In this article, I refute the unbiblical teaching of cessationism. I focus on the beliefs of cessationists, and specifically the scriptures they use to justify their beliefs. And I show exactly how they misinterpret scripture and contradict themselves.
Main Points
-
- Miracles did not fade away toward the end of the apostles’ lives.
- The gift of tongues was NOT to help the apostles preach the gospel in foreign languages, LOL.
- Tongues are a sign to unbelievers (not the nation of Israel).
- 1 Cor 13:8 teaches that tongues will cease at the end of the age.
DOWNLOAD FREE CHAPTERS FROM OUR NEW BOOKS
What is cessationism?
Cessationism is the belief that certain gifts of the Holy Spirit – tongues, interpretation of tongues, prophecy, healing and miracles – were only for the apostolic age (early church) and are not for the church today, i.e. these gifts have passed away. On the other hand continuationism believes that God never intended the gifts to pass away. Charismatics and Pentecostals are continuationists.
I am NOT a cessationist. Having said that, I do not subscribe to many of the practices that occur in charismatic churches. However, this article is not about PRACTICES but about DOCTRINE. In this article, I explain why cessationism is unscriptural, and I offer a point by point refutation of their interpretations of scripture.
Cessationist belief #1: History shows that miracles and gifts ceased
Cessationists observe that in Biblical history, miracles were concentrated into 3 periods each roughly 60-70 years long.
- Moses
- Elijah / Elisha
- Jesus / the apostles
Then there is the historical observation that the miracles and healings which were rampant in the early church, had eventually stopped taking place after the 1st century.
Cessationists further claim that even in the early church, healings and miracles started to wane during the end of the apostles’ lives. 1 Corinthians is the only epistle that speaks of spiritual gifts, 1 Corinthians being one of the early writings. The fact that later epistles don’t mention spiritual gifts implies that gifts had already ceased by then.
They also allude to the fact that Paul was sometimes unable to perform miracles e.g. he was unable to heal Timothy (1 Timothy 5:23), Epaphroditus (Philippians 2:25-27), and himself (2 Corinthians 12:9). They interpret this to mean the gifts were passing away even while Paul was still alive.
The Truth
Yes it is true that miracles were concentrated around the time of Moses, Elijah/Elisha and the early church, but that does not really prove anything. That is nothing more than an interesting observation. Miracles also took place during the time of Joshua, the judges and other prophets (e.g. Isaiah).
Also, that the gifts decreased in intensity after the 1st century again does not prove or mean anything. Even the doctrine of grace became dormant during the Dark Ages. That certainly does not mean grace had passed away. Historical observations don’t necessarily correlate with God’s desires or intentions.
Did miracles really fade away toward the end of the apostles’ lives?
Not according to Acts 28. In case you don’t know, Acts only has 28 chapters, yet we see in the last chapter of Acts, Paul was still doing mass miracles.
Acts 28:8 And it happened that the father of Publius lay sick of a fever and dysentery. Paul went in to him and prayed, and he laid his hands on him and healed him. 9 So when this was done, the rest of those on the island who had diseases also came and were healed.
Why is 1 Corinthians the only epistle that talks about healing and miracles?
Epistles were written for very specific purposes. Clearly 1 Corinthians is the only one that had a reason to address spiritual gifts. Galatians, James and both Thessalonians were written before 1 Corinthians, and they mention nothing about spiritual gifts.
Now here is where cessationists contradict themselves. They are trying to claim that the gift of healing was active when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians (57AD), but passed away sometime afterward. As evidence, they claim that Paul was unable to heal himself from the “thorn in his flesh”, which Paul wrote about in 2 Corinthians 12. 2 Corinthians was also written in 57AD or maybe 58 AD. So the cessationist is saying that the gifts of healing were active in 57AD but passed away in 58 AD.
What they don’t realize is that when Paul wrote about his thorn, he was referring to something that had happened 14 years earlier (2 Corinthians 12:2), which would have been around 43-44AD. So according to the cessationist, the gifts were active in 57AD, but passed away shortly afterward in 44AD. Really cessationist? Make up your mind what you believe, or at least study the Bible better than that.
