Pentecostalism
possesses a rich heritage in the realm of experience and a fervent conviction
with respect to faith. Yet the “Pentecostal experience” of Spirt baptism and
charismata must stand firmly upon the authority of the Bible. The debate over
the continuation of miraculous spiritual gifts in the modern church cannot be
answered by experience. While one may acknowledge the claims of modern
charismata, their validity rests upon the Bible as the fundamental rule of
faith. Traditionally, cessationists point to the completion of the New
Testament canon as the cessation of miraculous spiritual gifts, whereas
continuationists understand these charismata as continuing until the final
eschaton at the Parousia. Ultimately, the continuationists versus cessationists
debate centers on whether the Scriptures teach that miraculous spiritual gifts
continue in the church until the final eschaton or ceased by the end of the
first century. Because this study requires a proper exegesis of critical
passages regarding the timing of the cessation of charismata, the theological
method applied to this research must offer a systematic reflection of the
Scriptures. The conservative evangelical theological method provides a
systematic approach to the examination of doctrinal topics and theological
themes. Using a propositional approach to theology, this method will aid in
identifying and interpreting relevant passages regarding the cessation of
miraculous spiritual gifts. In addition, the conservative theological method
explores the integration of historical theology. This application will prove
effective in researching the historical interpretations of 1 Corinthians
13:8–12, which serves as the key New Testament cessation pericope.
Introduction
While
Pentecostalism fits within the bounds of an evangelical system, Pentecostals
likewise lay strong emphasis on the contemporary work of the Holy Spirit. This
often leads to the charge that Pentecostalism is simply experience-based. Yet,
Pentecostals view their own Holy Spirit experience(s) as secondary to the
authority of the Bible.[1] Craig Keener observes that modern
Pentecostal theology no longer embraces merely a “classical Pentecostal”
hermeneutics, but has, to an extent, become more generally a Christian
hermeneutic, since, as Kenner assesses, “All Christians should read Scripture
as people who are living in the biblical experience—not in terms of ancient culture, but as people living by the
same Spirit who guided God’s people in Scripture.”[2] As such, all Christians should
recognize the Holy Spirit’s work in assisting the student to understand the Bible.[3]
However, Gordon Anderson points out that with respect to the Holy Spirit’s role in the process of interpretation, Pentecostalism does not claim any special insight to the Bible unavailable to non-Pentecostals, but rather employs the standard methods of studying the biblical text via exegesis comparable to other evangelicals.[4] Marius Nel explains further that
[w]hat distinguishes Pentecostal Bible reading from other traditions is not a different interpretive method but a distinct narrative which leads to a coherent and cohesive interpretive manner in which the Spirit plays the most important role and the community of faith and its story forms the influential hermeneutical filter as pre-understanding forming the condition for understanding.[5]
Hence,
any study on the continuance and duration of charismata in the church
must rely on a common, theological method.[6] Although several theological
methods may relate to the study of Pentecostalism, the systematic, topical, and
thematic approach of conservative evangelical theology, also known as Bible
doctrines/conservative theology, offers the best method to the study of the
duration of miraculous spiritual gifts.[7]
Clark Pinnock’s technique of the conservative theological method appeals to Pentecostalism’s approach to doctrinal issues. Pinnock’s key sources for theological work—the biblical text, tradition, reason, and experience—mirrors the Wesleyan Quadrilateral of Wesleyan-holiness movements.[8] In addition, the current debate over cessationism versus continuationism applies the conservative theological method by focusing on key relevant texts and the proper exegesis of said texts. This process of theological investigation includes gathering the relevant biblical passages, developing a unified doctrinal theme, analyzing the meaning and context of the biblical texts, and examining the historical treatment and interpretations of the texts to determine any historical, doctrinal consequences.[9]
Identifying
Relevant Texts
This study focuses on the two prominent passages discussed regarding the temporal nature of charismata: 1 Corinthians 13:8–12 and Ephesians 4:11–16.[10] Special attention is given to the 1 Corinthians 13 pericope as providing the crux interpretum regarding the continuance or cessation of miraculous spiritual gifts.[11] The Apostle Paul specifies in 1 Corinthians 13:8–10 that prophecies, tongues, and knowledge will fail, cease, and vanish away “when that which is perfect has come.” This statement provides the reader with an expiration date, of sorts, for these miraculous spiritual gifts. Likewise, in Ephesians 4:11–13, Paul explains the temporal nature of apostleship and prophets as continuing “till we come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God.” Farnell sees an even stronger connection between these two passages given the historical connection of Paul’s writing of 1 Corinthians while ministering in Ephesus (1 Cor 16:8).[12] Both sides of the debate agree that charismata will cease. The purpose of this study, then, becomes to determine what particular time did or will miraculous gifts cease.
Exegesis: Grammatical/Historical/Cultural Interpretation
In
Ephesians 4:11–16, Paul established the purpose and temporal nature of apostles
and prophets. This section translates one long sentence in Greek treating two
subjects: the ministry that takes place in the body and the maturity this
ministry brings.[13] The phrase “till we all attain to the unity of
the faith” (4:13) illustrates the duration of the ministries mentioned in v.
11. Of special interest for this study is the temporal role of the apostles and
prophets and any relations this may have toward charismata cessation. Richard
Gaffin observes an almost certain parallel between the “unity/fullness” of Ephesians
4:13 with the “perfect” of 1 Corinthians 13:10, echoed by Paul’s use of teleios (perfect) in each context.[14] The issue of duration, then,
focuses on identifying what the phrase “the unity of the faith” describes.
