat?

Then, astonishingly, he now turns to 1 Corinthians...)

This is why 1 Corinthians 13:11 compares the sign gifts to the infancy of the church. (...where we find that the Corinthian church was misusing the gifts. That is, the "sign gifts" were not helping ensure this church would be healthy. Just the opposite!

Why the author refuses to quote Scripture is a mystery to us. 1Co. 13:9-12:

For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

The sign gifts are not the point of this passage. Paul is discussing the imperfect way we know and prophesy [Paul includes himself in "we"]. When the perfection of the saints finally comes as a pure and spotless bride readied for the Groom, we shall see Him face to face.

We discuss the "perfect" here.)

Paul actually calls them childish, (Now the author flat-out lies to us. He thinks we would not actually read the passage in question. Paul isn't calling the Corinthian church childish. We can read the Scripture for ourselves:

11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. 

He's clearly discussing our present state as compared to something better to come later.)

not because the gifts were for children, but because they were for the church when the church had not yet “become a man.” (We cannot address this specious assertion here. We again refer the reader to our detailed discussion of this passage.)

People can wrestle over what telios means until the cows come home, but getting over that debate, (Um, yeah. That is, the meaning of a key word of the passage isn't worth discussing?)

Paul’s comparison of the sign gifts to childishness is astounding. (Astounding? There is nothing astounding about Paul's statement, since he did not compare sign gifts to childishness. 

Isn't it indeed childishness that the best we have right now is our fleshly weakness, though Spirit-inhabited? That the very presence of God in us is yet childishness? We have this pitiful understanding and limited vision? Indeed, it is certainly "astounding" that all this will be passing away at a time when we we no longer look through a dark glass, we will know and be known, and we will see Him face to face. 

But of course, none of this is touched upon by the author, and none of it has any bearing on cessationism.)

Then glide your fingers over to Ephesians 4 where Paul again describes how some of the gifts (and particularly the gift of apostleship) were critical because the church had not yet grown up into maturity. As it was, the church was “children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine.” (Oh, my. This is truly embarrassing. This man is a teacher of the Word? We can hardly believe that a supposed teacher would so completely misrepresent a passage of the Bible in an effort to support his false doctrines. Once again we are tasked with supplying the passage, since the author refuses to do so.

Let's examine it and consider the context, beginning  at 4:3: 

Ep. 4:3-6 Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit — just as you were called to one hope when you were called. one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it.

So we first discover that Paul is not dealing with the formative church lacking leaders and the Scriptures. He is talking about unity. He is talking about the way we, even today, are obligated to love one another and to be in unity of the faith and grow to maturity. There is nothing here about the beginnings of the early church and the temporary need for Apostles. 

Ep. 4:11-13 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

Hmm, so if we as the "mature church" don't need apostles or prophets, then we certainly don't need pastors, evangelists, or teachers either, do we? 

Paul continues by telling us the ministry of the leaders in the church: They are supposed to be building up the body in faith, unity, and maturity. The author would have us believe that this has already happened, once, in the early church, and is no longer relevant for today. The Scriptures, however, betray his false teaching.  

Ep. 4:14-16 Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.

Now we learn the reason why Paul said these things. "WE" will no longer be infants. Not "you." "WE" will be no longer be immature believers, "WE" will speak the truth in love and grow up into the body, with a seamless function. Paul is talking about the body of Christ. It's not a temporary condition of the early church that is no longer relevant to us.)

I’ll save this for a future post, except to say that the connection between 1 Cor 12-13 and Eph 4 is obvious. (This "obvious" connection between two passages, yet they remain unquoted by the author... Astonishing.)

Both passages compare the church to a human body, they both describe the sign gifts as given before the church reaches “maturity/manhood,” and they both say that love is what remains when the church grows up.

In other words, the gifts were given to hold the church together until they got some of the NT books, and developed some elders who could preach whatever Scripture they could get their hands on (see also Eph 2:20). (The author continues to just make things up. There is no mention of the gifts holding together the church anywhere in the NT. 

In fact, the Corinthian church had all the spiritual gifts [1Co. 1:7], yet they were not unified because of the presence of the spiritual gifts. Just the opposite. They were dividing over who they followed [1Co. 1:12]. They were babes in Christ [1Co. 3:1]. They were arrogant [1Co. 4:18]. Sexually immoral [1Co. 5:1]. They were suing one another [1Co. 6:1]. They were letting people go hungry at the Lord's supper? 

