This is my first official paper I wrote for Issues & Methods class for the PhD in Theological Studies program at Columbia Biblical Seminary. Each paper we write is supposed to be something working toward our final dissertation that we will defend prior to graduation. My proposed dissertation will be on an eschatological approach to Continuationism, i.e. that miraculous spiritual gifts (such as tongues, prophecy, and healings) continue in the church until the final eschaton at the Parousia of Christ.
Modern Pentecostalism, in some fashion, appears in
almost every denomination. Yet tensions remain between the Pentecostal theology
of Continuationism and the Reformed theology of Cessationism. While
Pentecostals maintain that the baptism of the Holy Spirit and charismata
operate and function in the contemporary church, Cessationists affirm that
these miraculous spiritual gifts ceased some time shortly after the apostolic
age of the first century. This contention between Continuationists and
Cessationists involves more than just exegetical differences on key passages
such as 1 Corinthians 13:8–13 or Ephesians 4:11–14. Rather, the very foundation
of this disagreement regards the biblical purpose of miraculous spiritual
gifts. Every stable structure must be built upon a sure foundation as Jesus
illustrated with the wise man who built his house upon the rock (Matt 7:24).
Any errors or misapplications in the foundation affect the outcome and finished
product of the structure. Thus, doctrine must be built upon a stable
foundation. At its foundation, Cessationism connects charismata with divine
revelation asserting that these gifts were/are for the purpose of revealing New
Testament truth and to enable to write Scripture. In contrast, Continuationists
maintain that charismata serve, not as a revelatory means by which doctrine was
revealed, but as a manner of spiritual edification not only to the individual
believer, but also to the corporate church. As such, Continuations see no
conflict between contemporary charismata, such as speaking in tongues, the gift
of prophecy, and a word of knowledge and the concept of a closed canon of New
Testament Scripture.
Introduction
Since
the revivals of Topeka, Kansas and Azusa Street in the early twentieth century,
Pentecostalism has blazed a path across Christendom worldwide. Today,
approximately half a billion people identify as Pentecostal in one form or
another. Currently, some manner of Pentecostalism appears in almost every
church denomination.[1] However, Pentecostal theology of
present-day charismata, including glossolalia, prophecy, and healings,
challenges Cessationist views of certain mainline denominations. While Pentecostals maintain that the baptism of the Holy
Spirit and charismata operate and function in the contemporary church,
Cessationists affirm that these miraculous spiritual gifts ceased some time
shortly after the apostolic age of the first century.[2] The foundation of this
disagreement between Pentecostals and Cessationists lies not in one person’s
charismatic experience and another’s lack of such experience, but upon their
understanding and approach to the biblical purpose of miraculous spiritual gifts.
Cessationists connect charismata with divine revelation in which God revealed
himself in some way to man, which finally culminated in the New Testament
canon.[3] This paper, however, seeks to
affirm that, although God empowered the early church with miraculous
charismata, the miraculous spiritual gifts do not serve in a revelatory manner
as the means by which New Testament truth (doctrine) was revealed. As such,
charismata continue in the contemporary church today.
Cessationism,
“Revelatory Gifts,” and the Biblical Canon
Cessationists
maintain that charismata served as the means by which God, in the first century
church, revealed doctrinal truth. For example, Warren Tamkin expressed, “Each
of these gifts is connected with divine revelation. It was necessary for God to
reveal himself in some way to man before the canon of Scripture was available
as the guide for faith and practice.”[4] Gary Workman explains the
Cessationists’ view that spiritual gifts were for “the proclamation of the
gospel by divine inspiration.”[5] Likewise, David Lipe affirmed,
“[T]he purpose of miraculous gifts was to reveal the truth and confirm the
truth.”[6] Thus, because the truth has been
written down in the Bible (complete canon), Cessationists teach that miraculous
spiritual gifts have ceased.
