Cessationism - Proving Charismatic Gifts have Ceased - by Dr Peter Masters

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Followers of this blog know that we are continually searching for someone who can explain the biblical basis for cessationism. We have simple criteria:

1) Appealing to contemporary behaviors of charismatics is not relevant to the biblical case

2) Appealing to the silence of the Bible or history is not relevant to the biblical case

3) Suppositions or inferences about what biblical words mean is not the same thing as making the biblical case

Thus it falls to the defenders of cessationism to simply show from the Bible that the "supernatural" gifts of the Spirit ceased.

Here is the next contender, a Dr. Peter Masters. We were unable to locate a biography, but apparently he pastors a church in London. We don't know what his doctorate is in. Perhaps he can bring some light to the cessationism position. We will quickly discover our search to be in vain.

This is a long article. The author makes all sorts of a-biblical assertions. They mount up to the point where by the end we must call into question his competence as a teacher of the Bible.

We simply want the biblical case for cessationism. The author does not supply us with one.

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

Does the Bible teach definitively that the charismatic gifts have ceased? Can cessationism (the view that they have ended) be proved? Some say that the cessationism cannot be conclusively proved from Scripture.

We believe, however, that the ceasing of revelatory and sign-gifts (The author uses descriptors that presume his position. It has yet to be established that we must call them "sign gifts.")

in the time of the apostles is very plainly taught in God’s Word, so plainly, in fact, that the opposite view has only seriously appeared in the last 100 years or so. (Non sequitur. What is important is what the Bible teaches, even if teachers teach other things. 

Further, charismatic occurrences did not arrive in the last 100 years. It is a clear fiction that history has had a singular voice supporting the author's position. Examples that counter this claim:

Justin Martyr (100-165): “For the prophetical gifts remain with us even to the present time. Now it is possible to see among us women and men who possess gifts of the Spirit of God.”

Irenaeus (125-200): “In like manner we do also hear many brethren in the church who possess prophetic gifts and through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages. ... Yes, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years.”

Tertullian (150-240): “For seeing that we too acknowledge the spiritual charismata, or gifts, we too have merited the attainment of the prophetic gift ... and heaven knows how many distinguished men, to say nothing of the common people, have been cured either of devils or of their sicknesses.”

Novation (210-280): “This is he [the Holy Spirit] who places prophets in the church, instructs teachers, directs tongues, gives powers and healings, does wonderful works ... and arranges whatever gifts there are of the charismata; and thus making the Lord’s church everywhere, and in all, perfected and completed."

Origen (185-284): “Some give evidence of their having received through this faith a marvelous power by the cures which they perform, invoking no other name over those who need their help than that of the God of all things, along with Jesus and a mention of his history.”

Augustine (354-430): In his work The City of God, Augustine tells of healings and miracles that he has observed firsthand and then says, “I am so pressed by the promise of finishing this work that I cannot record all the miracles I know.”

And we note that if the supposedly recent arrival on the scene of charismatic teaching is a disqualifier, shouldn't we hold other "recent" teachings, such as premillenial dispensationalism, to the same standard?)

The term cessationism comes from the great 17th-century confessions of faith, such as the Westminster and Baptist confessions. These both use the same word. Speaking about how God has revealed his will and committed it to the Scriptures, the confessions say, 'Former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased'. (Waaait. Why would these confessionals from the 17th century be concerned with cessationism if charismatic teaching began only 100 years ago?

We also note that the contents of a confessional is not the biblical case.)

This word does not actually come from the Bible, but the doctrine does. (Yes, yes. The biblical case. We wait with bated breath for the biblical case...)

Not only has revelation been completed and ceased, but so have the signs that revelation is in progress. Here is a brief summary of six biblical proofs that the revelatory gifts have ceased (Yes, yes. From the Bible. We await this biblical proof.

And by the way, there is nothing in the Bible that refers to the "revelatory gifts.")

(visions, words of knowledge, words of wisdom, and prophecies), and also the sign-gifts (healings and speaking in tongues). (There is no such thing in the Bible as "sign-gifts.")

God still heals, of course, but in answer to prayer, and not through the hands of a gifted healer. (No Bible reference supplied.

And this begs an obvious question, if God still heals, then why does He not inspire prophecy or give visions with the same proviso offered by the author?)

The controversial passage of 1 Corinthians 13.8-10 will not be used in this article to prove the ending of the gifts. We will refer only to passages which we believe to be conclusive. (Conclusive? Wow. The Biblical case. Let's see how he does.)

