"Deef"-initely a WWWednesday...

It's been a whole week since the last WWWednesday post (duh), so let's get right to work. First, I'd like to relay two humorous stories from the past week - mainly so I will never forget them - which involve my friend Steve (aka 'Deef').

1) Linking to Tim Challies seems the be the sure-fire way to get him to appear, as evidenced by last week's post. I had a chance to exchange a couple emails with Tim in which the following happened:

• I told Tim I didn't expect people 'like him' [meaning Reformed, mega-bloggers] to be surfing to my [patheti-sad] blog.
• Tim quipped back to ask why I discriminated against Canadians.
• In an effort to dispel such rumors of Canuck persecution, I told Tim that I "already had one of those"... I meant that I already had a Canadian reader, namely Deef, and I linked to Steve's bio page thinking Tim would get a kick outta it.
• Seeing the picture of Steve and his wife, Challies thought I was implying that I married a Canadian... So he complimented me on my choice in women.
• I corrected Tim and later relayed the story to Steve. This is all particularly funny because I've already been accused of trying something sly with Steve's wife. Now the rumor's legs have grown long, indeed.

Lesson learned: Be very clear when you pass a biographical link to someone in an email. Sorry Steve! I'll apologize to Christine personally, later... I KID, I KID!!!

2) Thankfully, Steve has a good sense of humor and sharp wit which was evidenced the next day in a couple emails. Early in my series on the charismata, the UK's Adrian Warnock stopped by and left a comment. Many of you already know that Adrian's exchange with Dan Phillips over at TeamPyro was one of the catalysts for my posts.

Noting that Adrian might link here, Steve and I had the following exchange:

Steve: Who knows, you could get linked by Adrian as well, and *then* just think of wh.. well, maybe you don't want to think about that.

Me: Yeah, Dan Phillips will come after me with a [theological] pipe.

Steve:No, no, no. It would be a frozen ground beef chub from Costco.

I missed the allusion at first, so the image of a Pyromaniac chasing me with a frozen, value-pack sized lump of hamburger just tickled me silly.

Ok... Moving on.

3) Al Mohler, as always, posts some spot-on thoughts re: the VeggieTales controversy. UPDATE: For first-hand perspectives, check out Phil Vischer's blog on the matter.

4) I was looking for an article on election/sovereignty to forward to a friend. I browsed through the Center for Reformed Theology and Apologetics (CRTA) website. Immediately, it was confirmed to me why Google Ads are just a bad idea. Click the image to get a full-size version and see what I mean.

I shudder to think what Google would advertise on this page given my freaky postings...

5) Speaking of Al Mohler and election, the audio for Dr. Mohler's Calvinism 'debate' with Paige Patterson has been posted online. It's worth a listen!

6) The other night, I came across what I think might possibly be the greatest human train wreck ever: The Flavor of Love (now in season 2). The premise is reality TV gold, sadly... Flava Flav auditions 20+ women, who certainly are filled with the greatest of affection for him, and selects one to be his main squeeze. In the newest episode, Flav has narrowed the field to three and decides it's time to meet the families. So, he flies the parents in to get to know them.

As a parent, I wonder if I must add to my nightly prayers that I will never receive a phone call informing me that my daughter is seeking to 'hook up' with Flava Flav and asking me to come and meet him.

The girls in the show are, well, 'void'. Check this out, for example...

All that said: The clock is still dope.

7) So, how did you get here? Perhaps it was by one of these 'less travelled roads':

• I am the place to go if you're digging for info on Whitney Houston Gretest(sic) Love of All free.
• Unfortunately, 3 people have come looking for George Mallet nude. I must admit that I only just figured out who George Mallet is, and I have no interest in anything having to do with his nudity.
• Someone was looking for world wide janet pierce 2006 email address on Yahoo. I wonder if this is who they were looking for? Or maybe her, or her, or maybe her.
• It seems that those offensive Duggars on TLC have been causing a ruckus again!
  

Discontinuing cessationism: The End

I can't wait 'til I can do this kinda stuff full-time. There are nothing that I find more exciting and challenging that diving into Scripture and trying to understand what it has to say about some particular topic.

As I close this series on Cessationism versus Continuationism, I thought it'd be helpful [to me] to post a summary on where I've landed. In a couple areas, I know that I've moved rather significantly (in both directions) from my starting point. My hope is that these posts have been an honest, relatively unprejudiced, and responsible analysis of 1 Corinthians 12 - 14. I'd be happy to hear your thoughts and respond to any comments you'd like to offer. You can read the original posts here:

[Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4] [Part 5] [Part 6] [Part 7]

Summary

What should be our attitude when discussing topic like the Continationist vs. Cessationist debate?
Any discussion like this must be tempered by grace and humility. Whatever understanding or insight we have that escapes other people should cause us to marvel at God's grace in disclosing such truth to us. If we find ourselves being countered by solid, Godly men, we should also carefully and respectfully reconsider our position... That anything should be revealed to us should break our hearts for those who do not know the truth. Increasing knowledge of God in any sphere should not bring pride and self-righteousness, but humility and tear-stained cheeks.

There are positions relative to the operation of the Holy Spirit that are worthy of condemnation: God is not giving new scripture, nor has every gift of the Holy Spirit ceased. Let's save our vitriol for these errors* while continuing to plead our case personally, humbly, and prayerfully for those who hold a 'reasoned middle' view that varies from our own.

Understand I am not saying we can't vigorously argue for or defend our position... We absolutely must contend for the truth! However, we need to keep our 'holier than thou' attitudes in check.

Are you a continuationist or a cessationist now?
I can say, with conviction, that I would now call myself a 'Reformed Charismatic'. This phrase seems to accurately sum up the convictions of my heart: God is sovereign and Holy, our sin is infinitely offensive, the grace of the Cross is a treasure beyond words, and God has willed to glorify Himself through a sovereignly-gifted church until Christ returns.

