Series Ten: Miraculous Gifts Are Not for Today

by Jonathan Anderson

The purpose of this teaching is to help all Christians understand that the miraculous gifts have ceased. Accepting this doctrine is important for all in the faith to help debunk the claims by the charismatic movements. Furthermore, understanding that the sign gifts have ceased will help all believers understand and discern the real/authentic work of the Holy Spirit.

History Shows that Miraculous Gifts Ceased

The miraculous gifts were practiced from time to time throughout church history. While the history of the practice of charismatic gifts is not authoritative, it is illustrative. In fact, those who believe the miraculous gifts are for today’s church (Continuationists) recognize that there was a notable absence of miraculous gifting in the church until the early 1900s. Ironically, it would seem that Continuationists need to prove that the 1,900-year lack of miraculous gifts have ceased, while the Cessationists are saying that the status quo of 1,900 years continues today. Wayne Grudem is a notable Continuationist. He acknowledges that his position is new to the theological landscape from a historical perspective:

“In previous generations, systematic theologies did not have chapters on spiritual gifts, for there were few questions regarding the nature and use of spiritual gifts in the church. But the twentieth century has seen a remarkable increase in interest in spiritual gifts, primarily because of the influence of the Pentecostal and charismatic movements within the church.”¹

History of Continuationism

• Montanus
  • The first notable claim to practice the miraculous gifts was Montanus² in the middle of the 2nd century.
  • Eminent historian Philip Schaff wrote,
    • “Montanism, in the first place, sought a forced continuance of the MIRACULOUS GIFTS of the apostolic church, which gradually disappeared as Christianity became settled in humanity, and its supernatural principle was naturalized on earth.”³
• Zwickau Prophets
  • Thomas Münzer was a powerful speaker and influential leader in the Peasants’ War during the 1520s in Germany. After he arrived in Zwickau, he stirred up religious excitement already begun by two other fanatics, Nicolaus Storch and Marcus Thomä Stübner.
  • He appointed twelve apostles and seventy-two disciples. The local magistrates interfered and they were forced to leave.
  • Philip Schaff explains,
    • “These Zwickau Prophets, as they were called, agreed with Carlstadt in combining an inward mysticism with practical radicalism. They boasted of visions, dreams, and direct communications with God and the angel Gabriel, disparaged the written word and regular ministry, rejected infant baptism, and predicted the overthrow of the existing order of things, and the near approach of a democratic millennium.”⁴
• Edward Irving
  • Edward Irving might accurately be called “The Morning Star of the Modern Charismatic Movement.” Though trained and mentored briefly by the deeply spiritual and orthodox Thomas Chalmers, Irving went his own way theologically once he escaped from an assistant role in his own parish—the Caledonian Chapel in London (in 1821).
  • Popularity—He was a powerful speaker. His church grew quickly. He was a headliner. Poor and politician alike attended the chapel. The popularity and love of applause fed his innate desire for more influence and attention. In a chapter titled “Irving’s Reaction to Popularity,” Arnold Dallimore quotes B. B. Warfield:
    • “Irving’s sudden and unexampled popular applause did not completely turn his head, but it distinctly injured him. It left him an enthusiastic, simple-minded man; but it gave him overweening confidence in himself; and it infected him with the illusion that some high and world-wide mission had been committed to him.”⁵
  • Prophecy—His ministry became focused on the charismatic gifts (1824–28).⁶ Irving focused more and more on interpretation of prophecy. This certainly may have begun as a healthy focus on the reputed neglect of teaching about the Second Coming of Christ, but coupled with his penchant for the imaginative and fantastic, it was disastrous.
  • Miraculous Gifts—In the ensuing years, the Chapel became a hotbed for every spiritual gift. Prophecies were made for Christ to return on June 27, 1835.⁷ Tongues were commonplace,⁸ as well as interpretation.⁹ Healings and the resurrection power were practiced, or attempted, but the inevitable failure caused doubt among outsiders, and despair to those loyal to the movement.¹⁰
  • Doctrinal Questions—Beyond the dangerous practices, strange pneumatology, and aberrant eschatology, Edward Irving’s orthodoxy fell into question over the issue of whether Jesus Christ had a sinful human nature.¹¹ He apparently never affirmed that Christ actively committed sin. He did, however, teach that Jesus shared a post-fall Adamic human nature, which was a sinful nature like ours. The emphasis on how similar Christ was to us, though always victorious, inevitably undermined the unique substitution of Christ in our place. “We overcoming sin as Christ overcame sin, we doing the same works as Christ by the Spirit, tended to become the all-important element in his teaching. The Christian’s foundation, ‘Christ died for our sins’, was obscured.”¹²
  • Disillusionment—It is a sad commentary on the fruitlessness of such ministry that he lost popularity with many who were disillusioned by the fraudulent practices. He lost power in the church due to an establishment of apostles and prophets. Their authority kept Irving from being “little more than a servant, subject to their utterances and therefore to their commands.”¹³ With sad irony, Irving died in a state of expectancy—awaiting the gift of tongues, and healing from the sickness he endured. This healing would be “a testimony to all Britain of the reality of the charismatic gifts.”¹⁴ It never came, and he died on December 4, 1834.

