Is cessationism now a dated worldview that belongs to a past age

From my own perspective, the cessationist worldview has become somewhat of a relic and therefore it no longer has any place within the realms of serious theology. What are your opinions and if you have any reputable links to support your view then please post not only your opinions but any links as well. Hopefully any links will go to reputable sources and a sample can be found below.

The following is a partial list of major theologians who have written on the subject of Pneumatology. They represent not only classic-Pentecostals but also Pentecostals, charismatics and evangelical scholarship. Not all of these academics speak in tongues but as with most academics of our day they all acknowledge that the 9 Manifestations of the Holy Spirit (1Co 12:7-11) that they are for todays church.

• Peter Althouse Link Link (Ph.D. Wycliffe College, Toronto School of Theology)
• Assoc. Prof. Dr. Kenneth J. Archer Link (MDiv from Ashland Theological Seminary, Ph.D. University of St. Andrews in Scotland)
• Prof. Stanley M. Burgess Link
• Prof. D.A. Carson Link (BSc, McGill University, MDiv, Central Baptist Seminary, Toronto, PhD, University of Cambridge)
• Rev. Dr. Simon Chan (PhD, University of Cambridge, UK) Link
• Donald W. Dayton (PhD, University of Chicago) Link
• Dr. Jack Deere (MDiv, PhD, Dallas Theological Seminary) Link
• Dr. David E. Garland Link
• Prof. Gordon Fee Link Link Link
• Prof. Wayne Grudem Link Link (PhD, Univ. of Cambridge, MDiv, Westminster Theological Seminary, BA, Harvard University)
• Dr. Keith J. Hacking Link (PhD University of Durham)
• Prof. Walter Hollenweger Link
• Dr. Stanley M. Horton (M. Div. from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, an S.T.M. from Harvard University, and a Th.D. from Central Baptist Theological Seminary)
• Dr. Harold D. Hunter (Ph. D. Theology, Fuller) Link
• Prof. Douglas (Jake) Jacobsen (Ph.D., 1983 University of Chicago, M.A. Uni Chicago, B.A. Wheaton) Link
• Prof. Veli-Matti Karkkaine Link Link Link (MA, Fuller Theological Seminary, MEd, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland, DrTheol, University of Helsinki, DrTheol, Habil University of Helsinki)
• Dr. Craig. S. Keener Link Link
• Prof. Simon Kistemaker Link (Calvin College, A.B., Calvin Theological Seminary, B.D., Free University of Amsterdam, Th.D.)
• Dr. Steven J. Land (Ph. D. Systematic Theology, Emory University 1991) Link
• Prof. John R. Levison Link Link
• Dr. Wonsuk Ma Link
• Prof. Frank D. Macchia Link Link (ThD, University of Basel)
• Dr. Robert P. Menzies Link
• Prof. Roger E. OlsenLink (Ph.D., Rice University)
• Dr. John Piper Link
• Prof. Cecil M. Robeck, Jr (MDiv, PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) Link
• Prof. Jon Ruthven Link (B.D., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, B.A., Central Bible College, M.A., Central Bible College, Ph.D., Marquette University)
• Prof. Marion L. Soards Link (Furman University, BA; Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, MDiv; Union Theological Seminary, New York, STM, MPhil, PhD)
• Dr. Sam Storms Link LinkLink Link Link Link Link
  
• Assoc. Prof. Dr. Roger Stronstadt Link Link Link Link (MCS, Regent College; DD, Christian Bible College)
• Dr. Max Turner Link Link
• Prof. Grant Wacker Link (B.A. in philosophy, Stanford University & his Ph.D. in religion, Harvard University)
• Dr. Michael Welker Link
• Dr. Wolfgang Vondey Link Link
• Prof. Anthony Thiselton Link (King's College London (BD, MTh) the University of Sheffield (PhD), and the University of Durham (DD))
• Prof. J. Rodman Williams (B.D., and Th.M Union Theological Seminary, Ph.D. in philosophy of Religion and Ethics at Columbia University and Union Seminary.)
• Prof. Ben Witherington III, Link Link (Ph.D University of Durham, England, M. Div. Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, B.A. University of North Carolina)
• Prof. Amos Yong (Ph.D. from Boston University)

Lilly Owl said:

Mark Driscoll's approach on Reformed Spirit Filled living and how cessationism is an enemy of the Gospel.

