--------------------
This is a long slog, almost 6300 words. Yet we were only able to find four words actually quoted from the Bible. Just these four words: In the last days... That's it.
This is a long slog, almost 6300 words. Yet we were only able to find four words actually quoted from the Bible. Just these four words: In the last days... That's it.
It takes the author a little over 1000 words to mention his first Bible verse. And, another 2500 words pass by before the author starts to address the actual biblical case, where he opens with this:
The Essential Question: From God or Not from God?
As with any other doctrinal issue it is important to know the truth or the error of the "charismatic" position. This is not a purely doctrinal matter, since in the charismatic movement in all its various forms, such as Pentecostalism, neo-Pentecostalism, "power evangelism," and the "signs and wonders" movement, emphasis is placed on phenomena and subjective experiences. These experiences, which transcend doctrinal considerations and doctrinal boundaries, are the raison d'etre of the movement. They are not merely the daily outworking of one's doctrine as distinct from his doctrinal position, but are usually crisis events that allegedly go beyond normal, traditional Christian experience. These so-called "spiritual" experiences are either from God or not from God. There can be no neutral or partially true position. Either they are biblically true or they are false experiences. If they are biblically false then the issue is much more serious than merely another view of the Christian life, since the charismatic movement involves a spiritual experience that attempts to be in direct contact with supernatural forces. (Notice the author frames the issue in terms of A or B. All experiences together are true or they're all false. In the author's view, some experiences cannot be true and others false.
Since these gifts and signs did cease, the burden of proof is entirely on the charismatics to prove their validity. (Astounding arrogance. The author has a burden of proof for his own case, regardless of the activities of his opposition. We at Mountain Man Trails have made many detailed defenses of our non-cessationist beliefs. And there are many thoughtful explanations of these doctrines for any honest Bible student to seek out. We shall not allow the author to pretend that there is no case available to oppose him.)
The "latter rain" arguments are incorrectly based on verses that actually are referring to seasonal rainfall in Israel. Hosea 6:3 and Joel 2:23, for example, refer not to some unusual outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the last days of the Church Age. They refer instead to spring rains, in contrast to early rains in the fall. (Well, actually, a restoration of the blessing of autumn rains as supernatural act:
The miracles and signs of the apostolic age were clearly and overtly miraculous. Even the opponents of the gospel could not refute the miracles of the apostolic age. But today's "signs and wonders" cannot be verified even by those who are neutral or friendly to the movement. (Back to what contemporary people do. We still await the biblical case.)
The modern charismatic movement made little impact on the basis of speaking in tongues alone. (Sigh. Back to talking about contemporary activities. This has nothing to do with the biblical case.
If the church as a whole had performed miracles, (1Co. 12:10 to another miraculous powers... )
General biblical evidence. Moses performed a series of miracles. However, they did not continue throughout the Old Testament nor were other believers expected to do the same. (Argument From The Silence of Scripture.)
Specific biblical evidence. In addition to evidence from history there is also specific biblical evidence that certain gifts were temporary. The term "apostle," commonly used in ancient times in the sense of "representative," in a few passages describes representatives of a local church. This is not the New Testament gift of apostleship. Nor can this term, contrary to its normal meaning and contrary to the New Testament descriptions, be equated with the modern missionary merely on the basis of etymology. The only individuals in the New Testament who clearly possessed the miraculous gift of apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ and could perform miracles as required of an apostle (2 Cor. 12:12) (Let's quote:
When Paul wrote that all gifts were given to the church (1 Cor. 1:7) and benefited the church, he did not mean that all believers were apostles or performed miracles, but that the apostolic, miraculous ministry was experienced by and benefited the Corinthian church. Paul wrote in Ephesians 2:20 that the apostles and prophets are the foundation for the universal church. This at least implies that they were only for the beginning, (Is that how we determine doctrine now, by implication and supposition?)
We are done commenting.)
Characteristics That Refute Charismatic Claims
Various present-day forms of the charismatic movement are offshoots of Pentecostalism. All have the same basic ideology and all have arisen because of the modern Pentecostal movement. The primary focus for the individual, no matter how their theologians may describe it, is experiential. Many people in the charismatic movement emphasize the miraculous nature of this experience seemingly for personal benefit more than service to others.
Theological Associations
In Pentecostalism the doctrine of Christian perfectionism assumed a specific form in the inaccurate concept of a postconversion crisis experience, a "second blessing." This teaching with its concept of an effusion of power from the Holy Spirit resulted in the expectancy of and search to obtain overt "power" as described in Acts.
The movement crosses all theological boundaries. Speaking in tongues is present in non-Christian religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism, and in cults such as Mormonism. Healing, miracles, and exorcisms are also common in non-Christian religions. In conventional Christian circles the charismatic movement includes Protestants and Roman Catholics, liberals and conservatives, and individuals in many denominations. Those who believe in the inspiration of the Bible, justification by faith, and many other doctrines—as well as those who do not—are also involved.
Questionable Theology
The concept of the "second blessing" or "baptism or fullness of the Spirit" presupposes that while Jesus' death on the cross paid for sin, it is insufficient to empower for service, to enable one to be spiritual, or to give effectiveness in prayer. This differs drastically from the teaching of the New Testament. The view that only those who speak in tongues have real communication with God is contrary to the biblical teaching that all believers have full access to God. Romans 8:26 states that all believers are helped in prayer by the Spirit with inaudible, non-uttered, internal groanings.
The tongues movement presupposes that communication with the spiritual realm is more direct when it is apart from the mind. Such a concept, though found in various religions, is contrary to biblical Christianity. This emphasis on a level of communication that bypasses the mind and is not direct communication from the believer to God is a dangerous teaching. This interest in "supernatural" events, not primarily as convincing signs but as the daily experience of believers that supposedly places them in contact with the supernatural, is dangerous. This middle-level, spirit realm, called the "excluded middle," is an area of charismatic emphasis.
The emphasis on experience, particularly in this level above the rational, often results in emphasizing "experience" over Scripture. In a recent nationally televised program on the subject of televangelism several charismatically oriented evangelists appealed to the "call" as the license for a sinning preacher to continue his ministry. They made no appeal to the Scriptures.
Similarities To Non-Christian Religions
The modern-day charismatic movement is disturbingly similar to practices common in paganism, while at the same time it lacks correspondence to biblical miracles. Trancelike states and communications on a level apart from the mind are common in paganism. An emphasis on physical healing and exorcism for the benefit of adherents is common. The experience of a power or force "overcoming" the participants is similar to pagan practice. The bizarre and often wild practices of early Pentecostalism seem similar to pagan religion.
The idea of contact and interest in the spirit world, the "excluded middle" between God and man, is also common to pagan religions.
The Effects Of The Movement
All groups and doctrinal persuasions of Christendom have experienced theological and moral problems with both their leaders and laymen. As other Christians have experienced, so a number of charismatic leaders have led lives that are morally or ethically contrary to Scripture. If not more common, this is at least as common as among noncharismatics. Therefore it may be safely concluded that all the alleged miracles and so-called tongues-speaking have not produced any genuine spiritual advance over noncharismatics. It has produced enthusiasm for the miraculous, but this is not to be equated with spirituality.
All these supposedly miraculous events have produced no advance in biblical knowledge or spiritual living. The basic doctrines common to the movement are not original with charismatics. Their main claim to biblical knowledge is the assumption that the current church should be like the early church. Since the movement has not produced more spiritual believers or any advance in biblical or theological knowledge, what has it accomplished? Is it not amazing that a movement that claims to have restored power for service, ability to communicate with God more than others have, ability for self-edification, power to heal and perform other miracles, and ability to prophesy and receive direct revelation, has produced no significant advance in spirituality or in biblical or theological knowledge? Is it not inconsistent that a movement which claims to be in direct contact with the Holy Spirit, to have all gifts such as prophecy, apostleship, and the word of knowledge, to communicate directly with God by tongues-speaking and other means, can at the same time include Roman Catholics, conservative and liberal Protestants, amillennialists, premillennialists, Calvinists, Arminians, those who deny the verbal inspiration of the Bible, and those who reject Christ's vicarious atonement on the cross?