In this investigation, I have found the scriptural case for cessationism to be lacking:

• Paul gives thanks for the gifting of the Corinthians in chapter 1.
• Paul may very well be rebuking the Corinthians with his statement "But [you] desire the greater gifts" in 12:31. However, it is clear that he is rebuking their behavior and stewarship of the gifts. They are behaving in a way that lacks love and they are desiring the gifts they think are cool rather than seeking to edify the Church and glorify Christ. Paul corrects both errors firmly but continues to urge them, through it all, to seek the spiritual gifts provided they are sought with proper motives (love and edification).
• The classic proof-text for cessationism, 1 Corinthians 13:8-10, certainly does show that tongues and prophecies will disappear "when the perfect comes." However, I think that the clear implication of the text is that the "the perfect" is either Jesus Christ or His historic return. The further support to this view is given in 1:7 and by noting 13:12's use of "face to face", etc.

When I finished the last Bible post, I spent a fair chunk of time looking at the arguments posed by several cessationists on the web (John MacArthur being the most famous). It strikes me that their position is largely born out of dislike or even fear of the charismatic gifts, particularly the danger that people will claim new revelation which [they will declare] supercedes Scripture. While I respect this position on Biblical authority and admit the danger exists, we should not let the potential for error invalidate the good and true operation of the gifts.

There are many who misinterpret/misapply Scripture all over the place. Yet no one would suggest that we cast Scripture aside because sinful people distort it. In the same way, we should not bridle the Holy Spirit's sovereign actions simply because we know some will take license with it. We must hold fast to the Bible and acknowledge the Spirit's work.

So, I am a Reformed Charismatic.

How do we tell the real thing from something counterfeit or wicked?
Some people express that, by opening ourselves to the more miraculous spiritual gifts, we risk opening ourselves to delusion and even demonic attack. It strikes me that this is no more true of charismatics than any other group.

Given the rampant pagan worship in Corinth, you would suspect that the Corinthians would be especially susceptible to attack. While Paul does address food sacrificed to idols ("You can eat it!") and participating in pagan worship ("Don't do it!"), he never makes any similar, "Beware unholy influence"-type statements re: the miraculous, spiritual gifts.

Students where I work recently experienced an unsought, 'charistmatic outburst'. It's fair to say those events prompted this study. However, way back at the beginning I wrote this trying to collect my thoughts:

The fruit that is born from these events will bear witness to the source. If Scripture is not violated, if people are driven to the foot of the Cross, if people are genuinely repenting of sin, if they lean on Christ's righteousness alone for salvation, if they are driven to pray/study about or testify/witness to the God and Savior of the Bible, and if they seek His glory and not their own, then it's hard to attribute such an outpouring to either the enemy or our sinful dillusion (see 1 Corinthians 12:3).**

I think that is the measure to use... The fruit of a tree will testify to the condition of the roots.

How do seek and exercise the gifts?
I've been batting this one around with Deef in a couple emails. My take is this:

Paul tells the Corinthians, in 14:1, that they should "[p]ursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy." I think that pursuit should look something like this:

• Love God, His glory, and His people. Our ability to love and minister to each other is critically linked to, and will never surpass, our devotion to Christ.
• Ask God to help us to discover and use the gifts He has already given us. God's word tells us we are already equipped for ministry. Are we stewarding those gifts well?
  
• Seek increasing capacity (gifting) for ministry. Where we have gifts, ask God to help us use them. Where we lack, ask God to fill those gaps in us for His name's sake. Note: I think we should seek after the gifts (plural), particularly those that are focused on the teaching and proclamation of the Word. I think that seeking after one, specific gift ("Oh God, give us tongues!") risks our limiting God's freedom to gift us according to His purpose and our real - rather than perceived - needs... Sometimes satire hits at the heart of the issue, and I think this joke gets it right.
  
• Trust and Thank God for His grace. God loves His people, and desires to care for them. If our hearts are right, God will supply our needs and the church will be edified.

Wow... I just came up with my first pastoral mnemonic - LAST. Now I just need to come up with a witty phrase to make it memorable. How's about, "Built to LAST"?

OK... But practically speaking: How do we exercise the gifts?
I addressed this fairly exhaustively (until I got too exhausted) in this post, so I won't write much here.

The final rule and authority MUST be the Bible. Everything that we do should be subjected to the scrutiny of God's Word. I indicated above that the fruit tells us a lot about the source. While that is true, we only know the fruit to be looking for because of Scripture. The Bible is the beginning and end of every theological question.

With that in mind, the big shifts/take-aways were:

• Tongues seems to operate in three 'spheres': Proclamation, prayer, and song. When a message is given in tongues (proclamation), it must be accompanied by interpretation. Otherwise, the speaker should remain silent. However, I have become convinced that a person can pray/sing in tongues quietly and still be in line with Biblical guidelines.
• I would submit that no matter the setting, tongues must be an earthly/human language. I have not read a compelling Biblical case which allows 'angelic tongues'. In fairness, there's no clear scripture to absolutely rule out such languages either. Until a compelling case is made to me, I'll hold that Acts 2 is normative at least as it pertains to language. Even so, this is very much an 'open hand' issue to me.
  
• Similarly, prophecy is given to convict, encourage, or console the hearers. In pre-Scripture times, prophecy was judged to be from the Lord if it came to pass (Deut 18). In the New Testament time, prophecy also could not violate the Old Testament scriptures. Therefore, today we must test prophecy by first assuring it conforms to the full Canon of Scripture and then judging it's truthfulness (Did it happen? Was it true?).
• I believe that, looking at the story of Agabus, we can see that prophecy can have minor errors in details. However, the overall, underlying message must be clearly true for the prophecy to be deemed as 'from God'.
  

Now what?
Ummm... Good question. If you agree with my position, then we should be praying and studying a whole lot. Ask God to soften our hearts so we'd be open to the prompting of the Holy Spirit. Pray that the same Spirit would illuminate the Bible so we'd correctly test our 'knowledge' and gifts - both present and future - against the true standard.

If you disagree, I think you should be praying and studying a whole lot. The goal here, again, is not for 'us' to be right and 'you' to be wrong... The goal is that we would all grow in knowledge, devotion, and service to our Savior (Ephesians 4). I welcome your challenges to my understanding of the issue and the Scriptures so we can all grow handle God's Word well (2 Timothy 2:15).

