A Primer on Spiritual Gifts - by KEVIN BAUDER

Found here. Our comments in bold.

----------------------

A primer is a basic-level introduction to something, especially for children first learning to read. Thus we would expect that the author would provide us with some elementary information on the spiritual gifts. He does not do that, though he writes over 900 words. And, he can only manage to quote a single Scripture. 

This is the state of Bible teaching today, unfortunately.

Further, we don't think people should teach about things they don't believe, and particularly in the author's case, what they don't understand. In fact, what follows is not teaching about the spiritual gifts at all. The author can barely bring himself to mention them, and does not explain any of them.

Ultimately, the author tells us it's really not worth the bother to understand the spiritual gifts. It's not as important as serving in the church. His attitude is, go ahead and serve, and maybe a spiritual gift might come to bear, but don't count on it.

This is simply bad Bible teaching.

---------------------

The New Testament mentions three sorts of gifts connected with the three persons of the Godhead. (This is an odd statement. The author simply invents three categories out of thin air and assigns them to each of the three Persons of the Godhead arbitrarily. 

By the way, the first two categories aren't spiritual gifts at all.)

First, in general, every good and perfect gift comes down from the “Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning” (James 1:17). (Our only quoted Bible verse. This Greek word for gift here is dóréma, which means something given. Since James mentions Jesus only twice in his letter, and doesn't mention the Holy Spirit at all, we cannot conclude that these gifts are specifically and uniquely given by the Father as a category. 

Nor does this term have anything to do with the spiritual gifts.)

Second, the ascended Lord Jesus Christ gives certain individuals as gifts to humanity through His church—apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastor-teachers (Eph 4:8–11). (This use of the word "gift" is a different Greek word, didómi, which means to place or bestow. God "placed" apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers into the Church. The author wants to credit the installation of these men specifically to Jesus in service to his artificial delineation of the gifts, but only a few verses before this we read that there is only one body and one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one God over all.

This is not a verse about spiritual gifts.) 

Third, the charismata or pneumatika are given by the Holy Spirit to individuals. These last are usually spoken of as “spiritual gifts,” (??? The phrase "spiritual gifts” is not a colloquial expression used informally. Paul directly refers to spiritual gifts four times [Ro. 1:11, 1Co. 1:7, 1Co. 12:1, 1Co. 14:1].)

and they are mentioned and even listed in multiple passages (Rom 12:6–8; 1 Cor 12: 4–11, 28–30; and possibly 1 Pet 4:9–11). (The charismata are specifically God-empowerments:  xárisma ("grace-gift") divinely empowers a believer to share God's work with others, i.e. Spirit-empowered service to the Church to carry out His plan for His people. These are the only things that can be spiritual gifts, and this third section of his are the only relevant part of his presentation so far.

And interestingly, the author cites 1 Cor. 12:28-30 as a proof text for the spiritual gifts, but the text also mentions apostles and prophets, which God appointed [tithémi, to set or place.] But apostles and prophets were in the author's second category. Oops.

In addition, those lists contain spiritual gifts the author does not believe in.

The author has artificially created these three categories, which ultimately provide no useful purpose or insight. We wonder why he bothered.) 

The remarkable thing about these lists is that, while they contain overlap, they also differ considerably. Leaving aside 1 Peter 4 (which does not really offer a list), each summary mentions at least one item that does not appear on any other list. In other words, none of these lists is intended to be an exhaustive inventory of spiritual gifts. Each provides only a sampling of the broader category of spiritual gifts. (Why doesn't the author provide the lists? Why doesn't he contextualize and explain the Bible? What is he afraid of?)

Many Bible students have assumed that they could get an exhaustive list of spiritual gifts by simply collating the lists. The problem is that if each individual list is merely a sampling and not intended to be exhaustive, then there is no particular reason to suppose that a collated list would be exhaustive either. In other words, we can offer no real justification for claiming that the New Testament provides a comprehensive catalog of spiritual gifts. We cannot rule out the possibility that the Holy Spirit gives some gifts that the New Testament does not mention.

The common denominator shared by all spiritual gifts, whether or not they are mentioned in the New Testament, is that they are given by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:11). Yet the gifts appear to be given in different ways. Some of the gifts are clearly miraculous or revelatory (e.g. tongues, healing, prophecy, miracles). Other gifts resemble natural abilities shared even by unbelievers (e.g., helps, administrations, serving, teaching). (Finally, the author lists some of them, but only for the purpose of dividing them into categories. But all charismata are supernatural.)