Apparently the Holy Spirit is not concerned with communicating any information to correct all these differences, many of which are crucial and some of which are incorrect. All this direct communication with the Spirit has apparently done nothing to correct even basic errors. It has not even produced unity among charismatics regarding the nature and purpose of many of the gifts. This movement has solved no theological issue, produced no advance in biblical knowledge, and has not produced more spiritual Christians. Would such an effusion of the genuine Spirit of God produce so little? Other than enthusiasm there seems to be no spiritual advantage to this movement and the noncharismatics are not missing out on any genuine spiritual benefit. On the negative side the movement has split churches, and through its televangelists the movement has had one of the most significant negative impacts on the testimony of the church in recent history. These characteristics are evidence that the charismatic phenomena are not the New Testament phenomena, that the genuine gifts are not present.
Conclusion
In every attempt to prove that the New Testament gifts exist today, the charismatic movement fails. The objective evidence of history and lack of correspondence with the New Testament indicate that the genuine miraculous gifts ceased and have not reoccurred. Biblical evidence indicates that these gifts ceased with the apostolic age. The theological associations and results of today's so-called miraculous gifts are contrary to gifts given by God. The movement has not produced Christians who are more spiritually mature, as would be expected of a genuine occurrence of the New Testament gifts. Apparently a Christian experiences no spiritual loss by not becoming involved in the charismatic movement.
On the other hand there is a dangerous similarity to non-Christian practices, there is a dangerous interest in supernatural phenomena that give no evidence of being from God, and there is a disturbing interest in the spiritual world somewhere between God and man. Since evidence points to the cessation of the miraculous gifts in the apostolic age, no one can be confident that the charismatic phenomena are from God. Since believers are warned to avoid contact with the intermediate spiritual world and since they should do only what they are confident God approves, no one should experiment in the realm of the charismatic phenomena.
Author
Thomas R. Edgar Professor of New Testament Literature and Exegesis Capital Bible Seminary, Lanham, Maryland.
No Bible verse specifically states that tongues, signs, and wonders will continue throughout the Church Age. Nor is there a verse that specifically states they will cease at the end of the apostolic age.
This is astounding. How can a supposed Bible teacher, a professor no less, write thousands of words while admitting there is no actual proof verse for either point of view? How can he provide a Bible teaching without quoting the Bible? How is it possible to explain something this important while admitting his beliefs are really not stated in the Bible?
We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.
Referring to the charismatic movement Hollenweger states that "in the not too distant future there will be more Christians belonging to this type of Christianity than to the Anglican community. They will number almost as many as all other Protestants together." He feels that the numerical and perhaps the spiritual center of Christianity will shift to "Indigenous Non-white" or "Third World Pentecostal" churches. The validity of such a prevalent force is an issue that cannot be ignored.
The Essential Question: From God or Not from God?
As with any other doctrinal issue it is important to know the truth or the error of the "charismatic" position. This is not a purely doctrinal matter, since in the charismatic movement in all its various forms, such as Pentecostalism, neo-Pentecostalism, "power evangelism," and the "signs and wonders" movement, emphasis is placed on phenomena and subjective experiences. These experiences, which transcend doctrinal considerations and doctrinal boundaries, are the raison d'etre of the movement. They are not merely the daily outworking of one's doctrine as distinct from his doctrinal position, but are usually crisis events that allegedly go beyond normal, traditional Christian experience. These so-called "spiritual" experiences are either from God or not from God. There can be no neutral or partially true position. Either they are biblically true or they are false experiences. If they are biblically false then the issue is much more serious than merely another view of the Christian life, since the charismatic movement involves a spiritual experience that attempts to be in direct contact with supernatural forces. (Notice the author frames the issue in terms of A or B. All experiences together are true or they're all false. In the author's view, some experiences cannot be true and others false.
This is a false binary equation.)
Whether the charismatics are correct can only be determined from the Scriptures and other relevant facts. By the very nature of the issue, the "gifts," such as tongues, healings, and signs and wonders, so prevalent in today's charismatic movement, are either from God or not from God. There can be no middle ground.
Evidence Contrary to the Validity of the Phenomena
Several factors give evidence that the phenomena of the charismatic movement are not the gifts and activities of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. On the other hand charismatic proponents have given no evidence, other than their assumption, that these are the same phenomena. That their numbers are growing, that the followers are enthusiastic, and that there are alleged miracles are not evidence that the phenomena are from the Holy Spirit, since all these occur in other religions. To argue that the New Testament gifts could occur today or that no verse rules out such a possibility is not enough; it must also be shown that the modern charismatic "gifts" are the same as in the New Testament. (The author insists on a standard but does not tell us where he finds this standard. It's certainly not a biblical standard.)
Evidence Contrary to the Validity of the Phenomena
Several factors give evidence that the phenomena of the charismatic movement are not the gifts and activities of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. On the other hand charismatic proponents have given no evidence, other than their assumption, that these are the same phenomena. That their numbers are growing, that the followers are enthusiastic, and that there are alleged miracles are not evidence that the phenomena are from the Holy Spirit, since all these occur in other religions. To argue that the New Testament gifts could occur today or that no verse rules out such a possibility is not enough; it must also be shown that the modern charismatic "gifts" are the same as in the New Testament. (The author insists on a standard but does not tell us where he finds this standard. It's certainly not a biblical standard.)
The proponents of the charismatic movement have been unsuccessful in proving either the first (the possibility of the gifts today) or the second (that these are the same phenomena). Are all phenomena automatically from the Holy Spirit simply because someone makes such an assertion, unless a verse can be found that directly states they are not? It is not enough merely to assert that charismatic phenomena are New Testament phenomena. There must be evidence that they are the same. (The author is discussing present day situations and experiences. This is not the biblical case.)
The Evidence Of History
If the miraculous gifts of the New Testament age had continued in the church, one would expect an unbroken line of occurrences from apostolic times to the present. (Another standard not found in the Bible.)
The Evidence Of History
If the miraculous gifts of the New Testament age had continued in the church, one would expect an unbroken line of occurrences from apostolic times to the present. (Another standard not found in the Bible.)
If they are of God, why should such miracles be absent for centuries? (Why was there a 400 year period of silence between the OT and the NT?)
The entire controversy exists because the miraculous gifts of the New Testament age did cease and did not occur for almost 1,900 years of church history and certainly have not continued in an unbroken line. (This the matter to be demonstrated. We shall not allow the author to presume his case to be true before he makes it.)
The entire controversy exists because the miraculous gifts of the New Testament age did cease and did not occur for almost 1,900 years of church history and certainly have not continued in an unbroken line. (This the matter to be demonstrated. We shall not allow the author to presume his case to be true before he makes it.)
Questions about their presence today as well as differing opinions, even among charismatics, regarding the nature of tongues, prophecy, and certain other gifts are due to the fact that they ceased. (Undocumented claim.)
Chrysostom, a fourth-century theologian, testified that they had ceased so long before his time that no one was certain of their characteristics.
History contradicts the charismatics. (The author seems to think that the early church was unanimous in a cessationist opinion. At the risk of being accused of an Appeal to History ourselves, let's offer the true testimony of some early church fathers. These quotes demonstrate the author is in error:
History contradicts the charismatics. (The author seems to think that the early church was unanimous in a cessationist opinion. At the risk of being accused of an Appeal to History ourselves, let's offer the true testimony of some early church fathers. These quotes demonstrate the author is in error:
- 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.”
Notice that each of these figures pre-date Chrysostom.)
