The editor, Robert W. Graves is a Pentecostal scholar and president of The Foundation for Pentecostal Scholarship. This non-profit encourages Pentecostal/Charismatic authors, with awards for excellent new works. Mr. Graves has had a long-standing passion to defend Charismatic and Pentecostal claims of the present-day activity and gifts of the Holy Spirit.

The topic of the book, a rebuttal of cessationism, is both important and sad. It is sad because many good Christians still dispute the reality of the gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor 12–14) in the life of the contemporary church. This is over a hundred years after the Azusa Street revival and over sixty years after the Charismatic renewal burst among mainline churches. The suspicion and resistance to the operation of these gifts came under renewed attack in recent decades by the popular and influential ministry of the Rev. John MacArthur. His radio ministry and multiple books have lambasted gifts of the Spirit as bogus and their practice as heretical. This reviewer has had the honor of being the object of his critical comments with an entire chapter criticizing my work.[1] In fact Mr. Graves edited an earlier volume of essays dedicated to responding to MacArthur’s cessationist best-seller, Strange Fire.[2]

The Kingdom Case against Cessationism has a forward by Dr. Craig Keener, currently the most well-known and distinguished Charismatic New Testament scholar. The book is made up of 12 chapters by various authors, several of which are widely known and respected, such as Randy Clark and Michael Brown. But all are distinguished scholars in their fields.

The articles are uniformly excellent, and I found Randy Clark’s contribution, “The Inaugurated Kingdom of God–Now and Not Yet,” particularly useful. The same for Mr. Graves’s contribution, “Cessationism and the Struggle for the Promises and Commands of Jesus.”

The Kingdom Case against Cessationism contains three essays by Jon Ruthven, whose death has been a serious loss to Pentecostal scholarship (and to whom this book is dedicated). They were taken from his PhD masterpiece that also produced On the Cessation of the Charismata.[3]

The Kingdom Case against Cessationism has an index of persons as well as an index of biblical citations and ancient church sources. It is especially valuable to pastors and church leaders who have people in their congregations who still hold to the cessationist view. It is a handy source of biblical answers to the folly and “heresy” of cessationism. Mr. Graves is to be commended for his scholarly and useful work for the Charismatic/Pentecostal churches.

Reviewed by William De Arteaga

Notes

[1] John MacArthur, Reckless Faith (Crossway, 1994).

[2] (Nashville Thomas Nelson, 2013) See Strangers to Fire: When Tradition Trumps Scripture (Tulsa: Empowered Life Academic-Harrison House, 2014). [Editor’s note: See the Strange Fire roundup at PneumaReview.com: “Are Pentecostals offering Strange Fire?” See also the PneumaReview.com interview with Strangers To Fire editor Robert Graves and reviews by Tony Richie, John Lathrop, and further reflections by Jon Ruthven.]

[3] Jon Ruthven, On the Cessation of the Charismata (Tulsa: Word and Spirit, 2010). [Editor’s note: See Amos Yong’s review of Jon Ruthven: On the Cessation of the Charismata.]

As usual, the writing of Matthew Schmitz, senior editor of First Things, is clear and cogent—and courageous. He fearlessly tackles daunting topics such as, in this case, immigration. It is a genuine pleasure to follow his almost seamless integration of personal testimony, social environment, rational investigation, and theological articulation. I particularly appreciate Schmitz’s compatible juxtaposition of Protestant ethical and social theologian Reinhold Niebuhr’s realism and Catholic natural theologian Thomas Aquinas’s political theory. Well done!

I will confess up front that I am in a position of a high level of agreement with what I take to be Schmitz’s primary assertions. Liberal idealism is an impractical and unworkable assumption about the world in which we live. It arises out of an over-realized eschatology rooted in an inaccurate assumption that utopia has already been achieved if people will just act like it. Further, liberal Christianity’s idealism has an anemic hamartiology. It simply does not realize the depth and extent of human sinfulness.

I am in something of a shock over the intensity of Schmitz’s insistence that outright contempt is behind liberal attitudes toward American citizens in general. Indeed, religious elitists do often ascribe ignorance and inferiority to their opponents (John 7:49). But I wondered if Schmitz overstated his case here. I fear not. I know liberal Christians of whom contempt for others would not be an accurate description. Yet I must admit in my own dealings with liberal Christianity I have often encountered an arrogance and animosity toward conservative Christians that is nothing short of contemptuous.

