| Vanguard - Index | CETF - Index | Home | Search - Index |
|---|
Cessationism under the biblical spotlight...By Philip Powell ( October 2000 ) - Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3 To the LAW and the TESTIMONYIsaiah's appeal to the Word of God in terms of His law on the one hand and the record of His acts on the other (c/f Is 8:20 explained above) finds a counterpart in DOCTRINE (mainly the Epistles) and HISTORY (mainly the four gospels and the book of Acts) in the New Testament. Isaiah actually implies what will happen to those who depart from a Sola Scriptura position — dead formality i.e. a religious experience and practice, which lacks the supernatural element that is essential to make God's people "signs and wonders" (Isaiah 8:18) on the one hand; or on the other hand an occult situation among the "mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter" (Is 8:19). This is precisely what is happening. John MacArthur gives an example: "I talked to a man who is a leader in the modern Pentecostal movement,
and he said to me, `You cannot deny my experience.' "I responded by saying, `Well, let me ask you this. When an experience occurs, do you always, without question, know that it is of God? Be honest.' "He answered, `No.' "`Could it be of Satan?' I asked. "He reluctantly replied, `Yes.' " My charismatic friend had no answer. "This is exactly where the Corinthians were. They did not know what was of God and what was not. The work of the Spirit was confused with pagan ecstasies. They needed help."*16 MacArthur is of the view that "only what is valuable is counterfeited". He explains: "It seems obvious that if people in the Corinthian assembly were calling Jesus accursed, the gifts they claimed to have received from the Holy Spirit were counterfeit. My father had a saying, `No one counterfeits what isn't valuable.' One never hears about counterfeit brown paper. People do not counterfeit trash. But they do counterfeit money, diamonds, and jewellery. Counterfeits copy what is valuable because that is the only point in counterfeiting. Satan was busy in the Corinthian church imitating spiritual gifts, and he is busy doing the same thing today."*17 Wayne Grudem warns about associating tongues' speaking with the demonic: "Paul says, `I want you all to speak in tongues' (1 Corinthians 14:5 RSV). He gives no warning that they should beware of demonic counterfeit or even think that this would be a possibility when they use this gift."*18 On balance I favour MacArthur here as 1 Corinthians 12:3 implies the possibility of a demonic counterfeit. APOSTLES & PROPHETS: "Now therefore you are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building fitly framed together grows into a holy temple in the Lord: In whom you also are built together for a habitation of God through the Spirit" (Ephesians 2:19-22). In another place Paul tells us that Christ Himself is the foundation (1 Corinthians 3:11). Here, in Ephesians, he explains that this foundation is already laid and that Christ is also the "chief corner stone" viz that which holds the whole building together. The apostles and the prophets of Ephesians 2:20 have done the job once and for all time (c/f Jude 3). They were an exclusive group who were committed to a unique work. Neither will ever be repeated. The work of the apostles of the Lamb and the prophets of the scripture, through the enabling of the Holy Spirit, was foundational to the establishment and continuous building of the church of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is common ground for both parties — Sola Scriptura! Extreme Pentecostals and Charismatics depart from the sufficiency of scripture when they fail to see this and like Peter Wagner and his associates go into a non-biblical authoritative heavy shepherding teaching that end times "apostles and prophets" lay the foundation of the present day Church. For example, Peter Wagner says: "I am giving considerable emphasis to prophecy on these pages because I sense we are living in the midst of an extraordinary move of God. It has recently become evident that the fastest growing segment of Christianity on six continents is a movement I call the New Apostolic Reformation. It includes, among many others, African Independent Churches, Chinese house churches, Latin American grassroots churches, independent charismatics and many local congregations still operating within traditional denominational structures. One of the most innovative characteristics of this movement (although several exceptions might exist) is the reinstatement of the New Testament offices of prophet and apostle."