Cessationists understand apostles and prophets, based upon Ephesians 2:20, strictly as “foundational” church offices. Since the church is built upon “the foundation of the apostles and prophets,” cessationists conclude that these offices have ceased.[15] Samuel Waldron expresses:
The analogy used in the texts is one of a house with foundations. . .This requires that an historical or chronological interpretation be given to the analogy of the foundations and superstructure of the church/house. In other words, this language suggests that the apostles are foundational in an historical sense to the universal church. Thus, they precede it in time. The foundation period of the church is, then, the first century when the original apostles lived. The superstructure period is all the following centuries of the church built on the ministry of the apostles.[16]
In
addition, Waldron argues that all prophecy was/is in principle canonical and
carries canonical authority. Thus, if biblical prophecy exists today, then it
is likewise canonical.[17] Cessationists maintain that the
apostles and prophets, as the foundation, represent a type of “oral ‘interim
NT’,” which ceased when “the faith” was canonized in writing i.e., “the unity of
the faith.”[18] Elmer Moore explains, “[U]nity of
the faith, and the faith is the gospel. Until the gospel became a unit.”[19] Wayne Jackson concurs further
expounding, “[T]he apostle was teaching that the fragmentary supernatural gifts
would only remain in the church’s possession until they were united in the
complete New Testament revelation.”[20] Cessationists conclude that since
the New Testament canon is closed, the gift of prophecy (and by extension
prophets) has ceased, therefore requiring a first-century fulfillment of the
timeline “until we all come into the unity of the faith” (Eph 4:13), which many
cessationists equate with the completion of the New Testament canon.[21].
The
cessationists’ interpretation of “the unity of the faith” depends greatly upon
their presupposition of apostles and prophets serving strictly as the foundation
of the church. Sam Storms points out that Ephesians 5:20–22 does not specify “the
foundation of all apostles and prophets” and, according to the context, the
foundation had already been laid with the superstructure currently under
construction. Storms further explains, “In other words, the apostles and
prophets of verse 20, among whom was Paul, were also contributing to the
superstructure, of which the Ephesians were a contemporary part, simultaneous
with their laying the foundation on which it was being built. We must be
careful not to push the metaphor beyond what Paul intended by it.”[22] Hence, if apostles and prophets
ceased once the foundation was laid, then they would have already ceased by the
time Paul wrote to the Ephesians. Nothing in the context of Ephesians 2:20
suggests that “the apostles and prophets” is an exhaustive reference to all
apostles and prophets in the church or that they were/are limited to a
foundational role.
Using
Paul’s metaphor of the superstructure “being built” (present tense) upon the
laid foundation of apostles and prophets, just because a structure is built
upon a foundation of mortar and concrete blocks does not mean that there cannot
be more mortar and blocks anywhere else in that structure. Many buildings utilize
mortar and blocks in their exterior walls. Granted the mortar and blocks in the
foundation serve a different function than those in the walls, but the building
blocks/materials remain the same. Jack Deere offers a similar illustration of a
founding director of a corporation. While the founding director serves a unique
position, it does not exclude future directors for that corporation.[23] Hence, from Paul’s words that the
foundation had already been laid (Eph 2:20), apparently apostles and prophets,
likewise, continue in the superstructure of the church (Eph 2:21–22).
If
apostles and prophets have ceased, then their purpose, specified in Ephesians
4:12 as “for the equipping of the saints for the work of the ministry, for the
edifying of the body of Christ,” has likewise ceased. Continuationists affirm
that since this purpose persists in the church today, then apostles and
prophets, likewise continue in the contemporary church. Pentecostals, in
particular, acknowledge that the New Testament utilizes the term “apostle” in a
generalized sense, not strictly limited to the Twelve and Paul.[24] Cessationists, recognizing the
weight of this conclusion, argue that apostles and prophets continues to
minister and equip the saints today through their writings i.e., the completed
canon.[25] However, the same could be said
for the ministry of evangelists, pastors, and teachers, mentioned in
conjunction with apostles and prophets. Following the cessationists’ logic, one
could conclude that no work of the ministry or perfecting of the saints exists
beyond the time of the completion of the New Testament canon and that the
function of evangelists, pastors, and teachers, likewise, simply continues
through the biblical text. Yet, as Storms points out, Paul did not speak in
this passage of documents or epistles, but of actual persons whom Christ
appoints to function as apostles et. al. being actively present until the
church attains its full maturity. As long as immaturity remains, so do the ministries
Christ gave the church to overcome it.[26]
In
addition, there exists no biblical evidence to support the notion that all
prophesying is canonical or that any New Testament book is the product of a
prophetic utterance. The New Testament records several instances of prophesying
without dictating (canonizing) the exact words spoken.[27] Storms points out that if all
prophesying is a foundation-laying activity, as cessationists affirm, this
would lead to the nonsensical conclusion “that a group of anonymous disciples
in Ephesus (Acts 19:1–7), who prophesied upon their conversion (none of which,
be it noted, was ever recorded or mentioned again), did so with a view to
laying the foundation of the church. It is no less a strain to think that the