Cessationists often refer to
charismata as “revelatory gifts.”[7] Cessationists particularly employ
this term towards the gift of prophecy, which they maintain was a “divinely
imparted power to tell forth the mind of God previous to the full revelation
afterwards provided in the completed Scriptures.”[8] Ken Gentry concurs, “Luke
obviously had the gift of revelatory prophecy in that he wrote inspired,
canonical Scripture.”[9] Thus, Cessationists contend that
if the gift of prophecy, as well as other charismata, continues in the church
today, then this would lead to an “open canon,” where prophetic utterances must
be added to the Bible.[10]
However, Gentry’s assessment implies that a biblical author such as Luke penned his New Testament books through some sort of divine dictation or prophetic revelation, rather than through interviewing and recording the eyewitness accounts of events (cf. Luke 1:1–2; Acts 1:1–3).[11] Craig Keener notes “Luke’s appeal to autoptai (eyewitnesses) fits historians’ appreciation for research and valuing of eyewitness sources.”[12] Wayne Grudem concurs expressing that Luke utilized “ordinary historical research for writing his gospel.”[13] Furthermore, Jack Deere points out:
None of the writers of Scripture ever appealed to miracles to support their claim that they were writing Scripture. They certainly knew that they were writing Scripture. . . Paul did not appeal to the miracles of his ministry to support the fact the he was writing Scripture. Nor did Peter, when he referred to Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Pet. 3:16).[14]
Billy Lewis, likewise, commented that if, according to Cessationists, the purpose of charismata was to guide men into writing the Bible, then over half of the apostles failed by not writing any Scripture.[15] Several New Testament authors (Mark, Luke, and Jude) never performed any recorded miracles.[16] Thus, the fact that all scripture is given by inspiration of God (2 Tim 3:16) does not necessitate that the writing of scripture involved any gifts of the Spirit. The New Testament offers several examples of the gift of prophecy without any of the words spoken having been written down.[17] Kenner further explains:
Prophecy, like history, worship songs, or laws, is merely one genre of Scripture, and is by no means coextensive with it. Most prophecies in biblical times are not recorded anywhere (1 Kgs 18:13), and multiple prophecies in weekly house church meetings (1 Cor 14:29–31) that in the first few decade of early Christianity may have altogether numbered in the tens of thousands. Prophecy, then, could occur independent of Scripture; revelation in that broader sense was never limited to Scripture.[18]
This
leads toward a Pentecostal theology, which, as Douglas Oss notes, “do[es] not
vest canonical authority in these [prophetic] utterances, but rather submit[s]
them to the authority of Scripture.”[19] Thus, there is no biblical
principle that would require an “open canon” view in light of modern
charismata.
Likewise, inspired inscripturation (2 Tim 3:16) does not necessitate divine dictation or the use of miraculous gifts. In fact, there is no evidence that any New Testament book, not even the ecstatic visions of Revelation, were the product of some charismatic utterance (tongues, prophecy, or word of knowledge). The Cessationists’ view that spiritual gifts were for the purpose of writing or revealing the New Testament books[20] strongly implies a belief in Spirit possession and/or divine dictation, as if the human authors were simply a tool (like a pen) through whom the Holy Spirit wrote. Firstly, the Bible never describes charismata in terms of a type of Spirit possession. Paul specified in 1 Corinthians 14:32 that “the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.” Craig Blomberg explains:
Verse 32 proves that Christian prophecy (and presumably also tongues and their interpretation) is not “ecstatic” in the technical sense of that term. In other words, believers in the process of exercising their spiritual gifts are never so “out of control” as to be unable to stop or regulate their behavior.[21]
Secondly,
the majority of evangelical scholars reject the notion of divine dictation
based upon the distinctive writing styles and grammatical nuances of the
biblical authors.[22] If the New Testament authors were
merely Spirit-possessed, obedient stenographers, one would expect no variance
in styles, composition, and vocabulary, which are readily seen in the biblical
text.[23] Internal, evidence also suggests
that, rather than by spontaneous prophetic revelation, some New Testament books
were written in response to letters sent from first-century churches (cf. 1 Cor
1:11; 7:1; 2 Thess 2:2) and/or incorporated scribes in the physical writing of
the text (Rom 16:22, cf. 1 Cor 16:21; Gal 6:11; Col 4:18; Phlm 19; 2 Thess
3:17; and 1 Pet 5:12). Paul’s authenticity of canonical writing rested, not in
an ecstatic utterance, but his “large print” handwriting in the autographic
conclusions.[24]
Concerning the Cessationists’ identification of charismata as “revelatory gifts,” John Carpenter remarks that,
