Recently we've been reconsidering many of the things we thought we understood regarding doctrine and faith. We have begun to question certain beliefs, church structures, and practices of the western church. Too often we have discovered unbiblical doctrines and activities. This causes us concern. We have deemed this our “Rethink.”
Our questions include, how did we arrive at our doctrines? Does the Bible really teach what we think it teaches? Why do churches do what they do? What is the biblical basis of church leadership structure? Why do certain traditions get entrenched?
It's easy to be spoon fed the conventional wisdom, but it's an entirely separate thing to search these things out for one's self. In the past we have read the Bible with these unexamined understandings and interpreted what we read through those lenses. We were lazy about our Bible study, assuming that pastors and theologians were telling us the truth, but we rarely checked it out for ourselves.
Therefore, these Rethinks are our attempt to remedy the situation.
We should note that we are not Bible scholars, but we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to understand the Word of God.
Cessationists frequently use terminology which simultaneously assumes their doctrines and diminish their theological opponents. One such phrase is "sign gifts."
Here's a representative description:
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).
Our Response
First, lets' actually quote the verse:
The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works.
As the reader can see, Paul does not call them "sign gifts." Paul doesn't mention tongues, healing, or actually, any gifts at all. Therefore, this author arbitrarily creates an exclusive category.
Let's look at the context of 2 Cor. 12:12. Why was Paul making this claim? We have to go all the way back to chapter 10 to find where Paul started 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!As we can see, Paul did not pull his statement in 2 Cor. 12:12 out of thin air. He was defending his apostleship, a defense 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.Notice that the Corinthians were not accusing Paul of not being an apostle, they thought he was an inferior apostle. They didn't like his speaking style. They thought the other apostles were better. They criticized him for not being like these other apostles. He denied 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."
Paul was placing himself in the company of the "super apostles (2Co. 12:11)" that is, the foundational apostles (Ep. 2:20). He defended this status by telling them 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, (see Stephen, Ananias, and the unknown man for example) but rather Paul was specifically defending his status within the apostleship by appealing to the miracles. This verse is not about who can do signs and wonders, it is about Paul.
Notice that Paul was writing to defend himself well AFTER performing miracles. Catch that? Even though he had performed miracles in their midst they questioned his apostleship. Thus his miracles did not authenticate him!
The miracles did not authenticate him.
It has nothing to do with some sort of "sign gift" idea.
Conclusion
The reason this is important to cessationists is that they want us to think that miracles authenticated the apostles. This idea is not found in the Bible. The Gospel was being authenticated by the miraculous (He. 2:4).
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 and them alone to perform them. However, this isn't evident to the neutral observer.
No comments:
Post a Comment