four daughters of Philip were a part of the once-for-all foundation of the
church (21:9).”[28] Thus, a proper exegesis of Ephesians
4:13, “the unity of the faith,” depends upon the framework of the passage itself
and not a presupposition of Ephesians 2:20 and the purpose of the gift of
prophecy.[29]
The
context of Ephesians 4:11–13 illustrates that it is believers (“we all”—hoi pantes)
who attain or “come into” the unity, not the faith.[30] Nothing is said of faith becoming
a unit. The word “unity” appears three times in the Bible and in each passage
it refers to unity in respect of persons, not things becoming a unit.[31] Arlie Harris points out that
“‘until we all attain to the unity’ can only mean the saints are the ones to be
united.”[32] Likewise, Thomas Slater observes
that the phrase “unity of the faith” continues the theme from vv. 3–6
“endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit,” with a particular emphasis on a
unified belief.[33] In agreement, F. F. Bruce notes
that “the unity of the faith” is effectively the same as “the unity of the
Spirit,” which binds together those who share the common faith in Christ.[34]
While
Ephesians 4:13 also contains the term teleios,
which can mean “perfect or complete,” the term, here, describes the “man” as
mature and not “the faith” as a complete unit. Likewise, Paul’s metaphor of
“the whole body, joined and knit together” (Eph 4:16) describes the individual
believers as “every part” of the body, not the New Testament books as the
individual parts of the complete canon. The participle “knit together” also
appears in Ephesians 2:21 of the church as a building growing “into a holy
temple in the Lord.”[35] The context of Ephesians 4:11–16,
then, is not that of apostles et. al. continuing until “the faith” became
codified in a complete unit. Rather, Paul speaks of believers unifying in the
faith and growing together in the body to become a “perfect man” (a possible
allusion to the resurrection, cf. Phil 3:11–14). Clinton Arnold concludes that
although this three-fold goal of Ephesians 4:13 will not completely take place
until Christ returns; it is thus the responsibility of the ministry to
facilitate this growth to maturity.[36] Hence, exegeting Ephesians 4:11–16
following a grammatical/contextual method reveals, not a reference to the
completion of the faith as a unit i.e., the completed canon, but Paul’s call
for believers to live in unity and to grow in maturity.
The
next passage under discussion is 1 Corinthians 13:8–12. This famous love
chapter, which bridges Paul’s discussion on spiritual gifts (chapters 12, 14), serves
as the primary battleground in the debate on the duration of miraculous
spiritual gifts. Paul specifies three gifts, prophecies, tongues, and
knowledge, as representing the entire list of charismata in 1 Corinthians 12:8–10.[37] He then contrasts the permanent
nature of love against the temporal nature of miraculous spiritual gifts, which
will cease “when that which is perfect comes” (1 Cor 13:10). Paul describes the
passing away of spiritual gifts using a “now . . . then” formula and the
illustrations of a child growing into a man and seeing into a mirror dimly
versus seeing “face to face” (1 Cor 13:11–12). Both continuationists and
cessationists agree the question is not whether charismata will cease, but when
does charismata ceases.
Most
cessationists interpret the phrase “when that which is perfect comes” (1 Cor
13:10) as a reference to the completed New Testament canon i.e., the finished
writing of the New Testament, not necessarily the collection of the twenty-seven
books into one canon.[38] Thus, they conclude that
miraculous spiritual gifts ceased some time toward the end of the first
century. Cessationists understand charismata as “revelatory gifts” or
the means by which God, in the first-century church, revealed doctrinal truths.
These New Testament truths were received bit by bit or “in part” (1 Cor 13:9). Gary
Workman explains, “So the gifts enabled each gifted person to know and teach
only a part of God’s intended revelation to man.”[39] In agreement, Ken Gentry expounds,
“We should remember that Jesus promised to lead His disciples into ‘all truth’
(surely the final revelation of God’s will to man, i.e. completed scripture)
later after Pentecost (John 16:13). This leading to ‘all truth’ came in pieces,
being supplemented in the transitional era by sporadic prophecies; it was
finalized when the last Scripture book was written.”[40] Gentry further deduces, “Since the
‘partial’ speaks of prophecy and other modes of revelational insight (v. 8),
then it would seem that the ‘perfect,’ which would supplant these, represents
the perfect and final New Testament Scriptures (Jms 1:22).”[41] Cessationists, then, maintain that
what Paul describes as being “in part” (1 Cor 13:9) refers to partial or
piecemeal revelation, which then corresponds with “the perfect” as the
counterpart describing full or complete revelation i.e., the New Testament
canon.[42]
From this reasoning, cessationists understand Paul’s illustrations in v. 12 as describing the church in an infant state, without the completed canon, and later in a mature state, with the completed canon. Bruce Compton explains Paul’s statement “see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face” as:
Paul describ[ing] the church’s perception of God’s revelation based on the revelatory gifts with seeing something “in a mirror dimly,” this is, seeing something indistinctly or unclearly. In contrast, when God’s revelation for the church is fully disclosed, it will be like seeing someone “face to face,” that is clearly and distinctly . . . The phrase simply means to perceive God’s revelation for the church clearly and completely.[43]
Thus,
according to cessationists, what the first-century church only knew partially,
with miraculous spiritual gifts, the remaining generations of the church know
completely with the New Testament canon.[44]
However,
the cessationists’ interpretation of “that which is perfect” (1 Cor 13:10) as
the completed New Testament fits neither the grammar nor the context of the pericope.