the Bible doesn’t call spiritual gifts “revelatory gifts” (or “sign gifts”). It calls them “charismata” (literally, results of grace; or alternately it calls them “spiritual things”). “Revelatory gifts” is a term made up by cessationists to get us to the conclusion that they have ceased. Calling them “ceased gifts” and then concluding form that name that they have ceased, would be no more circular in reasoning. The term “revelatory gifts” is imposed onto scripture and gives the illusion that cessationism is a product of careful Bible study.[25]
As such, Cessationists are forced into this concept of “revelatory gifts.” Otherwise, they must acknowledge the possibility of charismata in the contemporary church, even in light of a closed canon. No New Testament passage specifies that spiritual gifts were/are for the purpose of revealing doctrinal truth. Deere recognizes
The first thing I noticed was that there are very few direct statements in the New Testament regarding the purpose of miracles. I never found a statement to the effect that “God gave miracles in order to . . .” I discovered that the purpose of miracles is sometimes indicated by “function” words accompanying the miracles themselves. Mark, for example, says that miracles “confirm” (Mark 16:20). John says that they “testify” (John 5:36). Peter says that Jesus was “accredited” by miracles (Acts 2:22). At other times the purpose of miracles must often be inferred form the context or from the result of the miracle.[26]
For
example, Paul expressed that those who speak in tongues edify themselves, but
anyone who prophesies edifies the church (1 Cor 14:4). Likewise, Paul described
prophesying, not as revealing New Testament doctrinal truth, but revealing the
secrets of the heart, which convicts the unbeliever turning them to “worship
God and report that God is truly among you” (1 Cor 14:24–25). In this context,
prophesying does not express canonical revelation, but exposes the innermost
thoughts and realities of a person.[27] This parallels precisely with
Jesus’s description of the work of the Holy Spirit to convict the world of sin,
righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8–11). Jesus further expressed that the
Holy Spirit would guide the apostles into
all truth (John 16:13), not reveal the truth to them. The manner in which the
Holy Spirit teach the apostles was not through prophetic revelations they did
not already know, but by bringing all things to their remembrance that Christ
had spoken to them in the flesh (John 14:26). Keener expounds that the Spirit
would explain further the teachings of Jesus, not make up or reveal new things.[28]
Furthermore, contra to Cessationists’ assessment that charismata (specifically tongues) were for the purpose of preaching the gospel under divine inspiration (in foreign human language),[29] Oss recognized:
In Acts 10:44–46 and 19:1–6 [examples of tongues and prophecy] preaching is not mentioned, nor is there any mention of an audience. And at Corinth an interpreter was required for public utterance in tongues during the worship service (1 Cor. 14:1–28). If the gift always took the form of the human language of the hearers, why were interpreters necessary in order to make the utterance comprehensible?[30]
Interestingly, on the Day of Pentecost, with the phenomenon of glossolalia, Apostle Peter did not present the gospel message of Christ crucified through a charismatic utterance, such as tongues. Rather, Peter raised his own voice (Acts 2:14) to testify and exhort the crowd, saying unto them “Save yourselves from this untoward generation” (Acts 2:40). If speaking in tongues is for the purpose of proclaiming the gospel in unlearned, foreign languages, as Cessationists claim, then Apostle Paul’s words, “I thank my God I speak with tongues more than you all; yet in church I would rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may teach others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue” (1 Cor 14:18–19) are superfluous! Gordon Fee observes:
Thus the section has come full circle. If Paul came to them as they wished, speaking in tongues, it would not benefit them. He must speak in intelligible ways. Now he affirms that he does speak in tongues—more than all of them; but in church, so that others might be instructed, he would rather speak just five words that could be understood than countless words in a tongue.[31]
In
addition, the apostles never appealed to or accredited charismata as
establishing doctrine or settling doctrinal differences. Craig Keener notes
that although Paul defined prophecy as intelligible inspired utterance, he
distinguished it from doctrine and exposition of Scripture (cf. 1 Cor 14:6, 19,
26).[32] Likewise, the apostles and elders
in Jerusalem settled the controversy of Gentile inclusion in the faith, not by
charismata or who spoke in tongues the loudest, but by the words of the
Scriptures (Acts 15:15–17). Keener notes that even the apostolic decree to
Gentile converts draws upon Old Testament prohibitions.[33] Hence, in a manner of speaking,
the apostles and elders settled this doctrinal dilemma upon sola scriptura and not charismata.