As far as everything else goes, I have a lot of class reading to do (2 weeks behind)... Expect this blog to be a little dull 'til I catch up. And expect the next couple posts to be about things we'll all agree are wacky! I wanna find someone we can unite against and we can bash into oblivion.

With love and grace, of course.... :-)

Thank you for reading. Now, let's hear from you!

* We should remember (and I say this to myself as much as anyone) that our righteous indignation should be directed at the errant position rather than the errant people. I'm not saying we give false teachers a 'pass', but I am saying that we need to adopt what Josh Harris has termed "Humble Orthodoxy" (video here). We'd be where they are, but for God's unmerited grace on us.

**I only saved this little snippet because it struck me as one of the most profound things that's ever crossed my mind. That such knowledge would pop into my head is, in itself, a sign that God still graciously works through His Spirit in the lives of those who seek Him.

Discontinuing cessationism: The Scriptures (4)

It's all downhill from here, really. The heaviest lifting has been covered in this last post. Having concluded that the full spectrum of spiritual gifts should be considered operative, all that remains it to firm up our definitions for the gifts and rules concerning their operation. If you're just tuning in and want to get up to speed, you can click on any of the previous posts and get some knowledge dropped on you... I'd recommend putting on your steel-toed shoes.

Part 1 (The Danger)

Part 2 (The Argument)
Part 3 (The Scriptures - Prologue)
Part 4 (The Scriptures [1])
Part 5 (The Scriptures [2])
Part 6 (The Scriptures [3])

Today, we'll be tackling 1 Corinthians 14, though we'll be treating it in larger chunks and more 'systematically' than previous, verse-by-verse passages. In the ESV, our passage reads:

Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up.

Now, brothers, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching? If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will anyone know what is played? And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air. There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning, but if I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me. So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church.

Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also. Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say “Amen” to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up. I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue.

Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature. In the Law it is written, “By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord.” Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers. If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds? But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, the secrets of his heart are disclosed, and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you.

What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up. If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God. Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.

I think it's important to note that we have here another confirmation of what the "greater gifts" Where the Corinthians seemed to desire the more miraculous, flashy gifts, Paul clearly emphasizes the superiority of those gifts that edify the church. So gifts like prophecy, teaching, or wisdom are all greater than something like tongues... Why? Because they edify the entire church assembly.

In this large passage, we get specific information that helps us answer the following questions:

So, what exactly is the gift of prophecy?
The plainest definition I can come up is that prophecy is proclaiming or speaking, in a language known to the speaker, insight given spontaneously by God. Prophecy serves as a sign to unbelievers because they are confronted with plainly-understood, supernaturally-obtained knowledge that serves to convict them (v24). Similarly prophecy edifies believers by offering encouragement and consolation that is understood by the assembly (v3).

To construct an example of the gift in action: An unbeliever enters a church. A prophecy is given which details a particular sin in their life (with more than 'fortune teller' clarity). The Holy Spirit presses on the heart of the unbeliever, they come under conviction of said sin, and repent.

All prophecy is held under the authority of Scripture. Not on par with the Bible, and certainly not superior to it. Scripture alone forms the final authority for judging the substance of any prophetic utterance.

Can prophecies be given regarding the future?
Perhaps, if in regards to the circumstances of an individual or group ("God has judged your [insert sin] and [something will happen] if you do not repent"). However, prophecies about coming event human history and the like should be viewed with extreme skepticism. God has revealed those portions of His plan that he wanted us to know already - in Scripture. And some mystery is clearly intended to remain until Christ returns.

Is 'post-Apostolic' prophecy inerrant? That is, should we hold prophecy to the standard set in Deuteronomy 18?
Wow... This is a toughie. And I've moved my position quite a bit in the past day while reading, and re-reading, the Scriptural evidence.

It strikes me that a modern prophecy can err in specific details, but that the errors cannot compromise the overarching accuracy of the prophetic word. Let me unpack that with two illustrations:

• First, we are told in verse 29 of our chapter that when one prophesies, the "others [should] weigh what is said." The word translated here as 'weigh' (diakrinetosan) has a real overtone of discernment. Other uses of the word reflect things like evaluate, consider. If used negatively, we could say things like dispute or even doubt. Clearly, the prophecies uttered should be subject to real scrutiny.
• Second, we have to contend with the account of Agabus to deal with... In Acts 11, Agabus shows up to deliver a prophecy that a great famine would arrive. Sure enough, it did. However, in Acts 21 Agabus shows up again. This time he prophesies regarding Paul's capture in Jerusalem. While his prophesy was correct (Paul was taken as a prisoner), he erred on a couple of the details.

Armed with context and those two passages, I'd lay out a mediating position. Any prophecy should be carefully examined by the leaders of the church. The ultimate validation for any prophecy found in its truthfulness. While one might allow for slight errors, the core message (in Agabus' case, that Paul would be captured in Jerusalem) must be dead-on accurate.

It is also worth noting that we'd obviously affirm that the prophetic gift is necessarily different today because we do have Scripture. The Old Testament prophets uttered "Thus saith the Lord" prophecies that we turned into Scripture. In the New Testament, the prophecies of Apostles and all others were by definition subject to scrutiny via the Old Testament. Now that we have the complete revelation of the Bible, we must subject all prophecy to full inspection in light of God's Word. Any prophetic utterance that contradicts Scripture ("The Lord has told me exactly when the end times will arrive") should be ignored and that 'prophet' should be disregarded.

What is the gift of tongues?
The gift of tongues is the Spirit-given ability to pray, sing, or prophesy (vv13-15) in a language unknown to the speaker. In corporate settings, the gift of tongues should only be exercised in conjuction with the gift of interpretation so that the congregants may be edified (vv26-28).

Here again, I've moved from where I thought I'd land. Initially, I'd have told you that tongues was effectively a variation on the gift of prophecy in which someone delivers a proclamation in another language which should then be interpreted for the edification of the congregation. It does seem, however, that Paul's application here is broader: Tongues can clearly be sung (v15) and seems to have an element which being born out of one's prayers and 'kept to yourself' (vv27-28).

So, I can accept the position that someone with the gift of tongues may pray or sing in tongues (to themselves during corporate worship; or 'out loud' in their private life) and still be operating withing the reasonable bounds of Scripture.