For example, while Gentry equates the “perfect” with “the final New Testament
Scripture (Jms. 1:22),”[45] the “word” or “perfect law of
liberty” in James 1:22–25 refers, not to the completed New Testament, but to
the completed Old Testament![46] Likewise, even with a complete or
perfect law (nomon teleion), James still had miraculous spiritual gifts
(Jas 5:14–16). This fact becomes even more apparent if one accepts the early
date of James’s epistle as written prior to Gentile conversion, which was
accompanied by speaking with tongues (Acts 10:44–46).[47]
Although cessationists identify “that which is perfect” with the completed canon, such a view seems highly improbable. Gordon Fee questions whether Paul himself could have articulated such as view since neither he nor the Corinthians lived in expectation of a completed canon.[48] In agreement, B. J. Oropeza further clarifies:
A major problem with this [cessationists] view is that it is anachronistic. Neither Paul nor the Corinthians could have known about the New Testament canon before it was canonized centuries later. Moreover, to suggest that they did know about this because God revealed it to them in advance, even though there is no evidence that they ever wrote about it, smacks of classical special pleading.[49]
Furthermore, to teleion (“that which is perfect”) is neuter singular, and New Testament
authors never employ a neuter singular word to describe the scriptures. The
standard terms designating the written scriptures are either masculine or
feminine.[50] As
such, to teleion seems an unlikely
reference to the completed canon.[51]
In
addition, the grammar of 1 Corinthians 13:10, “but when that which is perfect
has come” does not fit the concept of the completion of a canon. The verb “has
come” (elthē) is in the aorist tense, which would denote an
instantaneous event like the Parousia, not the perfect tense, which would best
describe the completion of the Bible to show the close of a continuous, drawn-out
process.[52] Furthermore, Marvin Treece
points out, “The conditional temporal hotan
(when) with the subjunctive elthē
(should come) displays a thought of uncertainty, which is never present when
[Paul] talks about scripture.”[53]
However, these terms occur frequently in reference to the eschaton.[54]
Likewise, Fee points out that Paul utilizes the verb katargeō (done away) elsewhere in the letter to denote the “passing
away” of what belongs only to the present age, and that Paul’s verb usage in
13:10 indicates a contrast indicative of the eschaton.[55]
The phrase “that which is perfect” translates
the Greek to teleion, which is the adjectival form of the noun telos
(end), a term commonly associated with the Parousia.[56] The Greek word telos,
and its associate forms, denotes the completion, termination, or cessation of
something.[57] Consequently, anything that has reached its telos
is teleios, complete, perfect.[58] In 1 Corinthians, Paul penned the term telos
three times, each of which describes the eschatological “end.”[59] Of special interest for this study is 1 Corinthians
1:7–8 where Paul encouraged the Corinthians, “So that you come short in no gift
(charismati), eagerly waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus
Christ, who will confirm you to the end (eōs telous), that you may be
blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Here, Paul employs a three-fold
repetition—“revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ,” “to the end,” and “day of our
Lord Jesus Christ”—to describe the Parousia.[60] Hence the phrase “to the end” (eōs telous) equals “until the Parousia.”[61] Anthony Thiselton points out, “The end, ἕως τέλους,
clearly corresponds to the day of our Lord Christ. The eschatological context
confirms the temporal reference.”[62] Paul Elbert points out that the context, here, clearly
expresses that Paul believed not one spiritual gift (charismata) would
be potentially unavailable until Christ returned.[63] Likewise, in 1 Corinthians 15:24, the term to telos naturally
reflects a synonymous or contemporaneous event with the Parousia.[64] If commentators interpret Paul’s use of to teleion
(1 Cor 13:10) against the backdrop of his use of the noun form telos, in
the same epistle, as parallel with the Parousia, then they face the undeniable
fact that the phrase “when that which is perfect has come,” likewise, describes
the Parousia. Hence, the eminent lexicographer, Joseph
Thayer defined the phrase “that which is perfect” (to teleion) as “the
perfect state of all things to be ushered in by the return of Christ from
heaven.”[65]
The eschatological nature of 1 Corinthians 13
also appears in Paul’s use of the idiom, “but then face to face.” Contrary to
Compton, the phrase “face to face” is not simply a metaphorical term used to
denote direct revelation.[66] Rather,
the term “face to face” consistently describes seeing someone physically in
person.[67]
For example, Gideon saw the Angel of the LORD “face to face” (Judg 6:22), that
is, physically in person. Likewise, John expressed his desire to “see” (horaō)
Gaius shortly and thus speak “face to face” (3 John 1:14).[68]
Paul’s language in 1 Corinthians 13:12 resembles the LXX of Numbers 12:6–8
where the Lord revealed that with Moses, he spoke “face to face, even plainly,
and not in dark sayings; and he sees the form of the LORD.”[69] As
Moses saw the physical “form” of the Lord, likewise, “when that which is
perfect has come,” presumably at the Parousia, believers will see Christ
“face to face.” Even a cessationist such as James Burton Coffman recognizes the
eschatological nature of the phrase “then face to face” when he comments, “then
face to face . . . in the Resurrection we shall behold the face of the
Beloved.”[70]
This eschatological interpretation of to teleion is strengthened by Paul’s statement, “but then (when that which is perfect has come and believers see “face to face”) I shall know just as I also am known” (1 Cor 13:12b). G. B. Winer notes that the inference, here, is to knowing all “perfectly even as perfectly as God knows us.”[71] David Garland concurs expounding:
“The perfect” refers to the state of affairs brought about by the parousia. Paul uses the verb ἐλθεῖν (elthein) in Gal 4:4 to refer to the coming of the fullness of time. Here, the battery of future tenses, the disappearance of the partial replaced by the complete, and the reference to knowing as God knows us, all point to the end time. He contrasts the present age with the age to come. The “perfect” is shorthand for the consummation of all things, the intended goal of creation; and its arrival will naturally displace the partial that we experience in the present age.[72]
Oropeza,
likewise, connects Paul’s language here with that of John, “Beloved, now we are
the children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we
know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He
is” (1 John 3:2) where seeing “face to face” and knowing “just as I also am
known” occur when believers see Jesus at the Parousia.[73] Thus, using the conservative theological method, the
epistolary, linguistic, and grammatical evidence strongly argues for an eschatological
interpretation of the phrase “when that which is perfect has come.” Hence, charismata
remain in the church until the final eschaton at the Parousia.