Click to expand...

I remember coming across this superb video about 12 months ago and from memory he was speaking to a conference of Reformed/Calvinist ministers. Driscoll is certainly an interesting character (in more ways than one) and I had to chuckle when defined himself as being a “charismatic with a seatbelt”. Of course many Pentecostals and classic-Pentecostals would be reticent with referring to him as a charismatic, but if nothing else, Driscoll is certainly one of the many contemporary church leaders who have embraced the Full Gospel, though maybe not all that experientially.

NorrinRadd said:

Ben Witherington is charismata-friendly. (He's a Methodist.)

Roger Olson seems charismata-friendly. (I think he identifies with Anabaptists now. He was Pentecostal and still follows trends in Pentecostalism, but if I understand correctly, finds some Pentecostal dogmas and attitudes unacceptable.)

Click to expand...

Ben Witherington, of course! I had his book sitting next me titled “Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians”. He addresses the issue of both tongues and prophecy on pages 276-296.

Thanks also for the link to Prof. Olsen; even though I cannot recall coming across any of his work, going by his blog he appears to have some very strong views regarding Renewal Theology which makes him someone who is worth looking into.

I jumped onto the forum this morning before going to work thinking that I would encounter some interesting debate by those who hold to the cessationist worldview; maybe when I get back later today I might encounter a few cessationist orientated posts.

Considering that it’s only about 1 PM on the US West coast (in Australia its already tomorrow), we might be able to see a bit more debate later in day or is it that the cessationists on this forum are unwilling to defend their position because they feel that it simply cannot be defended?

vocalyocal said:

don't see any cessationist reply.........possibly they don't have a bible to stand on

Click to expand...

Even though I believe that the cessationist worldview belongs to the era of the dinosaurs, I thought that there would have been a few cessationists on this forum who would have come forward. For those of us who came through the Charismatic Renewal of the 60’s and 70’s, we were well away that the cessationist position held the high ground but we also realised that most held to this viewpoint not from within a theological stance but simply that their leaders had told them that the Holy Spirit stopped working in power many centuries ago.

Maybe having placed such a solid list of academics in my opening post who support aspects of Renewal Theology was a bit too imposing; it’s a bit like sailing around a peninsula in a small sailing boat and confronting a line of heavy battleships who have all their guns pointed at you, that sort of scenario can very easily send a shiver down the sails of any craft.

joey_downunder said:

I know this is throwing bait to pirahnas but since you're asking for it...

Click to expand...

We have to give you some credit JDU as it seems that you have been the only cessationist who has dared raise his hand so far.
As for being a piranha, I’m not sure how I can really be one as I would first need a bit of meat to devour, but so far, all that you have done is to throw me a few bones which is not really all that much to chew on. Anyway, let’s see what you have given me…

Can you show evidence - in time period between early Church fathers (66 books finally officially chosen for the bible approx end of 4th century AD)

Click to expand...

As for the early churchmen of this period, I’m not really sure if I could point to anything of much value and I doubt if I could even find where any of them have expounded on ‘justification by faith’; it seems that we have to wait for about another 1000 years before we find any theologian standing his ground on this foundational truth – one which had previously been lost for a millennia. Remember, this was the beginning of the Dark Age of the church and for good reason! It seems that praying in the Spirit did not reappear (as far as we can tell) until a further 300 years with the Irvingites in Britain and the Huguenots of about the same period in France.
I think that I can best leave the answer to your question to that of John Wesley where he effectively summed up the horrid state of the Church of this period when he said:

• "It does not appear that these extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were common in the church for more than two or three centuries. We seldom hear of them after that fatal period when the Emperor Constantine called himself a Christian, and from a vain imagination of promoting the Christian cause, thereby heaped riches and power and honour upon the Christians in general, but in particular upon Christian clergy. From this time, they almost totally ceased; very few instances of the kind being found. The cause of this was not, as has been vulgarly supposed, because there is no more occasion for them because all the world were become Christian. This is a miserable mistake, not a twentieth part of it was then nominally Christian. The real cause was: the love of many, almost all Christians, so called, was waxed cold. The Christians had no more of the Spirit of Christ than the other heathen; the Son of Man when He came to examine His Church could hardly find faith. This was the real cause why the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were no longer to be found in the Christian Church; because the Christians were turned heathen again, and had only a dead form left.” Link

and beginning of 20th century - that speaking in tongues/ being slain in the spirit was taught as being necessary for all Christians/ sign of genuine faith by any *mainstream* Christian teacher?

Click to expand...

I have no doubt that there has not been a single Pentecostal or charismatic scholar who would dare suggest that being so-called ‘slain in the Spirit’ is a necessary requirement; for that matter most tend to be highly suspicious of this type of activity.

What I was hoping for with this thread was to see some contemporary scholarly material from the cessationist side which would allow us to discuss both the continuist and cessationist position from within a theological setting.

Reply to: NorrinRadd

One of the more interesting aspects of any discussion regarding Continuism and cessationism on this forum is that the vast majority of arguments from within the cessationist camp tend to be a bit dated. This is particularly evident when it comes to 1Cor 13:10 where it talks about the Lord returning in his Kingdom (the Parousia), where many cessationists still hold to the now dismissed view that this passage is referring to either the completion of the Canon or with the death of the last Apostle. These odd interpretations were finally put to death by the late 80’s primarily through the work of Gordon Fee (1988), Wayne Grudem (1982-88) and D.A. Carson (1987) and we would be hard pressed to find where any serious contemporary commentator would dare propagate the old cessationist views on this text.

NorrinRadd said:

I would add that only a few fringe groups insist on "tongues" as evidence of "genuine faith," if by "genuine faith" one means "salvation." The prevailing view is that "tongues" is the primary "physical" evidence of being "baptized in the Spirit," which in Pentecostal (and often Charismatic) parlance refers to an "empowering" event AFTER salvation.

Click to expand...

When it comes to the interaction between Evangelical and Pentecostal/charismatic academics, over the past 10 to 15 years there has been a shift of emphasis away from the legitimacy of the continuation of the 9 Manifestations of the Spirit (1Co 12:7-11) which is something that the more astute academic would rarely challenge. More recent activity has been over two primary areas of disagreement with the first being that of the baptism with the Holy Spirit, in that should this be a ‘two-stage’ reception of the Spirit which is the classic-Pentecostal position in that believers will all receive the Holy Spirit as a seal upon regeneration and later that we are fully immersed in the Spirit as with the baptism in the Holy Spirit. The other view is that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is a 'soteriological experience' in that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is what we receive at the moment of our initial regeneration.

The second contentious issue is with the classic-Pentecostal view that every believer who is baptised in the Holy Spirit that this must be evidenced by our speaking in tongues.

Initially I thought that this would have been a very lively thread but to my surprise the only brave soul who jumped in from within the cessationist camp was joeydownunder and even his position was not one that was based on Scripture or experience but from that of a lack of experience, which was with the lack of spiritual activity being evidenced in the Dark Ages of the church.

joey_downunder said:

From iTablet - My contributions are mostly done when family members are not around/ have uninterrupted access to computer.

Click to expand...

Having gone through similar I can understand your frustrations as my wife and daughters used to place their demands on my computer time up until I was able to develop my “man cave”; as they now have their own laptops this has meant that my life has become a bit easier; though I do need to be a bit careful with my computer time as my “man cave” is a room that is set apart from our house.

And please remember most people don't have the range of information sources/ time to research that you obviously have.

Click to expand...

I should have explained this a bit earlier but my field of interest is in the area of Pneumatology which I began to investigate from about 1994. Over the past three years I have ramped up my efforts and a part of this progression has required that I start the process of obtaining all of the more important books that have been written in this field from at least the 80’s. This was a good idea in theory but it seems that every time I go and buy a book about two more new publications pop up.

