Enigmatic... in more ways than one!
So today I've read through Sinclair B Fergusans "The Holy Spirit". I'm just as confused as ever! It seems to me that the argument about the continuation or cessation of the miraculous gifts is such a hard one to debate is because the two sides of the argument are, essentially, arguing about the same passages of scripture. Take Ephesians 2:20...
19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. (NIV)
Cessationists argue that this verse (within the context of the surrounding chapter) is indicative of the fact that the foundation of he apostles (including the use of the miraculous gifts) has now been completed, and as such they cease to exist. Continuationists would argue that this foundation is actually an example, and thereby we should follow it, and as such still seek and use the miraculous gifts. You see what I mean? It's not that there's a whole heep of verses that the cessationists use to prove their point, or conversely the continuationists. THEY'RE ARGUEING ABOUT THE SAME VERSES! They just interpret them differently!
I'm no greek scholar so I'm finding at hard to understand and decide which of these (as well as several other similar tyoe disputes) is correct. Thoughts anyone?
Also I sat today with my dictionary by my side, Fergusan, as well as the bible it turns out, is somewhat enigmatic. Why do theologians feel the need to use such complecated language? I'm sure it's unnecessary and it takes me twice as long to trawl through books!
1 comment:
I think the dichotomy between Cessationism and Continuationism frames the debate in a way that's unhelpful. I don't think it's a binary dichotomy like that.
What's the difference between a miraculous and non-miraculous gift? How to you separate out the two?
I'm not sure that it's possible to rigidly distinguish between the two. If God gives me the ability to learn Chinese, then that is a gift from him whether he grants me the ability to do so instantly, or through the normal process of learning, and I'd argue that if I am using that ability to communicate the Gospel, then I am exercising it as the spiritual gift of tongues (i.e. languages) whether or not that ability was imparted "naturally" or "supernaturally".
Similarly, prophecy is a particular kind of preaching. So someone who has an ability for that particular kind of preaching has the gift of prophecy whether he is preaching from God's revelation in Scripture or from a special direct revelation from God.
The spiritual gifts include things like faith and administration. the gift of administration obviously departed from the church at the time of the apostles (joke!) but the gift of faith surely continues, and God giving us faith is probably the greatest miracle of all.
I think that the big question is "what are the gifts for?" They're given for the common good in accordance with the Spirit. Take tongues as an example. It seems to me it's not about getting some individual buzz, but communicating the Gospel across language barriers. In the UK, where most people speak and understand English, there will be relatively little need for that spiritual gift, but in other times and places where there's more diversity of languages, God is more likely to give people a special ability to communicate the Gospel across those barriers.
Similarly, since we have the entire Bible in our own language, there is relatively little need for God to reveal himself . In times and places where people don't have easy access to God's written word (such as in much of the early church, and today in parts of the world where the Gospel is newly being preached), he is more likely to speak to them in other ways.
I don't think that you can make blanket statements such as "such and such spiritual gift has ceased everywhere for all time". I think you can say that "such and such spiritual gift is rarely needed in this particular time and place", which is what I'd say about tongues and prophecy in the "supernatural" sense, though I don't like that natural/supernatural distinction.
Post a Comment