So why couldn’t Paul heal on some occasions?
Very simple. The gifts of 1 Corinthians 12 were called manifestations that were given as God wills. When God chose to heal, He often manifested the gift of healing through one of His people. If God decided not to heal, there was nothing anyone could have done. This is an issue of God’s sovereignty, not cessationism.
Cessationist belief #2: the purpose of miracles was to authenticate God’s messengers
Cessationists believe that miracles were primarily given by God not to meet people’s needs, but to authenticate His messengers, so people would know that He sent them. As such, the purpose of miracles in the early church was to validate the apostles during the early stages of the church. They note that miracles occurred during Peter’s era (apostle to the Jews) and then again in Paul’s era (apostle to the Gentiles). There was no need for miracles after the apostles passed away because the gospel message had already been established. There was no need for further validation.
The Truth
The cessationist is right in that ONE of the purposes of miracles was a sign to authenticate God’s messengers. God did use signs to convince Pharoah, Ahab and others. Even Jesus was validated by the miracles that He did:
Acts 2:22 … Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst
But the cessationist is wrong in believing that was the only (or even primary) purpose of miracles. When Israel was trapped at the Red Sea with the marauding Egyptian army closing in on them, surely God’s primary purpose in parting the sea was not to convince anyone that Moses was His servant. It was to help Israel escape. Similarly, Jesus did not do miracles to show off a sign. In fact, He was reluctant to give signs.
Matthew 12:39 But He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. (See also Matthew 16:4; Luke 11:29).
Primary purpose of miracles
His primary purpose for doing miracles was because He was moved with compassion. The sign aspect of the miracle was nothing more than a secondary consequence. See Matthew 14:14; Matthew 15:32; Matthew 20:34; Mark 1:41; Luke 7:13-15.
Miracles are 3 things: signs, wonders and gifts. A sign points to something (in this case that the messenger is from God). A wonder describes the reaction of people to the miracle. And gifts are given for a specific purpose – to profit all.
1 Corinthians 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all:
Miracles and healings were primarily gifts to help people. Signs and wonders were secondary aspects of miracles.
Cessationist belief #3: The gift of tongues was for the apostles to preach the gospel in foreign languages
Jesus sent his apostles into the world to preach the gospel to people from every tribe and nation. Naturally these people would speak different languages, many of which would be unknown to the apostles. It would take the apostles an eternity to learn all these languages. So God gave the gift of tongues, which allowed the apostles to travel the world and preach the gospel by simply speaking in tongues. The natives would hear the gospel being preached in their own language, and believe. This is what cessationists believe happened in the early church.
If you are a charismatic, you are probably rolling on the floor with laughter. If you are from a cessationist church, you probably don’t even know that this is what your leaders believe. It is so far-fetched, it is not even funny. Stop laughing!
The Truth
There is one scripture that the cessationist can use to support this idea.
Acts 2
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
5 And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. 6 And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language. 7 Then they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, “Look, are not all these who speak Galileans? 8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born? 11 … we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.”
It clearly says that the 120 disciples spoke in tongues, and it turned out, unbeknownst to them, that they were speaking in languages that foreigners could understand. What were they saying? They were speaking the wonderful works of God (vs 11). So far so good.
This was a onetime event
For one, there was no other instance in the book of Acts where people understood what people were saying when they spoke in tongues. (See Acts 10:46; Acts 19:6). Neither is there any teaching to that effect in the epistles. 1 Corinthians 14:2 makes it clear that no one understands when someone speaks in tongues, only God.
1 Corinthians 14:2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.
Secondly, the book of Acts outlines many missionary journeys especially of the apostle Paul. It never said that he or anyone else spoke in tongues and the natives heard the gospel in their own language. It simply does not say that. You would think that if that was how the apostles preached the gospel, the Bible writers missed a crucial point by not telling us that, don’t you think?