1. Not since the apostles

The first proof for cessationism (the ending of revelatory and sign-gifts) is that healings and wonders could only be done by apostles, (Reason 1, false. Others besides the apostles healed. Was Stephen an apostle:

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

Was Ananias an apostle?

Ac. 9:17-17 Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord — Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here — has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes, and he could see again. 

What about this man:

Lk. 9:49-50 “Master,” said John, “we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we tried to stop him, because he is not one of us.” 50 “Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you.”)

and were their special authenticating signs. (More pejorative descriptors. "Revelatory gifts." "Sign-gifts." And now, "authenticating signs." None of these have been demonstrated from the Bible.)

In 2 Corinthians 12.12 Paul says: 'Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.' (Did Paul actually state that only the apostles could do such things? We don't see that in the quoted Scripture. The Greek word is σημεῖον, which means a sign, miracle, indication, mark, token. So the apostles were "marked" [noted and famous for] by signs and wonders. 

We also note that the same word is used about Stephen (Ac. 6:8).

Moreover, Paul claims "signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds." He did not say, "prophecy, tongues, and healing."

See our thorough discussion of authentication here.)

There were some people in the church at Corinth who challenged Paul’s apostleship. To defend himself he draws attention to his gift of healing and of working other miraculous signs, stating that only the apostles could do such things. (Um, no. We repeat the verse, as quoted by the author:

Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

The author is now lying to us. Paul did not say that only the apostles could do these things. Nor would he, since he knew his own healing had been accomplished by a non-apostle.)

An apostle was someone who had accompanied the Lord, seen him after his resurrection, and been personally commissioned by him. (This is false. Ac. 1:21-22:

Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.

It is clear Paul does not qualify, since he did not accompany the Lord. We discuss the apostles in some detail here.)

As a special witness of the resurrection he was given power to heal. (Undocumented assertion. Remember, the biblical case? When is this going to happen?)

He was also a person who would be shown 'all truth' by the Holy Spirit (John 14.26 and 16.13), and would either write or endorse inspired Scripture. (Also false. You can read our analysis of "all truth" here. And we note that not all the NT authors were apostles.

The author conflates "truth" with "Scripture," but the two are not the same. Nor is "all truth" restricted only to the apostles. Again and again we discover that Scripture itself contradicts the author's assertions. 

In 1 Jn 2:27 John writes this to his "dear children:"

As for you, the Spirit which he gave you is still in you, and you have no need of any teacher; but as his Spirit gives you teaching about all things, and is true and not false, so keep your hearts in him, through the teaching which he has given you.

Ah, so the Spirit teaches all of us about all things! So no, we cannot assent that only the apostles received all truth.)

Believers would need to know who the true apostles were in order to respect their unique authority. (Undocumented assertion.)

They would know them by their healings and other signs. (Undocumented assertion.)

People who did not belong to the band of apostles (which included two named assistants) could not do these things. (Undocumented assertion.)

If they had been able to do them, then no one would have been certain who were true apostles. (Undocumented assertion.)

In Acts 2.43 and 5.12 it is again made clear that all the miracles were performed 'by the hands of the apostles'. (True in those verses. This does not surprise us, since the official title of the book is "The Acts of the Apostles." But as we noted, others performed miracles.) 

This was exclusively their sign. (Undocumented assertion. As seems to be typical for cessationists, Dr. Peters is reluctant to quote the actual Scriptures he cited: 

Ac. 2:43 Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles.

Ac. 5:12 The apostles performed many miraculous signs and wonders among the people.

Do you see any indication of the exclusivity claimed by Dr. Peters?)

Also, in Hebrews 2.3-4 the healing gifts are firmly linked to the apostles. (Again Dr. Peters is reluctant to quote the actual Scripture:

He. 2:3-4: ...how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. 4 God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

First, there is no mention of the apostles doing miracles. Second, the author of Hebrews makes a separation between "signs, wonders, and various miracles," and "gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to His will." This passage clearly suggests that the latter category in particular was widespread among the believers, as opposed to being restricted to the apostles.

And note that what is being attested to here is not the apostles' ministry, but rather "this salvation!"

What seems to be clear is that cessationists can't seem to distinguish what the apostles did and what the early church was doing. These are two very different things, and is a fundamental error committed by cessationists.)

Paul was an apostle by virtue of having seen the risen Lord, (How is this a qualification? The reader is again directed to our thorough analysis of apostles here.)

and having been directly commissioned by him. His lack of training by Christ was made good by his receiving special and unique revelations. (Undocumented statement.)