Though some have attempted to prove that tongues and other miraculous gifts have occurred in the postapostolic history of the church, the very paucity and sporadic nature of alleged occurrences is evidence against this claim. Referring to alleged instances of tongues-speaking, Hinson, a church historian, sums up the situation this way: "The first sixteen centuries of its history were lean ones indeed. . . . if the first five centuries were lean the next were starvation years for the practice in Western Christendom and doubtful ones in Eastern Christendom." (Continuing his Appeal to History. Doubtless that the reader understand that what happened after the Bible was written in no way establishes doctrine. We wonder when he's going to get the biblical case.)
After a few alleged (!! Alleged?) instances in the second century there is a gap of almost 1,000 years before a few more occur. (Um, sir. What history records is not the same as everything that occurred. There may be many instances over the course of history, gone unreported.)
After a few alleged (!! Alleged?) instances in the second century there is a gap of almost 1,000 years before a few more occur. (Um, sir. What history records is not the same as everything that occurred. There may be many instances over the course of history, gone unreported.)
Obviously it would not have been difficult to produce evidence for these gifts during the apostolic age. Why then is there such a dearth of evidence if the gifts continued throughout church history? (We supplied some, above...)
The alleged instances are even more rare if restricted to genuine believers, and if hearsay evidence is omitted. If instances of the gift of healing rather than supposed answers to prayer are considered, the alleged instances all but vanish. That these miraculous workings ceased in the past can hardly be refuted, and this is recognized by many charismatics. Dayton feels that many charismatics actually prefer to grant that certain gifts ceased, since they regard today's phenomena as a latter-day pouring out of the Spirit.
Explanations are unrealistic. It is one thing for a doctrine such as justification by faith to be temporarily lost due to man's frailty. It is another thing entirely for miraculous signs and wonders to be missing. (?? Why? Upon what basis does the author make such a comparison? Justification by faith is a Bible doctrine that neither requires nor admits historical evidence.)
Explanations are unrealistic. It is one thing for a doctrine such as justification by faith to be temporarily lost due to man's frailty. It is another thing entirely for miraculous signs and wonders to be missing. (?? Why? Upon what basis does the author make such a comparison? Justification by faith is a Bible doctrine that neither requires nor admits historical evidence.)
Those at Pentecost were not expecting to speak as they did.
In Acts no tongues speaker (Hmm. Moving on to tongues, apparently. But still we lack the author's biblical explanation for the previous discussion.)
In Acts no tongues speaker (Hmm. Moving on to tongues, apparently. But still we lack the author's biblical explanation for the previous discussion.)
was previously aware of the existence of the gift; yet they spoke. They could hardly have had faith in their ability to perform miracles or to speak in tongues, since they were unaware of such gifts. They did not obtain or lose the ability because of their belief or lack of belief in the charismata. If God gave these gifts during the history of the church, they would have occurred regardless of man's frailty. To argue that the gifts faded away in the postapostolic church because of a failure to believe in miracles evades the facts of history and has no biblical support. (Irony Alert. The author has yet to provide biblical support for anything he has written to this point.
Would the author think that quenching the Spirit might have implications for the Church?
19 Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not despise prophecies. 21 Test all things; hold fast what is good. 22 Abstain from every form of evil. 1 Thessalonians 5:19-22
The author poo-poos early apostasy as a possible contributor the the fading of the supernatural, but he does so based on nothing more than his own opinion.)
First Corinthians 12-14 (Hooray! Our first actual mention of a Bible verse!!!)
implies that the early church was only too inclined toward such gifts rather than against them. (What "such gifts" are we talking about here? Paul writes:
1Co. 12:7-11 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, 10 to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.
There's a bunch of gifts listed by Paul. Will the author explain anything?)
In almost every religion men have been inclined toward the miraculous rather than toward rejecting obvious miracles. (Perhaps, but completely irrelevant.)
And yet some argue that miracles ceased or nearly so in the early church—an era when belief in the supernatural was rampant and when the signs and wonders actually occurred—because of disbelief in miracles! (We are totally uninterested in what "some argue.")
Yet it is claimed that in the most rationalistic of ages, when no miracles were occurring, 19- and 20th-century Christians believed to the extent that the gifts reoccurred, and reoccurred on the scale of today's claims. (We are totally uninterested in what "19- and 20th-century Christians believed.")
Since modern Christians are so receptive to signs and wonders and modern man is so willing to believe the charismatic claims, on what basis can one assume that the early Christians would refuse to do so? (We are totally uninterested in what both modern Christians and early Christians would do or not do.)
Those willing to believe religious miracles are always plentiful. To claim that this "miraculous infusion" of the Spirit gives joy, purpose, power for service, and revitalization of the church, and at the same time claim that such a tremendous working was ignored, rejected, and allowed to drop out of the early church which experienced it, is illogical. (Now the author appeals to logic. This is getting old. We only have so much patience.)
The only reasonable explanation for the lack of these gifts in church history is that God did not give them. (Apostasy. Bad Bible teaching. Persecution. There are a lot of possible reasons for the supposed lack of these gifts.)
If He had given them, they would have occurred. (This is false on its face. Israel had been given the Ten commandments but they didn't follow them. The Pharisees were taught by Jesus, but they didn't believe. For some unexplained reason, the author thinks that the lack of something happening is evidence that it shouldn't happen.)
Since these gifts and signs did cease, the burden of proof is entirely on the charismatics to prove their validity. (Astounding arrogance. The author has a burden of proof for his own case, regardless of the activities of his opposition. We at Mountain Man Trails have made many detailed defenses of our non-cessationist beliefs. And there are many thoughtful explanations of these doctrines for any honest Bible student to seek out. We shall not allow the author to pretend that there is no case available to oppose him.)
Too long Christians have assumed that the noncharismatic must produce incontestable biblical evidence that the miraculous sign gifts did cease. However, noncharismatics have no burden to prove this, since it has already been proved by history. (Wow. Just wow. History [that is, what was written down about what people did or didn't do] is the line the author draws. This is simply anti-biblical.)
It is an irrefutable fact (Well, we have just refuted it.)
admitted by many Pentecostals. (We are not interested in what "many Pentacostals" admit.)
Therefore the charismatics must prove biblically that the sign gifts will start up again during the Church Age and that today's phenomena are this reoccurrence. (The author demands a standard of proof he is unable or unwilling to embrace for himself.)
In other words they must prove that their experiences are the reoccurrence of gifts that have not occurred for almost 1,900 years. (No, charismatics only need to open their Bibles, read what is written, then ask the author why the things written there no longer apply. They need not accept what happened historically, since historical behavior may have been wrong.)
"Latter day" Explanations are Inadequate.
Many Pentecostals hold that the sign gifts did cease and that they have reoccurred in these "latter days." This must be demonstrated from Scripture, however. (No, we reject the author's demands until he himself conforms to them.)
"Latter day" Explanations are Inadequate.
Many Pentecostals hold that the sign gifts did cease and that they have reoccurred in these "latter days." This must be demonstrated from Scripture, however. (No, we reject the author's demands until he himself conforms to them.)
There is no biblical evidence that there will be a reoccurrence in the church of the sign gifts or that believers will work miracles near the end of the Church Age.
(Jn. 14:12 I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.1Co. 14:1 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.2Pe. 1:3 His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness.1Co. 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.Mt. 17:20 He replied, “Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, `Move from here to there’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.”)
However, there is ample evidence that near the end of the age there will be false prophets who perform miracles, prophesy, and cast out demons in Jesus' name (cf. Matt. 7:22-23; 24:11, 24; 2 Thess. 2:9-12). (Indeed. However, the existence of such men does not exclude charismatic gifts.)
During the Church Age there will be false leaders who fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness (2 Cor. 11:13-15). (Indeed. However, the existence of such men does not exclude charismatic gifts.)
During the Tribulation period, there is no indication that believers, other than the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3-12, will perform miracles. (Argument From Silence.)
