The continuation/cessation of Spiritual Gifts may very well be one of the most debated points of theology in the Christian Religion. With the Charismatic Movement’s exponential growth, cessationists have responded with things such as “Strange Fire Convention,” that is, a convention that bashes all things regarding the activity of spiritual gifts, and especially believers charismatic affiliations. I shall examine both sides of the debate and present my case for what I believe.

I define myself as a “Piperian Charismatic,” that is, I tend to agree with Pastor John Piper on the activity of the spiritual gifts (you can see his  oppinions on such gifts here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzipsG3-S6A and here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf1cdXdgFxU). I am not charismatic in the Pentacostal sense, meaning I do not think that speaking in tongues is the one and only sign of spiritual baptism and is required for salvation. Personally, I believe that spiritual gifts come in all shapes and sizes, and one Christian does not always have the same gifts as another. So, as you read this, take what I write with a grain of salt, for my biases tend to be quite strong.

For the sake of argument, an examination of the continuationist and cessationist arguments should prove helpful, starting with the later.

Cessationism is the belief that, with the end of the Apostolic Era, when the last direct apostle of Christ died, the gifts of the Holy spirit ceased, or stopped “working,” and were no more. The reason for this argument is that when the Cannon of Scripture was completed, there was no need for divine revelation any longer. There is no Scripture reference that directly supports this argument, other than 1 Corinthians 13:8, but such should not be a deterrent from adhering from a certain belief. An appeal to silence is a fallacy.

Continuationism, on the contrary, is the belief that the gifts of the Holy Spirit continue still today, and will not cease until the Second Coming of Christ. Scriptures supporting this belief are such as Acts 2:38-39, 1 Corinthians 13:8-12, and a few others.

The largest  cessationist argument is that of Sola Scriptura (by Scripture Alone), which means that Scripture alone is our one and only source of infallible divine authority. The gift most troubling to the cessationist is prophecy, which is most commonly defined as an infallible revelation from God. If this definition is upheld by a continuationist, then they can not simultaneously uphold Sola Scritura. The thing is, this definition is faulty and does not match up with the New Testament. While this may have been the case in the Old Testament, New Covenant prophecy is quite different.  Let’s examine one of the most extensive explanations of the Gifts in the New Testament: 1 Corinthians 13.

” Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part but when completeness comes,what is in part disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.” 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 (Italics added for emphasis)

So, as we can see, Paul states rather explicitly that New Testament Prophecy is not infallible. It is from God, of course, but it is not equal to Scripture. Surely an infallible prophesy would not be “in part.” Let’s take a look at another passage in Acts:

“After we had been there a number of days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. Coming over to us, he took Paul’s belt, tied his own hands and feet with it and said, “The Holy Spirit says, ‘In this way the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem will bind the owner of this belt and will hand him over to the Gentiles.’” Acts 21:10-11

Later, we see that Agabus’ prophecy was not completely true: it had two small mistakes: Paul was not bound by the Jews, rather the Romans, and the Jews did not deliver Paul to the Gentiles, rather the Romans had to rescue him from the Jews. It seems rather obvious that such a prophesy is not infallible, for it is errant. Thus the conclusion can be reached that New Covenant Prophesy is not infallible, but it is rather divine “promptings” or “inspirations.” For example, if I am witnessing to someone, prophesy would be evident if I say words that I didn’t know I knew, or make arguments clearer than I knew I could.  Likewise, another form of prophecy would be an intuition that something is wrong or will go wrong and something must be done about it, etc.

More could be said, and I will someday, but for now I hope I have at least stirred your mind a little. Please give your thoughts! 🙂

God Bless!

Lucas.