Are tongues always known human languages (a la Acts 2)?
Man... Is it getting hot in here? I need a glass of water.... Anyone got any water.

If you asked me this three days ago, I would've said "ABSOLUTELY! Don't be a fool!" If I was asked to draw a line in the sand, I would still take the earthly language position and by extension that Acts 2 serves as a some kinda regulative text for the operation of tongues.

However, I can't say that so strongly now.

• For one thing, the Acts 2 manifestation doesn't hold to the same standards that Paul outlines in 1 Corinthians. There were tons of people speaking, there was no 'strict interpretation', and it's hard to tell if the languages were know or if the hearers heard their own dialects being spoken. While I'm not throwing down a gautlet here, I am saying that using an admittedly unique event to define normal operation is sticky... Using that logic, I should expect Delaware to be a good football team this year (after all, they were good in 2003)...
• I stated before that Paul's use of 'tongues of angels' in chapter 13 strikes me as hyperbole for illustration only. But there's no other supporting text to make that case, and only one proof-text for the earthly language case... Not a mass of evidence.
• I've already confessed that I must grant that tongues can operate in the gifted person as prayer and even singing. That breaks the paradigm I had set up in my head all to pieces to start with...
  
• I also read an interesting case that points to Paul's use of the word idiotou (which the ESV translates 'outsider'). It's not interesting enough to make me buy the argument with any certainty, but it was interesting nonetheless.

So, in summary... Tongues can definitely manifest themselves in the prayers, singing, and 'prophetic' messages of a gifted person. While I believe that tongues would normally be known languages of people on earth, it is at least possible that Scripture allows for other, 'angelic' languages to be manifested.

How should these gifts be exercised in corporate worship?
Thankfully, Paul gives us some pretty clear guidelines:

• Prophecy - The person with a prophetic word must be acting out of love for Christ and His Church. Any prophecies must be offered in an orderly fashion so all can be heard and 'processed'.
  
  I would add two other things here that might be a bit of a stretch... First, I would think that the pastors/elders of a church could reasonably be asked to 'screen' the prophecies and weed out those that they feel fail in light of scriptural guidelines. I base this in part on verse 29. Paul's reference to "the others" could point at the other 'prophets', ordering them to test the statements given in the service. This pre-screening, as it were, also allows the clearly self-indulgent 'words' to be censored before they harm the congregation.
  
  Second, I think that confirming the accuracy of prophecies wouldn't be a bad idea occasionally. That is, if someone says that there's someone struggling with [specific circumstance], I might want to ask that someone come forward to an elder (after service) if they believe that word was 'for them'. We would expect that Spirit would be convicting and encouraging with these prophetic words. So, let's assure the rubber is meeting the road.
• Tongues - In corporate worship, a message given in tongues must be accompanied by an interpretation. Both sides must be present or else the tongues-speaker should be quiet. Those individuals who have the gift of tongues may pray or sing 'in the Spirit' quietly.

Overarching all the gifts is are two particular fruits of the Spirit: Love and self-control. For the gifts to be edifying to the church, they must be handled with love. In addition, the gifted are expected to exhibit clear self-control. "God is not a God of confusion" means that the believers are to utilize the gifts in an orderly way. The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets, and I think it's safe to say their tongues are subject to them as well.

Ok... It's getting way late. So, I'm signing off. Up next: A summary post to clean up any gaps I've left in my position and the I'll put this puppy to bed.

Discontinuing cessationism: The Scriptures (3)

We've got a big swath of 1 Corinthians to cut at today. Upon reflection, perhaps I was a little ambitious in picking this big of a section for one, single post. Let's see how it goes, but this may get split up. I'd highly recommend that you catch up on the previous posts if you haven't been following along the whole time. At a minimum you should read the Scripture posts before going any further.

Part 1 (The Danger)

Part 2 (The Argument)
Part 3 (The Scriptures - Prologue)
Part 4 (The Scriptures [1])
Part 5 (The Scriptures [2])

In the last post, I proposed that Paul's discourse on love in 1 Corinthians 13 was given to help show how spiritual gifts should be operating in the church. No matter how great the gift, it's value to the church is compromised (at best) if it is not used in love. In today's post, we'll hit the major cessationist proof text and also start looking at the scriptural operation of the gifts. We begin with the whole text (1 Corinthians 13:8-14:19):

Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up.

Now, brothers, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching? If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will anyone know what is played? And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air. There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning, but if I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me. So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church.

Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also. Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say “Amen” to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up. I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue.

And we dive right into the controversy with our first verse:
Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.

• So, love is superior to the gift and will outlast them. Tongues, prophecy, and the like are only temporary.
  
  To a cessationist argument, this is obviously a key passage. We have here clear, scriptural confirmation that the gifts will end. But when will they end? Both verbs here ('will pass away' [2x] and 'will cease') clearly point to something in the future.
  
  For the moment, let's recognize that the Corinthians were meant to see that the things there were so desperately seeking after - miraculous signs - are only temporary/transient. Love is enduring and will carry on after the other have run their course.
  

For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways.

• When will these gifts end? "When the perfect comes..." Once that which is complete and perfect is here, the partial and imperfect things we experience now will evaporate.
  
  Cue the obvious question: Just what is "the perfect" to which Paul is referring? If we know what it is, we might be able to get a better idea of when the gifts must end.
  
  If I asked that question in a Presbyterian seminary, hands all over the room would've shot up in the air and be frantically waving for attention... Cessationists almost uniformly contend that "the perfect" is the completed Canon of Scripture. They might support/expound that answer with a statemet like this (please feel free to help me sharpen the argument if you feel I haven't done it justice):

  Prior to the close of Scripture, each prophecy was only a part of the whole revelation that God intended for His people. Christ promised his disciples, who would become the Apostles, that the Holy Spirit would "guide them into all truth" (John 16). This perfect revelation, once collected together in Scripture, ended the need for ongoing, partial revelation from God. Therefore, "the perfect" (to teleion in the Greek) would be the perfect, complete revelation: Scripture.
  
