Response to John MacArthur Gift of Tongues

            I have debated cessationist on the issue of modern-day gifts of the Spirit, such as speaking in tongues, for over twenty years. In fact my very first public debate at the age of twenty-one was on the subject of miraculous spiritual gifts. In the past twenty-plus years I have debate several Biblical issues such as the baptismal formula, the Godhead, music in the church, Sabbath keeping, etc.; but the one issue I have debated more times than any is the subject of miraculous spiritual gifts in the church. In addition to debating the issue myself, I have helped moderate public debates on the issue of miraculous spiritual gifts. Lastly, I have studied other debates on the issue of miraculous spiritual gifts that date back as far as the 1934 McPherson-Bogard debate on miraculous spiritual gifts.

            One thing that ALL of these debates (which number into the hundreds) have in common is that no matter what denominational beliefs they held, ALL the cessationist taught that miraculous spiritual gifts ceased when the New Testament was completed in writing. They ALL taught that “that which is perfect” in 1 Corinthians 13:10 referred to the “perfected” or “completed” New Testament Canon. Apparently their futile effort to prove that “that which is perfect” refers to the completed New Testament has caused the cessationist to reevaluate their argumentation, and they have introduced a new type of cessationist argument. Some cessationist (partial-cessationist?) now teach that “that which is perfect” in 1 Corinthians 13:10 DOES in fact refer to the “perfect state of all things to be ushered in by the return of Christ from heaven” (Thayer), but they teach that speaking in tongues (and apparently other miraculous gifts of which they pick and choose) ceased at the end of the First Century – around the time of the death of the last apostle. John MacArthur is one of the top spokesmen advocating this view. This inconsistent view acknowledges that “prophecy” and “word of knowledge” will “fail” and “vanish away” when that which is perfect is come at the Second Coming, yet they teach that speaking with tongues and some of the other miraculous gifts ceased at the end of the First Century.

“Verses 9, 10 indicate that what will abolish knowledge and prophecy is ‘that which is perfect.’ When that occurs, those gifts will be rendered inoperative. The ‘perfect’ is not the completion of Scripture, since there is still operation of those two gifts and will be in the future kingdom (cf. Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17; Rev. 11:3). The Scriptures do not allow us to see ‘face to face’ or have perfect knowledge as God does (v. 12) … The perfect must be the eternal state, when we in glory see God face to face (Rev. 22:4) and have full knowledge in the eternal new heavens and new earth.” (MacArthur Study Bible 1 Cor. 13:8).

So in reality they teach only a partial cessation of spiritual gifts. Some spiritual gifts have ceased, while the remaining spiritual gifts are still active(?) in the church until the return of Christ from heaven. As proof of this so-called partial cessation of spiritual gifts, John MacArthur makes the following claim:

“Tongues, however, ‘will cease.’ The Greek verb used in 1 Corinthians 13:8 means ‘to cease permanently,’ and implies that when tongues cease, they will never start up again … It should be noted that 1 Corinthians 13:8 itself does not say when tongues were to cease. Although 1 Corinthians 13:9-10 teaches that prophecy and knowledge will cease when the ‘perfect’ (i.e., the eternal state) comes, the language of the passage – particularly the middle voice of the Greek verb translated ‘will cease’ – puts tongues in a category apart from these gifts. Paul writes that while prophecy and knowledge will be ‘done away’ (passive voice) by the ‘perfect,’ the gift of tongues ‘will cease’ in and of itself (middle voice) prior to the time that ‘the perfect’ arrives.” (Emphasis JLW)

 

            Notice that John MacArthur’s “proof” that the gift of tongues will cease “prior to the time that ‘the perfect’ arrives” is that fact that the word “cease” in 1 Corinthians 13:8 is in the middle voice. First of all it must be pointed out that the Voice of a verb in Greek has absolutely NOTHING to do with the time in which the verb takes place! “Voice” in Greek typically indicates “WHO” does the action of the verb. So the fact that “shall cease” is in the middle voice is NO indication that tongues will cease “prior to the time” that “the perfect” will come.

            Secondly, MacArthur is also mistaken when he says that middle voice indicates that tongues will cease “in and of itself.” In fact this is one of the “Grammatical Fallacies” covered by D. A. Carson in his book Exegetical Fallacies pp. 75-77. Carson explains that the middle voice in Greek “has a wide range of implications” (Carson, 76). The middle voice can mean the subject acts for itself or sometimes it can mean that the subject allows something to be done. For example in Acts 22:16 the words “baptize, wash away, and calling” are all in the middle voice. We certainly wouldn’t think that “baptize” in the middle voice meant that Saul “baptized himself.” Rather the middle voice indicates “allow yourself to be baptized” and is translated as a passive “get yourself baptized” (A. T. Robertson, Large Grammar, p. 808).