Integration of Historical
Interpretations
A survey of the historical
interpretations of 1 Corinthians 13:8–12 provides useful resources to
understanding the significant heritage of exegetical thought regarding the
cessation of charismata. Did theologians dispute over the proper
interpretation of “that which is perfect?” Or is there a consistent historic
theology in deciphering when “that which is perfect” shall come? Two
significant works investigate the historical interpretations of “that which is
perfect:” Gary Shogren, “How Did They Suppose ‘The Perfect Would Come? 1
Corinthians 13.8–12 in Patristic Exegesis” and Rodney Decker, “A History of
Interpretation of ‘That Which is Perfect.’”
From the available writings, the
ante-Nicene authors who reference 1 Corinthians 13:8–12 maintained a consistent
eschatological interpretation.[74]
The rare exception during this period occurs where Montanus, as the supposed
Paraclete, identified himself as “the perfect.” Eusebius quotes an
anti-Montanist statement refuting their view, “For the apostle thought it
necessary that the prophetic gift should continue in all the Church until the
final coming,” giving “that which is perfect” an eschatological fulfillment. The
Montanist, however, were not cessationists, per se, but claimed the exclusive
right to charismata.[75]
Archelaus, likewise, in dispute against Mani’s similar claims as the
Paraclete-Perfect maintained that Paul “declared to us that we are to look for
our Lord Jesus Christ as the perfect one,” once again applying a fulfillment in
the Parousia.[76]
The orthodox position of the post-Nicene
writers continued to interpret the “perfect” as a reference to the resurrection
and seeing Christ “face to face.”[77]
Even Chrysostom, who articulated a semi-cessationist view toward tongues and
prophecy (although he was not ignorant of claims of charismata during
his time), viewed knowledge as still partial, which would give way to complete
knowledge at Christ’s return when believers see “God’s open Face.”[78]
Decker concludes his study of patristic writers, “The consensus of the church
fathers is that Paul’s reference to τὸ τέλειον in 1 Corinthians 13:10 is an
eschatological one. None of them views it as a past event from their
perspective.”[79]
Shogren concurs that over the first five centuries of the church, with the
exception of gnostic sectarians, the exegetes of 1 Corinthians 13:8–12
understood the text to be a prediction of Christ’s return and that despite
their possession of the full canon, they would have to wait for the
resurrection to see God’s truth perfectly.[80]
Decker’s survey of Medieval writers
through the Reformation reveals that although certain writers maintained that charismata
ceased shortly after the apostolic age, they nonetheless consistently interpreted
1 Corinthians 13:10–12 with seeing Christ face to face whether in the hereafter
or the resurrection.[81]
This contradiction that charismata ceased in the apostolic age, yet
“that which is perfect” had not come and will not come until the Parousia reflects
an underlying inconsistency in cessationism. Robert Govett (1850) appears to be
the oldest writer found who records any knowledge of the canon view of the
“perfect,” although, he, himself rejected such view.[82]
Decker hypothesizes that the canon view may have resulted from the Plymouth
Brethren’s opposition to Irvingite charismata.[83]
From 1850 onward, the canon view became more publicized, for example with Andrew
Faussett’s commentary on 1 Corinthians in which he stated that the supernatural
gifts were superseded, as no longer required when the New Testament had been
collected together.[84]
Since the rise of the
twentieth-century Pentecostal movement, more writers and commentaries have
espoused the canon view of the “perfect,” although still the minority view.
Oropeza observes, “The cessationist interpretation of [1
Corinthians] 13:8, once a prominent strand in American Evangelicalism, found
its impetus as a reactionary movement against spiritism and religious ecstatic
excesses in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.”[85] Thus,
a survey of historical interpretations demonstrates that the majority of
biblical commentators have understood 1 Corinthians 13:10–12 to relate in some
way to the eschaton. In contrast, the canon view represents a relatively recent
invention developed out of controversy over contemporary charismata.[86]
As Garland notes, “The view that maintains that ‘the perfect’ refers to the
closure of the NT canon is driven more by an intent to limit the validity of
tongues to the apostolic age than by any credible historical analysis.”[87]
While the recency of an interpretation does not necessarily invalidate it, it
should caution the interpreter to be sure there is an adequate, valid
exegetical basis for it.[88]
Conclusion
Following the conservative
theological method, this study has supplied a grammatical-exegetical analysis
of the two prominently debated passages regarding the duration of charismata—1
Corinthians 13:8–12 and Ephesians 4:11–16—to prove the eschatological cessation
of miraculous spiritual gifts. In
addition, this report surveyed the historical interpretations of “that which is
perfect.” This investigation reveals that the majority of historical, biblical
commentators have interpreted the “perfect” as a reference to the Parousia,
while the canon view represents a recent development in response to charismatic
controversies.