History of Cessationism

Here are some choice quotes from faithful pastors in church history:

• John Chrysostom (c. 344–407)
  • “This whole place [speaking about 1 Corinthians 12–14] is very obscure: but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such as then used to occur but now no longer take place.”¹⁵
  • “Argue not because miracles do not happen now, that they did not happen then… In those times they were profitable, and now they are not.”¹⁶
• Augustine (354–430)
  • “In the earliest times, the Holy Spirit fell upon them that believe and they spoke with tongues, which they had not learned, as the Spirit gave them utterance. These were signs adapted to the time. For there was this betokening of the Holy Spirit in all tongues [languages] to show that the gospel of God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done for a sign, and it passed away.”¹⁷
• Martin Luther (1483–1546)
  • Martin Luther risked personal safety to oppose the Zwickau Prophets. “As to the pretended revelations of the new prophets, he despised them, and maintained that an inspired prophet must either be ordinarily called by church authority, or prove his divine commission by miracles.”¹⁸
  • “In the early Church the Holy Spirit was sent forth in visible form. He descended upon Christ in the form of a dove (Matthew 3:16), and in the likeness of fire upon the apostles and other believers (Acts 2:3). This visible outpouring of the Holy Spirit was necessary to the establishment of the early Church, as were also the miracles that accompanied the gift of the Holy Ghost. Paul explained the purpose of these miraculous gifts of the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 14:22, ‘Tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not.’ Once the Church had been established and properly advertised by these miracles, the visible appearance of the Holy Ghost ceased.”¹⁹
• John Calvin (1509–1564)
  • “Though Christ does not expressly state whether He intends this gift [of miracles] to be temporary, or to remain perpetually in the Church, yet it is more probable that miracles were promised only for a time, in order to give luster to the Gospel while it was new or in a state of obscurity.”²⁰
  • “The gift of healing, like the rest of the miracles, which the Lord willed to be brought forth for a time, has vanished away in order to make the preaching of the Gospel marvelous forever.”²¹
• John Owen (1616–1683)
  • “Gifts which in their own nature exceed the whole power of all our faculties, that dispensation of the Spirit is long since ceased and where it is now pretended unto by any, it may justly be suspected as an enthusiastic delusion.”²²
  • And in a comment on the warning of Hebrews 6, he said, “It is true, those alone are here firstly and directly intended who in those days had received extraordinary or miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. But this, by just analogy, may be extended unto others, now those gifts are ceased in the church.”²³
• Jonathan Edwards (1703–1758)
  • “The extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, such as the gift of tongues, of miracles, of prophecy, &c., are called extraordinary, because they are such as are not given in the ordinary course of God’s providence. They are not bestowed in the way of ‘God’s ordinary providential dealing with His children, but only on extraordinary occasions, as they were bestowed on the Prophets and Apostles to enable them to reveal the mind and will of God before the canon of Scripture was complete, and so on the primitive church, in order to the founding and establishing of the church in the world. But since the canon of Scriptures has been completed, and the Christian church fully founded and established, these extraordinary gifts have ceased. But the ordinary gifts of the Spirit, are such as are continued to the church of God throughout all ages; such gifts as are granted in conviction and conversion, and such as appertain to the building up of the saints in holiness and comfort.”²⁴
  • “And as these miraculous gifts of the Spirit were but temporary with regard to those particular persons that enjoyed them, so they are but for a season with regard to the church of God taken as a collective body. These gifts are not fruits of the Spirit that were given to be continued to the church throughout all ages. They were continued in the church, or at least were granted from time to time, though not without some considerable intermissions, from the beginning of the world till the canon of the Scriptures was completed.”²⁵
  • “But soon after that, the canon of Scripture being completed when the apostle John had written the book of Revelation, which he wrote not long before his death, these miraculous gifts were no longer continued in the church. For there was now completed an established written revelation of the mind and will of God, wherein God had fully recorded a standing and all-sufficient rule for His church in all ages. And the Jewish church and nation being overthrown, and the Christian church and the last dispensation of the church of God being established, the miraculous gifts of the Spirit were no longer needed, and therefore they ceased; for though they had been continued in the church for so many ages, yet then they failed, and God caused them to fail because there was no further occasion for them. And so was fulfilled the saying of the text, ‘Whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.’ And now there seems to be an end to all such fruits of the Spirit as these, and we have no reason to expect them anymore.”²⁶

Before the end of the 19th century, Continuationists hardly had a list like this beyond the embarrassing exceptions mentioned earlier. We could put virtually every faithful gospel preacher from after the apostles until 1900 on this list.