  One could also reasonably translate to teleion as "the mature" or "the complete". We know that signs and wonders served to establish the church and confirm the authenticity of the Apostle's ministry following Pentecost. Once the church had been fully established, the confirmation of the gifts became unneeded. These arguments are effectively unified given that the Canon's closure (at least compositionally) coincides with the death of the last Apostle.

  I have no problem with the multi-faceted translation of 'to teleion'. All three meanings are reasonable given the context ('the mature' especially, given Paul's continuation). However, the rest of the argument is not compelling to me.
  
  Let me affirm that I believe the Bible is perfect. You'll find no compromising there from me! However, the implication that "the perfect" refers to the Bible seems to be largely philsophical - perhaps even prejudiced - rather than based in the text. To make this position stick at all, I think one must actively choose to ignore the context of our passages. You'll see why as we read on...
  

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

• In fairness to the cessationist argument, let's remember that Paul is writing to the Corinthians before the gifts would've ceased (at the close of Scripture). So, the 'now' that applies to the Corinthians need not be the 'now' in which we are living.
  
  That said, I wonder if we really see "face to face" and/or "know fully" now that Scripture has been closed. A cessationist would have to say "Yes": We effectively encounter Christ 'face to face' when we hear the Gospel and Scripture. Scripture provides us a full revelation of what God intended to disclose before Christ's return.
  
  I affirm completely that we do meet Christ through the Bible and proclamation of the Gospel. However, the term 'face to face' (in Greek, "prosopon pros prosopon") is not unique in the New Testament and always refers to personal encounters [verses here]. More impactful is that we will "know fully, even as I have been fully known" (epignosomai kathos kai epegnosthen). While I agree we have a perfectly sufficient revelation now, this verse promises that we will know God as perfectly as He has known us. In addition to being mind-blowing, I think this statement shatters the idea that "the perfect" is Scripture or the mature arrival of the church.
  
  Again, I am not diminishing that Christ appears to our hearts in His word, nor stating that the Bible is less than perfect. However, the statements here are so incredibly personal and 'intimate' that I can't help but believe they point to a future state that we have not yet realized.
  
  Well, logically we need to ask what actually is Paul speaking of in this passage! I think that there are two, closely linked possibilities. In one sense, I think that Paul is plainly pointing towards the glorious return of Christ. At that time, we will be in God's literal, physical presence and be able to see Him clearly. As we put on immortality, our minds will be freed from our motal limitations to understand God and we will finally know Him fully. Miracles like healing will not be needed... For one thing, no one will be sick. We won't need prophets, because we will all be in the presence of that to which all prophecy points.
  
  And that would be my second take: "The perfect" could be a time - the arrival of the Kingdom of God - or it could also be rightly thought of as a person: Jesus Christ, himself. When we see Him the need for all other ragged intermediates will be vaporized in the light of His glory. Christ is, Himself, the ultimate revelation of God to us.

So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love. Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy.

• Paul repeats the supremecy of love and then essentially repeats his exhortation from 12:31. "Desire the fruit of the Spirit (that is, Love) a first and then seek that the Spirit would gift you for Ministry... Not that you would be gifted to feed your own egotism."

My primary purpose in these posts was to analyze the Scriptural for a classic cessationist viewpoint. Does the Bible plainly indicate that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit have ceased? I have tried to be fair in my analysis, even deliberately avoiding 'propaganda' that could prejudice me one way or the other.

As some of us have discussed prosopon pros prosopon ('face to face' - heh, Greek humor), it's almost impossible to come at such an issue without some sort of bias. Our history, experience, and the teaching we have encountered all impact the biases that we have. I know I bring an overwhelming displeasure with the charimaticism practiced in most places today. Though I have had some 'mystical experiences' that sway me one way, I have a bad taste in my mouth about a number of other charismatic trappings which draws me another direction.

So, I wanted to come at this and make a decision (for myself) from the Bible.

If you've read along with me, I hope that you'll agree that the Biblical case for a classic cessationism is weak. Certainly the gifts will cease... But there is little Biblical support for the idea that the cessation must've been coincidental with the end of either the Canon or the Apostolic age.

From my examination of 1 Corinthians 12-13 and other related passages (I only can type so much), I believe that Scripture teaches God is still 'able' [awkward, but I can't think of a better way to say it] to dispense any and all of the spiritual gifts, including those considered to be more miraculous. I also believe that God sovereignly gives the gifts according to His purpose and for His glory. Accordingly I believe that, though Paul uses a Body as the metaphor for the diversity of gifts, God need not dispense every gift for operation within any single believer or church family.

I openly admit that certain aspects of the sign gifts make me uncomfortable. No doubt this is thanks largely to what I believe is rampant misuse by certain ultra-charismatic groups... Regardless, neither my sin nor that of others should form the final verdict of how God should operate. If it did, the world would be a terrible place indeed.

*whew* Ok. There you have it. I'm a continuationist.

Well, where do we go from here? It strikes me that we must work to form a clear, Biblical understanding of the more miraculous, more misunderstood spiritual gifts. We also need to rightly construct a Biblical framework that will allow us to properly govern the operation of such gifts in the church. As if someone planned it that way, the continuation of 1 Corinthians 14 does just that.

We'll stop for now, let all this stuff stew, and then tackle the definitions/rules in the next post. I would ask that we all prayerfully consider the statements above. If I have erred, I fervently ask that you, my brothers and sisters, would reach out to me and correct/challenge me. My desire is to honor Christ, not malign God with false teaching.

If I am right, however, then we must all prayerfully seek to conform ourselves to the teaching of God's Word. Even if we don't like it... I don't like the idea that I'm a sinner. I don't like that God is angry with sin and must punish it. But truth is not founded on my opinion.

Above all, keep praying (on both sides of the aisle)!

Are you ready for some WWWednesday???

Welcome to another installment of my weak attempt to match the A La Carte from Challies or TeamPyro's Blogspotting. When you get linked there, your site gets mucho traffico. When you get linked here, you just feel kinda icky and cry.

In my defense, I've been WWWednesday-ing it longer than Phil's been Blogspotting. I doubt anyone's been at this longer than Tim Challies. After all, he invented blogging.