He states that he was 'one born out of due time' (1 Corinthians 15.8), indicating that he was the only apostle outside the original band and therefore the last apostle. (There is no Scripture that indicates that Paul was the last apostle. To the contrary, we find Paul instructing the Church on how these things operate throughout the Body. Ep. 4:11-12:

It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12 to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up..."

We also note the passages that name Barnabas, Andranicus, and Junias as apostles, so clearly Paul was not the last apostle. We again direct the reader here.

And again, what about Stephen? Nowhere does the Bible describe him as an apostle, yet he is recorded as  doing "great wonders and miraculous signs among the people." [Ac. 6:8]

The author continues to lie to us.)

(Modern claims to apostleship do not match the biblical qualifications and are improper and wrong.) (The author has yet to show us where the Bible backs up his claims.)

When people say that cessationism (the ceasing of sign-gifts) (We conclude this terminology "sign-gifts) is inaccurate and deceiving, based on the evidence we have supplied.)

cannot be proved from Scripture, they forget that the book of Acts says specifically that healings and other wonders were exclusive to the apostles, who have now passed away. (Again, false. We note for the record that Dr. Masters does not supply us with that Scripture reference for such a profound statement of doctrine.

We also note that the Bible itself contradicts his assertion. In 1Co. 12:7-9 we find this: 

"Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8 To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit..."

Paul also tells us this in 1 Co. 12:28-30:

"And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?"

Do these Scriptures in any way teach that only the apostles could heal? No! Paul is telling us about the proper operation of the Church, where the Holy Spirit works in various ways in various people. There is no hint here that Paul was talking about only apostles.

In fact, Paul talks about varieties of people. There are those who are not apostles, but are healers. Others are not prophets, but work miracles. He asks us directly, "are all apostles?" We answer in concert with Paul, "no!" Because some are administrators, while others are prophets or helpers. Some are tongues speakers while others teach. The manifestations of the Spirit were throughout the Church!)

When the churches had grown and multiplied Peter went to Lydda, and then Joppa, famously healing Æneas and raising Dorcas from the dead. (This is in Acts chapter 9. We note for the record that this is still the fledgling Church, and Acts is continually relating stories of what happened as the gospel began spreading to the gentiles. This is what surprised the Jewish believers! Ac. 10:45: 

The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles.

Entire communities were astonished, (The author implies that it was the Church that was astonished, but the biblical record is clear that it was non-believers who were astonished and subsequently turned to the Lord:

Ac. 9:35 All those who lived in Lydda and Sharon saw him and turned to the Lord.

Ac. 9:42 This became known all over Joppa, and many people believed in the Lord.

because none of the other believers in such places could do these things. (Unsupported assertion.)

When a lad fell out of a window in Troas, there was only one person present who could raise him up, and that was Paul. (Unsupported assertion.)

The charismatic idea that healings were performed by numerous Christians is simply not to be found in the New Testament. (This is astonishingly false, and an Argument from Silence. Otherwise Paul would have no reason to correct the Corinthian church and explain to them the proper operation of the gifts.

1Co. 12:6-7 There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men. 7 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.

"To each one" means everyone, not just the apostles. And those manifestations weren't given to authenticate the apostles, they were given "for the common good.")

Only the apostles are recorded as having healed, together with two apostolic assistants or delegates, Stephen and Philip, and possibly Barnabas. (And Ananias. We would suggest that these are pretty substantial exceptions, disproving the author's assertions.)

The only time someone outside this group performed a healing was when the Lord told Ananias to heal Paul. There is no other healing apart from these in the early church. (Hmm. Another exception. When does the list of exceptions grow long enough to negate the premise that only the apostles healed?

And by the way, Acts is about the Apostles, so why would there be numerous records of non-apostolic healings? 

And why the instruction to the Corinthians? Why would Paul tell them how these things worked if only the apostles were doing them and they were to be gone in a few years?

The supposed absence of Scripture regarding non-apostolic healings is nothing more than a gigantic Argument from Silence.)

The Pentecostal/charismatic idea that healings took place constantly by Christians at large is not taught in the Bible. (This of course is false.)

Thus the infallible record of Scripture shows the entire charismatic approach to healing to be a mistake based on a myth. The record proves that the healings and mighty deeds were restricted to a class of people who have passed away. (The author repeats his false premise.)

2. The temporary purpose of tongues (Our discussion of tongues is here, and we clearly demonstrate that the author's case is false.)

The second proof that cessationism can be proved from the Scriptures (sign-gifts have ceased) is about tongues-speaking. It is the biblical statement that tongues-speaking was given by God specifically as a sign for Jews, (Actually, a sign for the apostles, demonstrating the gentiles could receive the Holy Spirit.)

signalling to them that the new era of Messiah had arrived.