Those performed by the two witnesses are exceptional, and their actions are comparable to those of Old Testament prophets rather than to those of the apostles. The two witnesses are not part of the church, and if they were, they could hardly be considered typical of the church.
The "latter rain" arguments are incorrectly based on verses that actually are referring to seasonal rainfall in Israel. Hosea 6:3 and Joel 2:23, for example, refer not to some unusual outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the last days of the Church Age. They refer instead to spring rains, in contrast to early rains in the fall. (Well, actually, a restoration of the blessing of autumn rains as supernatural act:
Joe. 2:23 Be glad, O people of Zion, rejoice in the LORD your God, for he has given you the autumn rains in righteousness. He sends you abundant showers, both autumn and spring rains, as before. 24 The threshing-floors will be filled with grain; the vats will overflow with new wine and oil.
The author now seems to be lying to us.)
The arguments based on the expression "in the last days" in Acts 2:16-21 are also invalid. If the "last days" referred to in Acts 2:17 includes the day of Pentecost, the beginning of the Church Age, and "if this is that" (v. 16) includes Pentecost, then it cannot mean at the same time the "last days"of this Church Age. On the other hand if the "last days" do not include Pentecost, then Pentecost was not a fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, and Acts 2:16-21 refers specifically to Israel and is still future. (Let's quote, since the author seems reluctant:
The arguments based on the expression "in the last days" in Acts 2:16-21 are also invalid. If the "last days" referred to in Acts 2:17 includes the day of Pentecost, the beginning of the Church Age, and "if this is that" (v. 16) includes Pentecost, then it cannot mean at the same time the "last days"of this Church Age. On the other hand if the "last days" do not include Pentecost, then Pentecost was not a fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, and Acts 2:16-21 refers specifically to Israel and is still future. (Let's quote, since the author seems reluctant:
Ac. 2:17 “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. 19 I will show wonders in the heaven above and signs on the earth below, blood and fire and billows of smoke. 20 The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord. 21 And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."
Now with text before us we can compare it with the author's claims. He presents us with a choice:
- If Peter was referring to this passage as inclusive of the events that happened that day, then it doesn't apply to any other subsequent time.
- If Peter was referring to this passage but not including the events of that day, then Joel's prophecy means Pentecost is something other than our last days.
This obtuse explanation seems to suggest that Peter was explaining only that event, and if he wasn't, he also wasn't explaining our times. We can begin to see why the author doesn't quote Scripture. Has the end times occurrences of blood, smoke, and darkness happened yet? Has the great and glorious day of the Lord came? No, these are future events. Joel's prophecy doesn't not apply only to the events of Pentecost, because the prophecy talks of future events as well.
The author's explanation is spurious and puerile.)
Either way this passage gives no evidence for a reoccurrence of miraculous gifts during the "last (latter) days" of the church. (Of course not, because the Holy Spirit intended them to continue uninterrupted to present day. For whatever reason, the Church punted, grew cold, or disobeyed.)
The present charismatic movement is characterized by phenomena that began in the church about 100 years ago, which apart from any historical connection or evidence are claimed to be the same as the miracles performed in the apostolic age. (Back to talking about the events of history.)
It is simply naive to accept this claim without some direct historical link or solid biblical evidence (Irony Alert again.)
that these present phenomena are the same as those in the days of the apostles. The most reliable evidence would be a direct historical link with the apostolic gifts due to their continuity in the church. However, as already argued, history testifies to the contrary. The gifts ceased and there is no reason to expect their presence or reoccurrence today.
Lack Of Similarity With The New Testament
For any phenomena to make credible claim to be the same as the gifts and miracles of the apostolic age there must be great similarity between the two. (Is this actually what charismatics believe? Are the gifts and miracles required to be similar?)
Lack Of Similarity With The New Testament
For any phenomena to make credible claim to be the same as the gifts and miracles of the apostolic age there must be great similarity between the two. (Is this actually what charismatics believe? Are the gifts and miracles required to be similar?)
Any phenomena can be intentionally duplicated or copied. (Then how does the author know that the gifts must be similar, or that they're not genuine, if they can be duplicated or copied?)
Therefore similarity alone cannot prove the modern phenomena are genuine. (Oh. The author's first test is negated.)
Conversely a lack of similarity is definitely evidence against the claim that they are the same as the New Testament gifts and miracles. (Where does the Bible say this?)
An examination of the New Testament reveals that the modern charismatic phenomena are not sufficiently similar to those of the apostolic age. (But the phenomena can be duplicated? So the fake closely resembles NT expressions of the gifts (which the author would apparently accept as valid evidence), but the charismatic expressions are fake because they're not similar enough? What?)
An examination of the New Testament reveals that the modern charismatic phenomena are not sufficiently similar to those of the apostolic age. (But the phenomena can be duplicated? So the fake closely resembles NT expressions of the gifts (which the author would apparently accept as valid evidence), but the charismatic expressions are fake because they're not similar enough? What?)
Where are the tongues of fire and the rushing of a mighty wind as on the day of Pentecost? (Apparently contemporary supernatural occurrences are required to be not only similar, but exactly the same in every detail. Where does the Bible require this?)
Do missionaries blind their opponents as Paul did? (Where does the Bible require this?)
Do church leaders discern hypocrisy and pronounce the immediate death of members as in Acts 5:1-11? (Where does the Bible require this?)
Do evangelists amaze an entire city with miracles as did Philip (8:5-8)? (Where does the Bible require this?)
Are they then taken to another place of ministry by the Holy Spirit (vv. 39-40)? (Where does the Bible require this?)
Are entire multitudes healed by merely being in the shadow of the healer (5:15)? (Where does the Bible require this?)
Do prophets give specific prophecies which come to pass soon after (11:27-28)? (Where does the Bible require this?
And further, what if these thing were actually happening today? Would that be evidence the Holy Spirit was at work? How would the author know, since apparently these things can be duplicated?)
The miracles and signs of the apostolic age were clearly and overtly miraculous. Even the opponents of the gospel could not refute the miracles of the apostolic age. But today's "signs and wonders" cannot be verified even by those who are neutral or friendly to the movement. (Back to what contemporary people do. We still await the biblical case.)
A detailed comparison with specific individual gifts shows an amazing lack of similarity between the New Testament gifts and the modern "charismatic" gifts.
The gift of healing. The New Testament gift of healing is a specific gift to an individual enabling him to heal. It is not to be confused with healing performed by God in answer to prayer. (Why? Did NT healers not pray for peoples' healing?)
The gift of healing. The New Testament gift of healing is a specific gift to an individual enabling him to heal. It is not to be confused with healing performed by God in answer to prayer. (Why? Did NT healers not pray for peoples' healing?)
New Testament healings include those with verifiable afflictions and handicaps such as the man who was crippled from birth (Acts 3:1-10). The healings were instantaneous, complete, and obvious to all. (What about the blind man who at first saw trees [Mk. 8:22-25]? What about Jesus' home town, where He could not do very many miracles [Mt. 13:58]?)
The man crippled from birth had never walked, but he was instantly able to walk and jump. The healings in the apostolic age never failed regardless of the faith of the recipient. They did not depend on direct physical contact (5:15). There were no preliminaries, healing meetings, or incantations. The healer merely stated to the individual, even when the individual was unaware of the intention to heal (3:1-10), something equivalent to the words, "In Jesus' name, stand up and walk." The healings were usually in public, performed on unbelievers, and often en masse.
The modern charismatic movement made little impact on the basis of speaking in tongues alone. (Sigh. Back to talking about contemporary activities. This has nothing to do with the biblical case.
We are going to pause our commentary until the author finally arrives at a discussion of the Bible.)
It was not until "healing" was added that the movement began to grow in significant numbers.