Therefore, charismata, while given to edify the church were not the means by
which the apostles and early believes communicated the gospel or received New
Testament doctrine.
So Great a Salvation
The Hebrew writer reveals that the New Testament message of salvation came, not through prophetic revelation or other charismata, but by the very teachings of Jesus Christ in flesh:
How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will? (Heb 2:3–4).
In
addition, the Hebrew author, previously, established a striking contrast and
continuity between the Old and New Testaments where “God, who at various times
and various ways spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, has in
these last days spoken to us by His Son . . .” (Heb 1:1–2). Edgar McKnight and
Christopher Church recognize a contrast between the diverse revelations of the
Old Dispensation versus the singular and final eschatological speech of the Son,
when the “fullness of God’s revelation at the end of the ages was made known in
the Son.”[34] F. F. Bruce explains that the
language of Hebrews 1:2 tells the story of divine revelation, “a story of
progression up to Christ, but there is no progression beyond him.”[35] The phrase “in these last days”
represents a literal rendering of the Hebrew idiom found in the Old Testament
of the eschaton.[36] These are the same “last days” in
which Peter envisioned the eschatological promise of the Holy Spirit.[37]
The interesting thing in Hebrews is
that in the “last days,” God has spoken by his Son, not through the Holy
Spirit. The apostles did not receive “so great a salvation” message through
bits and pieces of charismatic revelation.[38] Rather, they preached the gospel
message that Christ had proclaimed to them! Even Cessationists, such as Ken
Gentry, recognize this point, when he states, “God had spoken finally in His
Son (as interpreted through His apostles, Heb. 1:1, 2; John 1:18; 14:6–9).”[39] On the first Day of Pentecost,
after Christ’s resurrection, when the crowd asked, “Men and brethren, what
shall we do?” (Acts 2:27), Peter and the eleven did not have to pray for some
prophetic revelation in order to answer the crowd. Rather, Peter proclaimed the
message that Christ commissioned his apostles to preach: “Repent, and let every
one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins;
and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38; cf. Matt
28:18–20; Mark 16:15–20; and Luke 24:47–49). This pattern of apostolic
preaching continues throughout the book of Acts. The Samaritans believed, were
baptized, and received the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:12, 15–17).
A. T. Robertson observes that the fact that Simon “saw” the Holy Spirit
being given “shows plainly that those who received the gift of the Holy Spirit
spoke with tongues.”[40] Likewise, Gentile converts
experienced belief, water baptism, and the gift of the Holy Spirit evidenced by
charismata (Acts 10:43–48). In each case, charismata were not for the purpose
of revealing doctrinal truths, but were the fulfillment of Christ’s promise of
Spiritual empowerment and command to present the gospel to all nations (cf.
Luke 24:47–49; Acts 1:8).