In 1 Corinthians 14.21-22 Paul says,

'In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not.'

In other words, the gift of tongues was a miraculous proof to Jews who were resistant to believing in Christ, that the new age and a new church order had arrived. It was not for the benefit of Jews who had come to believe, but a sign of promise and warning to those who did not believe. It was not intended for Gentiles, but Jews. (False again. In fact, the very first instance of tongues speaking were a sign to many nations: Ac. 2:8-11 

Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs — we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!

In addition, there is no indication that the tongues speaking of Ac. 19:6, 1Co. 12:10, or 1Co. 14:5 had anything to do with signs for the Jews. In actual fact, the tongues speaking in Acts was uniquely a sign for the apostles.)

Paul quoted from Isaiah 28.11, a chapter in which Isaiah prophesies Christ’s coming. As a sign to Jews, Isaiah says Jewish people will be addressed by those with 'stammering lips and another tongue'. Gentile languages will challenge them, a most belittling experience for Jewish people. At the same time it was a sign that the Messianic age would bring Gentiles into the church, and the Gospel would be preached in other languages. (See our discussion of Isaiah 28 here.)

This would be a mark of the new age when God would pull down the flag of the Jewish church, and run up the flag of the Jewish-Gentile church of Jesus Christ. Unbelieving Jews, who resisted Christ and clung to the skirts of Moses, would find the Word of God being preached to them in barbarian, Gentile languages. (Tell us, Dr. Masters, what language is 

10 For it is: Do and do, do and do, rule on rule, rule on rule; [Hebrew: sav lasav sav lasav kav lakav kav lakav (possibly meaningless sounds; perhaps a mimicking of the prophet’s words), also in verse 13] a little here, a little there.”

All this came to pass, beginning on the day of Pentecost. The Jews were duly called and warned, but tongues are not mentioned outside the Acts of the Apostles and 1 Corinthians 12-14, (Argument from Silence.

There is no mention of baptism after the epistle to the Galatians. 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon do not mention the cross. Should we infer that these things are not important anymore?)

showing that they had accomplished their purpose of warning the Jews that the new era had arrived. (Undocumented assertion.)

This announcing of the church age was accomplished while the apostles lived, and the sign has been withdrawn. What passes for tongues-speaking today (Appeal to contemporary expressions, not the Bible.)

is not done in the presence of doubting Jews, and has nothing to do with the sign of the New Testament. The sign that the church age has come has served its purpose, and been surpassed by the reality. (The author has supplied us with no evidence this is true. Again, we are waiting for the biblical case.)

The Gospel is now preached in virtually every language in the world, and the sign that this would happen is long extinct. The purpose of tongues (according to Paul’s teaching) has been fulfilled, proving their discontinuation. (Then why does Paul refer to his mind being fruitful vs. his spirit being fruitful with tongues? Tongues were not a "sign" in the early church! 1Co. 14:14: 

For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.)

3. Tongues were real languages

The third proof of cessationism adds to the second, and it is this – that a gift of real languages was given on the day of Pentecost (and for a while afterwards), which has never been seen since that time. It should be obvious to us that the miraculous languages of the books of Acts and 1 Corinthians have never occurred since those days. (See our discussion of Tongues here.)

Tongues-speaking of modern times is never any known human language, but only meaningless, disjointed speech. Nothing miraculous happens. (We reject the author's argument regarding modern church expressions. This has nothing to do with the biblical case.)

In New Testament times the tongues-speaker was given by the Spirit the ability to speak in a real language which he had never learned, and people who had grown up with him were astonished. (Can we ask the author what "real language" this might be: 1Co. 14:28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.)

Jewish people would be present (as it was specifically a sign for them). On the day of Pentecost many Jews who lived in foreign regions heard their own languages spoken, and attested the genuineness of the speakers. (The author cannot demonstrate that these people were all Jews.)

After Pentecost the Spirit would give the miraculous gift of understanding to interpreters so that the authenticity of the language would be proved. Nothing like this has been seen since Bible times.

Today those who advocate tongues-speaking point to 1 Corinthians 13.1where Paul, speaking hypothetically, says that even if he spoke an angelic tongue, without love, it would amount to nothing. Desperately looking for a text, charismatic teachers take Paul's words as a justification for ecstatic, non-linguistic tongues, but it is plain to any thinking person that this is a serious misuse of the verse. (Those who believe in tongues are in no way desperate for supporting Scripture. There is much that Paul has to say to the Church about these things. Again we refer the reader to our article on tongues.)