Today's healers admittedly often fail. This is blamed on the lack of faith of the sick rather than on the healer. The alleged healings are seldom instantaneous or complete. They usually are not healings of objectively verifiable illnesses; they often pertain to internal disorders such as "emotional healing." Rather than being irrefutable, they are unverified or even denied by those neutral. They involve healing meetings, preliminaries, incantations, and usually repeated visits. They are not performed in the streets, en masse, or at a distance. In a crowd they are usually performed on only a select few. They are never performed on those who are not aware of the "healer" or his intention to "heal."
There is little correspondence between modern-day charismatic "healings" and the healings recorded in the New Testament. The differences are so vast that many of today's healers are careful to point out that they do not have the gift of healing, but are merely those to whom God often responds with healing. No one heals today in such a way that it is clearly the New Testament gift of healing.
Exorcism of demons. The miraculous ability to exorcise demons directly also needs to be differentiated from answers to prayer (James 5:14). The exorcisms in Acts concerned those clearly recognized as "possessed," including a girl with a mantic gift (Acts 16:16-18). They were clearly differentiated from those who were merely ill (5:16). They were not nebulous cases of emotional problems such as "personality meltdown," frustration, tension, the "demon of worry," the "demon of drugs or alcoholism," as is often the case in alleged exorcisms today. Such can hardly be considered demonism in the New Testament sense.
The New Testament instances of exorcism never failed, were without preliminaries, were instantaneous, were usually performed in public, often en masse, usually on unbelievers, and in the case of the mantic girl (Acts 16:16-18) apart from any cooperation of the demonized. Today's "exorcisms" often fail, often require repeated sessions, are usually unverified as demonism, are never en masse, seldom if ever occur in public, and are only on the cooperative "faithful." Many cases are similar to common psychiatric or religious counseling sessions that are claimed to be "demon exorcism." This is not to suggest that genuine cases of demon possession may not exist. The point is that merely claiming to exorcise demons gives no evidence that one is actually doing so.
Raising the dead. Dorcas had been dead for some time when Peter apart from fanfare instantaneously raised her (Acts 9:40). The incident regarding Eutychus (20:7-12) concerns a boy who fell three stories and was dead. Paul with no fanfare pronounced him alive. In the apostolic age with all the miracles, exorcisms, healings en masse, and so on, there are only these two low-profile incidents of raising the dead. This action was apparently rare even for the apostles. There is no reason to expect this today. No modern-day "raising of the dead" has been verified. Wimber refers to a man who fell, hit his head, was apparently unconscious for three minutes, and "came to" with a bump on his head. After Wimber and others prayed the bump eventually went away. This is incredible, not as a miracle, but that anyone would consider this as a possible raising of the dead. Would anyone have been convinced by such a "miracle" that Jesus was the Son of God or that the apostles represented God?
The gift of tongues. The nature, purpose, and other characteristics of the gift of tongues, including a complete exegetical discussion and refutation of the concept of private or devotional tongues is included elsewhere. The tongues of the apostolic age were genuine miracles, since they were the ability to speak previously unlearned foreign languages, rather than the "charismatic tongues" of today, which can easily be duplicated. The only passage describing the nature of tongues speaking is Acts 2:4-11, where they are definitely languages. Peter stated that the tongues-speaking in Cornelius's house (10:46) was the same as on the day of Pentecost (11:17). And there is no reason to assume the instance in Acts 19:6 was different. Since 1 Corinthians 14 repeatedly states that the tongues-speaking in Corinth was in an assembly of believers, why then was it mysterious and why was there lack of understanding? It was because the believers did not understand the foreign languages of the tongues-speakers. The mystery was not because the tongues in 1 Corinthians differed in nature from the tongues in Acts.
New Testament tongues were verifiable foreign languages. The term glw'ssa means "language" and is never used for ecstatic speech. By contrast, today's "tongues" have never been verified as actual languages. All objective studies by impartial linguists indicate that they do not have the characteristics common to languages.
The New Testament gift of tongues is specifically said to be a sign for unbelievers (1 Cor. 14:22). This is how it functioned at Pentecost. All instances were public, not private. The people who spoke in tongues in Acts (2:4; 10:46; 19:6) were not previously aware that the ability or gift existed, and in Acts 10:46 and 19:6 the people were not previously aware of the gospel of Jesus Christ. They could not have been seeking or in any way exercising belief in such a gift, and yet they received it. There is no indication that the New Testament speakers spoke in a trance; they were in control of the phenomenon. Perhaps the most outstanding contrast is usage. The gift of tongues in the New Testament functioned, as did all the other gifts, for ministry to others (1 Cor. 12:1-30; 1 Pet. 4:10), rather than primarily for the benefit of the speaker as in the modern charismatic movement.
There is no similarity between today's tongues and the New Testament gift. Today's charismatic proponents are wrong regarding the nature, purpose, use, and every other aspect of tongues. There is no reason to assume merely on the basis of their claim that they are correct in identifying their tongues-speaking—which can easily be duplicated and is common to man—as the New Testament gift of tongues.
Conclusion. The "charismatic gifts" of today are not similar to the New Testament phenomena either in general perspective or in the details. There is no evidence to conclude that they are the same; there is every reason to conclude that they are not. The historical fact that the New Testament gifts ceased long ago and the fact that there is no historical link whatever between the charismatic phenomena and the New Testament gifts require the same conclusion. The only remaining possibility for giving credence to the modern charismatic claims would be to produce direct statements of Scripture that the apostolic phenomena will always be present in the church, or that they will specifically be in the modern church despite their cessation through most of church history. Even if this were produced, there must also be evidence that the charismatic phenomena are somehow the same phenomena referred to in the passages. However, there is no specific biblical evidence such as this. There is no biblical statement that requires a denial of historical fact or that requires an equation of such dissimilar entities merely on the assertion of the proponents. All objective evidence is contrary to the charismatic claims. It is not sufficient to assert that by faith their claims must be taken contrary to the evidence. This is existential naivety, not faith. Faith is trust in biblical evidence rather than in experience.
Biblical Evidence For Cessation
No Bible verse specifically states that tongues, signs, and wonders will continue throughout the Church Age. Nor is there a verse that specifically states they will cease at the end of the apostolic age. However, this does not mean that one cannot take a position on this issue. Many doctrines, such as the Trinity, are not directly stated but are derived from the study and correlation of passages of Scripture. There are several indications in the Scriptures that the gifts of tongues, healing, and miracles (signs and wonders) will not continue. (Which Scriptures?)
Today's healers admittedly often fail. This is blamed on the lack of faith of the sick rather than on the healer. The alleged healings are seldom instantaneous or complete. They usually are not healings of objectively verifiable illnesses; they often pertain to internal disorders such as "emotional healing." Rather than being irrefutable, they are unverified or even denied by those neutral. They involve healing meetings, preliminaries, incantations, and usually repeated visits. They are not performed in the streets, en masse, or at a distance. In a crowd they are usually performed on only a select few. They are never performed on those who are not aware of the "healer" or his intention to "heal."
There is little correspondence between modern-day charismatic "healings" and the healings recorded in the New Testament. The differences are so vast that many of today's healers are careful to point out that they do not have the gift of healing, but are merely those to whom God often responds with healing. No one heals today in such a way that it is clearly the New Testament gift of healing.
Exorcism of demons. The miraculous ability to exorcise demons directly also needs to be differentiated from answers to prayer (James 5:14). The exorcisms in Acts concerned those clearly recognized as "possessed," including a girl with a mantic gift (Acts 16:16-18). They were clearly differentiated from those who were merely ill (5:16). They were not nebulous cases of emotional problems such as "personality meltdown," frustration, tension, the "demon of worry," the "demon of drugs or alcoholism," as is often the case in alleged exorcisms today. Such can hardly be considered demonism in the New Testament sense.