            Thirdly, Carson points out that “it (cease – middle voice) never unambiguously bears the meaning ‘to cease of itself’ (i.e., because of something intrinsic in the nature of the subject); and several passages rule out such overtones as the automatic semantic force of the middle voice form of this verb” (Carson, 77). Carson points out that cease (middle voice) is also used in Luke 8:24 where Jesus rebuked the wind and raging water and they “ceased” (middle voice). Clearly the wind and raging water did not cease “in and of themselves,” rather they ceased in obedience of the command of Jesus. In Acts 21:32 the rioters “ceased” (middle voice) from beating Paul, not “in and of themselves,” but because they saw the soldiers and centurions. In like manner tongues will “cease,” not in and of themselves, but like all the rest of the spiritual gifts – when that which is perfect is come (1 Corinthians 13:8). The change from passive to middle voice in regards to passing of the spiritual gifts may indicate the reason these gifts cease. Prophecy will “fail” (passive) because there will be nothing left to prophesy and everything that has been prophesied will have been fulfilled. Word of Knowledge will “vanish away” (passive) because we will no longer have a “word” of knowledge, rather we will “know even as we are known” (vs. 12). However with the gift of tongues there may not be any underlying “reason” why they are done away other than they simply “cease” (middle voice) when that which is perfect is come.

            Therefore there is nothing in the grammar of 1 Corinthians13:8 to indicate that tongues will cease “prior to the time” that “that which is perfect” is come. In fact 1 Corinthians 1:7 Paul stated, “So that ye come behind in no gift (charismata); waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:” Several translations (CENT, ISV, LEB, etc) render this, “So that you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly await the revelation (apokalupsis) of our Lord Jesus Christ.” God placed the spiritual gifts in the church (1 Corinthians 12:28) and they will remain in the church until the church is caught up at the Parousia of Jesus Christ. There is NO passage in the Bible that indicates any spiritual gifts would cease before the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ!

The so-called Evidence from History

            In his tract “The Gift of Tongues,” MacArthur afforded more space to the so-called historical evidence as he did to Scriptural evidence. MacArthur began his historical treatment:

“It is significant that tongues are mentioned only in the earliest books of the New Testament. Paul wrote at least twelve epistles after 1 Corinthians and never mentioned tongues again. Peter never mentioned tongues; James never mentioned tongues; John never mentioned tongues; neither did Jude. Tongues appeared only briefly in Acts and 1 Corinthians as the new message of the gospel was being spread. But once the church was established, tongues were gone. They stopped.”

Let me illustrate just how unintelligent this argument of silence really is. MacArthur is saying that because speaking in tongues is not specifically mentioned in certain epistles (such as Peter, James, John, & Jude) that this is an indication that “tongues were gone. They stopped.” Apparently John MacArthur thinks the New Testament books are laid out in chronological order. This is not the case. The epistle of James is recognized by Bible scholars to have been the very first New Testament epistle written. It is even believed that the very Jewish nature of the epistle of James indicates that it was written during a time (49 A.D.) when there were only Jewish believer – before the conversion of the Gentiles in Acts chapter 10. And because James does not specifically mention “speaking in tongues,” John MacArthur takes this to mean that “tongues were gone. They stopped.” So, according to John MacArthur “tongues were gone” BEFORE the household of Cornelius was baptized with the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues (Acts 10:44-48). Also “speaking in tongues” is not mentioned in 1 & 2 Thessalonians, however these were Paul’s FIRST epistles, written BEFORE 1 Corinthians. 1 & 2 Thessalonians (which do not mention “speaking in tongues”) were written during Paul’s 2^nd missionary journey BEFORE Paul’s encounter with the twelve disciples of John (Acts 19:1-6) during his 3^rd journey in which we read that these disciples “SPOKE WITH TONGUES and prophesied.” So, again the fact that “speaking in tongues” is not specifically mentioned in an epistle by no means implies that “tongues were gone” by that time. This is a ridiculous straw-man argument that is blown away with the slightest of ease.

Although “speaking in tongues” is not specifically mentioned in certain epistles, we do find references or allusions to the miraculous gifts of the Spirit: Romans 12:5f mentions “prophecy” and “proportion of faith” and parallels with 1 Corinthians 12:4f; Galatians 3:5 refers to “ministering the Spirit” and “working miracles among you;” Ephesians 5:18 “be filled with the Spirit” cf. Acts 2:4; 1 Thessalonians 5:19-20 “do not quench the Spirt, do not despise prophesying;” 1 Timothy 1:18 prophecies spoken over Timothy; Titus 3:5-6 refers to the renewing of the Holy Spirit which He poured out cf. Acts 2:17, 33; 10:45-46; James 5:14f mentions healing and the prayer of faith; and Jude 20 refers to “praying in the Holy Spirit” cf. 1 Cor. 14:14-15.