Nevertheless, although my journey and that of Matthew Schmitz have much in common, they have different starting points—and that affects their direction. Schmitz initially assumed the need for open borders and viewed with contempt those who thought otherwise. His life experiences and development eventually changed his direction toward a more closed border mindset. I had the opposite experience. I initially assumed the dire need for strictly enforced closed borders. My familial background is Pentecostal Christian. Pentecostals are very conservative, both religiously and politically. Furthermore, my first jobs included construction work, working in a truck stop, and factory labor. Immigrants were frequent rivals for scarce resources. My brother-in-law lost his job as a sheetrock hanger because he could not compete with the low wages undocumented immigrants were constrained to endure. Secure borders were a matter of economic survival for us … even before 9/11 and another whole set of security concerns.

The Case for Miracles marks the latest installment in Lee Strobel’s series of “The Case for…” books. Strobel, a former atheist and award winning legal editor of the Chicago Tribune, is probably best known for his 1998 book, The Case for Christ, and with over twenty books under his belt, he has established himself as a well-respected voice in the world of Christian apologetics.

What makes Strobel’s “cases” so compelling is the fact that, as a journalist with a legal background and the former perspective of an atheist, he tries to employ an objective approach to all his work by taking on the role almost akin to that of a private investigator.

As has come to be expected by those familiar with Strobel’s work, The Case for Miracles takes the form of a series of interviews that function as the various chapters of the book. He takes the bold step of first interviewing Dr. Michael Shermer, founder of The Skeptics Society and editor-in-chief of the magazine, Skeptic. Interestingly, Shermer comes from an antipodal position of being a former Christian turned agnostic. Shermer’s skepticism was cemented with unanswered prayer regarding his college sweetheart who was paralyzed in a car accident. As is often the case with so many who have tuned their back on God, it begins with the perceived radio silence of a God they used to think existed.

Lee Strobel

Shermer makes what appears to be some cogent arguments against the existence of miracles. He cites anecdotal evidence as questionable and inconclusive and goes on to reference The Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP). Through the Harvard Medical School, STEP was a ten-year, $2.4 million clinical trial of the effects of prayer involving 1,802 cardiac bypass patients at six hospitals (p. 51).  The results showed that “there was no difference in the rate of complications for patients who were prayed for and those who were not.” (p. 51). Translate that as ‘prayer changes nothing’, or in Shermer’s words, “That’s not good for your side, Lee.” (p. 52). Shermer goes on to acknowledge the work of Scottish philosopher, David Hume, as influential on his view towards miracles or anything supernatural, saying, “Oh yeah. I think his treatise against miracles is pretty much a knockdown argument. Everything else is a footnote.” (p. 54).

While the first three chapters are dedicated to expounding Michael Shermer’s criterion for miracles being unlikely to impossible, the rest of the book focuses on the evidence that favors miracles. Strobel begins with interviewing Dr. Craig Keener.

At the Craig S. Keener author page at PneumaReview.com you will find numerous articles, reviews, lectures, and videos about biblical studies, including excerpts from Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts.

Craig Keener, a prolific New Testament scholar and author, has among many works, penned a two-volume epic study of miracles. He is quick to refute Hume’s “knockdown” argument against the validity of miracles. “Hume defines miracle as a violation of natural law, and he defines natural law as being principles that cannot be violated. So, he’s ruling out the possibility of miracles at the outset. He’s assuming that which he’s already stated he will prove—which is circular reasoning. In fact, it’s an anti-supernatural bias, not a cogent philosophical argument.”  Keener goes on to cite a number of modern-day miracles that he has investigated. One of the most impressive and moving miracles documents the case of a woman who, due to multiple sclerosis, had deteriorated to the point of death and was in hospice care confined to a bed and unable to care for herself. After a radio station of Moody Bible Institute put out a prayer request for the woman and some 450 Christians shared they were praying for the woman, she heard a voice from behind her say, “My child get up and walk” (p. 103). What resulted was a full and complete recovery that, thirty years later, still confounds the medical community. There are years of medical records to substantiate the illness and recovery, and the attestation of board certified surgeons with thousands of operations under their belts.

Paul Pomerville has produced an uncompromising argument against Christian Zionism. Drawing upon his extensive experience in police work, he detects a gap in the collection of evidence in the literature on Christian Zionism. He claims that no evangelical works have heretofore made a case against Christian Zionism based on New Testament evidence (xviii). Employing a creative methodology of simulating a criminal trial, Pomerville interrogates key witnesses in the New Testament and appeals to the reader as jury to find Christian Zionism guilty of the charge of perverting the gospel.

Dr. Pomerville holds a Ph.D. in Intercultural Studies from Fuller Theological Seminary. He served for two years as Graduate Professor and Department Chairman of Christian Missions and Cross-Cultural Communications at the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary. He is the author of The Third Force in Missions (1985), a groundbreaking work on Pentecostal missiology.