As for my inclusion of the rather imposing list of scholarship that has written on the topic of Pneumatology, I decided to preempt any comments regarding any supposed lack of theological support for the continuist position which can be shown by a previous comment made by Cappadocious in the previous topic regarding MacArthur, where he stated:

• NT Scholars" meaning scholars from reputable universities like Yale, or NT Scholars meaning "bible college" type folks? Because I don't think you'll like what real bible scholars have to say about glossolalia... or what historians and sociologists would say about the modern Azuza Street revival.

As this type of comment if frequently heard from within the non-academic realm of cessationism, I thought that it would be good to provide some material which shows the current and ongoing state of Pneumatology. If nothing else, it certainly goes to show how Continuism has soundly overrun the once lofty battlements that the cessationist view once stood behind.

As the Scriptures tell us that we are to study to show ourselves approved and that we must always be ready to give an account of ourselves then we are obliged to make ourselves conversant with what the Word of God has to tell us, particularly when it comes to the vital topic of Pneumatology:2 Tim 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.

Even though this is a thread on the validity of the cessationist position, there should be many Continuists who should be able to gain something from the sources that I have supplied - hopefully a few cessationists will be able to do the same!

The article by R. Fowler White

As you had made the effort to track down the article, I decided to print it out before I left home earlier today so that I could go through it during my lunch break but as it contained 10 pages it of course took a bit longer to digest. Even though I had read part of this article a number of years ago, I did not go all that far into it as White had seemingly built much of his argument on the very dated false dichotomy of “love as opposed to gifts”. Except for White, as Gaffins approach appears to have been ignored by the majority of academics, it seems that Gaffins attempts to redefine Pauls meaning with this passage has fallen on death ears.

As I have Grudems book, which I purchased soon after it was released in 1988, this allowed me to go back and check on Whites critique of Grudems material. I did note that Grudem had made the following remark on page 229 “So the overall function of 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 is to show that love is superior to gifts [emphasis added] like prophecy because those gifts will pass away but love will not pass away.” At first glance it could appear that Grudem is also presenting the false dichotomy of love-vs-gifts but I would expect that this was not his intention as he goes to great lengths to explain that we must always have love as our motivation.

Even though it was once common to hear this false dichotomy in many earlier texts on 1 Corinthians, scholarship has now recognised that Paul was telling the Corinthians (and us) that unless we are motivated by love that whatever we do in the Lord will be of little value to us.

Both Gaffin and White agree that 1 Cor 13:8 is talking about the Parousia and that they both realise that this text cannot be used to say that prophecy and tongues will cease at either the death of the last Apostle or with the completion of the Canon; they have both admitted that cessationists cannot use this text to support their view that the Holy Spirit no longer works through the Believer as he had in the first few centuries of the Church period.

To return to the purpose of this thread

Question: are researchers' writings *alone*what you expect to be given as evidence? There are plenty of sermons/ serious blogs available that answer these continuationist claims after all.
If yes then you'll need to track down a theology forum/ theologian that frequents this forum.

Click to expand...

Wait a minute…you can’t depart from this topic that easily-surely not!

In my first 10-15 years within Pentecost, we Pentecostals and charismatics were certainly on the back-burner when it came to support from the theological heavyweights of our time, so it was up to us to explain the Scriptures to our cessationist friends and this we were able to do – even without their support. Even though we could not quote credible sources or use scholarly terminology we were able to keep our heads above water to the point where the Full Gospel movement became the largest section of the believing church. This means that if we could do this without the support of these heavyweights then the cessationists of our day should be ready and willing to defend their own position.

...are researchers' writings *alone*what you expect to be given as evidence?

Click to expand...

Why should I go to a questionable website or even worse, to a blog, when I can go out and buy the best peer reviewed material that is currently available. Should we go to a blog for advice regarding a serious medical condition or would we be better off going to see (and pay for) a medical specialist. For that matter if we are seeking some solid financial advice should we be seeking out a website that offers a "get rich scheme" or should we go and see (and pay) for some solid financial advice.

You had a note of superiority to that latest entry that is very offputting.

Click to expand...