As
the debate among continuationists and cessationists has continued for decades,
the landscape of evangelical, dispensational, and fundamentalist theology
continually changes, especially shifts in eschatological trends. As such, a
contemporary examination of charismata
is needed to meet new challenges and emphases in the theology and practices of
each view. Likewise, a contemporary discussion of this topic is important, not
only to satisfy a theological interest, but, more importantly, because it has
direct experiential and missiological ramifications.[89]
Students interested in further investigations are encouraged to research the
works of cessationists such as Bruce Compton, Kenneth Gentry, and Samuel
Waldron and continuationists such as Jack Deere, Wayne Grudem, and Sam Storms
as well as survey as many commentaries of 1 Corinthians as possible.
Bibliography
Anderson, Gordon L. “Pentecostal Hermeneutics, Part One.” iValue. https://ag.org/-/media/AGORG/Beliefs/Resources/PentecostalHermeneuticsPt1.pdf.
Arnold, Clinton E. Ephesians. ZECNT. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010. ePub.
Bernard, David K. Spiritual Gifts. Hazelwood, MO: Word Aflame Pub., 1997.
Blomberg, Craig. 1 Corinthians. NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994.
Brown, Colin, editor. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1975–1978.
Bruce, F. F. The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians. NICNT. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1984.
Chung, Sung Wook. “Bible Doctrines/Conservative Theology: Codifying God’s Word.” Pages 31–51 in Evangelical Theological Method: Five Views. Edited by Stanley E. Porter and Steven M. Studebaker. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2018.
Coffman, James Burton. Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Abilene, TX: ACU Press, 1984.
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.
———. “First Corinthians 13 and the Cessation of Miraculous Gifts: A Critique of Thomas Schreiner’s Spiritual Gifts: What They Are and Why They Matter,” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 25 (2020): 31–49.
Danker, Frederick W., Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Third Edition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2000
De Benedicto, Marcos. “The Role of the Holy Spirit in Enabling Believers for Ministry: an Adventist Perspective.” DMin diss., Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI, 2004.
Decker, Rodney J. “A History of Interpretation of ‘That Which is Perfect’ (1 Cor 13:10) With Special Attention to the Origin of the ‘Canon View.’” ThD paper, Central Baptist Theological Seminary, Shawnee, KS, 1994. http://ntresources.com/blog/wp-content/ uploads/2009/03/perfectpaper94.pdf.
Deere, Jack. Surprised by the Power of the Spirit: Discovering How God Speaks and Heals Today. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993.
Elbert, Paul. “Face to Face: Then or Now? An Exegesis of First Corinthians 13:8–13.” Pages 493–520 in Strangers to Fire: When Tradition Trumps Scripture. Edited by Robert W. Graves. Tulsa, OK: Harrison House-Empowered Life Academic, 2014.
Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. Third Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013.
Farnell, F. David. “When Will the Gift of Prophecy Cease?” Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (April 1993): 171–202.
Fee, Gordon F. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. NICNT. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987.
Gaffin, Richard B. Jr. “A Cessationist View.” Pages 25–64 in Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views. Edited by Wayne A. Grudem. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.
Garland, David E. 1 Corinthians. BECNT. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003.
Gentry, Kenneth L. Jr., The Charismatic Gift of Prophecy: A Reformed Response to Wayne Grudem. Fountain Inn, SC: Victorious Hope, 2011.
Govett, Robert. The Church of Old in Its Unity, Gifts, and Ministry: An Exposition of I Corinthians 12, 13, 14. Norwich, England: Josiah Fletcher, 1850. Reprinted; Miami Springs, FL: Conley & Schoettle Pub., 1985.
Harris, Arlie Wayne. “An Exegesis of Ephesians 4:1–16.” MA thesis, Harding Bible College, Memphis, TN, 1959.
Jackson, Wayne. “Ephesians 4:12 – The Unity of the Faith.” Christian Courier. https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1058-ephesians-4-13-the-unity-of-the-faith
Keener, Craig S. Gift &
Giver: The Holy Spirit for Today. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001.
———. Spirit Hermeneutics: Reading Scripture in Light of Pentecost. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2017.
McCartney, Dan G. James. BECNT. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009
Moore, Elmer and D. L. Welch. Religious Debate on Pentecostal Doctrine. Athens, AL: Truth Books, 1965.
Nel, Marius. “Attempting to Define Pentecostal Hermeneutics.” Scriptura 114 (2015): 1–21.
Oropeza, B. J. “When Will the Cessation of Speaking in Tongues and Revelatory Gifts Take Place?” Pneuma 40 (2018): 489–497.
Raily, James H., Jr. and Benny C. Aker, “Theological Foundation.” Pages 35–53 in Systematic Theology. Revised Edition. Edited by Stanley M. Horton. Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007. ePub.
Robertson, A. T. Word Pictures of the New Testament. 6 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1960.
Ruthven, Jon. On the Cessation of the Charismata: The Protestant Polemic on Postbiblical Miracles. Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supplement Series. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.