The aim of The Christian Case Against Christian Zionism is to establish guilt by association, correlating Christian Zionism with the Judaizers of the New Testament (48). The scope of the book modulates between the Judaizers of the first-century church and contemporary Christian Zionists of a dispensational bent who believe that the plan of God holds a future for national Israel. Pomerville identifies his target audience as theologians, pastors, Christians in general, and Christian Zionists in particular. As to its place in the world of literature, although claiming to represent a fresh approach, this book is another of the many works devoted to the repudiation of Christian Zionism. Pomerville upholds the thesis that the brand of Christian Zionism which is dispensational in its hermeneutical orientation and pro-Israel in its political stance constitutes a distortion of the New Testament gospel of the kingdom.

One of the strongest points of Pomerville’s argument is his critique of dispensationalists for an undue focus on the futurity of the kingdom, which marginalizes the present reality of the kingdom and detracts from the gifts of the Spirit as central to the gospel of the kingdom inaugurated by Jesus. He also indicts dispensationalists for distinguishing two tracks in the divine plan of redemption, Israel and the Church. Pomerville castigates the most extreme form of Christian Zionism as “pseudo-Christian Zionism” because of its “retro-theology” of expecting the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem and restoration of a Jewish kingdom in the land of Palestine during the end times. Pomerville raises important questions about the identity of the people of God and the place of Israel in salvation history. He favors a “fulfillment theology,” according to which Jesus Christ fulfills Old Testament prophecy and creates a new spiritual people of God composed of both Jews and Gentiles. He writes, “Those born of the Spirit, Jew and Gentile, are the people of God” (160). “Membership in the people of God is not determined by Jewish ancestry, but by faith in Jesus, spiritual rebirth, and by the transforming power of God” (161). In regards to the place of Israel in salvation history, Pomerville argues that it is inappropriate to apply Old Testament prophecies to the modern State of Israel (173). The Christ event marked the end of the temple order of worship, Israel’s ancestral privilege, and territorial rights. “Gospel values won out over national values” (178) when Jesus unleashed a new spirituality based on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and an inner spiritual kingdom which made obsolete the old spirituality of the nation and land. Hence, the author avers that holding on to a vision of an exclusive Jewish kingdom is at odds with the plan of God for universal salvation, which is to say that Israel has retained no privileged place in God’s plan of redemption.

Perhaps the most significant of Pomerville’s contentions is that the Judaizing conflict in the first-century church exercised a formative influence on the view of Israel and the Church adumbrated in Luke-Acts, Paul’s letters, Hebrews, and the Gospel of John. This conflict was addressed at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), yet not decisively resolved, as the church continued to struggle with the unification of Jewish and Gentile believers. Pomerville adeptly detects indications of this struggle between the lines of the writings of the New Testament books mentioned above. Concomitantly, he faults Christian Zionists for committing an offense analogous to the Judaizers by giving Israel a place in God’s plan of salvation separate from the Church. This is a charge worth pondering.

A subsidiary bone of contention intermittently raised by Pomerville has to do with the missiological implications of Christian Zionism. Pomerville argues that uncritical support for Israel among evangelicals has fomented “hatred” in the Muslim world, giving the impression that Christians are impervious to the injustices committed by the State of Israel, precluding acceptance of the gospel by Muslims. The barriers to evangelizing Muslims in the Middle East are complicated by Christian Zionism. My research found that the Pentecostal missionaries in Palestine who succeeded in planting sustainable churches in the West Bank had to distance themselves from Christian Zionism. They did so by contextualizing the Christian message, empathizing with the Palestinian reality, and speaking against the injustices committed against the Palestinian Arab population (Newberg 2012).

How should we lead the church?
In this Pneuma Review conversation, Dr. Woodrow Walton reveals the humility and anonymity of true servant leadership.

 
Picture if you would a regatta where there are several vessels slicing across a river. Where is the leader of any one of those streamlined vessels? Is it the rower up front? Or, is it the man in the middle? Maybe, it is the man between the man in the middle and the man in front? You simply cannot tell yet it is progressing toward its destination: winning the race. There is no way to observe where the leadership is. There is anonymity.

Another illustration of anonymous leadership is that of moving a herd of cattle along the old cattle trails of the plains. There is a modern modification but more often chutes and trucks are used. A point man, swing men, and one or two behind the cattle are all important. The point man ahead of the cattle, all he does is give some guise of direction but there is a problem. Each cow, bull, heifer, steer, and calf would go off in every direction and not follow. This is where the right swing men and the left swing men are important. They are on either side of the herd and the herd, supposedly, moves together. You will also have stragglers made up of older head and young calves and this is where the men in the back work. Who is the leader? Actually, all are, as each have a designated function. There is an anonymous leadership.