My reply may seem a bit trite, but it can be very easy to confuse superiority with confidence and when it comes to this particular topic I can certainly say that I have a complete and full confidence regarding my position! When it came to my comments about your first post (where no other cessationist dared to respond to this thread) I was actually acknowledging your bravery (where are the others); though I did recognise that you were basing your post on history and particularly with that of the Dark Ages where we see an almost complete absence of the ministry of the Holy Spirit through the believer.

I should point out that in the list of academics that I supplied in my opening post, I have not included any individuals from within the word of faith, latter-rain or new apostolic renewal camps as I find that these three are merely aberrations of the Full Gospel. To my knowledge there are no scholars from within the word of faith camp but there are some from the other two.

NorrinRadd said:

A few hours ago, I checked my copy of Norm Geisler's Systematic Theology (the single-volume edition). Geisler is a cessationist. I was disappointed and frankly surprised by his presentation. His support for his view was weak and IMO superficial and uninformed, and his refutation of continuationism involved what I would consider to be straw men, since they were arguments I would never make and indeed had never before seen or heard.

If this is indicative of Geisler's overall ability as a theologian and apologist, I'm thoroughly puzzled as to why he has a high reputation.

Click to expand...

For those of us who came through the charismatic renewal of the 70’s and for a few even that of the 60’s, things were much simpler in that virtually every academic was a cessationist so it made it rather easy to find a non-cessationist based commentary – as there simply weren’t any!

About a month ago I came across a comment by a well-known older scholar (whose name I cannot remember for the moment) who stated that many scholars of the period before the charismatic renewal did not bother making comments regarding what we know now to be Full Gospel theology as these type of questions simply did not come up from within their ranks. Once the Episcopalian Dennis Bennet in 1960 announced to his congregation that he spoke in tongues this forced a change within the academe and as more questions were being asked by both church leaders and lay members then we see the academe beginning to play catchup and by the early 80’s things began to change for the better. When Grudem released his doctoral thesis in 1982, his document had a great impact on the academic world and thankfully he saw fit to publish his thesis in his book “The Gift of Prophecy” in 1988.

When it comes to many of these older academics who have written on 1st Corinthians or on Pneumatology, if they were translated into our time period, I wonder how many of them would embrace a more Biblical outlook when it comes to the person and ministry of the Holy Spirit, though I doubt if many of those who are still in the “old Calvinist” school would be able to shake off their old shackles. Up until recent times most Pentecostals and charismatics tended to characterise the Calvinist school as a fairly dead and lifeless entity where it seems that there was very little evidence of the life of the Spirit within their ranks – but how things have changed in recent years with the onset of the “New Calvinists” who tend to be Continuist in outlook.

Four Ways 'New Calvinism' is So Powerful (Mark Driscoll link)

1. Old Calvinism was fundamental or liberal and separated from or syncretized with culture. New Calvinism is missional and seeks to create and redeem culture.
2. Old Calvinism fled from the cities. New Calvinism is flooding into cities.
3. Old Calvinism was cessationistic and fearful of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. New Calvinism is continuationist and joyful in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.
4. Old Calvinism was fearful and suspicious of other Christians and burned bridges. New Calvinism loves all Christians and builds bridges between them.

IMO, Scripture itself invites this confusion because of differing emphases and inconsistent use of terminology, both among the various authors, and within individual authors at different times and places.

Click to expand...

About two years ago I had to go through a major shift with my understanding of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Since 1974 I have accepted the classic-Pentecostal ‘two-stage’ reception theory of the Holy Spirit but now I take the position that the BHS is meant to be our initial experience along with that of speaking in tongues. This means that I am no longer a classic-Pentecostal but a Pentecostal! I don’t wish to suggest that one must speak in tongues to be saved as this is simply not the case but from what we see in the New Testament it seems that it was normal for believers to receive the Spirit and speak in tongues – as such the BHS in early NT times was essentially soteriological and not a second experience.

For those who would like a simple summary of weaknesses of the old cessationist position this can be found at the following link. The article is an extract from “Surprised by the Power of the Spirit” by Dr. Jack Deere.