The Modern Gift of Prophecy is Different than the Biblical Gift

For the revelatory gift of prophecy to be biblically valid today, it must be as infallible and authoritative as it was in the New Testament. The modern prophetic movement typically allows for prophecy that is less accurate and less authoritative than Scripture. This isn’t consistent with biblical pattern.

• Definition of prophecy:
  1. to proclaim an inspired revelation, prophesy
  2. to tell about something that is hidden from view, tell, reveal
  3. to foretell something that lies in the future, foretell, prophesy²⁷

This differs from both the verb for preaching and the noun “herald/preacher.” Although both involve forth-telling, what is unique to prophecy is the revelatory aspect of the message. The herald simply declares the message of another. The prophet declares a message that he couldn’t have acquired except by divine revelation. It might involve information that he couldn’t acquire by his own personal knowledge (e.g., Matt 26:68, where the soldiers demand that Jesus prophecy who hit Him while His head was covered), or it may predict the future. Either way, prophecy was proven by 100% of its content being precisely accurate:

• Deut 18:21-22; cf. 1 Kgs 13:2–5 and 2 Kgs 23:15–16; Isa 7:16 and 8:3–4; Acts 11:28
• OT prophets may say, “Thus says the LORD” (among the hundreds of examples, see Exod 5:1; Isa 1:11).
• New Testament prophets may say, “This is what the Holy Spirit says” (Acts 21:11).

In spite of these truths, Continuationists maintain that prophecy exists today, but it is not potentially fallible, and less authoritative that what we see in the Bible. According to Grudem, there are five indications that New Testament prophets did not speak with authority equal to the words of Scripture. These passages, however, don’t uphold what Grudem says they do. Here are the problems with his argument, taking each of his five points in turn:

1. Acts 21:4—Grudem says: “This seems to be a reference to prophecy directed towards Paul, but Paul disobeyed it! He never would have done this if this prophecy contained God’s very words and had authority equal to Scripture.”²⁸
   • But “through the Spirit” modifies “telling,” not the exhortation to avoid Jerusalem (“telling” is the main verb; “to set foot” is a dependent infinitive).
   • Grammatically, the infinitive of verse 4, “to set foot,” functions best as a purpose infinitive²⁹: “speaking to Paul through the Spirit in order that [so that] he might not go up to Jerusalem” (my translation).
   • Grudem never mentions the prophecy that Paul received in 20:22–24. The Spirit’s prophecy contained the revelation that Paul would be arrested or imprisoned. Paul says nothing about persuasion not to go to Jerusalem.
   • Acts 19:21 explains that the same Spirit who gives prophecy put intentionality in Paul’s heart to go to Jerusalem: “Paul purposed in the Spirit to go to Jerusalem after he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia.” Is the Spirit now contradicting Himself?
   • The order of events in this verse is virtually repeated in the next narrative:
     • inspired and infallible prophecy of imprisonment and suffering
     • followed by a well-meaning exhortation of personal concern
     • followed by Paul’s commitment to obey the Lord in spite of persuasion attempted by well-meaning disciples
2. Acts 21:10-11—Grudem writes: “Agabus prophesied that the Jews at Jerusalem would bind Paul and ‘deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles,’ a prediction that was nearly correct but not quite: the Romans, not the Jews, bound Paul, and the Jews, rather than delivering him voluntarily, tried to kill him and he had to be rescued by force. The prediction was not far off, but it had inaccuracies in detail that would have called into question the validity of any Old Testament prophet. On the other hand, this text could be perfectly well explained by supposing that Agabus had had a vision of Paul as a prisoner of the Romans in Jerusalem, surrounded by an angry mob of Jews. His own interpretation of such a ‘vision’ or ‘revelation’ from the Holy Spirit would be that the Jews had bound Paul and handed him over to the Romans, and that is what Agabus would (somewhat erroneously) prophesy. This is exactly the kind of fallible prophecy proposed above—reporting in one’s own words something that God has spontaneously brought to mind.”³⁰
   • This is an argument from silence. Acts 21:27–32 does not affirm that the Jews apprehended him without rope or the use of any restraint. The text never affirms that. Are we to assume that they talked Paul out of the Temple so that they could kill him in the Court of the Gentiles? That is equally absurd and unfounded as Grudem’s explanation that they did this without binding him in any way.
   • The idea that the Romans arrested Paul without the aid of the Jews is entirely unbiblical. Instead of reading about Roman soldiers peeling Jews off of Paul in order to arrest them against their wishes, 21:32–33 affirms exactly what Agabus said: “when [the Jews] saw the commander and the soldiers, they stopped beating Paul.” The next thing that happens is a peaceable exchange where the commander arrests Paul.
   • This agrees with what Paul himself says to the Roman Jews in Acts 28:17: “Brethren, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans.”
   • Samuel Waldron is right to fear “that the interpretive approach used by Continuationists with reference to Agabus, if applied to the rest of the Bible, would uncover errors in many places where conservative Continuationists would not like to find them.”³¹
3. First Thessalonians 5:19–21—Grudem writes, “If the Thessalonians had thought that prophecy equaled God’s Word in authority, he would never have had to tell the Thessalonians not to despise it—they ‘received’ and ‘accepted’ God’s Word ‘with joy from the Holy Spirit’ (1:6; 2:13). But when Paul tells them to ‘test everything’ it must include at least the prophecies he mentioned in the previous phrase. He implies that prophecies contain some things that are good and some things that are not good when he encourages them to ‘hold fast what is good.’”³²
   • The fact that a message needs to be scrutinized by the truth doesn’t mean divine prophecy was often mixed with error
   • In 2 Thessalonians 2:1–2 we find that someone wrote an epistle that contained error. This doesn’t mean that inspired epistles contain error.
   • In Acts 17:11, the Bereans examined Paul’s teaching with Scripture and Luke commended them for it.
   • Grudem concludes, “This is something that could never have been said of the words of an Old Testament prophet, or the authoritative teachings of a New Testament apostle.” Deuteronomy 13:1–5 and 18:15–22 say exactly the opposite of what Grudem affirms. The fact that OT prophecy must be examined by previous revelation doesn’t make any portion of the OT fallible.
4. First Corinthians 14:29–38—Grudem writes, “[Paul] suggests that they should listen carefully and sift the good from the bad, accepting some and rejecting the rest… If prophecy had absolute divine authority, it would be sin to do this. But here Paul commands that it be done, suggesting that New Testament prophecy did not have the authority of God’s very words.”³³
   • This argument is so similar to #3, that my answer above would sufficiently answer this argument.
   • However, the 1 Corinthians context gives us one additional truth—there is no such thing as picking and choosing when it comes to prophecy. We are not encouraged to test the prophecy in order to accept portions of it. No, the gift “discerning of spirits” refers to the diagnosis of the source of the prophecy. The other prophets evaluated the prophecy given (14:29) by using the gift of “distinguishing of spirits” (12:10). First Corinthians 12:3 explains that the source of the prophecy determines whether any of it or all of it is true!
5. Apostolic Preparations for Their Absence—Grudem writes, “The problem of successors to the apostles is solved not by encouraging Christians to listen to the prophets (even though there were prophets around) but by pointing to the Scriptures.”³⁴
   • His parenthetical comment begs the very question we are asking. Imagine the following interaction with Dr. Grudem: “Do prophecies continue today?” Grudem: “Yes, but they’re fallible.” “How do you know?” Grudem: “Because the apostles point Christians back to the Scriptures, not to prophecies.” “Isn’t that because prophecies cease, while the Scripture continue on?” Grudem: “No, because prophecies continue today.” The argument that prophecies continue because they continue must be abandoned.
   • The apostolic command examined above to uphold and affirm prophecy (1 Thess 5:19–21) is problematic for Grudem’s argument here.

