A Nobody Responds to Tom Pennington's Case for Cessationism, Part 3

In this edition, I would like to respond to points 4-7 from Tom Pennington's case for cessationism at the recently concluded "Strange Fire" Conference. 

Rebuttal to Argument #4:  The Nature of Miraculous Gifts

Pastor Pennington attempts here to demonstrate that the contemporary phenomena associated with miraculous gifts bear no resemblance to what we read about in the New Testament.  He cites the common cessationist belief that tongues were always known human languages and not the gibberish of many charismatic expressions for example and that charismatics (even reformed ones) always wrongly differentiate Old Testament prophecy from New Testament prophecy.

In response I will say several things.  Firstly it appears to me (though I may be wrong) that this assumption betrays certain Western biases.  Now I have always believed that this kind of accusation is somewhat overstated, but in this case the shoe fits.  That miraculous events are, in fact, often occurring on many foreign mission fields is well attested (for example, I own a first-hand account of miraculous events that occurred in Indonesia during a revival in the last century).

Secondly, this is an argument from experience (or lack of it).  The double standard is astonishing.  If I were to claim a miraculous healing as verification that healing is for today, I would be rebuked strongly by cessationists for basing my theology on experience.  Yet this is exactly what Tom Pennington would ask us to do - base a theology of cessation, at least partially, on lack of experience.

Thirdly, Pennington's thesis is easily falsifiable.  In addition to the account I own of events in Indonesia, I also own first-hand experience myself, as well as the first-hand accounts of others, of miracles in here in the United States.  To give one very personal example, I nearly died nine years ago when visiting South Dakota.  At some point during the trip, in the middle of the night, my windpipe closed up almost entirely and I literally could not breathe.  Yet it was through the immediate prayers of a Nazarene pastor (an Arminian!) that led to my windpipe opening back up immediately. 

Fourthly, let's consider the gift of tongues.  Space prevents me from going too deeply into it, but I will state that I believe that while the gift of tongues can be real human languages, they may not always be.  A good example of contemporary tongues as real languages is found in the late Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel (another Arminian!), who tells of a story in his book Charisma Vs. Charismania (pages 107-109) of a Jewish girl saved during the early days of Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa through the use of tongues and interpretation which were spoken in a very rare dialect of French.  The girl had recently lived in France and knew this dialect, but also that very few outside of France could use it.  She became a Christian that day.

However, that tongues must always be human languages is debatable.  Sam Storms puts forth some very good arguments that tongues can also, in addition to real human languages, be angelic or heavenly languages (see, The Beginner's Guide to Spiritual Gifts, pages 141-144).

Fifthly, Pennington wrongly equates OT prophets with NT prophets.  Yet Hebrews 1:1 explicitly tells us that the OT Prophetic ministry was only for the OT period and finds its fulfillment in God's Son Jesus Christ.  Yet, some kind of prophetic ministry exists during the NT period.  So if OT prophets are obsolete with the coming of the Messiah, yet there exists NT prophets, it is reasonable to conclude that there is a distinction between OT prophets and NT prophets.

Rebuttal to Argument #5:The Testimony of Church History

At this point, Tom Pennington marshals several quotations from church history to show that the miraculous gifts, did in fact, cease.  However, this is a knife that cuts both ways.  There are also accounts of miracles throughout church history as well as respected theologians who explicitly affirm their continuation.  Rather than produce them myself, here is a link to Sam Storms' article on miraculous gifts in church history.

See also chapter 5 in Jack Deere's Surprised by the Voice of God titled "Presbyterian Prophets?".

Pennington also attempts to show that because miraculous gifts are mentioned early in the New Testament (1 Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians), but then are scarcely mentioned in the later New Testament (the Pastoral Epistles for example), it shows that miraculous gifts were already on their way out, so to speak.  In response, this is a classic example of both a non sequitur and an argument from silence.  The conclusion does not follow from the premise.  Simply because tongues, for example, are taught on early, but not later does not prove that tongues were already ceasing.  There is no mention of the Lord's Supper after 1 Corinthians.  Should we then conclude that the early Church stopped taking communion later in the NT era?  Of course not!  Likewise, we should not conclude that miraculous gifts were already ceasing by the time of the later New Testament books.  Besides, the New Testament is not written to be redundant!  If God the Holy Spirit only inspires the New Testament authors to teach on something once, than that is enough.