According to Hebrews 2:3–4, the New
Testament “new birth” message of salvation was first revealed by the Lord Jesus
and confirmed through apostolic preaching. Harold Attridge clarifies that “the
preaching of the gospel is supported by the note that the message of salvation
was ‘confirmed’ (ἐβεβαιώθη) by those who heard it.”[41] Likewise, Hebrews 2:4 expresses
that the “various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit” were not the means by
which “so great a salvation” was revealed but were God’s additional testimony
with signs and wonders. In other words, miracles were a confirmation, in
addition to the preaching of the gospel as handed from Christ to his apostles.[42] As Bruce illustrates, “The witness
of their informants, however, was confirmed by the signs and wonders and mighty
works which attended their proclamation of the message; these were tokens
granted by God to attest the truth of what was proclaimed.”[43] Thus, rather than reveal
New Testament truth, as Cessationists claim, miraculous spiritual gifts, confirmed
the truth of what the eyewitnesses of the Lord preached i.e. “so great a
salvation.”
Some Cessationists, recognizing that
charismata confirm the truth, maintain that since the truth has already
been confirmed, the purpose of miraculous spiritual gifts has been fulfilled.
Thus, miraculous spiritual gifts no longer function in the modern church.[44] However, Lewis responds to this
argumentation by showing that the testimony of Christ had already been
confirmed in the Corinthian church (1 Cor 1:6), yet Paul encouraged the
Corinthian believers to “desire spiritual gifts” (1 Cor 14:1).[45] If spiritual gifts were/are to
cease once the truth has been confirmed, then why were charismata still active
in Corinth (1 Cor 14:26) or why did Paul admonish the Corinthians to lack no
charismata awaiting the revelation of Jesus Christ (1 Cor 1:7)? The obvious
answer is because just because the truth has been confirmed once, does not mean
that the truth cannot be confirmed again.[46] Another biblical illustration,
closer to the Cessationists controversy, appears in the Old Testament with the
prophetic ministries of Moses and Elijah. The miracles of the Exodus were to
confirm that the LORD is God, and there is none else.[47] Both the miracles and confirmed
message were written in a complete canon, the Law of Moses. Thus, using
Cessationists rationale, any Old Testament prophet, after Moses, who wanted to
confirm that the LORD is God, and there is none else would simply need to
appeal to the pages of the Law of Moses because, according to Cessationists,
once the message was confirmed it never needs confirmed again. However, four
hundred years after Moses, Elijah confirmed the very same message—the LORD is God, and there is none else—through
the miracle of calling fire down from heaven (1 Kg 18:38). In this case,
Elijah’s miracle served, not to reveal a new message to be written down, but to
confirm the same message already recorded in canon.[48]
Cessationists claim that the
apostles only knew God’s will partially through charismata, that “each gift
enabled each gifted person to know and teach only a part of God’s intended
revelation to man.”[49] Yet, Paul proclaimed that he had
not shunned to declare “the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27) or as Joseph
Thayer translates “all the contents of the divine plan.”[50] This Cessationist notion of only
knowing and teaching a part of God’s intended will renders Paul’s warning in
Galatians 1:8 nonsensical. If Paul was only preaching “part of God’s intended
will,” then how could he warn that if anyone preached any other gospel “let him
be accursed?” According to Cessationists, there would be more “parts” to
preach.
Conclusion
Confusion concerning the purpose of
charismata forms the unstable foundation of Cessationism. As Carpenter
recognizes, “[C]essationism is a self-contradictory doctrine that claims the
Bible is sufficient so we don’t need spiritual gifts (that the Bible tells us
we need) but we do need the doctrine of cessationism (that the Bible doesn’t
teach).”[51]
As demonstrated in this report, the purpose of charismata was not for the
revealing of New Testament doctrine or to write Scripture. Rather, miraculous
spiritual gifts confirm the preached word and edify both individual believers
and the corporate congregation. The purpose of charismata was not fulfilled in
the completion of the writing of the New Testament. Thus, charismata did not
cease with the completion of the New Testament canon. As such, the miraculous
spiritual gifts have not ceased and still serve the purpose of edifying the
church today.