On with the show!
1) At 4:55 last Friday, this blog registered its 2,000th visitor. It is fitting that the milestone visitor was my lovely wife... It makes the story both geekily romantic and logical since she probably accounts for at least 50% of my visits.

2) Marketing is ultra-subjective... Sometimes you like it, other times you hate it. It's gonna be hard to argue, however, the UK's Conservative Party got anything approaching their money's worth when their logo was recently redesigned. Gone is the strength of the old Thatcher-esque logo seen to the right... Hail the era of broccoli!3) To make the Conservatives feel better, I'd highly recommend this touching rendition of the hit song "Feelings". Music soothes the savage beast, they say.

4) I've often thought that the world would be a much better place if people would Just Stop and Think. Seems some other people agree. If you're not one of my Christian friends, I'd urge you to watch the video and honestly listen. Is your rational worldview really so rational?

5) The entire world is talking about the Pope's remarks re: Islam. I have to be honest that I've only caught bits and pieces... But it is interesting that riots and threats of violence seemed to be the dominant response to the Pontiff's little speech. There are a ton of people commenting on the net, but I found the alway insightful centuri0n's article interesting. On a related note: It's also interesting to look at today and then look at this editorial from April.

6) Should Christians start rioting over stuff like this? Compare and contrast with Islamic fundamentalism. Discuss your findings with the class.

7) This has turned more serious than a typical WWWednesday post... One more serious thing and I'll get back to the blithe and merry stuff you've come to expect. In addition to the Pope, a lot of people are talking about Jesus Camp around the water cooler. Did you see the story on ABC? If not, you can check it out here. Interestingly, Julie from LonePrairie went there as a kid and offers her perspectives here.

8) Hollywood thought that it would be SkyNet that got us. They were wrong. Elmo will become self-aware this Christmas. Once that happens, he'll see us all as threats and that will be then end. Whatever you do, don't unplug him! Can the Matrix really be that far off?

9) You probably got here because you know me and were really bored. Pity these fools who got here because of the cruel nature of search engines:

• Someone wanted more info on "cessationism or cessationist or cessationists or charismatics or charismata or continuationist or continuationism or charistmatic". I've heard of being thorough in your research, but yeesh!
• I wonder how the Super Nanny trash talks... "[bleep]! You call that weak-[donkey stuff] a manners chart? [Heck]! You ain't even gots no star stickers!"
  
• Unfortunately, I'm the 5th hit for pastor farts on Yahoo. And strangely, 3 different people were investigating that topic this week.
• People should do some careful investigation before stating that Gary Busey cut her up.

10) Lastly, here's some humorous video-goodness to balance the serious. Nothing's funnier than German Engineer thugs or the legendary Burt Bacharach.

Discontinuing cessationism: The Scriptures (2)

Time to chop through another swath of 1 Corinthians. When we last left 1 Corinthians, everyone was all chummy. Now we start getting to the real, crucial verses for the Cessationist scriptural case. Hope y'all like fireworks.

I'm going to try something a little different format-wise this time. I tend to want to revise my post every time I look at it. This isn't a huge problem when I can sit and write things in one sitting. However, when forced to write over multiple days... Well, let's just say it stinks. So, the next two posts will assume the shape of a traditional Bible commentary. I know this will be helpful to me (and hopefully to you, too, by extension).

You can catch up on the background by visiting the previous posts:

Part 1 (The Danger)
Part 2 (The Argument)
Part 3 (The Scriptures - Prologue)
Part 4 (The Scriptures [1])

First, let's look at the whole passage for today (1 Corinthians 12:27 - 13:7) in the ESV and then we'll go verse-by-verse:

Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?

But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way.

13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Now, let's work through all this systematically...

Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.

• You'll recall that Paul has just finished presenting the metaphor of a body to illustrate the proper operation of spiritual gifts. Just as our body has many parts (some prominent, others less so) and needs all its parts to be healthy, so the Body of Christ - the Church - is made up of diverse people with diverse gifts. The use of all our gifts to glorify Christ and serve one another is what marks a healthy church body.

And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues.

• Let's put the first thing first: Again, Paul is putting an emphasis on the fact that the various, diverse gifts which the Holy Spirit gives all benefit and strengthen the Body. Just as we have toes and fingers and ears, so the church has people with differing gifts like teaching and discernment and administration.
  
  That said, I agree with most commentators that what we see here is a distinction being made between offices and gifts. People are appointed to the office of apostle, prophet, or teacher by God and God alone. It would follow that those people God appoints to these offices are also gifted by God to accomplish the ministry set before them. These offices seem to be particularly centered around the proclamation and confirmation of the Gospel of Christ.
  
  Those people holding the office of Apostle (sent personally by Christ) are all dead. As are all the people who held the office of prophet, which we see particularly operative in the Old Testament. Many would equate the office of 'teacher' here with our modern office of Pastor/Elder, which obviously goes on.

Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?

• The Apostle Paul - King of Rhetoric. Of course they don't all have the same offices or gifts... God gives different gifts to different people to accomplish his sovereign plan.

But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way.

• Here comes the hot stuff. This idea of 'desiring the greater gifts' is interpreted three different ways.
  
  On one hand, Paul could be saying that - even though not everyone will manifest them - we should actively seek after the so-called 'greater gifts' . If correct, this interpretation would clearly add to the evidence supporting the continuationist view. To paraphrase these verses in that light, one might say: "Of course all aren't apostles/teachers/etc! But don't let that quench a healthy, righteous desire for the greater gifts for use in glorifying God!"
  
  On the other hand, perhaps Paul is employing sarcasm (as we noted he has elsewhere). To put that slant on it, the verses might read, "Are all apostles/teachers/etc? Of course not... Oh, but you guys desire the greater gifts. Those plain ol', garden variety gifts aren't good enough for us Super-Corinthians!" Or perhaps Paul is transitioning to the discussion of love that follows in chapter 13, implying that 'Love' is the greater gift to be sought.
  