Obviously the former involve some direct agency of the Spirit in bestowing supernatural ability. The latter are not so clearly supernatural, but may involve some indirect focusing and heightening of a natural ability by the Holy Spirit. ("May involve?" The author is speculating. Upon what basis does he offer this speculation? Where does the Bible say to us that some gifts are maybe not supernatural or that they may be enhancements of natural abilities?)

People who are gifted administrators or teachers in Christian enterprises are likely to be able administrators or teachers in mundane contexts as well. (All charismata are supernatural endowments by definition. Talents and skills are not spiritual gifts, by definition. The author is attempting to create separate categories for the charismata without reason or justification, based only what he thinks is likely or what appears to be. 

This is not how we interpret the Bible.

Why is he doing this? Because he is setting us up for the cessationist viewpoint, that some of the gifts ceased after the apostles were gone.)

Consequently, no clear line of demarcation can be drawn between spiritual gifts and natural abilities. The differences are most clearly seen with the miraculous gifts, which by definition do not resemble anything natural. (All charismata are miraculous.)

The non-miraculous gifts, however, seem to involve some conjunction of native ability with giftedness from the Holy Spirit. (Even more supposition. What "seems" to be is not how we determine doctrines.)

Since the purpose of miraculous gifts was to authenticate the apostles during the period when God was shifting his work in the world away from Israel and toward the Church (Heb 2:4; 2 Cor 12:11–13), (Now the author has moved to more serious error. Let's quote these verses. First He. 2:4:

He. 2:4 God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

What is the "it" being testified to in Hebrews 2:4? "It" is not the apostles, since the writer of Hebrews never mentions them in his entire letter. Verse 3 tells us that this "it" is our "great salvation." Salvation, not the apostles, was testified to, via both the miraculous and the spiritual gifts.

Now 2Co. 12:11-13:

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. 12 The things that mark an apostle — signs, wonders and miracles — were done among you with great perseverance. 13 How were you inferior to the other churches, except that I was never a burden to you? Forgive me this wrong!

Is Paul really telling us about apostolic qualifications? Let's look at the context leading up to this passage. We have to go all the way back to chapter 10 to find where Paul starts discussing the issue:

2Co. 10:1 By the meekness and gentleness of Christ, I appeal to you — I, Paul, who am “timid” when face to face with you, but “bold” when away!

So Paul was defending himself against criticism and attack, a defense that actually lasts all the way until the end of the letter, four chapters! We get hints of the complaints of the Corinthian church:

2Co. 10:10 For some say, “His letters are weighty and forceful, but in person he is unimpressive and his speaking amounts to nothing.”

2Co. 11:5-6 But I do not think I am in the least inferior to those “super-apostles”. 6 I may not be a trained speaker, but I do have knowledge. We have made this perfectly clear to you in every way. 

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.

They didn't like his speaking style. They thought the ministries of other apostles were better. They criticized him for not being like these other apostles. Finally, Paul has had enough. That's where the subject verse appears:

2Co. 12:12 The things that mark an apostle — signs, wonders and miracles — were done among you with great perseverance.

So Paul is essentially saying, "You think I'm not super enough? I did signs and wonders among you!" 

Paul was placing himself in the company of the foundational apostles (Ep. 2:20), that is, the "super apostles (2Co. 12:11)." His defense of his status was that if he claimed to be in the same company as the "super apostles" but could not do miracles, he would not be a "super apostle." 

This does not mean that someone doing miracles makes them an apostle (Stephen and Ananias were not apostles), but rather Paul was specifically defending his own apostleship by appealing to the miracles. This verse is not about apostolic validation or qualification, neither is it about who can do signs and wonders, it is about Paul's apostleship only.

Let's consider some other details.

The word translated "mark" is the Greek word σημεῖον, which means a sign, miracle, indication, mark, token. So the apostles were "marked" [noted and famous for] by signs and wonders. The miraculous was something the apostles were particularly, but not exclusively, known for.

Lastly, notice also that this verse

1. does not describe spiritual gifts or the supernatural in the church. 
2. does not establish the idea that authentication of apostleship is the only purpose of miracles. 
3. does not imply that they would cease at some point.)

those gifts stopped when the apostles were gone. (Suddenly the author's documentation disappears. No wonder, since this statement cannot be documented from Scripture.)

The rest of the gifts, however, seem to have been intended for serving rather than as signs. ("Seem." Again the author speculates. There is no Bible verse that discusses this concept of serving versus signs.

A false conclusion based a false and undocumented premise.)

These gifts most likely function throughout the church age. ("Most likely." The author is prone to describe things based on what seems to be and what is most likely. The author has done little else but speculate based on his doctrinal predilections, and he does not document where his speculations come from.)