By describing literal languages, the Bible effectively warns us that these gifts have been withdrawn. They simply have not happened at any time in history, anywhere in the world, since the very early days of the church. (The author now claims universal knowledge.)

What happens today is that people (who may be sincere Christians), in their desire to do what their leaders insist is right, seek to give utterance outside the rules of speech. However, they do not speak real languages, or even understand what they are saying.

Cessationism is clearly taught in Scripture, (We have yet to see a biblical case that this is true.)

by virtue of the fact that the very precise description of real languages given in Scripture cannot be applied to anything that has taken place since.[1]

Since Bible times we have had glorious events of reformation and mighty revivals, when the Spirit of God has been pleased to work in exceptional power. Yet we have not one reported or recorded claim of anyone speaking a real language they had never learned. This is certain proof that the gift of biblical tongues has ceased. (Again this does not come to bear on the biblical case. Moreover, the author appeals to his own ignorance as proof. Strange indeed.)

4. No instructions to appoint prophets

The fourth proof for cessationism is this: there are no New Testament instructions about appointing apostles, prophets, healers, or anything of the kind. (Um, because they were appointed by God. Scripture is clear.

1Co. 12:28 And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues.

And: 

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, 12 to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 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 fulness of Christ.

It seems plain to even a casual student of the Bible that the church was not appointing these people, God does this.)

This is a matter of tremendous significance, because God has given a detailed pattern for the church in the New Testament. It is true that some Christians do not believe that the Bible provides a blueprint for the church, but most people who are of baptistic, Bible-believing persuasion do. (I noted before that the author is a pastor. Perhaps he might describe to us how the Bible outlines a church structure that places one man at the top-dog position in the local church. Unfortunately for him, the Bible does not teach this, so his claim to embracing the biblical blueprint for the structure of the church rings hollow.)

The apostle Paul commands us repeatedly to be the most careful imitators of him in our church polity and conduct, and the pastoral epistles set out how we should behave and function in the church of God. We are given the precise pattern for the church for all time.

We disobey God's perfect pattern if we make appointments in the church he has not prescribed or commanded. (Like pastors? Sunday school teachers? Denominations?)

We have instructions that most carefully set out how to select preaching and ruling elders and deacons, but no instructions about the appointment of apostles (because they were not to be perpetuated), or on how to recognise or accredit a prophet (because revelatory gifts ended with the completion of the Bible). (This is a major whopper, since the N.T. is replete with examples of how to know a true prophet, how prophecy is to function in the church, and the superior desirability of possessing the prophetic gift. We discuss prophecy here and here.)

Nor are there instructions about appointing healers.

This is not merely an argument from silence, but a proof that these offices and functions were not to continue. (At least the author acknowledges the inadequacy of arguing from silence. But for some reason he takes it back and proclaims it a proof.)

The instructions for all matters of church organisation are complete and detailed and all-sufficient for the church until Christ comes again. We disobey God’s perfect pattern if we make appointments in the church that he has not prescribed and commanded. We disobey Scripture.

How can it be said that there is no certain scriptural proof that the gifts have ceased, when the pattern for the church gives no instructions for the continuation of inspired spokesmen and sign-workers? This is conclusive proof of cessationism – (Sigh. Something not mentioned is deemed conclusive proof?)

unless we do not hold to the sufficiency of Scripture, and do not believe that God has given a pattern for his church.

5. Revelation is now complete

The fifth proof for cessationism is that the Bible plainly teaches that revelation is now complete. There can be no new revelation after the time of the apostles. We have already noted that in John 14.26 and in John 16.13 the Lord Jesus Christ says twice to the disciples that the Holy Spirit, when he comes, will lead them into all Truth. (The author conflates terms. Revelation is not the same thing as truth. Neither is synonymous with the canon. We deal with "all truth" extensively here, so we won't repeat our arguments.)

They would be the authors of New Testament books, and the authenticators of inspired New Testament books not from their own pens. Soon all the Truth would be revealed, and after the apostolic era there would be no more revelation of Scripture. (Few would dispute the closed canon, but that is a non-sequitur to the prophetic gift.)

The Word would be complete. (Which it is.)

How glad we are of that! What a state we would be in if people could pop up here, there and everywhere (as they do in the charismatic world) giving us new revelations. Who would know what was right, and what was true? (Astonishing. The author is unaware of the biblical tests of the prophetic?)