Furthermore, the thesis is false!  There is later New Testament mention of miraculous gifts.  For example, particular prophecies are alluded to in the Pastoral Epistles regarding Timothy (1 Timothy 1:18; 4:14), the Apostle John gives instruction on dealing with distinguishing true prophetic ministry from false prophetic ministry (1 John 4:1-6), and the church in Ephesus was testing apostolic credentials (Revelation 2:2), implying they believed apostolic ministry was still functioning in their time.

Rebuttal to Argument #6: The Sufficiency of Scripture

This is another very common cessationist argument, and another one that has been refuted often.  In short, the argument is that since we have the closed revelation in Scripture, we do not need any kind of revelation in the form of prophecies, dreams, and visions for example.  To allow for contemporary prophecy would threaten Scripture's finality and sufficiency, so we are told.  Pennington cites 2 Timothy 3:16,17:

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.  NKJV

My response to this is quite simply that prophecy can, but only if we let it.  Any good thing can functionally overtake Scripture's authority like creeds and confessions for example.  However, it is a total misapplication of the sufficiency of Scripture to claim that contemporary prophecy will always threaten Scripture's sufficiency.  As a Reformed Charismatic, I affirm fully the sufficiency of the Bible and the doctrine of Sola Scriptura.  Pennington (and other cessationists) miss something key in their application of 2 Timothy 3:16,17.  Here, Paul tells Timothy that the Scriptures make the man of God complete and thoroughly equipped for every good work.  So far, I and cessationists agree.  But the Bible teaches me about spiritual gifts and tells me what they are for and how long they are to last.  So then I conclude that among the "good works" that the Scriptures are sufficient to "thoroughly equip" me for is how to understand and use spiritual gifts, including prophecy.  The claim that continuationism is a threat to Sola Scriptura is therefore false.

Pastor Pennington then quotes Martin Luther who said "Let the man who would hear God speak read Holy Scripture".  All I can say to that is amen!  In my reading of Holy Scripture, I hear God speaking through His Word concerning spiritual gifts, giving both teaching and example of how and how not to use spiritual gifts.

Rebuttal to Argument #7:  The New Testament Rules Laid Down for the Miraculous Gifts

Tom Pennington's final argument is that the New Testament lays down several rules for how spiritual gifts were to have been practiced while they were still around, but that modern charismatic practice is at clear variance with that teaching. 

Truthfully, I agree with just about everything he said at this point.  Much charismatic and Pentecostal practice is at variance with New Testament teaching.  I myself have witnessed many travesties of supposed gifts; or gifts that were used contrary to the teaching of the Bible.  But it is a baffling application and conclusion that Pennington reaches and a total non sequitur.  Simply because there is a lot of fake, doesn't mean the real doesn't exist.  At my job, I sometimes deal with counterfeit money.  Does that mean there is no real money?  I have heard a lot of bad preaching.  Does that invalidate true, biblical preaching? 

The answers to these questions are of course not.  Similarly, simply because many charismatics do not practice the gifts biblically does not mean that there aren't others who do.  And to argue for the cessation of the charismata on this point is terrible logic!

Conclusion

I had never heard of Tom Pennington prior to the Strange Fire conference so I know very little of him beyond what he himself believes about miraculous gifts.  I am sure he is a godly man who loves Jesus and seeks to please him.  Truth be told, he does understand several things that are encouraging.  For example, he does, toward the end, acknowledge that there are different kinds of continuationists - from the outright heretical to the biblically sound.  Secondly, he does not soft-peddle the differences between cessationists and continuationists.  He realizes that they are deep. 