Evidently every Christian possesses at least one spiritual gift (1 Cor 2:11). (Actually, 12:11. 

"Evidently?" Paul tells directly, we don't need to speculate:

1Co. 12:7 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.

We are beginning to think that the author is not a competent Bible teacher. He simply speculates on what things might mean. He doesn't know, he's guessing. So how can he teach us anything?)

Some Christian leaders have suggested that it is important for believers to identify their gifts so that they will know how to serve. Several have developed long inventories of gifts, complete with descriptions of how each gift functions, what sort of person is most likely to be given a particular gift, and which strengths and weaknesses typically accompany the various gifts. A few have even developed instruments, resembling psychological tests, that are supposed to tell believers what gifts they possess.

The New Testament itself, however, does not provide a detailed description for most gifts. Students of the Bible can only guess at what some of them might, or might have, involved. Furthermore, the New Testament offers no procedure for helping Christians to know which gifts they have received. It would seem that this matter was rather less important to the apostles than it is to some noteworthy modern Bible teachers. ("Seem" again. This is growing pedantic.

If the spiritual gifts were not terribly important, why are they mentioned? And why did the author write this article? He dismisses them on the basis that they are not explained well enough to suit him. 

But notice he said "most gifts." Which of course means some gifts are explained. Indeed, Paul discusses tongues and prophecy at length. Why does the author not mention this? Because he doesn't believe in tongues or prophecy. So the best-explained spiritual gifts are minimized.

Again we suspect the author is not a competent Bible teacher.)

The New Testament emphasizes serving more than it emphasizes giftedness. (Um. Sir, serving is a spiritual gift [Ro. 12:7].

We will explain, since the author doesn't seem interested. All manifestations of the Spirit are for the primary purpose of serving one another [1Co. 12:5] in the congregational setting [1Co. 14:26]. 

Our duty to serve one another is mentioned several times [1Co. 16:15, 2Co. 8:4, 2Co. 9:1, Ga. 5:13, Ep. 6:7, 1Ti. 6:2, 1Pe. 4:10, and 1Pe. 5:2 for example], which may be somewhat more than the spiritual gifts, but as far as emphasis, well, that is a matter of opinion.

In fact, service and spiritual gifts are intertwined. We would suggest that there is no way to deem one more important than the other.)

In moments of weakness and trial our gifts will not be sufficient for us. (Again the author's documentation disappears. Where does the Bible say this? How does he know this is true?)

Only our Lord will. (Wait, what? The Lord as separate from His spiritual empowerments? Where does the Bible say this? For some unknown reason, the author wants to delineate between God's presence at work in us and God Himself. This makes no sense.

Further, perseverance is a characteristic to be developed as opposed to a spiritual empowerment. It comes as a matter of maturity:

Ja. 1:2-4 Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, 3 because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. 4 Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.

It a product of persistent training:

2Pe. 1:5-7 For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6 and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7 and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love.

The author seems given to undocumented statements and speculations. We are losing confidence in him.)

But then, our Lord is always sufficient. (He Himself is sufficient, but His spiritual work in us is comes up short? This makes no sense.)

Sometimes we find ourselves challenged to serve in areas where we do not believe ourselves to be particularly gifted. If so, we should not shrink from the opportunities that the Lord gives us. (The author assumes that these opportunities are always given by the Lord. No documentation for this, either.)

Under normal circumstances about ninety percent of ministry is a matter of just showing up—whether we are gifted or not. (Really? So the author now moves to deny the necessity of any kind of spiritual gift. Where is this stuff coming from?)

I do not mean to deny that we might know at least some of our giftedness. I believe that I know some of mine. But we discover our giftedness in the process of serving, not by completing evaluative instruments. (Another undocumented statement.)

We also learn about our gifts as we see where God uses us in real ministry and as we listen to the counsel of those who know us well. (Hmm. Previously the author wrote:  the New Testament offers no procedure for helping Christians to know which gifts they have received. But now he does seem to know how it all happens.)

Too much talk about giftedness smacks of the effort to grant each person her or his own bespoke ministry. Under these circumstances, spiritual giftedness becomes a kind of ministry boutique in which expressions of service can be customized. (??? This makes no sense.)

Faced with this problem, we must avoid encouraging people to think of spiritual giftedness in terms of their own self-assertion and personal gratification. Let us remember that the needs of the body come first, while expressions of giftedness follow after. (What a mess. The author started out by making some categories of gifts, which was questionable, then descended to some undocumented assertions, and ends his article with gobbledygook. Wow.)