*19 The idea that modern "apostles and prophets" are the foundation of the church is rank error and leads to an apostasy of THE FAITH once delivered to the saints. But — and here's the dividing line between those who take a cessationist position and those of us who don't — while the Ephesians 2:20 "apostles and prophets" and their work were unique, those mentioned two chapters later are not just the twelve or the OT prophets, as an examination of the context and a detailed study of the NT make plain. "And He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the 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" (Ephesians 4:11-13). Here is the NT reference to the five (some say four) ascension ministry gifts of Christ. Each person is himself a "gift" of Christ to His church. Naturally each will have "gifts" to enable him to perform his function, but that is not the emphasis of this passage. Christ gave each ministry gift to His body for all time — until "we all come to the unity of the faith". The fact that "evangelists" and "pastor/teachers" or "pastors and teachers" are mentioned alongside of "apostles and prophets" points to the fallacy of the idea that the ministry gifts of apostles and prophets ended with the canon of the NT or the passing of the Apostles of the Lamb. Paul teaches that Christ gave all five (four) for the "equipping of the saints for the work of ministry", which is required throughout the church age. The incident of Acts 1:15-26 indicates that the apostles chosen by Christ did not view themselves as exclusive. They were prepared to elect someone to replace Judas. Irrespective of whether we view Matthias or Paul as the true replacement we are faced with an extension to the original twelve apostles. Acts 14:14 mentions Barnabas as another. It is possible, though not certain that Judas, Barsabas and Silas (see Acts 15:22, 23 & 33) were also apostles. Some have pointed to Romans 16:7 as including Andronichus and Junia (a woman), but the evidence is flimsy to say the least.*20 Wayne Grudem writes, "The verse has too little clear information to allow us to draw a conclusion."*21 It is far more likely that the apostles recognised them as notable faithful followers of Christ. The idea of a woman being a NT apostle is contradicted by Paul in 1 Timothy 2:12 and 1 Corinthians 14:34. These considerations, plus texts such as 2 Corinthians 11:13 and Revelation 2:2 indicate that the term apostle was fairly liberally applied to leaders in NT times, so much so that there arose false apostles, who were in danger of deceiving God's people. All of this points strongly to the idea that we are not looking at an exclusive group that was as numerically limited as some have led us to believe. "Now you are the body of Christ, and members in particular. And God has set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet I show you a more excellent way" (1 Corinthians 12: 27-31). In 1 Corinthians chapters 12 to 14 Paul is basically dealing with conduct within the local church especially as it applies to spiritual activity. He commences with the injunction— "Now concerning spirituality" literally "spirituals" [Greek pneumatikos (Strong 4152) the word gifts is not in the original of verse 1]. In verses 4-7 he outlines his subject: 1) Verse 4—different gifts—taught in verses 7-11; 2) Verse 5—different parts—taught in verses 12-27; and 3) Verse 6—different appointments—taught in verses 28-30. Contrary to what is implied by some Pentecostals, Paul is dealing with spirituality and spiritual function as a whole within the context of a local church and not only with the gifts of the Spirit. So, could it be that when he comes to consider appointments (functions) as the final point of his teaching in this chapter, he is talking about those who operate only in a local church setting? In other words are there local apostles as distinct from the twelve and distinct from the apostles of the church universal? The problem that we face is one of translation. The Greek apostolos (Strong 652) signifies one who is sent forth with orders. He is a delegate or a messenger. Our English apostle transliterates the word and this has tended to create grandiose ideas, which may not have occurred had the word been translated. Peter Wagner and the many Assembly of God and other Pentecostal leaders, such as Brian Houston, Phil Pringle, Mark Conner, John Lewis and Danny Guglielmucci, whom we named in the previous CETF *22 as being some who have jumped on the band wagon of self promotion, have cashed in on this and in so doing have over-looked what Paul had to say about himself and other genuine ambassadors (apostles) of the NT church. He calls himself the least of the saints, the greatest of sinners and, as an apostle, one who was set last not first. He was an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ i.e. one who was sent forth to represent the One who made Himself of no reputation and became obedient to the death of a cross. It is an issue of identification not one of authority. If all the marks of an apostle as outlined by Paul were applied to those who see themselves as modern day apostles there would be few takers. Yes Paul does speak of supernatural signs (2 Corinthians 12:12) and church planting (2 Corinthians 10:16), but he also points to the things that