Schaff, Philip and Henry Wace, editors. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post–Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church. 1886-1889. 28 volumes in 2 series. Reprinted; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994.
Shogren, Gary Steven. “How Did They Suppose ‘The Perfect’ Would Come? 1 Corinthians 13.8–12 in Patristic Exegesis.” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 5 (1999): 99–121.
Slater, Thomas B. Ephesians. Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary. Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2012.
Snodgrass, Klyne. Ephesians. NIVAC. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.
Storms, C. Samuel. “A Third
Wave Response to Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.” Pages 72–85 in Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views. Edited by Wayne A.
Grudem. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.
———. Understanding Spiritual Gifts: A Comprehensive Guide. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2020. ePub.
Thayer, Joseph H. Greek–English Lexicon of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1993.
Thielman, Frank. Ephesians. BECNT. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010.
Thiselton, Anthony C. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. NIGTC. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000. ePub.
Treece, Marvin D. 1 Corinthians. The Literal Word. Shippensburg, PA: Treasure House, 1995.
Veeneman, Mary M. Introducing Theological Method: A Survey of Contemporary Theologians and Approaches. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017.
Waldron, Samuel E. To Be Continued? Are the Miraculous Gifts for Today? Merrick, NY: Calvary Press, 2005.
Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.
Winer, G. B. A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament. Edited by Joseph Thayer. Philadelphia: Smith, English & Co., 1869.
Workman, Gary. Has “That Which Is Perfect” Come? An Exposition of I Corinthians
13:8–13. Abilene, TX: Quality Pub., 1971.
[1]James H. Raily, Jr. and Benny C. Aker, “Theological Foundation,” Systematic Theology, Revised Edition, ed. Stanley M. Horton (Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007), 44, ePub.
[2]Craig S. Keener, Spirit Hermeneutics: Reading Scripture in Light of Pentecost (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2017), 5; italics in original.
[3]Raily and Aker, “Theological Foundation,” 35.
[4]Gordon L. Anderson, “Pentecostal Hermeneutics, Part One,” iValue, https://ag.org//media/AGORG /Beliefs/Resources/PentecostalHermeneuticsPt1.pdf
[5]Marius Nel, “Attempting to Define Pentecostal Hermeneutics,” Scriptura 114 (2015): 13–14.
[6]For this study, the term charismata refers specifically to the miraculous spiritual gifts (pneumatikos) mentioned in 1 Cor 12:8–10 and the miraculous signs (sēmeion) in Mark 16:17–18.
[7]Sung Wook Chung, “Bible Doctrines/Conservative Theology: Codifying God’s Word,” Evangelical Theological Method: Five Views, eds. Stanley E. Porter and Steven M. Studebaker (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2018), 31.
[8]Mary M. Veeneman, Introducing Theological Method: A Survey of Contemporary Theologians and Approaches (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017), 108.
[9]Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, Third Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013), 53–58
[10]F. David Farnell, “When Will the Gift of Prophecy Cease?” Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (April 1993): 185–86; 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): 63.
[11]Farnell, “When Will the Gift of Prophecy Cease?” 191.
[12]Ibid., 194.
[13]Klyne Snodgrass, Ephesians, NIVAC (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 202.
[14]Richard B. Gaffin, Jr. “A Cessationist View,” Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views, ed. Wayne A. Grudem (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 55.
[15]Samuel E. Waldron, To Be Continued? Are the Miraculous Gifts for Today? (Merrick, NY: Calvary Press, 2005), 39–43, 75–77.
[16]Ibid., 38.
[17]Ibid., 77–78.
[18]Jon Ruthven, On the Cessation of the Charismata: The Protestant Polemic on Postbiblical Miracles, Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supplement Series (Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 216.
[19]Elmer Moore and D. L. Welch, Religious Debate on Pentecostal Doctrine (Athens, AL: Truth Books, 1965), 228.
[20]Wayne Jackson, “Ephesians 4:12 – The Unity of the Faith,” Christian Courier, https://www.christian courier.com/articles/1058-ephesians-4-13-the-unity-of-the-faith
[21]Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Charismatic Gift of Prophecy: A Reformed Response to Wayne Grudem (Fountain Inn, SC: Victorious Hope, 2011), 58–59.
[22]C. Samuel Storms, “A Third Wave Response to Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.” Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views, ed., Wayne A. Grudem (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 78.
[23]Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit: Discovering How God Speaks and Heals Today (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993), 248.
[24]Craig S. Keener, Gift & Giver: The Holy Spirit for Today (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 128–30; cf. BDAG, 122.
[25]Waldron, To Be Continued, 62; Gentry, The Charismatic Gift of Prophecy, 58.
[26]Sam Storms, Understanding Spiritual Gifts: A Comprehensive Guide (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2020), 383, ePub.
[27]Cf. Acts 19:6; 21:9; 1 Cor 11:4–5, 14:31; 1 Tim 1:18; 4:14.
[28]Storms, “A Third Wave Response to Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.” 80.
[29]For further discussion of the purpose of charismata see Jason L. Weatherly “Seminar Paper 1: The Purpose of Miraculous Spiritual Gifts.”
[30]Frank Thielman, Ephesians, BECNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010), 280.
[31]Cf. Ps 133:1; Eph 4:3, 13.
[32]Arlie Wayne Harris, “An Exegesis of Ephesians 4:1–16” (MA thesis, Harding Bible College, 1959), 121.