Bibliography
Allen, Jimmy. Survey of First Corinthians. Third Edition. Searcy, AR: Harding College, 1989.
Attridge, Harold W. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989.
Blomberg, Craig. 1 Corinthians. NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994.
Carpenter, John B. “Recovering From Strange and Friendly Fire,” The Christian Post. November 5, 2013. https://www.christianpost.com/news/recovering-from-strange-and-friendlyfire-107976/.
Compton, Bruce. “The Continuation of New Testament Prophecy and a Closed Canon: Revisiting Wayne Grudem’s Two Levels of NT Prophecy.” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 22 (2017): 57–73.
Deere, Jack. Surprised by the Power of the Spirit: Discovering How God Speaks and Heals Today. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993.
Erickson, Millard. Christian Theology. Third Edition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013.
Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.
Gentry, Kenneth L. Jr. The Charismatic Gift of Prophecy: A Reformed Response to Wayne Grudem. Fountain Inn, SC: Victorious Hope Pub., 1989.
Grudem, Wayne. “Preface.” Pages
9–20 in Are Miraculous Gifts for Today:
Four Views. Edited by Wayne A. Grudem. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.
———. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994. ePub edition.
Hibbs, Darren. Spiritual Gifts: Are They Still for Today? Coppell, TX: 10 Week Books, 2014.
Horton, Stanley M. editor. Systematic Theology. Revised Edition. Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007. ePub edition,
Jacobsen, Douglas, ed., A Reader in Pentecostal Theology: Voices from the First Generation. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2006.
Keener, Craig S. Acts. NCBC. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press, 2020.
———. 1-2 Corinthians. NCBC. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,
2005.
———. “John MacArthur’s Strange Fire:
reviewed by Craig S. Keener.” The Pneuma
Review. November 15, 2013. http://pneumareview.com/john-macarthurs-strange-fire-reviewed-by-craig-s-keener/.
———. Gift & Giver: The Holy Spirit for Today. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.
Lewis, Billy and David Lipe. The Lipe-Lewis Debate: A Religious Discussion on the Godhead and Miraculous Gifts. Winona, MS: J. C. Choate Pub., 1984.
MacArthur, John. Strange Fire: The Danger of Offending the Holy Spirit with Counterfeit Worship. Nashville, TN: Nelson Books, 2013.
Marshall, I. Howard. The Gospel of Luke. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978. ePub edition.
McKnight, Edgar and Christopher Church. Hebrews-James. Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary. Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys Pub., 2004.
Oss, Douglas A. “A
Pentecostal/Charismatic Response to Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.” Pages 86–93 in Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views.
Edited by Wayne A. Grudem. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.
———. “A Pentecostal/Charismatic View.” Pages 239–283 in Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views. Edited by Wayne A. Grudem. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.
Robertson, A. T. Word Pictures of the New Testament. 6 volumes. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1930.
Tamkin, Warren E. “‘That Which is Perfect’ I. Corinthians 13:10.” BD thesis, Grace Theological Seminary, 1949.
Thayer, Joseph H. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1977.
Vine, W. E. 1 Corinthians. London: Oliphants, 1951.
Workman, Gary. Has “That Which Is Perfect” Come? An Exposition of I Corinthians
13:8–13. Abilene, TX: Quality Pub., 1971.
[1] Douglas Jacobsen, ed., A Reader in Pentecostal Theology: Voices from the First Generation (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2006), 1.
[2] Wayne Grudem, “Preface,” Are Miraculous Gifts for Today: Four Views, ed. Wayne A. Grudem (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 10–11.
[3] Bruce Compton, “The Continuation of New Testament Prophecy and a Closed Canon: Revisiting Wayne Grudem’s Two Levels of NT Prophecy,” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 22 (2017): 62.
[4] Warren E. Tamkin, “‘That Which is Perfect’ I. Corinthians 13:10,” (BD thesis, Grace Theological Seminary, 1949), 38.
[5] Gary Workman, Has “That Which Is Perfect” Come? An Exposition of I Corinthians 13:8–13 (Abilene, TX: Quality Pub., 1971), 9.