  For my money, I'll take the first reading. If this were a sarcastic statement, one would expect Paul to emphasize it more and then state a correction about not desiring the greater gifts. We don't see that here. Likewise, while Paul is transitioning to a discussion of love, I think he is preparing to display love as the supreme ethic that should govern our interactions and (as a result) the operation of our spiritual gifts. To make my case for the first reading more solid, Paul effectively repeats the exhortation in 14:1 adding the qualifier that love be chief among our pursuits.
  
  My personal conclusion: Paul wanted to encourage the Corinthians and us, by extension, to pursue the greater gifts. The problem was that Paul knew the hearts of his audience... I can hear them (and me, sadly) now... "An order to seek something greater must mean that we're greater if/when we receive it, right??" Wrong. And so Paul qualifies his exhortation... We are to seek the greater gifts, but only if our seeking them is steeped in love.

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

• Controversy verse again. In my summary post, I'll define the different spiritual gifts in light of what I've learned in this study. In the meantime, I think it's safe to assume you know enough about them to understand the texts.
  
  This verse is used by continuationists to show that the gift of tongues can be expressed using both earthly languages (a la Acts 2) or using 'heavenly languages'. While I suppose this is true, I think this is a terrible proof text.
  
  First off, Paul clearly uses the word "If" here (and yes, it's there in the Greek too). He could've said, "I do speak in the tongues of men and angels, but without love..." but the Holy Spirit chose not to. Moreover, check out the next couple verses.

And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

• It strikes me that Paul is speaking in hyperbole. While I don't doubt that Paul was gifted with prophecy, his consistent use of the words 'If' and 'All' ("all mysteries, all knowledge, all faith...") sure make it seem like he's setting up a deliberately extreme, illustrative example.
  
  Rather than say he does speak angelic language, I think Paul is saying even such amazing, unbelievable, miraculous gifts would be effectively worthless without love. "If I could leap tall buildings in a single bound..."
  
  Some would argue that Paul wouldn't use the illustration of speaking angelic languages if it wasn't a valid example. While that may be true, I think that the context makes that particularly hard to sustain. Nonetheless, I must concede that this Paul's statement certainly doesn't preclude angelic tongues... Still, it certainly doesn't establish them as normative either.
  
  Sorry, my pentecostal friends... But don't fear! I'll be joining your team when I hit verse 8 in the next post!
  

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

• Just an aside... Isn't it amusing that this verse is constantly used in weddings? While I think Paul's definition of love obviously holds, the whole context revolves around the operation of gifted people in the church.
  
  As I noted before, it seems Paul is clearly establishing love as an overarching, almost supreme ethic. No matter what skills, office, or gifts we have, the condition of our heart ultimately controls the effect that we will have for Christ.

So, where does that leave us?

Scripture has clearly established that God gives spiritual gifts to all believers (each and every one). The specific gifts will vary from person to person, but they are all to be used for building up other believers in the Body of Christ - the Church.

We can admit that some gifts are more prominent or 'flashier' than others... Nonetheless, those gifts are no more important to the fabric of the Church than the person with the gift of administration who keeps things running. To properly use any of these gifts, we must operate out of love. We must love Christ, who bought us out from slavery to sin. We must love the church and seek to serve our brothers and sisters with the gifts God has given us.

As far as controversies tackled: I personally feel confident that the statement by Paul to 'earnestly desire the greater gifts' can be seen as a command. The cases for viewing that verse as either specifically pointing to Love as the greatest gift or as being a sarcastic jab at the self-important Corinthians are both weak.

And while we can't rule out angelic speech in light of Paul's statement re: 'tongues of men and of angels', I also think that the passage is a shaky foundation on which to establish scriptural support for heavenly speech. Given the context, it appears that Paul is really making a point about how any gift (no matter how cool) is made worthless by a lack of love.

Well, it's late... Sorry that this is so long and that there's just text. I hope you'll agree, however, that the text really is the important part. I also pray that I've cast the Scriptures in the properly light... More on Thursday or Friday!

Discontinuing cessationism: The Scriptures (1)

In case you're just joining us, this is part of a seriese of posts... You can read the background stuff by clicking on any/all of these links:

Part 1 (The Danger)
Part 2 (The Argument)
Part 3 (The Scriptures - Prologue)

The next 4 posts will deal directly with the Biblical text from 1 Corinthians, chapters 12 through 14. It'd be worth reading the whole section by clicking HERE if you haven't done so already. In each post, we'll work our way down through the passage and pause wherever there valid point to be made or an error to address.

Enough dilly-dallying... Off we go. Starting with 1 Corinthians 12:1-26 (all emphasis in the Biblical texts are mine):

Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be uninformed. You know that when you were pagans you were led astray to mute idols, however you were led. Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says “Jesus is accursed!” and no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians provides the responses of the Apostle Paul to some questions raised by the church at Corinth. The word "Now" transitions from the response from one question to another. It is very important to note that the Corinthians are operation from an 'uninformed' position. As we approach the text, we should expect to see Paul's corrections and admonitions to the Corinthians. We must be careful not to use the errant conduct of the Corinthian church as our model for right behavior.

No one, Paul says, who speaks of Christ as being accursed is speaking by the Spirit of God. Similarly, those who recognize and love Christ's Lordship must be operating with the enabling of the Holy Spirit. In his essay on the ministry of the Holy Spirit, Charles Hodge writes:

It is the special office of the Spirit to convince the world of sin; to reveal Christ, to regenerate the soul, to lead men to the exercise of faith and repentance; to dwell in those whom He thus renews, as a principle of a new and divine life. By this indwelling of the Spirit, believers are united to Christ, and to one another, so that they form one body. This is the foundation of the communion of saints, making them one in faith, one in love, one in their inward life, and one in their hopes and final destiny.

So the operation of the Holy Spirit must exalt Christ. Any conduct that is happening under the guise of 'the moving of the Spirit' which does not bring glory and honor to Christ is absolutely not from the Holy Spirit.

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.

Many notes working in harmony - all crafted, given, and conducted by God. Every believer is the recipient of some gift (or several gifts) of the Holy Spirit. And towards what end? All of the gifts are sovereignly given by God to glorify His name and edify the church. Each individual gift is part of a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. Paul expounds on this concept with a great analogy:

For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.

The eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.