he suffered and his good example in appointing to office only those who shared his character and humility (2 Corinthians chapters 11 & 12). On one occasion I told my former colleagues who were touting one of their members as an apostle that he was precluded on account of the character of some whom he appointed as pastors. One was a homosexual and another became a double adulterer. These things do count even though the modern church so readily overlooks them and hides the facts. Apostles don't appoint men of questionable character and conduct as pastors or elders of God's people. So in summary, while Cessationists may see only one expression of the ministry of apostles and prophets in the NT, there is a strong biblical argument for at least two and possibly three. GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT "But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit everyone. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another different kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: But all these work by one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man according to his will" (1 Corinthians 12: 7-11). The biblical word "manifestation"(1 Corinthians 12:7) Greek phanerosis (Strong 5321) is derived from phaneroo (Strong 5319), which contains the idea of something that "shines forth" as distinct from "fruit" (Galatians 5:22) Greek karpos (Strong 2590), which signifies that which grows i.e. the natural product of life. The nine gifts of the Spirit, in their pure expression are manifestations i.e. (the out-shining) of the works of God, of whom the Holy Spirit is the executor. The nine fruit of the Spirit are the natural product of the nature of God, which is love. True manifestations and the real fruit of the Holy Spirit reveal God in His works and in His nature and character. They are complementary and should never be viewed as competitive or mutually exclusive. Cessationists never question the validity of the fruit of the Spirit at any point in church history, including the present day, so why do they question the gifts of the Holy Spirit? Is there any biblical basis for their denial? Some point to 1 Corinthians 13:8-13. The argument mainly relates to the statement that "tongues will pass away" (in the middle voice) i.e. "pass away of themselves" . The argument in not convincing as an examination of the passage shows: "Love never fails: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away" (verses 8-10). Groups like the Strict or Bible Baptists and some Open Brethren have argued that the "perfect", which Paul said would come, is a reference to the completion of the canon of scripture, when prophecies and tongues would cease. While not naming the denominations, John MacArthur acknowledges: "Many suggestions have been made as to the meaning of `the perfect'. Some believe it is the complete New Testament; thus they conclude this passage is saying that tongues would cease when the canon was closed."*23 But there are huge logical and contextual problems to that idea. Paul says that knowledge will "vanish away". Did this happen with the advent of the canon of scripture? Knowledge far from vanishing has increased enormously. Faced with this problem some cessationists say that the knowledge referred to is the supernatural gift of the word of knowledge mentioned in verse 8 of the previous chapter. If that is so then how do they explain the phrase "we know in part" in the context of their argument? Did the canon of scripture make our knowledge complete? If you reason that Paul and the Holy Spirit are referring to the supernatural "word of knowledge" then logically you must say that the coming of the canon of scripture extended the gift into another dimension. It didn't cause it to cease. Then they are faced with a further problem when asked to explain the analogy of 1 Corinthians chapter 13 verses 11 and 12: "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known". The completion of scripture does not put anyone of us in a position where we know everything (even as we are known), nor does it ensure that we always put away childish thoughts and ways. The coming of the "perfect" to which Paul refers cannot possibly be a reference to the canon of scripture though we agree that the scriptures are perfect. And yes we agree with many cessationists that it is not our Lord Jesus Christ that he is referring to, though He too is perfect. On the basis of logic and the context of the passage it is quite clear that Paul is talking about a future state, which will eclipse this present church age. He is alluding to the Second Coming of our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ when the gifts of the Holy Spirit as the early church and the pilgrim church of the ages experienced them will no longer be required. The clause "then face to face" (v 12) is the key to WHEN this will be — at his second coming. So what are these gifts and how do they operate? First we must face a prior