The Modern Gift of Tongues Is Different than the Biblical Gift

For the miraculous gifts to be biblically valid today, they must be biblical in essence, purpose, and practice. The modern tongues movement is not faithful to the Bible in any of those three categories.

In order to understand the gift of tongues properly, let’s ask the questions What are they? Why do they exist? How were/are they used?

• What are they?
  • The word “tongues” as a description of the spiritual gift comes from the Greek word glōssa, which means, in a literal sense, the organ in your mouth used for speaking, or metaphorically, a distinct spoken language.
  • The miraculous gift of tongues was an ability to speak a known language without acquiring that skill through a natural learning process. Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 12–14 use the Greek word glōssa for “a language” or “a tongue.” In addition to this word, Acts also uses diálektos (Acts 2:6, 8) for a “language of a nation or region.”³⁵
  • The miracle of tongues was not a miracle of the ear, but of the mouth. Some Continuationists would point to Acts 2:8, which says that everyone heard Christians speaking in their own language, in order to say that what was spoken may have been nonsensical, but the miracle occurred in the ears of the audience. However, we know that they heard what was actually coming out of the apostles’ mouths because verse 4 says, “And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.”
  • Paul’s instruction on tongues in 1 Corinthians is just as clear. First Corinthians 14:10 literally reads this way, “If there happen to be so many types of languages (even “species” of languages or speaking) in the world, not even one is without meaning” (my translation).
• Why do they exist?
  • The purpose of tongues—why do they exist? Every spiritual gift is for the edification of the believers (1 Cor 12:7; 14:5–6, 12, 17, 26). This is true of tongues and every other gift.
  • But beyond this universal purpose of gifts, there is another unique purpose of tongues that Paul tells us about in 1 Corinthians 14:21–22—it is a sign of condemnation on unbelieving Israel. Here, Paul quotes Isaiah 28:11–12.
• How were/are they used? Seven rules protect tongues from abuse in 1 Corinthians 14:26–33:
  1. It must be for edification (26).
  2. There must not be more than two or three in any service (27).
  3. One must interpret (27).
  4. The speaker must keep silent in the absence of an interpreter (28).
  5. Others must judge the content (29).
  6. The speaker must sit down and remain silent if another receives a fresh revelation while he is speaking (30).
  7. Each must speak one at a time (31).

