Upon This Foundation: Ephesians 2:20 and the Gift of Prophecy, by Jon M. Ruthven
Concluding Statement
The most unsettling premise of the ‘foundational’ argument is the notion employed of what ultimately is the ‘foundation’—the most important element or core value—of the church. Some cessationists appear to be insisting that the ‘foundation’ is the established doctrine of the NT documents. As one committed to the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture, I would never seek to minimize the central significance of the Bible for faith. Nevertheless, the Bible in general, and Ephesians in particular, does not identify itself as the foundational core of the church. Rather, the disclosure experience of Christ, although within its biblical framework, is truly the foundation of the church. St. Paul was concerned that Christians’ faith rested not on words, but on “a demonstration of the Spirit’s power” (1 Cor. 2.14). This strongly suggests that normatively, a system of propositions, however true they may be, is not the basis for faith; rather it is Christ himself, through the activity of the Spirit of Christ, with a strong overtone of revelation, that characterizes this foundation.
Endnotes
1 For the purposes of this paper, the term, “cessationist” designates one who asserts the demise of the so-called “sign-” or “miraculous” gifts of the Holy Spirit, usually connected with the death of the apostles or completion of the NT writings. For the various descriptions and times of this termination by cessationist writers see R. W. Graves, “Tongues Shall Cease: A Critical Study of the Supposed Cessation of the Charismata,” Paraclete 17/4 (Fall 1983): 20-28.By contrast, Pentecostal or charismatic Christians believe that all the so-called “miraculous” gifts of the Spirit have continued in the church. Many in this latter group, however, deny the continuing gift of apostleship.
2 E.g., by R. B. Gaffin, Jr., Perspectives on Pentecost: Studies in New Testament Teaching on the Gifts of the Holy Spirit (Phillipsburg, Pa: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishers, 1979): 93-116;R. L. Thomas, “Prophecy Rediscovered? A Review of The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today,” BibSac 149/593 (Jan-Mar 1992): 83-96; K. L. Gentry, The Charismatic Gift of Prophecy: A Reformed Response to Wayne Grudem (Memphis: Footstool, 1989); R. F. White, “Gaffin and Grudem on Eph 2:20: In Defense of Gaffin’s Cessationist Exegesis,” WJT 54 (1992): 303-20; and F.D. Farnell, “Is the Gift of Prophecy for Today?” BibSac 149/595 (July-September 1992), 277-303; 149/596 (October-December 1992), 387-410; 150/597 (January-March 1993), 62-88; 150/598, (April-June 1993), 171-202. This latter series derives from the author’s doctoral work, “The New Testament Prophetic Gift: Its Nature and Duration,” (Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1990). Richard D. Kelso, “An Evaluation of the Biblical Support Presented by Wayne Grudem regarding the Nature, Role and Exercise of Non-Apostolic Prophecy in the New Testament and Today” (M. A. Thesis, Columbia Biblical Seminary and Graduate School of Missions, 1999).R. Fowler White, “Reflections on Wayne Grudem’s ETS 1992 Presentation, ‘The New Testament Gift of Prophecy: A Response to My Friends.’” TREN, 1993.
3 This historicist interpretation of the Eph 2:20 “cornerstone” (akrogone) metaphor has only the most tenuous roots in church history. For example, of about 101 references discovered by the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae CD-ROM, version D, virtually all of the references to the “cornerstone” of Ephesians 2:20, which offer sufficient context to discern its location, show that the “cornerstone” appears as the “capstone,” “keystone,” or the most prominent and highest stone in the building—usually the “final” stone to be placed, completing the structure. One may find a possible exception in the Shepherd of Hermas ANF, II: 49 “‘And the stones, sir,’ I said, ‘which were taken out of the pit and fitted into the building: what are they?’ ‘The first,’ he said, ‘the ten, viz., that were placed as a foundation, are the first generation, and the twenty-five the second generation, of righteous men; and the thirty-five are the prophets of God and His ministers; and the forty are the apostles and teachers of the preaching of the Son of God.’” This hardly offers a coherent basis for the cessationist metaphor from Eph 2:20, since the last stones mentioned, apparently the fourth (!) generation represent apostles!
4 Gaffin appeals to a “canon-within-a-canon” argument. “The decisive, controlling significance of Ephesians 2:20 (in its context) needs to be appreciated….I Corinthians 14 … has a relatively narrow focus and is confined to the particular situation at Corinth. Ephesians, on the other hand, may well be a circular letter, originally intended by Paul for a wider audience than the congregation at Ephesus. More importantly, 2:20 is part of a section that surveys the church as a whole in a most sweeping and comprehensive fashion. Ephesians 2:20 stands back, views the whole building, and notes the place of prophecy in it (as part of the foundation); I Corinthians and the other passages on prophecy examine one of the parts from within. Ephesians 2:20, then, with its broad scope ought to have a pivotal and governing role in seeking to understand other NT statements on prophecy with a narrower, more particular and detailed focus…” Perspectives on Pentecost. p. 96. “Ephesians 2:20 figures prominently in this debate.” Charles E. Powell, Dallas Theological Seminary, at the 48th Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Jackson, MS, November 1996. http://www.bible.org/docs/theology/pneuma/giftques.htm
Category: Biblical Studies, Pneuma Review, Winter 2002
Followers
Fans
