To say that Jesus' prediction about the destruction of the Temple has now been fulfilled, does not require extra-Biblical authority - because the Bible itself gave a timeframe for its fulfilment. But to say tongues, prophecy and knowledge have now ceased, as cessationists do, requires extra-Biblical authority because the Bible gives no timeframe for its fulfilment.
Paul said spiritual gifts will cease. But to say they have already ceased is a determination that can only be made from an extra-Biblical authority. It denies the doctrine of Sola-Scriptura.
Paul's instructions for the church regarding the gifts of the Spirit all assume that the gifts of the Spirit are present and functioning in the church. To say that these instructions are no longer valid for the present-day Church places the instructions given by post-apostolic writers on an equal or higher level of authority over the present-day Church than the New Testament itself. It would mean we have a second dispensation of the Church. Built on a separate foundation. A third testament. A discontinuation of covenant.
Jesus' predictions about the destruction of the Temple, on the other hand, are different because He gave a timeframe for the fulfilment of that prophecy: it was to happen within that generation. The Book of Daniel also included timeframes - and the destruction of the Temple was a theme of the Book of Daniel. Scripture itself therefore authorises us to say that that prophecy has now been fulfilled. In fact to say it hasn't been fulfilled would be an extra-Biblical assertion to make, seeing the Bible itself gave a timeframe.
But Paul gave no such timeframe for the passing away of spiritual gifts, or for when that which is perfect shall come. To be true to Paul's statement therefore requires taking the same stance as his - that spiritual gifts shall cease, not that they have ceased - that that which is perfect is to come, not that it has come.
No comments:
Post a Comment