So, Mr. Johnson. Tell us again how the elders and the gifts were to help the church until the Bible was canonized.

A completely false conclusion based on a false and unsupported premise.)

3) Because the function of the sign gifts was to authenticate the apostles:

In an immature church without the NT and without elders, what would people believe? What would they teach? Who would teach? Who would throw out the heretics, and who would commission the missionaries? (Maybe the author might crack open his dusty Bible and tell us, because the Scriptures answer these questions. 

• The people would devote themselves to the apostles' teaching [Ac. 2:42], sound doctrine [Tit. 1:9], to the apostles' Gospel [1Th. 1:5], to the letters [Col. 4:16], and the apostle's personal visits [Ro. 15:29].
• They would be taught by the apostles [Ro. 6:17], those who have the spiritual gift of teaching [Ro. 12:7, Ep. 4:11], they would teach one another [Col. 3:16], they would study the letters [2Th. 2:15], the elders would teach [1Ti. 3:2, 2Ti. 2:24], the older women would teach [Tit. 2:4].
• Heretics were thrown out by the apostles [Ga. 2:4], church leaders [1Ti. 1:3]; the people can test spirits [1Jn. 4:1], and make judgments [1Co. 5:12].
• Who could commission missionaries? The apostles [Ac. 6:6], men of faith [Ac. 9:12], prophets and teachers [Ac. 13:3], the elders [1Ti. 4:14]. The author is asking about elementary teachings [He. 6:1].

The author is astoundingly ignorant.)

Basically it would be a free-for-all, not at all unlike Corinth.

The answer to those questions in the book of Acts was simply: The Apostles. (Oh, so he does know about the apostles' ministry...)

But how do you know who they are? You don’t have their pictures on Facebook. You can’t fax a photo from Corinth to Jerusalem to have this Paul guy checked out (aka: Saul). The function of the sign gifts was to fulfill this purpose (again, see 2 Cor 12:12).

(We are even more embarrassed for the author. He seems to think that the Apostles relied on signs and wonders to prove who they were. But this is not the case. 

1) Letters of recommendation: 

Ac. 15:22-23 Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings.

1Co. 16:3 Then, when I arrive, I will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with your gift to Jerusalem.

 2Co. 3:1 Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, like some people, letters of recommendation to you or from you?

1Co. 4:17 For this reason I am sending to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church.

 Personal recommendation:

2Co. 8:17-18 For Titus not only welcomed our appeal, but he is coming to you with much enthusiasm and on his own initiative. And we are sending along with him the brother who is praised by all the churches for his service to the gospel.

Ph. 2:25 But I think it is necessary to send back to you Epaphroditus, my brother, fellow-worker and fellow-soldier, who is also your messenger, whom you sent to take care of my needs.

Col. 4:7-8 Tychicus will tell you all the news about me. He is a dear brother, a faithful minister and fellow-servant in the Lord. I am sending him to you for the express purpose that you may know about our that he may know circumstances and that he may encourage your hearts.

Col. 4:10 My fellow-prisoner Aristarchus sends you his greetings, as does Mark, the cousin of Barnabas. (You have received instructions about him; if he comes to you, welcome him.)

Tit. 3:12 As soon as I send Artemas or Tychicus to you, do your best to come to me at Nicopolis, because I have decided to winter there. 

Phile. 10-12 I appeal to you for my son Onesimus, who became my son while I was in chains. Formerly he was useless to you, but now he has become useful both to you and to me. I am sending him — who is my very heart — back to you.

We discuss authentication here.)

The gifts authenticated the Apostles, (The author can't seem to keep his story straight. His sole scriptural evidence is 2Co. 12:12, which has yet to actually quote. We shall do so again: 

The things that mark an apostle — signs, wonders and miracles — were done among you with great perseverance.

"Signs, wonders, and miracles." These are not gifts. So are "sign gifts" spiritual gifts? Are sign gifts miraculous events? Are "sign gifts" what we find in 1 Corinthians chapter 12? Are tongues wonders? Is mercy a "sign gift?"

The author is diving deep into confusion.

We discuss this misinterpreted verse here.)

and demonstrated to the world that they were the ones Jesus left in charge of his church until elders and the NT arrived. (Incorrect. The gifts are to build up the body: 1Co. 14:12 "So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church.")