The New Testament instances of exorcism never failed, were without preliminaries, were instantaneous, were usually performed in public, often en masse, usually on unbelievers, and in the case of the mantic girl (Acts 16:16-18) apart from any cooperation of the demonized. Today's "exorcisms" often fail, often require repeated sessions, are usually unverified as demonism, are never en masse, seldom if ever occur in public, and are only on the cooperative "faithful." Many cases are similar to common psychiatric or religious counseling sessions that are claimed to be "demon exorcism." This is not to suggest that genuine cases of demon possession may not exist. The point is that merely claiming to exorcise demons gives no evidence that one is actually doing so.
Raising the dead. Dorcas had been dead for some time when Peter apart from fanfare instantaneously raised her (Acts 9:40). The incident regarding Eutychus (20:7-12) concerns a boy who fell three stories and was dead. Paul with no fanfare pronounced him alive. In the apostolic age with all the miracles, exorcisms, healings en masse, and so on, there are only these two low-profile incidents of raising the dead. This action was apparently rare even for the apostles. There is no reason to expect this today. No modern-day "raising of the dead" has been verified. Wimber refers to a man who fell, hit his head, was apparently unconscious for three minutes, and "came to" with a bump on his head. After Wimber and others prayed the bump eventually went away. This is incredible, not as a miracle, but that anyone would consider this as a possible raising of the dead. Would anyone have been convinced by such a "miracle" that Jesus was the Son of God or that the apostles represented God?
The gift of tongues. The nature, purpose, and other characteristics of the gift of tongues, including a complete exegetical discussion and refutation of the concept of private or devotional tongues is included elsewhere. The tongues of the apostolic age were genuine miracles, since they were the ability to speak previously unlearned foreign languages, rather than the "charismatic tongues" of today, which can easily be duplicated. The only passage describing the nature of tongues speaking is Acts 2:4-11, where they are definitely languages. Peter stated that the tongues-speaking in Cornelius's house (10:46) was the same as on the day of Pentecost (11:17). And there is no reason to assume the instance in Acts 19:6 was different. Since 1 Corinthians 14 repeatedly states that the tongues-speaking in Corinth was in an assembly of believers, why then was it mysterious and why was there lack of understanding? It was because the believers did not understand the foreign languages of the tongues-speakers. The mystery was not because the tongues in 1 Corinthians differed in nature from the tongues in Acts.
New Testament tongues were verifiable foreign languages. The term glw'ssa means "language" and is never used for ecstatic speech. By contrast, today's "tongues" have never been verified as actual languages. All objective studies by impartial linguists indicate that they do not have the characteristics common to languages.
The New Testament gift of tongues is specifically said to be a sign for unbelievers (1 Cor. 14:22). This is how it functioned at Pentecost. All instances were public, not private. The people who spoke in tongues in Acts (2:4; 10:46; 19:6) were not previously aware that the ability or gift existed, and in Acts 10:46 and 19:6 the people were not previously aware of the gospel of Jesus Christ. They could not have been seeking or in any way exercising belief in such a gift, and yet they received it. There is no indication that the New Testament speakers spoke in a trance; they were in control of the phenomenon. Perhaps the most outstanding contrast is usage. The gift of tongues in the New Testament functioned, as did all the other gifts, for ministry to others (1 Cor. 12:1-30; 1 Pet. 4:10), rather than primarily for the benefit of the speaker as in the modern charismatic movement.
There is no similarity between today's tongues and the New Testament gift. Today's charismatic proponents are wrong regarding the nature, purpose, use, and every other aspect of tongues. There is no reason to assume merely on the basis of their claim that they are correct in identifying their tongues-speaking—which can easily be duplicated and is common to man—as the New Testament gift of tongues.
Conclusion. The "charismatic gifts" of today are not similar to the New Testament phenomena either in general perspective or in the details. There is no evidence to conclude that they are the same; there is every reason to conclude that they are not. The historical fact that the New Testament gifts ceased long ago and the fact that there is no historical link whatever between the charismatic phenomena and the New Testament gifts require the same conclusion. The only remaining possibility for giving credence to the modern charismatic claims would be to produce direct statements of Scripture that the apostolic phenomena will always be present in the church, or that they will specifically be in the modern church despite their cessation through most of church history. Even if this were produced, there must also be evidence that the charismatic phenomena are somehow the same phenomena referred to in the passages. However, there is no specific biblical evidence such as this. There is no biblical statement that requires a denial of historical fact or that requires an equation of such dissimilar entities merely on the assertion of the proponents. All objective evidence is contrary to the charismatic claims. It is not sufficient to assert that by faith their claims must be taken contrary to the evidence. This is existential naivety, not faith. Faith is trust in biblical evidence rather than in experience.
Biblical Evidence For Cessation
No Bible verse specifically states that tongues, signs, and wonders will continue throughout the Church Age. Nor is there a verse that specifically states they will cease at the end of the apostolic age. However, this does not mean that one cannot take a position on this issue. Many doctrines, such as the Trinity, are not directly stated but are derived from the study and correlation of passages of Scripture. There are several indications in the Scriptures that the gifts of tongues, healing, and miracles (signs and wonders) will not continue. (Which Scriptures?)
The charismatic movement in all its forms rests not on exegetical evidence that the gifts will continue, but on the assumption contrary to history that since they occurred in the apostolic age they should also occur today. The foundation for this assumption is nonexistent.
The New Testament church was not characterized by power and miracles as the charismatics assume.
The New Testament church was not characterized by power and miracles as the charismatics assume.
(Sigh. Let's see what the Bible says about power in the NT church:
Ro. 15:13 May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.
1Co. 4:20 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of talk but of power.
1Co. 5:4 When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present...
2Co. 13:3 ...He is not weak in dealing with you, but is powerful among you.
Eph. 1:18-19 that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, 19 and his incomparably great power for us who believe.
Ep. 3:16 I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being...
Ep. 3:20 Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us...
Ep. 6:10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power.
Col. 1:10-11 And we pray this in order that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and may please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God, 11 being strengthened with all power according to his glorious might...
2Ti. 1:7 For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.
In our opinion, the author's doctrine was accurately described by Paul:
2Ti. 3:5 having a form of godliness but denying its power.)
It was characterized by the problems addressed in the epistles (including, e.g., the problems that beset the Corinthian church) and the problems of the churches described in Revelation 2 and 3. (That's what Paul wrote about, which is all the information we have. We do not know anything about what he did write about. We therefore cannot characterize the early church by the limited information contained in corrective or instructive letters written to churches, for there would not be a reason for Paul to write to a church if it did not need correction or instruction.)
Miracles were performed with very few exceptions only by the apostles (Acts 2:43; 5:12). (Exceptions? If there are exceptions, then the author's statement is moot. There is no statement in the Bible that tells us that only the apostles did miracles. Rather, the Bible tells us, 1Co. 12:10 to another miraculous powers... )
Those who "turned the world upside down" were the apostles, not the churches as a whole. (Undocumented claim.
Ac. 17:6 But when they did not find them, they dragged Jason and some other brothers before the city officials, shouting: “These men who have caused trouble all over the world have now come here...")
The charismatics assume that the church today should be like their imaginary church. They assume that the entire church today should be able to do all the apostles did in the New Testament.
If the church as a whole had performed miracles, (1Co. 12:10 to another miraculous powers... )
it is only an assumption, apart from evidence, that this should be true today. This assumption is not interpretation. The assumption that the miraculous events recorded in the Book of Acts should occur today is "a distinct hermeneutic, a distinctively Pentecostal manner of appropriating the Scriptures." This development of theology on the basis of narrative rather than on direct teaching of Scripture is always a precarious methodology.
General biblical evidence. Moses performed a series of miracles. However, they did not continue throughout the Old Testament nor were other believers expected to do the same. (Argument From The Silence of Scripture.)
The Old Testament prophets occasionally performed miracles, but Israel in general was not expected to do so, nor did the miracles continue throughout Israel's history. (Argument From The Silence of Scripture.)