If the modern notion of unintelligible speech is not biblical, then where did it come from? Before the modern charismatic movement, tongues were universally regarded as the ability to speak a known language. As Arnold Dallimore records, this idea of tongues as actual languages

“…was not a new idea. Rather, for centuries it had been believed that the gift of tongues, instead of being the production of unintelligible sounds, was the ability to speak a language which had not been learned. This had been the claim of the Montanists in the second century, and of several groups which used ‘tongues’ during the Middle Ages. The biographers of such Roman Catholic missionaries as Francis Xavier and Vincent Ferrer made it appear these men spoke in unlearned languages, although such claims did not stand up under examination.”³⁶

The answer goes back to Edward Irving. Here are the developing factors that contributed toward a redefining of the word “tongues”:

• Up until 1831, Edward Irving had no doubts about the fact that the spiritual gift of tongues was actual, known human languages. He said of this phenomena:
  • “It is a mere abandonment of all truth to call it screaming or crying… And when the speech utters itself in the way of a psalm or spiritual song, it is the likes to some of the simplest and ancient chants in the cathedral service… So far from being unmeaning gibberish, as the thoughtless and heedless sons of Belial have said, it is regularly-formed[,] well-proportioned, deeply-felt discourse, which evidently wanted only the ear of him whose native tongue it is, to make it a very masterpiece of powerful speech.”³⁷
• By 1832, some of the followers were beginning to doubt the legitimacy of the movement. One young lady, Mary Campbell (Caird), claimed she could speak Pelew, Turkish and Chinese. She moved to Europe to maximize her ability of speaking in tongues for the purpose of evangelism. She and her husband “were immediately forced to recognize her gift of tongues did not enable her to speak any of the languages they came upon.”³⁸ They returned to England, and dropped all missionary ambition and charismatic practice.
• George Pilkington was disillusioned with tongues and left the movement sometime before 1831. He published a pamphlet with the following subtitle: Various interesting colloquies between the writer and Mr. Irving and his followers, and observations which manifestly show they are all under a delusion.³⁹
• By 1832, the fraudulent claim of real languages was thoroughly exposed. There was no chance of maintaining that this was the biblical gift of tongues. Rather than acknowledge the deceit and admit the whole thing was a hoax, Arnold Dallimore writes:
  • The difficulty was overcome by the assertion that there were two kinds of tongues in the New Testament: (1) those of the day of Pentecost which were languages and (2) those of the Church at Corinth which it was now claimed were merely the ecstatic utterance of incoherent sounds. And since the phenomenon which appeared in Scotland and London did not prove to be this first kind there was now a general acceptance of the idea that it was the second kind which was being experienced.
  • The realization the tongues were not languages proved a further disappointment to Irving. But he satisfied his own mind in the matter by stating that God had as yet granted only the Corinthian type, that He had done this merely in order to introduce the restoration of the gifts, and that the Pentecostal type, the languages, would come later.⁴⁰
• When the Irvingites couldn’t respectably claim that their tongues-speaking was a real language, they changed their story which they had told for the past three years. Only after they were exposed did they finally discover that the Bible actually did teach two different kinds of tongues, and one of them happened to be the exact same unintelligible phenomenon that they were experiencing. This semi-plausible explanation is widely repeated today in spite of its lack of biblical merit.

The Modern Gift of Healing is Different than the Biblical Gift

The biblical gift of healing didn’t refer to medical miracles sovereignly orchestrated by God. It refers to the gift given to an individual who would use that gift for the benefit of the church and confirmation of the apostolic message. In other words, the gift consisted in divine power healing the infirmed through the gifted individual; whereas, the unmediated miracle of healing happens perpetually according to God’s sovereign will. The only examples of individuals using the gift of healing in action are apostles and their ministry associates (i.e., the seventy—Luke 10:9, and possibly two of the seven deacons: Stephen—Acts 6:8, and Philip—Acts 8:6, 13). Healing was performed by virtue of the spiritual gift’s power, regardless of the faith of the person healed.