Finally, I wish to reiterate that I realize that my very small contributions are not going to change the landscape of evangelical Christianity in the West.  Tom Pennington is very unlikely to read nor care about what I have to say.  The reason I have undertaken to write my critique, is because his critique is aimed at people like me - ordinary believers who embrace all of the Holy Spirit's miraculous charismata.  I feel it is within my rights to respond biblically and graciously.  It is my hope that whoever does read (and care) about what I have written may be spurred on to think more biblically about this very important issue.

A Nobody Responds to Tom Pennington's Case for Cessationism, Part 2

In part 1 of my 3-part series, I took issue with Pastor Tom Pennington's critiques of certain continuationist arguments.  In this section, I will take a look at the first three points of his sevenfold case for cessationism.

Rebuttal to Argument #1:  The Unique Roll of Miracles

Pastor Pennington's first argument is centered around the proposition that there were only three periods in biblical history where miracles were prevalent: The Exodus and Conquest period, the ministries of Elijah and Elisha, and that of Christ and the Apostles.  It is implied that outside these periods, miracles were either very scarce or non-existent.  This is a very old and common argument and, in fact, one that has been refuted many times over and so I'll not spend too much time on it.

Firstly, this argument fails to account for the numerous biblical examples of miraculous and prophetic activity outside these time periods.  Jack Deere in his excellent book Surprised by the Power of the Spirit uses an illustrative table in Appendix C (pages 253-266) to show this very fact.  I won't reproduce that table, but only point out a small handful of obvious examples of miracles outside the aforementioned time periods:

-The prophetic ministry and rapture of Enoch (Genesis 5:24; Jude 14,15)
-The Flood
-The Lord's appearances to Abraham and the plagues upon Pharaoh's house and his subsequent dream after he attempted to take Sarah as his wife.
-The destruction of Sodom and Gommorah
-The miraculous conception of Isaac
-Joseph's dreams
-The miracles performed by, in, and through the Judges, including Gideon and Samson
-Hannah's womb is miraculously opened to conceive Samuel
-None of Samuel's words would fall to the ground (1 Samuel 3:19-21)
-The tumors that strike the Philistines
-God's presence in the Temple (1 Kings 8:10)
-Hezekiah's life is extended (2 Kings 20:5)
-The miracles and prophecies involving Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.

This is only a sampling that Deere produces to maintain that many miraculous signs occurred throughout OT history, thus contradicting Pennington's thesis.  Jack Deere also points out two other Scriptures in the OT that point to miraculous intervention throughout the period of the OT.  First, we are brought to Jeremiah 32:20:

You have set signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, to this day, and in Israel and among other men; and You have made Yourself a Name, as it is this day. 
NKJV

This passage explicitly tells us that miraculous signs had occurred at least from the time of the Exodus to at least the time of Jeremiah's prophetic ministry. 

Secondly, consider Psalm 74:9.  Here, the psalmist writes, We do not see our signs; there is no longer any prophet; nor is there any among us who knows how long.  For whatever reason, signs and wonders were not all the prevalent, but instead of seeing this as God's normal way of dealing with His people, the Psalmist laments this fact as something abnormal.  The context of Psalm 74 is dealing with the anger of God against the sheep of His pasture (v. 1) and in the face of defeat from God's enemies.  Clearly the absence of signs and wonders is seen as an unusual occurrence owing to divine displeasure rather than the usual program of God in periods of giving revelation.  This would imply that signs and wonders were a regular part of God's gracious activities among His people, and thus not exclusively a means of authenticating His special messengers.

None of this is to deny that one purpose of miracles is authentication.  Of course it is.  However, there are other reasons miracles are done such as bringing glory to God and as an act of compassion.  Consider the account of Jesus raising up the son of the widow of Nain:

 Now it happened, the day after, that He went into a city called Nain; and many of His disciples went with Him, and a large crowd.   And when He came near the gate of the city, behold, a dead man was being carried out, the only son of his mother; and she was a widow. And a large crowd from the city was with her.   When the Lord saw her, He had compassion on her and said to her, “Do not weep.”   Then He came and touched the open coffin, and those who carried him stood still. And He said, “Young man, I say to you, arise.”   So he who was dead sat up and began to speak. And He presented him to his mother.  Then fear came upon all, and they glorified God, saying, “A great prophet has risen up among us”; and, “God has visited His people.”   And this report about Him went throughout all Judea and all the surrounding region.  (Luke 7:11-17 NKJV)

Here, in this passage, in addition to calling attention to Jesus' identity, this miracle also served a powerful doxological purpose (v 16) and as an expression of God's heart of compassion for a widow who would otherwise have been left in extreme poverty.  I conclude then, that miracles had and still have other purposes that are just as relevant today as they were then.