In both cases there is leadership but there is no apparent leadership. You know there is leadership of some kind because there is obvious progression toward a desired goal. There is anonymous leadership as you cannot single out any particular person as leader. Who would think of the back rower in a canoe to be the person who steers it.

There is a principle here that is not often recognized. Leaders cannot be singled out from the community, or to use the words of Stanley Hauerwas, “Leadership cannot be abstracted from communities that make leadership possible.”¹

We may justly observe that Moses led the Israelites out of bondage; however, the writer of the letter to the Hebrews made a very interesting comment about Moses. “Now Moses was faithful in all God’s house as a servant …” (Heb. 3:5, ESV). The preposition “in” makes a critical point. Moses was not separated, or taken, out from among the people or community of Israel. The phrase “as a servant” is also critical. Moses is not over the people as in a superior position. God is over the people. The leader is the cloud or the fire by night. Those within the camp who criticized Moses for leading them into the wilderness were not upset with his leadership; they were upset because they wanted to be in the driver’s seat. As a consequence the earth opened on them.

Francis J. Beckwith, William Lane Craig, and J. P. Moreland, eds., To Everyone an Answer: A Case for the Christian Worldview (Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 396 pages, ISBN 9780830827350.

These essays are presented in honor of Norman L. Geisler, a popular Evangelical theological apologist who has significantly influenced the editors and contributors of this volume. As the title, drawing from 1 Peter 3:15, indicates and as Josh McDowell (Foreword) and Beckwith (Introduction) further explain, To Everyone an Answer is a book about and of apologetics. Christian apologetics of course attempts to provide thoughtful people with a rationally defensible basis for faith. This book will well serve that purpose. In particular, this volume, though affirming the biblical basis of the Christian perspective on reality, appeals primarily to general revelation in an attempt to provide rational arguments understandable to those who do not (yet) share Christian faith.

To Everyone an Answer is organized in five parts with contributions from scholars in their respective areas of expertise. Foundational to the project, “Part 1: Faith, Reason, and the Necessity of Apologetics” is essentially an apology for apologetics. In other words, it defines apologetics and defends the rationale for doing apologetics. Here, for instance, Thomas A. Howe and Richard G. Howe carefully and skillfully detail the definitions and relations of faith and reason. “Part 2: God’s Existence” gets right at “new and improved versions” of classical arguments for theism. For example, Paul Copan presents a moral argument somewhat in the tradition of C. S. Lewis to trace the origin and existence of objective morality to a moral Creator and God. “Part 3: Christ and Miracles” demonstrates the rationality of belief in biblical miracles, including and especially Christ’s resurrection. An example is Ben Witherington III revisiting Christology in light of academia’s quest for the historical Jesus. “Part 4: Philosophical and Cultural Challenges” addresses issues like evolution, theodicy, and postmodernism. In one selection, Ronald Nash gives a clear, cogent Christian presentation of the problem of evil that ends by reminding that no one, including no philosophy or no religion, has explained evil in a universally satisfactory manner but that Christian theism is most credible. “Part 5: Religious Challenges to Christian Faith” looks at the reality of religious pluralism of world religions from a staunchly Christian perspective. In this section Ravi Zacharias writes a stimulating and challenging chapter on Indian culture and philosophy in the context of the gospel.

As is so often the case with such projects, To Everyone an Answer is excellent in many ways but often uneven as well. For example, most Bible-believers will probably take delight in the defense of the miracles of Christ but many Charismatic Christians will be disappointed that the present reality or continuing validity of belief in miracles appears generally dismissed or avoided. Understandably, in convincing non-Christians, the place to start is with establishing the credibility of biblical miracles. However, that does not mean contemporary relevance is dismissible. Quite the contrary, once establishing biblical miracles, adequately explaining why a miracle working God would suddenly cease working miracles could be a rational obstacle. Furthermore, hope that God can and will directly intervene in life today can be a strong inducement to trusting faith. Moreover, on the one hand, Moreland gives a striking defense of “the immaterial nature of consciousness and the soul” that suggests a body-soul “dualism” of human nature based on the teachings of Jesus. His is an excellent argument against mere “physicality” or pure “materialism.” Yet on the other hand, Douglas Groothius effectively attacks “secular postmodernism” but then mistakenly assumes he has successfully defeated Christian postmodern spirituality thereby. In fact, he did not even address Christian postmodernism or even any generic postmodern spirituality. In his defense, this oversight seems to be a supposition of the entire book as taken from introductory and concluding remarks (as well as scattered references throughout) on the subject. Yet it disappoints still.