Healing ministries today are difficult to evaluate because they often have large differences among them. In spite of the differences, I have found some similarities. Healing ministries often believe one or both of the following:

1. Healing equals forgiveness.
2. Healing comes by faith.

• Healing does not equal forgiveness.
  • Healing disease is part of the partial reverse of the curse that will happen when Christ returns. Forgiveness is present and healing of the world and the sick is future for the apostles (Acts 3:18–21).
  • True enough, some healings include forgiveness (Mark 2:1–11). However, some healings come with a rebuke for unbelief and future disobedience (Mark 1:40–45).
• Healing doesn’t occur because of the faith of the sick person.
  • Luke 17:11–19—only one of the ten who were healed had faith.
  • The phrase “your faith has saved you,” is used exclusively of those who had faith. Some faith healers try to use these passages to point out that faith will heal you physically. However, it is only spoken to people who are saved spiritually. Often this involves someone who is healed physically, and saved by faith spiritually. But Jesus said it of the woman in Luke 7:36–50 who wasn’t even sick, but she was a sinner.

Paul Taught That the Gifts End During the Church Age (1 Cor 13:8–13)

Paul actually teaches about the termination of the miraculous gifts in 1 Corinthians 13:8–13. The three gifts listed here are contrasted with the abiding realities of faith, hope, and love in verse 13. In fact, this contrast frames up the entire paragraph (vv. 8, 13 bookend the argument). If faith becomes sight, and hope is realized when He returns, then the things that are terminating must end before Christ’s return. Otherwise, the contrast is meaningless and the whole paragraph falls apart.

It seems that Anthony Thiselton’s dictum, which prevents anyone from being able to allude to this passage, has been embraced by many: “These verses should not be used as a polemic for either side in this debate.”⁴¹ I find this problematic. I don’t want to read any theology into a text any more than the next guy, but the text means something. It is almost as though one has to act like 1 Corinthians 13 can’t be touched—it is the honest interpreter’s kryptonite. Although this is a difficult passage, I disagree that it shouldn’t speak to the issue when the passage is about the passing of three miraculous/revelatory gifts and their contrast with the abiding of three virtues. Let’s ask three questions that have direct relevance for the cessation of the miraculous gifts:

1. What is “the perfect” in verse 10?
   • This translation is already an interpretation.
   • The term “the perfect” (tò téleion) can be used several ways. Two definitions of the word are hotly debated in the context of our verse: “1. pertaining to meeting the highest standard… perfect, complete, expert… 2. pertaining to being mature, full-grown, mature, adult…”⁴² The meaning of a word must be determined by its context.
   • Ephesians 4:13—both the NASB and ESV translate the word “mature,” because the context contrasts maturity with the picture of immaturity in the reference to a child. (Children aren’t any more or less perfect that adults, but they are less mature).
   • 2 Corinthians 1:13–14—Paul contrasts the Corinthians’ partial understanding of a previous letter with the full understanding that he wants them to enjoy. The terms he uses are “partially understand” and “fully understand” (ESV). The ESV translators nailed the meaning in 2 Corinthians 1:13. They know that télos should be translated “fully,” because the word is contrasted with “partial” in verse 14. The terms translated “partially” and “fully” are the same Greek root words Paul uses in 1 Corinthians 13:9–10.
   • 1 Corinthians 13:9–11 is comparing and contrasting partial revelation or communication from God, with mature or complete revelation from God. The gifts listed in verse 9 are partial.
   • Paul has already paved the way for us to elevate Scripture over prophecy as a superior gift to the church. In 1 Corinthians 12:28 Paul begins a list of gifts, ranked in order of importance. The latter gifts are unranked. He simply says, “then miracles, then gifts of healings, then…” But notice that the beginning of the list does rank the gifts. The first three in the list are also of preeminent importance: “first apostles, second prophets, third teachers.” This helps us understand what he means when later he says, “Be intensely interested⁴³ in the greater gifts” (1 Cor 12:31; cf. 14:1, 12, 39). Although you are individually given gifts according to the sovereign distribution of the Spirit (1 Cor 12:11), as a church we should be earnestly and intensely interested in promoting the greater gifts because they edify and equip those around us. (All of chapters 12–14 bears this out.) So, what is the contribution of the first gift? The apostles gave us the New Testament Scriptures. This is the complete revelation that not only out-ranks prophecy (12:28), but also terminates its necessity upon its completion (13:10).
2. What is the relationship among verses 10, 11, and 12?
   • Verse 10 is the reality, 11 is the illustration, and 12 is the reason.
   • 10—Paul explains that when the complete revelation of God arrives for the church, the partial revelation of prophecy and words of knowledge will be abolished.
   • 11—Paul illustrates the difference between the two by picturing the speaking, thinking, and reasoning of a child (perhaps paralleling tongues, prophecy, and wisdom) as the partial revelation. The arrival of adulthood means the doing away with childish things. This adulthood pictures the arrival of complete revelation. It would be inaccurate to say that Paul is calling prophetic revelation childish and apostolic revelation adult-like. Nevertheless, it is a helpful illustration of what Paul does say—prophetic revelation is partial and Scripture is complete. Once we have Scripture, we put away partial things like prophecy and words of knowledge.
   • 12—This is the reason why we would put off childish ways when we become a man. The view of God we have through completed revelation is described as “face to face” while the view of God through partial revelation is like a murky reflection.
     • “Face to face” is used in the OT of theophanies (Gen 32:30; Deut 34:10; Judg 6:22).
     • In Deuteronomy 5, Moses prefaces the Ten Commandments by saying, “The LORD spoke to you face to face at the mountain from the midst of the fire, while I was standing between the LORD and you at that time, to declare to you the word of the LORD; for you were afraid because of the fire and did not go up the mountain” (vv. 4–5). Notice that the Israelites didn’t even see God. They saw fire, and their fear prevented them from wanting to hear directly from God. Instead, God graciously condescended and communicated to the people through Moses. God gave Moses verbal revelation (the first written revelation from God to man). So, this scenario of the Israelites seeing God “face to face” consisted of them receiving inspired written revelation of God’s character through the intermediary of the prophet Moses. He stood between God and Israel, brought the revelation down to them, and this receiving of written revelation is seeing God face to face.
     • Compared to the obscurity of partial revelation in words of knowledge, seeing God in the completed revelation of His Word is seeing face to face. In this way, this passage is parallel to Deuteronomy 5:4–5.
     • The verb “know” is from epiginṓskō, which means among other things “to come to an understanding of, know exactly, or completely.”⁴⁴ Usually, commentators take this as a reference to the knowledge we will have of God in heaven. Interestingly enough, it is never actually used that way in the Greek New Testament. Neither the noun nor the verb is used of our relationship with God or Christ in heaven. Instead, the consistent usage of these words refers to a true knowledge of something in this life. They are used of a true knowledge of God the Father,⁴⁵ God the Son,⁴⁶ God’s will or command,⁴⁷ the guiltiness of sin,⁴⁸ true understanding of a message or letter,⁴⁹ and a saving knowledge of the truth.⁵⁰ The word group occurs sixty-four times in the New Testament. Yet, remarkably, it is never used in Revelation, nor is it used in the Epistles to refer to our heavenly knowledge of God. (Of course, many would say that Paul uses it here in 1 Corinthians 13:12 of heaven, but that is the very point we are examining.)
     • Some assert that verse 12 refers to heaven. That is usually because we will have perfected minds. But that really isn’t the issue because in heaven, though our minds are perfect, they are still finite. In that sense, we will never know God as He knows us. However, in Scripture, we can know God in the sense of epígnōsis. Not only is that what Paul refers to in Matt 11:27; Rom 1:28; 10:2; Eph 1:17; 4:13; Col 1:10; 3:10; 2 Pet 1:2, 3, 8, but also Paul boldly declares that through the Scripture, as he has the mind of Christ (1 Cor 2:16). This isn’t in the context of revelations and heavenly visions, but in the Spirit’s work of illuminating the Christian to the implications of the inspired truths (2:11–15).
     • For the future post-apostolic generation to cling to partial knowledge of God makes no sense because they can have the mind of Christ through the Scriptures.
3. Why must the miraculous gifts end before Christ’s return?
   • 1 Corinthians 13:8–13 has two contrasting bookends—three things are terminating and three things are abiding.
     • Verse 8b says, “but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.”
     • This is surrounded by 8a and 13a: “Love never fails” and “But now faith, hope, love, abide these three.”
     • Prophecy will be shut down, or abolished, as will the word of knowledge. Tongues will cease and pass away. On the other hand faith, hope, and love all abide. When do faith and hope end? When faith becomes sight (2 Cor 5:7) and when hope is realized (Rom 8:24–25).
   • Here is the impossible question for the Continuationist: “According to your view of the perfect/mature, these gifts will end at the return of Christ or the death of the saint. If that is true, then how can the three things that are terminating end at the exact same time as faith and hope, which abide and continue?” This impossible question shows how the Continuationist position destroys the entire point of the paragraph. You can’t have the miraculous gifts terminating at Christ’s return when they are contrasted with things abiding or continuing, that also happen to end at Christ’s return.
   • One Continuationist dared to answer this question this way: “Presumably in one sense Paul expects hope to continue beyond this life in the continued enjoyment of that for which we hoped… Put psychologically, we may ask: Will we stop looking forward in anticipation to what is ahead once we begin to enjoy the new heaven and the new earth?”⁵¹ He fails to mention any passages that would teach this truth regarding faith. Regarding this aspect of hope, however, he believes that 1 Corinthians 15:19 teaches that our “hope is not merely the anticipation of the blessings to come, an anticipation no longer needed once those blessings have arrived, but a firm anchor in Christ himself.” Although this statement may be true, it doesn’t explain the passage. I don’t see how the passage says that our hope in Christ Himself won’t be realized in heaven. Otherwise, what do we make of the constant contrast between faith and sight, or hope and things already realized?⁵² His dichotomy between hoping for blessings and hoping for Christ is foreign to the question of whether hope in Christ is realized at the beginning of the eternal state.

