Some cessationists point-out that the Gospels include things that no longer apply directly to the Church and therefore were not written for the Church. And they say that the Epistles, on the other hand, were written directly for the Church.
But do cessationists really believe the Epistles are letters to the presentday Church for doctrine and instruction?
If the instructions in I CORINTHIANS about signs and gifts are no longer relevant, then they should concede that I Corinthians at least is one Epistle that was not written for the presentday Church.
Cessationists also like to point-out that I Corinthians was an early Epistle, and that later Epistles don't contain instructions concerning the use of the gifts of the Spirit because by that time the gifts were being phased-out of use.
Even if the sign-gifts were not mentioned in later Epistles, that in itself wouldn't be evidence that they'd passed away. It could just mean that Paul didn't need to address the manner of the use of the sign-gifts in those Epistles like he needed to in his first Epistle to the Corinthians.
But in fact, other Epistles do mention them.
ROMANS mentions "mighty signs and wonders by the power of the Spirit of God".
In II CORINTHIANS Paul mentions the Holy Ghost, and power - in defence of the authenticity of his ministry.
GALATIANS also mentions ministering the Spirit and doing miracles.
For the EPHESIANS, being filled with the Spirit was evidently not meant to be a thing of the past, for Paul exhorted them in his Epistle to them that they should continue to be filled with the Spirit (verse 18) - just like they had been when he was with them.
In the Epistle to the PHILIPPIANS Paul predicted the future, thus exercising the supernatural gift of the word of wisdom (1:19,25).
COLOSSIANS mentions "all might [not just some might, but ALL might] and glorious power". There was no diminishing of power.
Colossians also mentions "spiritual songs" - i.e., songs in tongues and interpretation (I Cor. 14:15).
I THESSALONIANS gives an instruction concerning the gift of prophecy; and even says not to quench (diminish) the things of the Spirit!
II THESSALONIANS mentions the work of faith with power.
In I TIMOTHY Paul again predicts the future - thus exercizing again the supernatural gifts of the word of wisdom and prophecy (4:1).
In II TIMOTHY Paul urged Timothy to stir-up the gift (which had been imparted to him through the laying-on of hands). Timothy's gifts hadn't passed away. They were just as valid as ever.
In II Timothy Paul also mentioned the power of the Gospel, without qualifying that some of the manifestation of that power might have diminished by then.
He told Timothy that he should keep (preserve, not diminish) all the good things that were in him, by the Holy Ghost!
Again, in II Timothy Paul exercised the supernatural gifts of the word of wisdom and prophecy when he predicted that in the near future men would have a form of Christianity which would deny (fail to give place to) the power of God. Paul was certainly right about that!
He then told Timothy to continue to do the work of an evangelist - and instead of saying that the work of an evangelist by then no longer included healing, miracles and casting-out demons, he added that Timothy should make FULL PROOF of this ministry.
And these were very late Epistles! There is no Scriptural indication that signs and wonders had diminished towards the end of Paul's ministry.
I could continue and mention the writings of JAMES, PETER, and JOHN - each of whom mention signs.
The Book of REVELATION, and the OT Book of JOEL both mention that God will be giving signs right up until the coming of the Lord!
So if cessationism is true, then it can't be said that the Epistles were written for the Church any more than the four Gospels were.
If such was the case, a Third Testament should have been written. And it should be said of the presentday Church that it is built not merely "upon the foundation of the holy Apostles and Prophets" like the early Church was, but instead upon the foundation of the holy Apostles, Prophets, and Oregon and Augustine (later 'authorities' who wrote that tongues had by then apparently ceased)!
And in such a case it should be conceded that the presentday Church must in fact constitute a different dispensation of the Church distinct from the dispensation of the early Church (as much as Presbyterians lothe dispensationalism!)
Feel free to point-out any lack of logic in my argument. I'm open to learn.
No comments:
Post a Comment