Rebuttal to Argument #2:The End of the Gift of Apostleship


In part 1, I kind of already tackled this one, so I'll only point out one thing.  Pastor Pennington asserts with all cessationists and even some continuationists (Wayne Grudem for example), that we cannot have apostles today because to be an apostle one had to meet three requirements:  (1) You had to be an eyewitness to the resurrection of Christ, (2) you needed a personal commission from Christ, and (3) You had to be able to work miracles.

However, this fails on several levels.  Working in reverse order, number 3 is patently false.  The ability to work miracles did not and does not make one an apostle.  It is true that the apostles worked miracles, but so did many others.  Stephen and Philip worked miracles and neither were apostles.  First Corinthians 12 lists workings of miracles as one of the charismata being given to the church at large, not just the apostles.  Lastly, there is John 14:12, Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.  Even a casual glance at the context will show that the works being referenced by our Lord are His miracles which He did while on earth.  Amazingly, Christ is saying that believers will be empowered to perform miraculous signs because of His soon departure to the Father and the resultant sending of the Holy Spirit.  Everywhere else in John's gospel, the phrase "he who believes in Me" refers to all believers everywhere.

Point 2, is also false.  While most of the Twelve and Paul did receive a personal commission from Christ, one of the Twelve did not, namely Matthias.  Certainly God, in His sovereignty chose him through casting lots to replace Judas, but that's not the same as a personal commission from the resurrected Lord.  If one, needed a commission from Jesus in person, one might assume Matthias would have been chosen to replace Judas prior to Jesus' ascension.

Relatedly, is point three; that one must have been a witness to Christ's resurrection to be commissioned an apostle.  This one is the strongest point, but also fails to take into account all of the data.  First, it should be noted that Matthias was replacing Judas among the Twelve Apostles whose names are written on the foundation stones of the New Jerusalem, but in Ephesians 4:11, Paul lists the gifting of apostleship among the gifts of Christ's ascension.  Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest that to be one of the Twelve, one needed to have been an eyewitness to the resurrection, but to be an apostle of the ascension, spoken of in Ephesians, obviously one does not.


Rebuttal to Argument #3:The Foundational Nature of the New Testament Apostles and Prophets

This one is related to point 2 above and I have already somewhat addressed this issue already so I'll not belabor the point.  However I will spend some time refuting another common cessationist argument.  Ephesians 2:20 is a favorite passage among cessationists of both the reformed and dispensational stripes.  They believe the argument is bulletproof.  The argument goes like this; in context, Paul is laying out the nature of the Church as the union of Jews and gentiles in one body.  The apostles and prophets laid the foundation of the NT church.  Since you only lay a foundation once, there would be no more need of apostles and prophets subsequent to laying this foundation. 

In reply, it could be argued that this passage, being written to a specific local church is applicable at the local level.  It could then follow that all local churches should be built on apostolic and prophetic foundations.  I think there is some merit to this idea, but I wouldn't die on a hill for it, and even if it does refer to the Church universal, I will only draw attention to the verb tenses in verses 20-22.  Verse 20 uses the past tense, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, while verses 21 and 22 use the present tense. 