[6] Billy Lewis and David Lipe, The Lipe-Lewis Debate: A Religious Discussion on the Godhead and Miraculous Gifts (Winona, MS: J. C. Choate Pub., 1984), 72.
[7] John MacArthur, Strange Fire: The Danger of Offending the Holy Spirit with Counterfeit Worship (Nashville, TN: Nelson Books, 2013), 126.
[8] W. E. Vine, 1 Corinthians (London: Oliphants, 1951), 169.
[9] Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. The Charismatic Gift of Prophecy: A Reformed Response to Wayne Grudem (Fountain Inn, SC: Victorious Hope Pub., 1989), 33.
[10] MacArthur, Strange Fire, 68, 95.
[11] Cf. I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), ePub edition, 48–50 for Marshall’s assessment of Luke’s investigation into the facts of Jesus’ ministry.
[12] Craig S. Keener, Acts, NCBC (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2020), 18.
[13] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), ePub edition, 83.
[14] Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit: Discovering How God Speaks and Heals Today (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993), 106.
[15] Lewis and Lipe, Lipe-Lewis Debate, 82.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Cf. Acts 19:6; 21:9; 1 Tim 1:18; 4:14
[18] Craig S. Keener, “John MacArthur’s Strange Fire: reviewed by Craig S. Keener, The Pneuma Review,” November 15, 2013, http://pneumareview.com/john-macarthurs-strange-fire-reviewed-by-craig-s-keener/.
[19] Douglas A. Oss, “A Pentecostal/Charismatic Response to Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.” Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views, ed. Wayne A. Grudem (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 92.
[20] Jimmy Allen, Survey of First Corinthians, Third Edition (Searcy, AR: Harding College, 1989), 165.
[21] Craig Blomberg, 1 Corinthians, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 279.
[22] Cf. Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, Third Edition (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013) 174–80. Grudem, Systematic Theology, ePub edition, 82–84. Stanley M. Horton, ed., Systematic Theology, Revised Edition (Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007), ePub edition, 82–85, 91–92.
[23] Horton, Systematic Theology, ePub edition, 82–83.
[24] Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 836–37.
[25] John B. Carpenter, “Recovering From Strange and Friendly Fire,” The Christian Post, November 5, 2013, https://www.christianpost.com/news/recovering-from-strange-and-friendlyfire-107976/.
[26] Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, 103.
[27] Darren Hibbs, Spiritual Gifts: Are They Still for Today? (Coppell, TX: 10 Week Books, 2014), 55.
[28] Craig S. Keener, Gift & Giver: The Holy Spirit for Today (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 39.
[29] Workman, Has “That Which Is Perfect” Come?, 9.
[30] Douglas A. Oss, “A Pentecostal/Charismatic View,” Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views, ed. Wayne A. Grudem (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 280.
[31] Fee, First Epistles to the Corinthians, 676.
[32] Craig S. Keener, 1-2 Corinthians, NCBC (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 113.
[33] Keener, Acts, 369.
[34] Edgar McKnight and Christopher Church, Hebrews-James, Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys Pub., 2004), 29–30.
[35] F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, Revised, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 3.
[36] Ibid.
[37] Keener, Acts, 72.
[38] Allen, Survey of First Corinthians, 165.
[39] Gentry, Charismatic Gift of Prophecy, 54.
[40] A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1930), 3:107.
[41] Harold W. Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989), 67.
[42] Lewis and Lipe, Lewis-Lipe Debate, 87.
[43] Bruce, Epistle to the Hebrews, 30.
[44] Lewis and Lipe, Lipe-Lewis Debate, 72.
[45] Ibid, 82.
[46] Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, 108.
[47] Cf. Exod 5:2; 7:5, 17; Deut 4:35–39.
[48] Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, 254.
[49] Workman, Has “That Which is Perfect” Come?, 6.
[50] Joseph H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1977), 104–05.
[51]
Carpenter, “Recovering From Strange Fire.”
