Conservative Evangelical Theological Method and Continuationism

 

Abstract

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.

[46]Dan G. McCartney, James, BECNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009), 123.

[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.