But the Scripture is the final yardstick for everything, being complete and perfect, sufficient and trustworthy.

Jude (Remember that the author just stated that "They [that is, the apostles] would be the authors of New Testament books..." Jude was not named as an apostle.)

was able to speak about the faith which was 'once delivered unto the saints'. (Let's quote the verse: Jude 3: 

Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.

Now the author conflates "the faith" with "the truth", "the canon," and "revelation." These are not the same. "Faith" [pistis] is πίστις, εως, ἡ, faith, belief, trust, confidence; fidelity, faithfulness. That is, faith is the totality of what we believe and trust in and hold to. It is not a reference to the canon, the scripture, or the prophetic.)

His epistle was written possibly 25 years before the final book of the Bible, but late enough for all the main doctrines and church instructions to have been revealed. (I.e., "the faith.")

At this late stage of revelation he speaks of the faith once delivered, or better, once for all delivered. It is virtually complete; soon (from Jude’s standpoint) there will be no more revelation. (Does the author really know Jude's mind regarding this?)

The closing verses of the Bible warn that nothing must be added or taken from the words of the book of Revelation, but this clearly applies to the whole Bible, not just the last book. (Presumption.)

We know this because the warning closely echoes the one given by Moses in the first book of the ­Bible (the first five were originally one book), namely Deuteronomy 4.2, 'Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it' (words repeated by Moses in Deuteronomy 12.32). (Yet the OT is replete with subsequent prophetic material. And the entire NT was added later. Clearly the "word which I command" does not exclude the subsequent prophetic utterances by the OT prophets or NT writers.)

The completion of revelation is also proved by the fact that apostles and prophets are described as the foundation stage of the church. (The word "stage" is not found in the text.)

In Ephesians 2.20 the church is described as being – 'built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets [that is – New Testament prophets], Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone'. A foundation is something completed and stable, while the building continues to be constructed. (This text does not in any way exclude prophecy, including the prophetic nature of the completion of what would become the balance of the NT. Something is seriously wrong with the author's thinking.)

What about Joel's prophecy, quoted by Peter on the day of Pentecost, saying that when the Spirit is poured out, all believers, male, female, old and young will prophesy? (The hoops the author jumps through to dismiss and negate this Scripture will be astonishing. The reader will be flabbergasted.)

Is it not implied that this will go on literally until the Lord’s return? No, because our understanding of this prophecy must agree with the unassailable teaching of the Bible that revelation was soon completed, and then ceased. (False assertion #6. Oh my. That is, since the author has made the spurious claim that the "supernatural" gifts have stopped, he is now duty-bound to interpret Joel's prophecy in this light. That is an appallingly weak and facile argument.

Let's quote the passage, since the author apparently is concerned that quoting it will reveal the poverty of his arguments. 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. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.

Remember how the author told us that only the apostles did supernatural things? Remember how he told us that prophecy ended in the first century? Remember how he said only the apostles received "all truth?" This Scripture, quoted by Peter, was used to explain the supernatural pentecostal outpouring they had just experienced. Notice how totally this Scripture refutes the author.)

It is this completed revelation (especially the Gospel) that will be the witness of believers of all ages, male and female, through all the world, until the end. Believers will continue to see visions and dream dreams in the sense that they embrace, reflect upon, and proclaim the infallible '­visions and dreams' given to them in the Bible. (Hey, how about a supporting Scripture for this novel doctrine?)

They will not 'prophesy' in the sense of receiving new revelation. (Well, then. In what sense will they prophecy? How is it possible to have non-revelatory prophecy? Will the author cite us some examples of non-prophetic prophecy? Since this is a widespread phenomenon, the author surely knows of many people experiencing this.)

They will also dream dreams of Gospel plans and conquests. In this sense the prophecy of Joel is still being fulfilled. (Did you catch this? The author denies the continuing truth of the Joel prophecy, then takes it back and adds undocumented, non-Scriptural provisos and conditions.)

The extraordinary manifestations such as tongues had clearly vanished by the time Peter wrote his two epistles, for he gives no hint whatsoever that these features of the early scene were
still operating. (Another Argument from Silence. Beyond that, it is an incredible claim. Peter had particular subjects in mind as he wrote his epistles. Why would he write about tongues? 

Peter also did not mention evangelism, forgiveness, or the poor in his epistles. Are we to take that to mean these things have vanished as well?) 

As revelation was completed in the time of the apostles, we see that the task of apostles and prophets is over. And if the gifts of revelation are ended, then so are the authenticating signs of inspired penmen. We remember how Paul said, 'Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in…signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds' (2 Corinthians 12.12).