MacArthur continued his historical (more like hysterical) teaching on speaking in tongues mentioning Chrysostom (c. 400 A.D.) and Augustine (c. 420 A.D.) and that they taught that the miraculous gifts had ceased. MacArthur went on to say:

“In fact, during the first five hundred years of the church, the only people who claimed to have spoken in tongues were followers of Montanus, who was branded as a heretic.”

This statement is factually incorrect. John MacArthur is either very ignorant concerning church history, or he is very biased. It is interesting that MacArthur ignored several historical statements concerning the miraculous gifts of Spirit. Justin Martyr (c. 150 A.D.) [not a Montanist] claimed that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit were still in operation (Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew, ch. 82, 88). Irenaeus (c. 202 A.D.) [not a Montanist], Against Heresies, book 5, chapter 6 stated:

“In the like manner we do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of God…” (ANF 1:531, 1913).

Tertullian (c. 200 A.D.), who converted to the Montanist, recorded several occurrences of miraculous spiritual gifts being in operation, such as gifts of revelation, visions, ecstatic utterances (ANF 3:188, 1913). Cessationists praise Tertullian as they plunder him. Tertullian was the father of Trinitarian doctrine (he coined the term “trinitas”), yet they must also admit that he converted to the Montanist “heresy” which claimed to operate in spiritual gifts. Novatian (c. 240 A.D.) [not a Montanist] mentioned tongues, healings, and other gifts of charismata in the church (Treaties Concerning the Trinity, ch. 29). Eusebius (c. 300 A.D.) testified that the miraculous gifts WERE NOT limited to Montanist:

“As Eusebius informs us, the charismata were not extinct in the churches when the Phrygian imitations began to puzzle the faithful” (ANF 3:4, 1913).

MacArthur mentioned that miraculous gifts were not present in the (Roman Catholic) church of Chrysostom and Augustine (c. 400 – 420 A.D.). What he conveniently forgot to mention is that Augustine debated the Donatist on the issue of speaking in tongues! The Donatist where labeled a heresy by the Roman Catholic Church because they baptized in Jesus’ name and taught that speaking in tongues was the evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit (Schaff, Select Library NPNF, 4:442, 454, 548).

            MacArthur went on to say that “the next time any significant tongue-speaking movement arose in Christianity was in the late seventeenth century.” I’m not sure what constitutes “significant” for John MacArthur, but the simple fact is there has never been a time in the history of the New Testament Church from Pentecost to present that there hasn’t been a group of believers who claimed to be Spirit filled tongue-talkers! Both the Montanist and Donatist sects continued through the Middle Ages. There were Celtic Apostolic churches who spoke with tongues. There were tongue-talking churches in Europe in the Ninth Century (Martyr’s Mirror, p. 234). It is well known that both the Waldenses and Albigenses (12^th. Cent) practiced speaking in tongues. Various sects of the Anabaptist spoke with tongues. In an Anabaptist Confession of Faith (A.D. 1600) a pious Christian was one that “spoke with tongues” (Martyr’s Mirror, p. 400). The Reformers were well acquainted with Anabaptist tongue-talkers. The Dippers Dipt (A.D. 1645) depicts various Anabaptist sects, several of which were tongue-talkers.

 

Tongue-talking groups of believers continued throughout Europe and United Kingdom, such as the Plymouth Brethren (19^th Century). This led to the tongues revivals of the early 20^th Cent in the United States, particularly Azuza St., Los Angeles, CA and Topeka, KS.

MacArthur concluded his historical essay on tongue-speaking by saying:

“All of those supposed manifestations of tongues were identified with groups that were heretical, fanatical, or otherwise unorthodox.”

            John MacArthur is really hung on the horns of a dilemma in his appeal to history. Remember, the “orthodox” Roman Catholic Church of that time believed in literal transubstantiation (that the wafer literally became the flesh of Christ), celibate priesthood,  they prayed to dead saints, they bowed down to idols, paid money for penance, etc. And the “Reformers” were no better! Both Luther and Calvin were guilty of helping sentience to death Anabaptist preachers for rebaptizing adults by immersion! Luther was eventually referred to as the Protestant Pope. Any group who broke away from these false doctrines was hunted down as a “heretic.” So, John MacArthur can join hands with his idol-worshiping “orthodox” fore-fathers if he wishes,  but like Paul in his day, “after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers” (Acts 24:14). The testimony of history alone indicates that tongue-speaking has not ceased.