[33]Thomas B. Slater, Ephesians, Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2012), 113.
[34]F. F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, NICNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1984), 350.
[35]Ibid., 352.
[36]Clinton E. Arnold, Ephesians, ZECNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 405, ePub.
[37]Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987), 643, 662; Bruce Compton, “First Corinthians 13 and the Cessation of Miraculous Gifts: A Critique of Thomas Schreiner’s Spiritual Gifts: What They Are and Why They Matter,” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 25 (2020): 36–37.
[38]Gary Workman, Has “That Which Is Perfect” Come? An Exposition of I Corinthians 13:8–13 (Abilene, TX: Quality Pub., 1971), 23.
[39]Ibid., 6.
[40]Gentry, Charismatic Gift of Prophecy, 58.
[41] Ibid., 54.
[42]Compton, “First Corinthians 13 and the Cessation of Miraculous Gifts,” 37.
[43]Ibid., 38.
[44]Ibid., 41.
[45]Gentry, Charismatic Gift of Prophecy, 54.
[47]Ibid., 16–17. Even if one accepts James’s epistle as written later, prior to the Acts 15 council, this still places the epistle, with mention of the “perfect law,” as written during the time charismata flourished cf. Acts 19:6.
[48]Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 645n23.
[49]B. J. Oropeza, “When Will the Cessation of Speaking in Tongues and Revelatory Gifts Take Place?” Pneuma 40 (2018): 490, emphasis in original.
[50]The terms logos (word of God) and nomos (law of Christ) are masculine, while graphē (scripture) is feminine. The neuter plural grammata (scriptures) occurs once, only in 2 Tim 3:15 as a reference to the Old Testament.
[51]David K. Bernard, Spiritual Gifts (Hazelwood, MO: Word Aflame Pub., 1997), 102.
[52]Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 554–55, 573, 581.
[53]Marvin D. Treece, 1 Corinthians, The Literal Word (Shippensburg, PA: Treasure House, 1995), 318.
[54]Cf. Matt 19:28; 21:40; 25:31; Mark 8:38; 1 Cor 15:24, 54.
[55]Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 643–44.
[56]A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1960), 4:179.
[57]BDAG, 998. Cf. BDAG, 995–99 for forms of telos.
[58]NIDNTT, 2:59.
[59]Cf. 1 Cor 1:8; 10:11; 15:24.
[60]Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 42–43.
[61]BDAG, 998.
[62]Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NIGTC (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), 137, ePub.
[63]Paul Elbert, “Face to Face: Then or Now? An Exegesis of First Corinthians 13:8–13,” Strangers to Fire: When Tradition Trumps Scripture, ed. Robert W. Graves (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House-Empowered Life Academic, 2014), 497.
[64]Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 753–54.
[65]Joseph H. Thayer, Greek–English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1993), 618.
[66]Compton, “First Corinthians 13 and the Cessation Of Miraculous Gifts,” 38.
[67]BDAG, 887.
[68]Cf. Gen 32:30; Acts 25:16; and 2 John 1:12.
[69]Cf. Exod 33:9–11; Num 14:14; Deut 5:9; 34:10 where God spoke to Moses in the physical manifestations of a cloud, fire, and glory.
[70]James Burton Coffman, Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (Abilene, TX: ACU Press, 1984), 219.
[71]G. B. Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, ed. Joseph Thayer (Philadelphia: Smith, English & Co., 1869), 263.
[72]David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians, BECNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 622–23.
[73]Oropeza, “When Will the Cessation of Speaking in Tongues and Revelatory Gifts Take Place?” 494.
[74]Gary Steven Shogren, “How Did They Suppose ‘The Perfect’ Would Come? 1 Corinthians 13.8–12 in Patristic Exegesis,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 5 (1999): 99–107; Rodney J. Decker, “A History of Interpretation of ‘That Which is Perfect’ (1 Cor 13:10) With Special Attention to the Origin of the ‘Canon View’” (ThD paper, Central Baptist Theological Seminary, 1994), 1–8, http://ntresources.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/ perfectpaper94.pdf
[75]Shogren, “How Did They Suppose ‘The Perfect’ Would Come?” 102–04.
[76]Decker, “A History of Interpretation,” 7–8.
[77]Shogren, “How Did They Suppose ‘The Perfect’ Would Come?” 110–18.
[78]Ibid., 120; NPNF1, 12:202.
[79] Decker, “A History of Interpretation,” 16.
[80]Shogren, “How Did They Suppose ‘The Perfect’ Would Come?” 108, 121.
[81] Decker, “A History of Interpretation,” 16–25.
[82]Robert Govett, The Church of Old in Its Unity, Gifts, and Ministry: An Exposition of I Corinthians 12, 13, 14 (Norwich, England: Josiah Fletcher, 1850; Repr.; Miami Springs, FL: Conley & Schoettle Pub., 1985), 54.
[83]Decker, “A History of Interpretation,” 25–26n86.
[84]Ibid., 28.
[85]Oropeza, “When Will the Cessation of Speaking in Tongues and Revelatory Gifts Take Place?” 490.
[86]Decker, “A History of Interpretation,” 66.
[87]Garland, 1 Corinthians, 622n14.
[88]Decker, “A History of Interpretation,” 66.
[89]Marcos De Benedicto, “The Role of the Holy Spirit in Enabling Believers for Ministry: an Adventist Perspective” (DMin diss., Andrews University, 2004), 316.