How can it be said that there is no biblical proof for cessationism when Scripture emphatically says that all revelation has been completed, like a foundation, at the beginning of the church age? (We yet await the text that "emphatically" says this. In fact, we yet await any kind of thoughtful argument at all that this is true.)

6. Scripture witnesses the end of gifts

The sixth proof for cessationism is that Scripture shows that they were in the process of being withdrawn at that very time. Paul, for example, who possessed apostolic power to do signs and wonders and mighty deeds, could not, in the course of time, heal Timothy or Trophimus or Epaphroditus. (Arguing from the silence of Scripture again. We deal with this specific claim here.)

We also see the withdrawing of the healing gifts in James 5, where James gives instructions about praying for the sick, and how the elders may lay hands upon the bedridden. It is obvious in this passage that there is no gifted healer in sight, only elders, who pray. (Wow. The author is so inured he can not see that non-apostolic healing is commanded in this Scripture.)

Anointing is mentioned, but the Greek term for religious anointing is not used. The Greek uses a very practical word that means 'rub down' with oil, more like a remedy for bedsores. (The author must make this text fit his doctrinal framework somehow.)

James effectively says, 'Don’t be so heavenly-minded that you are of no earthly use, but take some physical relief for the suffering person.' (The author is now doing verbal gymnastics, so we are now obligated to once again quote the Scripture in question: Ja. 5:14-15:

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.

Notice there is no indication of a medicinal purpose for the anointing. In fact, the anointing is to be performed "in the name of the Lord," and in conjunction with faith.  And James does not tell us the elders should make the sufferer comfortable. He says their prayers will make the sick person well.

This is simply dishonesty from the author.)

What matters most is prayer. It is certain in the instructions of James that no gifted healer is brought in to command healing, or to give a healing touch. (ummm, the elders???)

The laying on of hands of ordinary elders is a symbolic act, communicating the church’s love, care and responsibility. (Oh the depths the author will go to support his doctrine! Perhaps this is why he doesn't like to quote the Bible, because actually reading it will reveal the utter violence the author is doing to the verses. 

There is no "symbolic act" involved here. There is a significance to the laying on of hands.

1Ti. 4:14 Do not neglect your gift, which was given you through a prophetic message when the body of elders laid their hands on you.

1Ti. 5:22 Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, and do not share in the sins of others. 

He. 6:1 Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, 2 instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.

The writer of Hebrews seems to be speaking directly to the author, for the author doesn't understand the "elementary teaching" about the laying on of hands.)

The passage of James contains four exhortations to pray, and it follows his teaching that we ought to say, 'If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.' (Now the author is afraid to give the reference. Let's provide a larger part of the text in order to discern its context. Ja. 4:13-15: 

Now listen, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.” 14 Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. 15 Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.”

James has been giving little nuggets of wisdom and instruction, which he continues to do going in to chapter 5. They are not related to each other, and stand on their own. So, James is not talking about prayer or healing or anointing. James is discussing a completely different thing than what the author explained. 

His dishonesty is mounting up. He is reduced to lying to us to save his precious doctrines.)

We can and must pray for healing, but it may be God’s will that a sufferer should witness to God’s grace in the illness. (15 And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well...)

The main point for us in this article is that there is no one possessing personal power to heal in James 5. (The elders...)

Healing is by God in answer to prayer. The ongoing stance of the church is seen as praying for healing, remembering that some are called to live as 'an example of suffering affliction, and of patience' (James 5.10).

The fact that James does not mention healing gifts shows unmistakably that the possession of healing power was withdrawn quite early in the course of the apostolic era. (This is a particularly twisted Argument from Silence. We have just read the command from James that the elders should lay on hands and pray in faith. But somehow the "gift" of healing is not mentioned and therefore no one has the gift of healing? This is now crazytown.)

Would a neutral reader assume Bible gifts were for every age? (Now THAT'S a very good question. Our author is not a neutral reader, he's clearly reading everything through his doctrinal lens.)

It has been suggested that if a new convert with no experience of church life were shut in a room with a Bible, it would never occur to that person that the charismatic gifts had ceased. The opposite is true. There are many people (we know some) who come from other faiths who have been converted to Christ by private Bible reading, and subsequently found their way into a church. From the Bible alone they received no expectation of a charismatic scene. Much more frequently – increasingly so as time passes – believers leave charismatic churches having realised that what takes place there is not what they find in the Bible. (An argument from contemporary experience.)

(Based on our discussion above, the following assertions we can safely deem as false.)