In other words, by the time Paul wrote Ephesians, the once-for-all foundation for the Church was already fully laid and the superstructure already underway, yet apostolic ministry was still occurring and was even occurring past the time Paul wrote.  Apostles and Prophets form the superstructure just as much as the foundation.  How do I know this?  After Paul's ministry, we know the apostle John ministered in Ephesus where he likely wrote his gospel and epistles and even after John was exiled to Patmos and was receiving Revelation, the Ephesians were testing apostles (though in this case, finding them liars; but if apostles would have ceased after laying the foundation, then the Ephesians wouldn't have needed to test apostles; they would have known not to expect anymore).  Clearly, the Ephesians themselves didn't take Paul's words in Eph. 2:20 as implying the cessation of the apostolate and, in fact, Paul tells them (and us) to expect more apostles (4:11-16).

That concludes Part 2.  Soon, I hope to respond to arguments 4-7 of Tom Pennington's presentation.

-Christian

A Nobody Responds to Tom Pennington's Case for Cessationism, Part 1

Okay, I'll admit it - I'm a nobody.  Not in the absolute sense, but in the grand scheme of things sense of the Christian blogosphere.  The reality is, my opinion counts for squat as far as most people are concerned and I have no illusions that my critique will be seen (or cared about) by any important people in the larger evangelical world.  The truth is, that's fine with me.  I'll blog anyway!

In that spirit, I hope to respond briefly to Pastor Tom Pennington's talk during the recently concluded "Strange Fire" Conference titled appropriately, "A Case for Cessationism"  Pennington first attempts to refute several of what he believes are popular continuationist arguments and then positively presents seven arguments for the cessation of the "sign gifts" (his term, not the Bible's) toward the end of the first century.  I plan to go into these arguments in turn with my rebuttals.

Pennington's Critique of Popular Continuationist Arguments

Pastor Pennington first argues that while the New Testament nowhere asserts the cessation of the gifts, it also never asserts their continuance.  He anticipates the charismatic appeal to 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 and attempts to deflect the force of the argument by stating that this is a highly disputed passage open to a number of different interpretations and that it has also been marshaled in defense of cessationism.

In reply, it must be stated that the NT simply tells us that certain gifts of the Spirit exist and we must assume their continuation unless we are explicitly told otherwise.  Using a parallel.  Take the doctrine of the Lord's Supper also conveniently taught about in 1 Corinthians.  We are told we must celebrate the Lord's Table and why, namely to proclaim Christ's death.  In fact, we are told we should do this, until He comes (1 Corinthians 11:26).  Since we lack a clear statement to stop taking the Lord's Supper and also having a clear statement as to its duration, we should continue to take the Lord's Supper.  Similarly, we are told to practice spiritual gifts and are explicitly told their duration in chapter 13 (and elsewhere).

Baptism is another example.  We know from Matthew 28:19-20 and Romans 6:1-4 that baptism is a sacrament of the Church.  We are never told to cease the practice, so we must then assume we will continue to baptize until presumably the eschaton when Jesus comes again.  The burden of proof would have to be on the one telling us not to baptize anymore (some brands of hyper-dispensationalism will argue this).  Similarly, absent a clear statement of early cessation, we must assume continuance.

Another point is Pennington's argument that 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 cannot be mustered to support continuance because that passage is disputed.  It is well known that John MacArthur and company are staunchly premillennial in their eschatology.  But Revelation 20 is also a very highly disputed passage, even more so than the Corinthian passages on spiritual gifts.  So should we not come to convictions on the millennium simply because the passage is disputed?  I think not.

Pennington then attempts to parry the argument that the NT only speaks of the church age as a unit and that divisions of the Church Age into apostolic and post-apostolic periods are artificial.  Since most charismatics don't believe in a continuing apostolate, there is precedent for the cessation of at least one of the charismata.  It would follow then that other charismata might have ceased as well, even sans a clear statement of cessation.

In response, it should be stated that I do not share the belief that apostles have ceased.  Consider the following passage:

Therefore He says:

“When He ascended on high,
He led captivity captive,
And gave gifts to men.”

 (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth?   He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)

 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,   for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ,   till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;   that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ—   from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love. 