Paul Rhodes Eddy (Ph.D. Marquette University) is professor of biblical and theological studies at Bethel University, and Gregory A. Boyd (Ph.D. Princeton Theological Seminary) is the senior pastor at Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, Minnesota. These two scholars have set forth to analyze the plausibility of conceptualizing the story of Jesus of Nazareth as mere legend.

Debates about the historical reliability of the gospels are not new. However, Eddy and Boyd here look at the issue from a new perspective. In fact, they take a particular approach of investigating whether the synoptic gospels can be judged as actual history on the one hand, or fictional legend on the other. In so doing, they analyze eight commonly held contentions of those who hold to a form of the legendary Jesus hypothesis. I will elucidate these eight contentions momentarily, but first it would be helpful to elaborate on the legendary Jesus hypothesis. There are three general groups of scholars that maintain, in some form, the idea that the Jesus of faith was some sort of legend. For example, some scholars (e.g. Bauer, Drews, and Wells) maintain that the Jesus (or Christ) of faith is entirely fictional, and that there is no historical basis of belief in him, either as a person or the son of God. A second group of scholars, typified by Bultmann, hold that while a historical person named Jesus in fact lived, the reports of him are saturated with legend and myth, insomuch as we have very little accurate historical information regarding him. Third, there are numerous scholars (Funk and Crossan, e.g.) who argue that while the present form of the gospels may contain myth and/or legend, there is a historical ‘core’ of truth to them.

These various groups of scholars contend that the naturalism of the present era excludes the plausibility—and even the possibility—of the supernatural occurrences reported in the gospels. Moreover, they posit that the Hellenistic Judaism of the era in which the Jesus-legend arose was conducive to the type of fabricated myths that one finds in the gospels. Third, they note that the parallels of Jesus-like (i.e. miracle workers, etc.) people in the surrounding areas in the same time frame, undercuts the validity of the reports of Jesus of Nazareth. They also contend that the relative silence in non-biblical literature and the relative silence in the epistles of Paul of the historical (not the risen Jesus, i.e.) Jesus, make the case for the gospels’ historical reliability tall indeed. Sixth, they point out that the oral nature of the first transmission of the gospels was inherently free-form and unstable, thus possibly allowing error and myth to creep in to them. Moreover, they question whether the writers of the gospels themselves intentioned their writings to be viewed as historical. And finally, these Jesus-legend advocates generally hold that those who view the gospels as historically accurate hold the burden of proof to prove it.

In the preceding article, we left our friend, George, the novice charismatic whose excited testimony ran into a wall of biblical-sounding arguments from his pastor, a cessationist.¹ This article offered a kind of pocket guide of “pro” charismatic arguments which George (or you, gentle reader) can photocopy and send to your cessationist friends for comment. We now offer George some responses to a couple of prominent arguments he is likely to hear from his cessationist pastor and others like him.

The most thorough catalog of cessationist arguments—and answers—appears in these pages in Wayne Grudem’s four-part article, a reprint of chapter 2 in an excellent book by Gary Greig and Kevin Springer, editors of The Kingdom and the Power: Are Healing and the Spiritual Gifts Used by Jesus and the Apostles and the Early Church Meant for the Church Today? published by Regal Books in 1993.

This present article seeks to supplement that chapter with answers to two prominent objections to continuing spiritual gifts:  1) “History shows that miraculous spiritual gifts have ceased,” or, in a variation of that objection: “If miracles and spiritual gifts have continued, then why don’t we see them as widespread and obvious today as in New Testament times?”  2) “Ephesians 2:20 shows that the ‘foundational gifts’ of apostle and prophet have ceased.” In my experience, these are two of the most common cessationist arguments in use today which are worth examining.

1.    “History shows that miraculous spiritual gifts have ceased.”

Following Benjamin Warfield’s classic cessationist work, Counterfeit Miracles published in 1918, many today appeal to history to show the cessation of miraculous gifts. Warfield insisted that his book stood on “two legs”: biblical and historical proofs. But his “legs” were grossly disproportional: probably 97% of his book stood on the historical leg, while his biblical arguments were haphazardly scattered through his pages, responding only to the biblical arguments of his opponents.

Older Pentecostals and charismatics find this odd, since our critics have often said that we base our “theology” on “experience” rather than on the word of God. Yet an appeal to “history” is actually an appeal to “experiences”—at least to those in the past. These days, the shoe is very much on the other foot: cessationists increasingly appeal to “experience” (history) while charismatics, like Jack Deere, Gordon Fee, Wayne Grudem, Gary Greig, Max Turner and John Wimber are building increasingly sophisticated biblical arguments.²