On reading Acts carefully, they discover that only the apostolic band healed, and feel they have been misled by the Pentecostal-charismatic notion that numerous people did so.

Some wonder what the original significance or purpose of tongues was, and when they learn from Paul that they were specifically for Jews, they again feel misled by their teachers.

They also feel mis-taught when it becomes obvious that tongues were real languages, a vastly more miraculous matter than incomprehensible sounds.

Then, as soon as these believers appreciate the importance of the scriptural pattern for the church, the question sometimes arises in their minds – 'Where are the Bible's instructions for appointing apostles, prophets and healers today?' They find there are none, and become even more critical of the teaching they have received.

Then the question of the authority and sufficiency of Scripture intrudes, and they think, 'Is not revelation complete? How, then, can modern prophecies be valid and inspired?' It becomes obvious that all the 'authoritative' prophecies they have heard are a great mistake, and a delusion.

Many thinking believers see for themselves that to charismatic people, Scripture is second in importance to human imagination and mysterious experiences.

Finally, the more these friends study the Word, the more they see the evidence that the signs disappeared soon after their spectacular initial outpouring.

None of this means that the Lord does not move his people to remember duties or truths, or urge them to do certain things, or warn them of imminent dangers. These are divine intimations, not revelations or gifts. (The author makes this distinction without explaining it our providing the biblical basis. So we ask, how can God reveal something without it being revelation?)

In the history of the church, there are recorded instances of people having an intimation from God about some threatening event or person, but these are never revelations of doctrine. (Revelations of doctrine? The prophetic is not a claim to revelations of doctrine.

So now the author is walking back his claims. There apparently is extra-biblical revelation.)

We find such things in times of severe persecution. For instance, up until Perestroika in Russia, we heard of very credible instances when God’s key servants were wonderfully delivered from arrest because the Lord impressed on someone not to go to some particular place. It was later discovered that a KGB-police ambush lay in wait for them. However, no recipient of such an intimation was given a regular gift, and certainly not an authoritative revelation of doctrinal truth. (The author is now off the deep end.)

God can do all kinds of things to deliver and bless his people, but this is not in any way the reappearance of apostolic or prophetic gifts bestowed on individuals.

The damage of charismatic teaching (This is an appeal to the errors of contemporary expressions, which has no bearing on the biblical case for cessationism.)

Many charismatics are coming to see the enormous gap between the ­Bible and what they have been taught. Such doubters are often troubled by the fact that huge numbers of Catholics, who depend on Mary, the Mass, and works for salvation, are also able to speak in tongues and prophesy. Many also worship in exactly the same way as charismatic Protestants.

Charismatic doubters may also hear that non-Christian cults also speak in tongues. You do not need to be a saved Christian to speak in charismatic-style tongues, because it is not a true gift of the Spirit.
There are many sincere Christians in the charismatic movement, but we believe that the attempt to revive revelatory and sign-gifts is a very harmful mistake. We can see the harm in the emergence of huge sections of the movement in which the Gospel has virtually disappeared, buried under unbiblical extravagances.

There are large charismatic groups that now deny the penal substitution of Christ, and some even deny the Trinity. (One of the world’s most famous charismatic preachers and authors denies the doctrine of the Trinity.)

Worldly entertainment-style ­music dominates charismatic churches, even music of the most extreme and godless kind. The theatrical antics of money-grabbing charismatic leaders may be seen at any time on religious TV, and the prosperity-gospel heresy is seemingly everywhere.

Numerous charlatans and rogues have built large followings, carrying out their supposed 'healings' at venues throughout the world. Even music-hall fortune-telling techniques are being presented as spiritual wonders, in once respected churches.

The powerful current that constantly propels the charismatic constituency further and further from the Bible is evidence of a serious fundamental error, namely, the idea that the ­revelatory and sign-gifts are for all time. To experience them involves a twofold mistake: firstly, the downscaling of the gifts to something non-miraculous (eg: turning real languages into non-linguistic utterances); and secondly, the downgrading of Scripture, which must bow to imagined experiences of dreams, visions, 'words from the Lord', and similar revelations. There is harm done also to individual Christians whose faith is greatly diverted from the Lord and his Word, to phenomena and sensations.

We sincerely pray that God will deliver those who are his true children from the accumulating harm of this wildly mistaken departure from Scripture. It is perfectly possible to prove that cessationism is a Biblical truth.


Reference
[1]The unauthentic tongues-speakers of today do not even attempt to follow the Bible’s rules for the exercising of the gift in those days – that no more than two or three at most should speak in any service (1 Corinthians 14.27).