question — what initiates the reception and/or manifestation of the nine gifts of the Holy Spirit? "In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, (v2) and saying, Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (vs 5 & 6) Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and the entire region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins (vs 10-12). And now also the axe is laid to the root of the trees: therefore every tree, which brings not forth good fruit, is hewn down, and cast into the fire. I indeed baptise you with water to repentance: but he who comes after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptise you with the Holy Spirit, and with fire: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the granary; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire" (Matthew 3:1-12). According to Hebrews chapter six there is a New Testament doctrine of baptisms (c/f v 2) — note the plural. In the above scripture John Baptist mentions two: 1) His own baptism in water to repentance; and 2) Baptism by Christ with (into) the Holy Spirit and with fire. The New Testament mentions three other baptisms: 3) The Baptism of Suffering—for Christ and His followers (Luke 12:50 c/f Matt 20:22-23); 4) Christian Water Baptism replacing John's Baptism (Matthew 28 c/f Acts 19:3-5); 5) Baptism by the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). Each of these baptisms forms an important part of the third of the six foundational truths spoken of in Hebrews chapter 6 and is worthy of deep study. For the purposes of this article we need to look briefly at the second and the fifth viz baptism by Christ, the Head of the church in or into the Holy Spirit and baptism by the Holy Spirit into Christ i.e. the body of Christ In 1 Corinthians 12:13 Paul refers to the Holy Spirit as the subject of the action and the body of Christ as the element into which the believer is immersed. In Matthew 3:11 John the Baptist identifies Christ as the subject of the action and the realm of Holy Spirit as the element into which the followers of Christ would be baptised. There are obvious distinctions so we must conclude that there is a real difference. Can this be confirmed from other bible passages? John chapters 14, 15 and 16 contain the major teaching of Christ regarding the Holy Spirit whom He identifies as the comforter, helper, advisor or advocate. His essential work is to replace and represent Christ by "abide[ing] with you forever" (John 14:16-18), "teach[ing] you all things and bring[ing] all things to your remembrance" (John 14:26), "testify[ing] of Me" (John 15:26) and "convict[ing] the world of sin, … righteousness and of judgement." In achieving this Jesus said to His disciples, "you know him; for he dwells with you, and shall be in you" (John 14:17). In summary our Lord taught that the Holy Spirit is WITH in REVELATION i.e. convincing or convicting of sin, righteousness and judgement. He comes INTO to bring ANIMATION i.e. life at the moment of the new birth or what we call regeneration. This is illustrated when our Lord appeared to His disciples on the day of His resurrection, breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit" (John 20: 22). Such teaching is in complete harmony with Peter's view of the new birth as taught in his epistle — "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy has begotten us again to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3). "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which lives and abides for ever" (1 Peter 1:23). In the act of regeneration the Holy Spirit enters the life of the believer and applies the Word of God, which is the active life-giving agent. As Paul puts it, "So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Romans 10:17). The basis of this is not what happened at Pentecost but what happened at the resurrection of Christ. In Acts chapter one our Lord promised that the Holy Spirit would come upon His disciples to empower them to become witnesses to Him i.e. DEMONSTRATION, see Acts 1:8. In verses 4 and 5 He calls this the Promise of the Father, which He Himself had previously told them about and which He links to the action and statement of John the Baptist — see Matthew 3:11. It is very clear that the baptism in or into the Holy Spirit by Christ the head of His church, to which John the Baptist referred and which Christ said would occur "not many days from now", took place on the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts chapter 2, ten days after Christ's ascension (Acts 1:9). By comparing scripture with scripture it seems reasonable to say that it is by the entry of the Holy Spirit into a person that he/she is "baptised" (initiated) into the body of Christ and it is by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon the believer that he/she is baptised (initiated) by Christ into the realm of the Spirit. That both may happen simultaneously is possible; that each may be separate in time and occasion is also possible. THE CRUX OF THE MATTER "He that speaks in an unknown tongue edifies himself; but he that prophesies edifies the church. I would that you all spoke with tongues, but rather that you prophesied: for greater is he that prophesies than he that speaks with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying" (1 Corinthians 14:4&5). 