Ephesians 4:8-16 (NKJV)

This passage indicates that the gifts listed are to function as means of building up the Church until unity in the faith and full maturity in Christ occurs.  Clearly we are not there yet.  Tellingly, the first two ministries listed are those of apostles and prophets.  Therefore, I conclude that apostles and prophets have continued to function within the Body of Christ (though I am getting a little ahead of myself).  Since I cannot concede the point that apostles have ceased, I cannot concede that other gifts might have ceased.  If I should be challenged on whether I believe modern apostles are as great as Peter, John, or Paul; I would say no.  These men were great because they were the first apostles, not because they were apostles.  Also, using a parallel from the business world, Sam Walton was a great retailer, virtually without peer.  However, others continue to envision and run Walmart even more than 20 years after his death.  So then, simply because the greatest apostles have died, doesn't mean no more apostles have come since, in fact Ephesians tells me to expect they will.

"By far the most common argument", says Pennington is that 500 million professing Christians who claim charismatic experiences can't all be wrong.  He then points to the fact that there are about 1 billion Roman Catholics who have an even longer history of purported miracles.  He concludes that 500 million people can be wrong.

In response, amen!  Sheer numbers of people tell us absolutely nothing whether in favor of continuance or cessation.  This is a totally irrelevant point to the discussion, so by all means, Pennington is right to refute it; but the weakness of this argument does, in no way, either weaken the continuationist argument, or establish the cessationist one.

That does it for part 1.  Soon, I hope to move into a thorough critique of Pennington's sevenfold positive case for cessationism, while at the same time arguing that continuationism is the more biblical position.  Blessings.

The "Strange Fire" Conference and the Charismatic Response

If you're an evangelical Christian in the West, chances are you may have heard of the Strange Fire Conference which is wrapping up tonight in Southern California at Grace Community Church where Dr. John MacArthur has been senior pastor since 1969.  The lead up to this conference and the forthcoming book of the same name have generated no small controversy, which only the conference itself has been able to eclipse.  Evidently even Seattle pastor Mark Driscoll "crashed" the conference to hand out copies of his new book. 

Interestingly, and perhaps encouragingly, this conference has caught the attention of not only the evangelical reformed community, but also much of the charismatic wing of the church as well.  Before the conference even started, charismatic theologian Dr. Michael L. Brown appealed to MacArthur to reconsider his position.  I have also seen some responses from other charismatic sources including prophetic pastor R. Loren Sandford. 

While the reactions of Brown and Sandford have been vigorous, they have also been mostly charitable.  However, that has not been the case across the charismatic board.  Sadly many of the responses to MacArthur from the "rank and file" of charismatic Christians has been in a very familiar pattern.  A pattern that I often encountered when I moved in more explicitly charismatic circles.  Make no mistake, this conference and the rhetoric that has emanated from it deserve a very thoroughgoing rebuttal and response, but the nature and tone of the reactions I have been getting from many, but not all charismatics is troubling.

In a nutshell, one of the greatest critiques of the charismatic movement broadly and the prophetic streams particularly is that they are very much guilt manipulation based.  Despite waxing greatly about God's unconditional love and the Father's heart, they nevertheless have a real penchant for dismissing the legitimate concerns and critiques of those who disagree with certain manifestations or just aren't there yet.  Evidently, because someone isn't convinced of the phenomenon of being "drunk in the Spirit", for example, it is entirely because he/she either haven't experienced it, or possesses a "religious" or "pharisaical" spirit.  Nevermind whether or not the Bible supports this experience or not, it must be a critical, religious spirit.  All this serves to do is make others feel small and feeds the pride of those who make others small.

While this conference and the related book will no doubt continue to feed the debate over miraculous gifts and hopefully cause many cessationists to reconsider their position, it would do many charismatic Christians well to reconsider their own attitudes toward those for whom the moving of the Spirit in tangible, miraculous gifts is not yet a functional reality and who are concerned over unbiblical excesses.  Let us remember that Paul was not shy about correcting abuses, but neither did he command the Corinthians to declare a moratorium on spiritual gifts.  Rather, he corrected their attitudes and instructed them to seek the more excellent way of love.  I hope that all believers in this controversy would do the same.