The fact that some individuals on special occasions in biblical history performed miracles did not result in others doing the same or in a continuity of those miracles. (Argument From The Silence of Scripture.)
So there is no reason to assume that since the apostles and a few members of the early church performed miracles, they are to be expected today. (Argument From The Silence of Scripture.)
Specific biblical evidence. In addition to evidence from history there is also specific biblical evidence that certain gifts were temporary. The term "apostle," commonly used in ancient times in the sense of "representative," in a few passages describes representatives of a local church. This is not the New Testament gift of apostleship. Nor can this term, contrary to its normal meaning and contrary to the New Testament descriptions, be equated with the modern missionary merely on the basis of etymology. The only individuals in the New Testament who clearly possessed the miraculous gift of apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ and could perform miracles as required of an apostle (2 Cor. 12:12) (Let's quote:
2Co. 12:12 The things that mark an apostle — signs, wonders and miracles — were done among you with great perseverance.
Hmm. The only thing this Scripture tells us is that the apostles were known for their miracles. There is nothing here about apostolic qualifications, or that the miraculous was confined to the apostles.)
were the Twelve and Paul. Perhaps Barnabas and James can be included. (Stephen [Ac. 6:8]. Ananias [Ac. 9:17]. Agabus [Ac. 11:27]. The Antioch prophets [Ac. 13:1]. Judas and Silas [Ac. 15:32].
When do the "exceptions" overwhelm the premise?
And by the way, what is mentioned in Scripture is not all that happened. It's called "Acts of the Apostles" for a reason. It therefore makes total sense that there are not a lot of mentions of others doing supernatural things.)
Almost every branch of the church, including most Pentecostals, has held that apostles in this sense have not continued in the church. The charismatic reliance on the narrative of Acts is often avoided when defining "apostles" or "prophets," as too restrictive. These gifts can be precisely delineated, however. Imprecise use of Scripture is a common failing among charismatics. (Irony Alert...)
No matter how one tries to broaden the term "apostle," there is little doubt that apostles such as the Twelve and Paul did not continue. If they did not, then all things are not as they were in the New Testament church, all miraculous gifts did not continue as in the beginning church, and at least one gift in the New Testament did not continue. (So far, the author has only managed to deny. He has yet to actually prove his case.)
In addition the New Testament sets standards for an apostle that preclude the continuance of this gift. Not only must an apostle be able to perform miracles (2 Cor. 12:12), not only was the early church very careful about granting anyone, even Paul, the title of "apostle" (Gal. 2:1-10), (Sigh. Really. Here Paul talks about the Jerusalem leaders, who were skeptical of Paul. Remember, he had furiously persecuted the saints. Many didn't believe his conversion [Ac. 9:13]. And, worse than that, his mission to the gentiles offended many in the Jerusalem leadership [Ga. 2:7, Ga. 2:11-12]. So when he went to Jerusalem and they saw the grace upon him [Ga. 2:9], they gave him the ok.
In addition the New Testament sets standards for an apostle that preclude the continuance of this gift. Not only must an apostle be able to perform miracles (2 Cor. 12:12), not only was the early church very careful about granting anyone, even Paul, the title of "apostle" (Gal. 2:1-10), (Sigh. Really. Here Paul talks about the Jerusalem leaders, who were skeptical of Paul. Remember, he had furiously persecuted the saints. Many didn't believe his conversion [Ac. 9:13]. And, worse than that, his mission to the gentiles offended many in the Jerusalem leadership [Ga. 2:7, Ga. 2:11-12]. So when he went to Jerusalem and they saw the grace upon him [Ga. 2:9], they gave him the ok.
This was not about the early church being careful about granting apostleship, it was about Paul's situation only.)
but also an apostle must have seen the resurrected Lord (1 Cor. 9:1-2; Acts 1:22-26). (Sigh again. Let's quote. The first reference:
1Co. 9:1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my work in the Lord? 2 Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. 3 This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me. 4 Don’t we have the right to food and drink? 5 Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? 6 Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?
Unless the author is willing to accept that being free is a criteria for apostleship, entitling them to eat and marry, this is not what the author claims it is. Second reference:
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.
"Become a witness with us" is not a qualification, it's a duty. The new apostle must join with them to testify [give witness] of the resurrection.)
Paul explicitly stated that he was the last one to see the resurrected Lord (1 Cor. 15:8), and he specifically connected this fact with his apostleship. (Again, let's quote:
1Co. 15:5-7 and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
Unless the author is willing to admit there were more than 500 apostles, then he must accept that Paul was not referring to apostolic qualifications. Especially since we know now that witnessing the resurrected Christ was never an apostolic requirement.)
This requirement for apostleship refers to genuine appearances of the resurrected Christ and not to "visions." (Was Paul's encounter a vision, or a literal appearance of Christ. Did Barnabas [Ac. 14:14, apostolos] see the risen Christ? What about Epaphroditus [Ph. 2:25, apostolos]?)
There have been no resurrection appearances since the apostolic age. Paul clearly stated that the last appearance was to him. (Revelation 1:12-18 refers to a vision, and is not an appearance of the resurrected Lord in bodily form on earth.) Therefore apostles in the sense of the Twelve and Paul cannot occur today. (Which of course is a false conclusion based on a misreading of Scripture.)
When Paul wrote that all gifts were given to the church (1 Cor. 1:7) and benefited the church, he did not mean that all believers were apostles or performed miracles, but that the apostolic, miraculous ministry was experienced by and benefited the Corinthian church. Paul wrote in Ephesians 2:20 that the apostles and prophets are the foundation for the universal church. This at least implies that they were only for the beginning, (Is that how we determine doctrine now, by implication and supposition?)
and this accords with the other specifics mentioned above. Since "apostle" in the full sense of the gift was only a temporary gift and did not continue in the church, (A thesis the author has yet to prove.)
the biblical precedent is established that some gifts given in the apostolic age did not continue and were only temporary. It is contrary to Scripture to assume that all gifts and all happenings of the apostolic church are to continue and to be expected in today's church.
Since the ones who performed the miracles were only in the beginning church, it is logical that the miracles themselves were only for the apostolic age. (Ga. 3:5 Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?)
Since the ones who performed the miracles were only in the beginning church, it is logical that the miracles themselves were only for the apostolic age. (Ga. 3:5 Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?)
Since the ability to perform such miracles was evidence of apostleship (2 Cor. 12:12), (The author assumes that evidence of apostleship means exclusive to apostles. This is not a proper inference.)
then with rare exceptions others could not have performed such signs and wonders, and they would not continue when the apostles ceased. In addition to this implication the temporary nature of miracles is directly supported by Scripture. Mark wrote that the apostles went forth in accord with the Lord's instructions and preached (aorist tense) everywhere and the Lord confirmed their word with signs. This is all placed in the past at the time of Mark's writing (Mark 16:20; the time of the present participle is relative to the past tense of the main verb). The same is true in Hebrews 2:3-4, which says miracles were performed by eyewitnesses of the Lord (apostles), and were performed by God to confirm the word of the eyewitnesses. All this was past at the time Hebrews was written (the main verb is past tense and the participle is relative in time to the main verb "was confirmed"). In both cases the signs, wonders, and miracles are referred to as being in the past at the time of writing; they were not referred to as occurring at that time. In both passages miracles were performed by the apostles (eyewitnesses) and are described as intended by God as evidence to authenticate the apostles' preaching.
James 5:14 does not instruct the sick to look for a healer or for someone with the ability to heal. Rather it instructs the sick to call for the elders and they are to pray for him. This is basically in accord with the procedure in noncharismatic churches, but is in direct contrast to what would be expected if the gift of healing were available for believers. Either the gift was not to be used to heal believers, or the only other option is that it had ceased. (The author continues to make Arguments From Silence.)