1 Corinthians chapters 12 to 14 contain some of the most difficult and contentious parts of the New Testament.*24 The issue of "speaking with tongues" has been one of the most divisive. While that is acknowledged, neither the passage of scripture nor the gift of tongues should be ignored. All scripture is inspired of God i.e. God breathed (2 Timothy 3:16) and is therefore vital to us as His people. In 1 Corinthians 14:4-5 Paul brings together what are often referred to by Pentecostals as the three vocal or inspirational gifts, though both designations are obvious over-simplifications. The context shows that he is teaching the correct public function of these gifts in the local church at Corinth, where he implies all sorts of abuses including the wrong use of the gift of tongues. He tells us that the person who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues unless that person actually interprets the tongue, which he speaks. The reason being that tongues, on its own does edify the individual but it does not edify the church, while prophecy on its own does edify the church. The basic idea of edify is to build up. Remembering that Paul is teaching the public operation of the gifts for the benefit of the whole church, his meaning is quite clear and, contrary to what has been claimed by some cessationists, he is correcting but not condemning the public use of tongues. In another verse he actually says that he uses the gift of tongues more than anybody and thanks God that he does, but when he is in church he chooses not to speak in tongues, his emphasis being on teaching. (1 Corinthians 14:18-19). Quite obviously then Paul has in mind a speaking in tongues which is other than public. In verse 15 he writes: "I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also" and links this in verse 18 with speaking with tongues. The argument of verses 4 and 5 — see above — points very clearly to the idea that all public tongues speaking, whether ordinary speech or in song requires interpretation for the edifying of the church, something which is not required if it is done in private. This is in line with the force of Paul's argument of verses 18 and 19. There is no other satisfactory explanation of this passage of scripture: "What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. Else when you shall bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupies the place of the unlearned say Amen at your giving of thanks, seeing he does not understand what you say? For you indeed give thanks well, but the other is not edified. I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than you all: Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue" (1 Corinthians 14:15-19). WHAT IS THE GIFT OF SPEAKING WITH TONGUES? "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them divided tongues like fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:1-4) Those in the upper room — the context suggests all 120, not just the 12 Apostles — spoke forth what the Holy Spirit gave them to articulate. They did not know what to expect. It would be much better if people, who seek the fullness or baptism of the Holy Spirit today didn't know either. Pentecostal specialists, who first instruct then suggest what to articulate, actually degrade the experience to a humanistic and psychological level. This is the result of an undue and unbiblical emphasis on speaking in tongues. That which was a sovereign act of God has been reduced to a human manipulation where men count scalps. How many have "come through" is all too frequent a question on the lips of Pentecostal seekers. Speaking in tongues not the mighty baptism in the Holy Spirit has become the focus and pursuit of many. In Acts 1:8 Jesus promised ability (dunamis) to bear witness (become martyrs) not some initial evidence of speaking with tongues. Nonetheless they did (all of them) speak in tongues so what was it or what is it? "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how is it that we hear every man in our own tongue we were born with? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, what does this mean? Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine" (Acts 2:5-13). The "other" Greek "heteros"*25 (= other than one's own) "tongues" Greek "glossa"*26 (= languages or dialects) of verse 4 is paralleled by "our tongues" of verse 11. Those identified in verses 1 to 4 spoke in identifiable languages, which were recognised by a number of foreign visitors at Jerusalem and not learned or previously known by those who spoke. Some of their audience did not understand the languages spoken or what was happening. The scoffers dismissed it all as the conduct of drunks, not because there was any suggestion of conduct associated with drunken behaviour, but simply because they didn't understand the languages nor what was happening. Each spoke in an unknown tongue. Six times in 1 Corinthians chapter 14 the KJV translates the word glossa by "unknown tongue" — see verses 2, 4, 13, 14, 19 and 27. The fact that there is no Greek equivalent for the English "unknown" does not destroy the significance of the words chosen by the KJV translators. The context of each verse listed above implies that the language or dialect spoken was unknown to the person speaking and to the body of the church unless what was said was interpreted. In fairness when Pentecostals use the word unknown in this context they do not imply that it is not a valid language that was spoken, as some Cessationists have falsely claimed. Pentecostal scholar and commentator, Dr Gordon Fee, writes concerning 1 Corinthians 13:1— "`Tongues of men' would then refer to human speech, inspired by the Spirit but unknown to the speaker, `tongues of angels' would reflect an understanding that the tongues-speaker was communicating in the dialect(s) of heaven."*27 The unknown tongue is a valid language that will be known and spoken somewhere _ on earth or in heaven.*28 In fairness though I disagree with the use of the expression ecstatic utterance, in respect of speaking in tongues, it does not imply meaningless babble. It simply expresses the attitude and expression of joy of the person speaking. On account of the bizarre, outrageous and totally absurd claims and conduct of some of my former Pentecostal friends I have, at times, longed to be able to find an explanation for speaking in tongues other than the one which I was taught within the Pentecostal camp, but I can't. The idea that speaking in tongues is simply a linguistic ability just makes nonsense of what Paul says and teaches. It also contradicts what happened on the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts chapter 2. Both apply speaking in tongues to an act of the Holy Spirit, which superseded human knowledge and intelligence: "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:4). "For he that speaks in an unknown tongue speaks not to men, but unto God: for no man understands him; but in the spirit he speaks mysteries" (1 Corinthians 14:2). WHY TONGUES? There are four major clear incidents in the book of Acts where we are told about the Holy Spirit filling, falling upon or being received by the people — Acts 2, 8, 10 and 19. On three of these occasions speaking in tongues is directly identified. Cessationists say that each is a sort of corporate baptism or initiating — the first of the Jews, the second of the Samaritans, the third of the gentiles and the fourth a special case. This is an extra biblical explanation or a dispensational interpretation. There is no basis in scripture itself for the conclusion. It is theologically and logically unacceptable. If there is a need for a corporate baptism of different ethnic groups, which is highly questionable, it still does not account for the Special Case of Acts 19 where, in verse 6 we have the evidence of tongues and prophecy. Some say that in the case of the latter we have a group of people who were not Christians but simply followers of John Baptist. But verse 1 denies this. The word "disciple", unless it is otherwise previously qualified, is consistently applied to Christ's followers in the four gospel narratives and the book of Acts. Consistency demands that it means and implies here what it does elsewhere. The issue in question is not whether these 12 men were followers of Christ but whether they had heard about the Holy Spirit, which then raised the issue of baptism. The question remains — if the idea of corporate baptism by the Spirit is a valid one then why the special case? The only other case that features in scripture is that of Saul of Tarsus who became Paul the apostle — "Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, who appeared to you in the way as you came, has sent me, that you may receive your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 9:17). Interestingly and to contradict those Cessationists who argue that the filling of the Holy Spirit referred to here was a reference to Saul's conversion, Ananias calls him "brother" and makes no reference to his pending conversion, regeneration or new birth, but simply to his receiving sight and being filled with the Holy Spirit. Saul's unconditional submission to the Lordship of Christ (Acts 9:6) makes it very clear that he was converted on the road to Damascus (c/f 1 Cor 12:3) and then later filled or baptised into the Holy Spirit and into water. Later he says to the Corinthians, "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than all of you" (1 Corinthians 14:18). So of the five cases mentioned in scripture — there are no others — there are four