Because those Apostles are dead, churches have elders, and the NT is completed, those gifts have obviously run their course (cf. point 1). (Obviously... ? We wonder if the author will ever give us the biblical case.)

Because the gifts ceased inside the NT (And we have discovered that this is false.)

4) Finally, the NT itself describes the cessation of the gifts. 

Consider Hebrews 2:3-4:

“It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.” (Wow. An actual Scripture quote!!! Our first. But he leaves part of it out. The whole quote is 

3 how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard, 4 while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

"It was declared." "It" is not "the apostles," "it" is "such a great salvation." This passage is not about the apostles or authentication.) 

Notice that the author appeals to his readers to remember the time when Jesus spoke, his message was proclaimed by the apostles, and God validated their message by the miraculous gifts. All of this points backwards to a time when that had happened in their past. If those sign gifts were still ongoing in the church, there is no conceivable way to understand these verses. (Apparently the author's ability to understand is severely limited. We read this verse apart from the cessationist lens and we see a reminder written to the readers of that day of the powerful ways God acted, things that happened not long ago. In fact, the OT writers, while doing signs and wonders themselves, continually reminded Israel of the mighty way God delivered them from the Hands of Pharaoh, for example. 

But of course, it did not mean that God had stopped supernatural things simply because the OT Scriptures recounted His mighty deeds. He still sent them the prophets and did wonders. So it is quite proper for the writer of Hebrews to remind them, and us. But such a reminder carries no implication that they had ceased. 

Further, we see three things mentioned about this "great salvation," not two. 1) Declared by the Lord and witnessed, 2) bore witness to by signs and wonders, and also 3) by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed. 

"Signs and wonders" is not the same as "gifts of the Holy Spirit." Were only the apostles doing these? The verse doesn't say this or mention apostles at all. The gifts were widely spread around. The signs and wonders were commonly known. Nothing here for the author's case at all. 

It would be different if the Apostles were the only ones doing signs and wonders. But they weren't. Peter appealed to Joel to show the universality of signs and wonders: 

Ac. 2:17-18 “In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy." 

Ac. 6:8 Now Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, did great wonders and miraculous signs among the people.

1Co. 12:4-10 There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men. Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues...

So not only weren't the Apostles the only ones performing signs and wonders, neither were they the only ones with spiritual gifts. 1Co. 14:5: I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. The miraculous was everywhere, and it wasn't to authenticate the Apostles, it was to build up the body: so that the church may be edified.)

Again, the argument is simply: “Don’t walk away from the gospel, because remember the time when Jesus spoke, and then his followers spoke, and they had the miracles to back it up!” (Really? Let's requote the passage: 

3 how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard, 4 while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

Let's provide our own paraphrase: This incredible salvation, first spoken by Jesus, was then spoken to us by the very people who heard him. God also provided testimony by signs, wonders, and miracles. Further, He also gave spiritual gifts to many people exactly the way He wanted.  

We shall let the reader decide whose they prefer.)

Earlier I compared how the gift of healing worked in Paul’s life with the so-called gift of healing today. (Appeal to Contemporary Expressions.)

(see: “handkerchiefs” in Acts 19:11-12 vs. TBN). But the truth is, we don’t even need to compare Acts 19 with the present day, when we can instead compare it with 2 Timothy 4:20: “Trophimus I left sick in Miletus.”

And with Trophimus, context is key. These are the last words Paul writes before he dies. He is abandoned, alone, and without his co-workers. He pleads with Timothy to hurry and join him, and tells Timothy that part of his urgency is because Trophimus was too sick to come.

Hebrews 2 and 2 Timothy 4 show that by the time elders had been raised up in churches, and much of the NT was written, the sign gifts had already faded away from the scene. (We discuss this false idea here.)

They didn’t end when Revelation was completed, or when John died in isolation. They had run their course long before that.(This also is an argument from silence. 

We need to note that the NT writers will tend focus on what's important at the moment. In the case of the NT, it was important to to note the establishment of the authority of the Apostles early on, so that's what was focused upon. Later, building up the body. Again, focus. At the end, the call to move on to maturity in the faith. Again, focus.

This in no way leads us to conclude a progression of increasing powerlessness. And we already know from our above discussion that not everyone was healed, simply because Apostles prayed. 

So, absent biblical proof, or even a biblical discussion, there is no reason at all to conclude cessationism is true.)