Conclusion. There is ample biblical evidence that the miraculous gifts ceased with the apostolic age. (Sigh.)
James 5:14 does not instruct the sick to look for a healer or for someone with the ability to heal. Rather it instructs the sick to call for the elders and they are to pray for him. This is basically in accord with the procedure in noncharismatic churches, but is in direct contrast to what would be expected if the gift of healing were available for believers. Either the gift was not to be used to heal believers, or the only other option is that it had ceased. (The author continues to make Arguments From Silence.)
Conclusion. There is ample biblical evidence that the miraculous gifts ceased with the apostolic age. (Sigh.)
To assume that such gifts are permanent is contrary to the Scriptures in general and to the biblical precedent that some gifts such as full apostles of the Lord definitely ceased. History is against the charismatic claims. The dissimilarity between the New Testament gifts and the alleged gifts of the charismatics also contradicts their claims. The assumption that because these gifts existed in the apostolic age they should also exist today is a gratuitous assumption contrary to objective evidence. It is also an assumption contrary to scriptural principles and specific biblical evidence. There is no teaching in Scripture that the church should look for such miraculous gifts, (1Co. 14:1 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.)
nor are they referred to in the passages discussing the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23), spiritual warfare (Eph. 6:10-18), the life of faith (Eph. 5:18; Col. 3:12-17), and requirements for church leaders (1 Tim. 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9) as necessary for the believer to lead a spiritual life. (Argument From Silence again.
This is the end of the author's Scriptural discussion, all accomplished without quoting a single Scripture. Pathetic.
We are done commenting.)
Characteristics That Refute Charismatic Claims
Various present-day forms of the charismatic movement are offshoots of Pentecostalism. All have the same basic ideology and all have arisen because of the modern Pentecostal movement. The primary focus for the individual, no matter how their theologians may describe it, is experiential. Many people in the charismatic movement emphasize the miraculous nature of this experience seemingly for personal benefit more than service to others.
Theological Associations
In Pentecostalism the doctrine of Christian perfectionism assumed a specific form in the inaccurate concept of a postconversion crisis experience, a "second blessing." This teaching with its concept of an effusion of power from the Holy Spirit resulted in the expectancy of and search to obtain overt "power" as described in Acts.
The movement crosses all theological boundaries. Speaking in tongues is present in non-Christian religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism, and in cults such as Mormonism. Healing, miracles, and exorcisms are also common in non-Christian religions. In conventional Christian circles the charismatic movement includes Protestants and Roman Catholics, liberals and conservatives, and individuals in many denominations. Those who believe in the inspiration of the Bible, justification by faith, and many other doctrines—as well as those who do not—are also involved.
Questionable Theology
The concept of the "second blessing" or "baptism or fullness of the Spirit" presupposes that while Jesus' death on the cross paid for sin, it is insufficient to empower for service, to enable one to be spiritual, or to give effectiveness in prayer. This differs drastically from the teaching of the New Testament. The view that only those who speak in tongues have real communication with God is contrary to the biblical teaching that all believers have full access to God. Romans 8:26 states that all believers are helped in prayer by the Spirit with inaudible, non-uttered, internal groanings.
The tongues movement presupposes that communication with the spiritual realm is more direct when it is apart from the mind. Such a concept, though found in various religions, is contrary to biblical Christianity. This emphasis on a level of communication that bypasses the mind and is not direct communication from the believer to God is a dangerous teaching. This interest in "supernatural" events, not primarily as convincing signs but as the daily experience of believers that supposedly places them in contact with the supernatural, is dangerous. This middle-level, spirit realm, called the "excluded middle," is an area of charismatic emphasis.
The emphasis on experience, particularly in this level above the rational, often results in emphasizing "experience" over Scripture. In a recent nationally televised program on the subject of televangelism several charismatically oriented evangelists appealed to the "call" as the license for a sinning preacher to continue his ministry. They made no appeal to the Scriptures.
Similarities To Non-Christian Religions
The modern-day charismatic movement is disturbingly similar to practices common in paganism, while at the same time it lacks correspondence to biblical miracles. Trancelike states and communications on a level apart from the mind are common in paganism. An emphasis on physical healing and exorcism for the benefit of adherents is common. The experience of a power or force "overcoming" the participants is similar to pagan practice. The bizarre and often wild practices of early Pentecostalism seem similar to pagan religion.
The idea of contact and interest in the spirit world, the "excluded middle" between God and man, is also common to pagan religions.
The Effects Of The Movement
All groups and doctrinal persuasions of Christendom have experienced theological and moral problems with both their leaders and laymen. As other Christians have experienced, so a number of charismatic leaders have led lives that are morally or ethically contrary to Scripture. If not more common, this is at least as common as among noncharismatics. Therefore it may be safely concluded that all the alleged miracles and so-called tongues-speaking have not produced any genuine spiritual advance over noncharismatics. It has produced enthusiasm for the miraculous, but this is not to be equated with spirituality.
All these supposedly miraculous events have produced no advance in biblical knowledge or spiritual living. The basic doctrines common to the movement are not original with charismatics. Their main claim to biblical knowledge is the assumption that the current church should be like the early church. Since the movement has not produced more spiritual believers or any advance in biblical or theological knowledge, what has it accomplished? Is it not amazing that a movement that claims to have restored power for service, ability to communicate with God more than others have, ability for self-edification, power to heal and perform other miracles, and ability to prophesy and receive direct revelation, has produced no significant advance in spirituality or in biblical or theological knowledge? Is it not inconsistent that a movement which claims to be in direct contact with the Holy Spirit, to have all gifts such as prophecy, apostleship, and the word of knowledge, to communicate directly with God by tongues-speaking and other means, can at the same time include Roman Catholics, conservative and liberal Protestants, amillennialists, premillennialists, Calvinists, Arminians, those who deny the verbal inspiration of the Bible, and those who reject Christ's vicarious atonement on the cross?
Apparently the Holy Spirit is not concerned with communicating any information to correct all these differences, many of which are crucial and some of which are incorrect. All this direct communication with the Spirit has apparently done nothing to correct even basic errors. It has not even produced unity among charismatics regarding the nature and purpose of many of the gifts. This movement has solved no theological issue, produced no advance in biblical knowledge, and has not produced more spiritual Christians. Would such an effusion of the genuine Spirit of God produce so little? Other than enthusiasm there seems to be no spiritual advantage to this movement and the noncharismatics are not missing out on any genuine spiritual benefit. On the negative side the movement has split churches, and through its televangelists the movement has had one of the most significant negative impacts on the testimony of the church in recent history. These characteristics are evidence that the charismatic phenomena are not the New Testament phenomena, that the genuine gifts are not present.
Conclusion
In every attempt to prove that the New Testament gifts exist today, the charismatic movement fails. The objective evidence of history and lack of correspondence with the New Testament indicate that the genuine miraculous gifts ceased and have not reoccurred. Biblical evidence indicates that these gifts ceased with the apostolic age. The theological associations and results of today's so-called miraculous gifts are contrary to gifts given by God. The movement has not produced Christians who are more spiritually mature, as would be expected of a genuine occurrence of the New Testament gifts. Apparently a Christian experiences no spiritual loss by not becoming involved in the charismatic movement.
On the other hand there is a dangerous similarity to non-Christian practices, there is a dangerous interest in supernatural phenomena that give no evidence of being from God, and there is a disturbing interest in the spiritual world somewhere between God and man. Since evidence points to the cessation of the miraculous gifts in the apostolic age, no one can be confident that the charismatic phenomena are from God. Since believers are warned to avoid contact with the intermediate spiritual world and since they should do only what they are confident God approves, no one should experiment in the realm of the charismatic phenomena.
Author
Thomas R. Edgar Professor of New Testament Literature and Exegesis Capital Bible Seminary, Lanham, Maryland.
No comments:
Post a Comment