incidents of speaking in tongues either at the time or subsequently. The one exception is Acts 8, where quite obviously there was some dramatic and immediate supernatural sign that the believers had received the Holy Spirit seeing Simon the sorcerer offered money for the power to impart the Holy Spirit. We do not know what it was and must not argue from silence either for or against tongues. We do know that Simon had witnessed miracles performed by Philip and that he did not make the same offer to him that he later made to Peter and John. So what he saw and/or heard when the Samaritans received the Holy Spirit was obviously quite remarkable and Simon expected similar displays when others received. The question remains "Why did God choose speaking in tongues?" Paul applies the prophecy contained in Isaiah 28:11-12 to the NT practice of speaking in tongues — c/f 1 Corinthians 14:21 — and gives one reason for tongues speaking viz a sign to unbelievers (1 Corinthians 14:22). This is what happened on the day of Pentecost and it became at least in part a fulfilment of what Isaiah said would happen. However the force of Paul's words, being in the present tense and the local church setting, is that the sign would be ongoing, but only in a selective way. "Brethren, do not be children in understanding: but in malice be children, but in understanding be men. In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak to this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, says the Lord. So then tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that do not believe: but prophesying serves not for them that do not believe, but for those who believe. If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are uninstructed, or unbelievers, will they not say that you are mad?" (1 Corinthians 14:2). Paul is not condemning tongues speaking. He is correcting the abuse of it in the local church and regulating its function to the edification of the body. That it is a sign to the unbeliever remains a truth established by testimony (Acts chapter 2) and by doctrine (Paul's teaching). To depart from this is to depart from the Sola Scriptura principle. "Let all things be done for edification. If any man speaks in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and in succession; and let one interpret. But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God" (1 Corinthians 14:26-28). We may deduce another reason why God chose tongues from the teaching of James who tells us that no-one is capable of controlling his tongue i.e. his speech (James chapter 3). What happened at Pentecost and in the house of Cornelius and at Ephesus and to Paul and the Corinthian tongues speaking believers — all of these are clearly established historic incidents — were displays of divine ability to control what no man or woman is able to control unaided by the Holy Spirit. At Pentecost God tamed the human tongue and caused men and women to speak forth the praises of God in languages which they had never learned, thus by-passing the one faculty which tends to make us arrogant and proud — our intellect. Could there be any greater reason why God would choose tongues? However, having said all that, there are two important things to emphasise: 1) God does not arbitrarily overrule man's will, so the control, which is illustrated in the gift of speaking in tongues, is not a permanent feature in respect of human behaviour. It was as the Holy Spirit gave them to articulate at Pentecost and it is as the Holy Spirit distributes as He wills in respect of all of the gifts of the Spirit; and 2) It is unbiblical to seek tongues per se. We should seek the baptism or filling of the Holy Spirit and there's the rub and what I consider to be a major contributing factor to much of the error that has crept into the Pentecostal and charismatic movements. Many Pentecostals have become "tongues" seekers instead of being seekers after God and the mighty baptism into the Holy Spirit.
Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3 *16 John MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos, pp202-203. *17 Ibid., pp205-206. *18 Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, p1077. *19 C. Peter Wagner, Praying with Power. Ventura, California: Regal Books, 1997, p44. *20 Some versions render this as `Junias' which is masculine. *21 Grudem, Systematic Theology, p909. *22 CETF Vol 6.1 (April 2000) page 4. *23 John MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos, p389. *24 It also includes the sublime chapter on love. *25 Strong 2087 *26 Strong 1100 *27 Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Company, 1987, p630. *28 My personal view is that 1 Cor 13:1 is an hyperbolic reference to the power of oratory. It does not prove or disprove the idea of angelic languages. In scripture angels always communicated in the local dialect. [ TOP ] Appeared in Issue CETF 6.2 December 2000 |
| CWM home page | CWM Resources | Contact CWM at... |
|---|