The Continuationists have no satisfactory explanation about why these three gifts receive instruction about their termination when, according to their view, all the gifts end at the same time. Verse 13 proves that Paul has good reason to warn them that the termination of these gifts precedes Christ’s return. This paragraph (1 Cor 13:8–13) teaches that the miraculous gifts end before the return of Christ, when faith becomes sight and hope is realized.

Apostles and Prophets Were Foundation, Not Perpetual

The role of apostles and prophets were foundational to the church, in that their revelation of truth grounded the church for all ages. The truth of the gospel revealed through them was handed down once for all to the saints (Jude 3). Requirements of being an apostle are: 1) being an eyewitness to the resurrected Christ, 2) being personally commissioned by Christ, and 3) being able to perform signs, wonders, and miracles as evidence of your apostleship. By their very nature apostles cannot exist beyond the first generation of the church. Since signs, wonders, and miracles attest to their message and ministry (next section), they have passed away with the apostles.

• Apostolic doctrine was foundational for the church:
  • Acts 2:42; Eph 2:19–20; 4:11; Jude 3
• Apostles, by definition, can’t outlive the first generation of the church:
  • Jesus selected them (Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13).
  • Judas was replaced by Matthias with two requirements (Acts 1:21–22):
    • Personal presence through Christ’s earthly ministry
    • Personal eyewitness of His resurrection
  • Resurrection testimony (1 Cor 9:1; Acts 10:39–41; 1 Cor 15:4–9a)
• Since the apostles were foundational, and not perpetual, the signs that confirm an apostle are also not perpetual. Since the miraculous gifts (signs, wonders, and miracles) attested to the divine origin of apostolic ministry and message, they serve no purpose now that all the eyewitnesses of the resurrection have died. The church has been founded. All that is left is the ongoing edification on that foundation. At this point in the church age, to resurrect miraculous sign gifts is to resurrect apostles. To resurrect the role of an apostle is to return to laying the foundation all over again. To lay the foundation all over again is an arrogant rejection of the foundation already laid.

Signs, Wonders, and Miracles Confirm Divine Revelation

There is one final problem that Continuationists can’t avoid in Scripture—the purpose of the miraculous gifts. Scripture consistently records that the purpose of the miraculous gifts (signs, wonders, and miracles) are for the proof that prophets and apostles are sent by God. Their message, by default, is also proven to be the message given them by God. God doesn’t intervene in His created order by giving men supernatural abilities to perform signs, wonders, and miracles for no good reason.⁵³ It is always to affirm His revelation of truth.

The consistent explanation for the miraculous being performed by the hands of men is to accomplish a function of signifying or confirming the man and the message as being from God.

• Moses (Exod 4:1–5, 21, 30–31; Deut 4:2, 32–36; 12:32)
• Prophets
  • Prophets were visibly recognizable by their garments (Mark 1:6; 2 Kgs 1:8), but this was easy to imitate (Zech 13:4–5).
  • Purpose of prophets’ signs (1 Kgs 17:24; 18:36; Jer 32:20) Notice how Isaiah 7:1–8:2 gives immediately fulfilled prophecy in order to prove the truth of prophecy pertaining to Christ and His kingdom (Isa 9; 11–12; 49; 53).
• Jesus (Matt 11:2–6; John 10:25, 37–38; 14:10–11; Acts 2:22)
  • Consider the primacy of preaching, even over that of miracles in Mark 1:14-15, 21–28, and 33–38.
• Apostles (Acts 2:43; 4:33; 5:12; 8:14; 14:32; 2 Cor 12:12; Heb 2:1–4)
  • Consider the primacy of preaching, even over that of confirmatory miracles in Acts 13:7–12; 19:8–20.
  • Consider Peter’s concern about the termination of the apostolic ministry in 2 Peter 1:12–15.

The problem with the contemporary charismatic movement is that it isn’t known for its message. What truth am I rejecting by rejecting the current practice of miraculous gifts? The miraculous attests to the message, as Numbers 14:22⁵⁴ says: “Surely all the men who have seen My glory and My signs which I performed in Egypt and in the wilderness, yet have put Me to the test these ten times and have not listened to My voice…” The rejection of God’s revelation (which was attested by the signs and miracles) is the problem. So, with regard to the modern practice of the miraculous gifts, I am forced to ask the question, “What new revelation am I in danger of rejecting? What is your new message?” When the first century audiences were exposed to the apostles, no one doubted that the Christ they preached was the Messiah, that His resurrection had happened, and that the apostles were founding God’s church. There is no correlating reality for the charismatics. If the miracles are real, their message must be more visible than the miracles themselves. And that message, which will never violate previously revealed truths, must be new as well. The content preached in the charismatic movement ranges from new and heretical to old and faithful, but it is never both faithful and new.