Have you ever broken a toe or a finger? Or have you ever had an ear that plugged up and stopped hearing for a couple days? Remember that time that your nose was all plugged up for a solid week?

If you answered 'yes' to any of those questions, you know what Paul is getting at. Our bodies were 'fearfully and wonderfully made' out of a bunch of interdependent parts. While they all having varying degrees of prominence, size, and responsibility, our bodies don't function well without all of them. In the same way, Christ has woven His Church together from a wide array of people with diverse interests, talents, and giftings. By recognizing our dependence on one another, we are rightly humbled and free our gifts to be used to serve others.

We are gifted by God to accomplish His purpose by edifying His church. Both the source of the gift and the purpose must be clearly understood if the church is to operate properly. When we don't acknowledge that God is the on who gives us our gifts, we become filled with either pride ("Look at how gifted I am!") or jealousy ("Look how gifted he is!")... In either of those states, we are compromised in our ability to operate as edifying agents in the church. What results is a bunch of people fighting to be a 'feet' with no head or arms operating properly to complete the body.

We might think of our gift as 'modest', but the fact that it comes from God means that it's unbelievably valuable. God has ordained for you to manifest that particular gift, placing you right where you are needed. Does that mean that we must expect to see every gift in operation everywhere? No, I don't think so. The mingling of the gifts we have, operating in service to one another, makes us a body that can function well for God's glory.

Alright.... We've laid the groundwork. To be honest, I probably could've skipped this section of Corinthians in this series of posts. There's nothing particularly controversial here and probably both sides of the continuation/cessation argument would affirm the 'plain' readings of these verses. However, these passages are crucial for setting up the context which informs the really controversial stuff.

Most of which is coming in the next post. So, stay tuned.

Let me also apologize for this post's rambling nature... I wrote/rewrote it two or three times trying to find a format that I think works. I think I've gotten it, and will start with a different format next time. In the meantime, you're getting something that's a bit of a hodgepodge... Sorry!

Discontinuing cessationism: The Scriptures (Prologue)

Well, WWWednesday is behind us, I'm already behind on my class readings, and I can't stop thinking about all this 1 Corinthians stuff. So, rather than wait, let's keep moving and dive into the thing... Ok? (Hopefully, we do better than this gal!)

Just a little pre-dive cleanup duty: Coramdeo (CD) asked some questions in the comments of a previous post that deserve clarification here on the 'main page'.

In that posting, I made note that I attend a "functionally cessationist church". CD fairly asked, "Since I've used the expression "functional cessationist" too, why don't you also define what you think it means?" Why I'd be happy to!

In speaking of my own church, I was simply trying to be descriptive (rather than applying some technical definition). Our church's doctrinal statement makes no specific mention of our position on the ongoing operation of the sign gifts of the Holy Spirit. However, if you walk in our church on a Sunday you will not see the gifts functioning in our corporate worship. So, I was calling our church 'functionally cessationist' because we simply function as a cessationist church whether or not that is specifically a point of doctrine for us. Just to be fair, I expect that our church's elders likely would land in the cessationist camp if the issue was brought up and tackled.

So, that was a practical definition rather than a technical one. If you were to ask me to technically define 'functional cessationism' I might come up with something like this: A functional cessationist sees no specific scriptural mandate for the gifts to have ended operation at a specific point in the past. However, observation of the church at large shows that the sign gifts have ceased (implicitly stating that the gifts as manifested in most corners of modern charismaticism are 'out of line' with scriptural norms). So, while the gifts have ceased function for the time being, the Holy Spirit can, and perhaps will, sovereignly dispense those gifts in the future.

The other clean-up item: CD said, "I do think this issue, like others, may not be simply binary. I find myself ... often holding the "excluded middle" in many matters. If my uncertainty on this matter were a matter of sloth or weakness of leadership, shame on me. But can I hold a prinicpled middle-ground? perhaps..."

I surely hope that there's a "principled middle-gound" to be held, since that seems to be where I'm going to land... Ok, perhaps I'll be a little off-center. My point originally was not to imply that this is a binary, 'either/or' kinda issue. I certainly think that we're discussing something of a continuum of views, any one gradation of which may be correct. I'm not challenging the adoption of a 'moderate' position, but rather the adoption of such a position without choosing to study the Word and let it inform our opinion.

As believers, we must stand somewhere. We must wrestle with the text and come to a conclusion about what we believe and why. The 'middle' is fine if that position can be validated scripturally.

Many people exhibit a tendency with issues like this to just say, "Yeah that's a toughie!" and avoid the topic altogether. In doing so, they really choose to land nowhere rather than left, right, or center.

The purpose of these posts is/will be to examine the Biblical statements on the operation of the gifts of Holy Spirit (with few biases, Lord willing). I want to land where I believe the "Scriptures and plain reason" demand that we land. If that's on the far-left or far-right, let's say "Amen, Lord make it so in us". If it's somewhere in between, let's say the same thing. Either way, let's affirm not only the position but the all-important foundation of that position: the Testimony of God's Word.

Now, that's 'Sola Scriptura'.

Here's the roadmap: I expect that picking through 1 Corinthians 12 thru 14 is going to take four more posts, at least one of which is going to approach epic proportions... I want to work through this as quickly as I can (in order to keep pace with my other responsibilities) but I also want to be prayerful and considerate with the text. So, bear with me. Expect something like the following to materialize:

• The first post on 1 Corinthians 12:1-26 will drop sometime Friday or Saturday.
• I'll try to follow that up by covering 12:27 through 13:7 by Tuesday.
• Next Wed, Thur, or Fri will bring a post picking through the rest of chapter 13 and part of 14 (13:8 on down to 14:19).
• The final post on 14:20-40 will be thrown out sometime next weekend.

Then, all that will remain is for me to draft a summary post and dodge the barbed jousts from all of you. *smile*

Those of you who know me know that I'm a stickler for context... Taking verses, or even sections of verses, in isolation can introduce problems. With that in mind, I'd humbly ask that those of you reading along with these posts would take the time to read the entire section of 1 Corinthians that's 'in play' at least a couple times. Get the feeling for the whole message before we break it up into tasty, bite-sized nuggets. Click Here to give it a read.

And keep praying... Above all else, pray.