Praying in the Spirit: That Glorious Day When Tongues are Not Needed: Until Then … Part 2

Obviously, the first response to this argument is that it is a textbook case of arguing from silence. If he is to be logically consistent, the cessationist who accepts this argument must also accept the idea that the Lord’s Supper is no longer for the Church, for it is regulated by Paul in 1 Corinthians and is mentioned nowhere in later epistles. The cessationist must also conclude that the silence of miraculous “sign” gifts in the early epistle of 2 Thessalonians proves that they had ceased by the time that Paul penned the epistle, around AD 51. But that is contradicted by later epistles, especially 1 Corinthians (Brumback, p. 76). Or if we were to judge the charismatic experience of the Ephesians by Paul’s letter to them, we would discover little or no evidence of tongues-speaking. If we turn to Luke, however, we see that speaking in tongues formed the genesis of their Christian experience (Acts 19:1-7). Such are the dangers of arguing from silence.

There is, of course, good reason why Paul and other New Testament writers did not mention tongues in the other epistles. They did not mention tongues for the same reason that they did not mention any other topic that was not mentioned! The absence of reference to something in no way proves it no longer existed. Simply put, anything that was not germane to the writer’s intention did not find its way into the letter. That there were no problems with tongues is just as logical a conclusion as the argument that there were no tongues.

Also, Paul wrote more to the Corinthian church than he did to the Galatian, Ephesian, Philippian, Colossian, and Thessalonian churches combined (Cantelon, p. 60). Usually, the more you write, the more you write about. His chances, therefore, of saying something about tongues to the Corinthians were much greater. Furthermore, since Paul’s letter to the Corinthians was circulated among the churches, it is possible that he would not have to address the issue of tongues repetitiously.

Concerning the absence of tongues from the later lists of spiritual gifts, it should be noted that no two lists (1 Corinthians 12:8-10, 28; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11) are identical or exhaustive, and “ordinary” gifts, as well as some “sign” gifts, do not occur in the later lists. The charismatic gift of prophecy, it is noted, does occur in every list.

As for Paul’s inability to heal a person whenever he desired, it cannot be established that Paul’s gift of healing operated unconditionally. Even Jesus did not heal those who did not believe (Matthew 13:58). Furthermore, lack of healing has more than one cause (Brumback, pp. 77-78). In addition to this, the miraculous “sign” gifts did not assure healing, as the deaths of Stephen, James, and other martyrs sadly prove.

The Absence of Tongues in Church History

The absence of tongues in the writings of those following the apostles is another argument that purports to prove that tongues ceased with the Apostolic Age. Cessationist George Dollar chides Pentecostals and charismatics for not referring “to the grand stream of church history from apostolic times until our present day for proof of God’s plan to perpetuate” a continuously charismatic Church (p. 316). He concludes that “the voice of church history … is against the modern tongues movement . . “ (p. 321). More recently, MacArthur asserts dogmatically, “History records that tongues did cease. … Clement of Rome [c. AD 96], Justin Martyr [165], Origen [254], Chrysostom [430]—some of the greatest theologians of the ancient church—considered tongues a remote practice, something that happened in the very early days of Christianity” (p.169).

Cessationist Hoekema, who also believes that tongues ceased with the Apostolic Age, addresses the Pentecostal-charismatic response that God has restored the gifts in these the latter days. He asks why these gifts, if they were essential, disappeared and why God would withhold the gifts for 1500 years (Baptism 65). “Did God deliberately impoverish his people?” (What, p.113).

The cessationist argument here, as in the previous argument, is based on silence: Tongues must have ceased since the post-apostolic writers do not mention them as currently in operation. The Pentecostal pioneers of the turn of the century seemed to have accepted the cessationist assumption that post-apostolic writers indeed do not mention tongues, for they claimed that the prophet Joel’s latter rain (Joel 2:23, 28; Acts 2: l6-2l, KJV) had fallen in the twentieth century. Current research, however, supports the view that the prophetic and so-called “sign” gifts did indeed operate in the post-apostolic period.

The cessationist argument here reminds me of the tactic deployed by American tobacco companies: no matter what the evidence indicates, deny, deny, deny that there is any link between cigarette smoking and health problems. Warfield denied it, Rogers denies it, Dollar denies it, MacArthur, Gromacki, Hoekema, and others deny that certain gifts of the Holy Spirit were to be in the Church until Christ comes. The saddest effect of this teaching is its incubation of doubt and disbelief. Not that we should be credulous, mind you, certain fantastic stories of the post-apostolic writers are indeed beyond belief.

Tags: day, glorious, needed, part, praying, spirit, tongues

Category: Spirit, Summer 2000