Thirdly, right there in Acts 2, there is a clear distinction between speaking the wonderful works of God in tongues and preaching the gospel. Acts 2:4-11 describe the 120 disciples speaking the wonderful works of God in various languages. Then from verse 14, Peter stood up and preached to the people for 25 verses. This sermon culminated with the exhortation to repent and be baptized. The disciples spoke in tongues, and then Peter preached the gospel. Two separate events. Just to make it clear, the speaking in tongues part was NOT the preaching of the gospel. Most likely, they were just praising God in various languages.
In what language was Peter preaching?
I asked this question to my cessationist friend and he said that he believes Peter was speaking in tongues, and the other 11 apostles were interpreting. That was how all the foreigners in Jerusalem were able to understand the message.
The major problem with that belief is that the Bible simply does not say that. That is nothing more than wild speculation. This would be like saying that when Abraham Lincoln gave his four score and seven speech, he was actually speaking in Latin and someone else was translating into English. If that is what happened, then surely someone in history would have said so. In the absence of that, the simpler explanation is more likely the correct one – Lincoln spoke in English.
How did all these foreigners understand Peter?
How did they understand each other in the first place? Very simple. They were bilingual and they had a common language.
There is something called Hellenism, which describes the spread of Greek culture during the reign of the Greek Empire. This occurred about 300 years before Christ. During this period, Greek became the common language of Asia Minor, in addition to all the local languages. So most people spoke Greek as well as their native language. This made it very easy for Jesus and the apostles to spread the gospel without having to learn a myriad of languages.
The apostles never needed tongues to preach the gospel, neither was tongues given for that purpose. That is cessationist mythology. This article explains the purpose of tongues according to the Bible.
There is simply zero precedent and evidence from scripture that the apostles inadvertently preached the gospel while speaking in tongues. The one scripture that the cessationist might have appealed to makes a clear distinction between speaking in tongues and preaching the gospel.
Cessationist belief #4: Tongues were a sign to the unbelieving Jews
The cessationist believes that tongues were a sign of judgement on the unbelieving nation of Israel. They claim that unknown languages are usually a sign of judgement on Israel. They often cite the examples of Babel, Babylon, Assyria.
Then they quote 1 Corinthians 14 and Isaiah 28:
1 Corinthians 14:21-22 In the law it is written: “With men of other tongues and other lips I will speak to this people; And yet, for all that, they will not hear Me,” says the Lord. 22 Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophesying is not for unbelievers but for those who believe.
Isaiah 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue He will speak to this people, 12 To whom He said, “This is the rest with which You may cause the weary to rest,” And, “This is the refreshing”; Yet they would not hear.
Once judgement on Israel took place in 70AD, tongues had fulfilled its purpose, and had ceased.
The Truth
It is amazing how much you have to squint to believe in cessationism. They have chosen one of the most obscure scriptures in the Bible on which to build a doctrine. Everyone knows that you build doctrine on the clearest scriptures, and then you figure out the hard ones.
In Isaiah 28, God was chastising Israel for being drunk with wine. He says He will speak to them with stammering lips and foreign languages. This could have been referring to some kind of judgement. It could have been referring to God saving gentiles to rule over Israel. The stammering lips could simply have been a satirical response to Israel being intoxicated with wine.
So why did Paul quote this verse in 1 Corinthians 14? He was drawing a reference to unbelieving Israel. Paul likened unbelieving Israel in the OT to unbelieving sinners in the NT. He used this analogy to conclude that tongues is a sign to unbelievers, not believers. Israel were so drunk and unbelieving, that if God spoke to them in stammering lips, they still wouldn’t believe. Similarly, if we speak in tongues in church (without an interpretation), unbelievers will not be able to understand and believe. But if we interpret tongues or prophecy, then they will understand and believe.
The unbelievers here is not referring to Israel, but unbelieving sinners – Jews or gentiles. Paul is simply establishing that tongues is a sign not to believers but to unbelievers.
Paul’s Illustration
Paul gives the following illustration of what he means by unbeliever and how exactly tongues is a sign to them.
1 Corinthians 14:23 Therefore if the whole church comes together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are uninformed or unbelievers, will they not say that you are out of your mind? 24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an uninformed person comes in, he is convinced by all, he is convicted by all. 25 And thus the secrets of his heart are revealed; and so, falling down on his face, he will worship God and report that God is truly among you.
Unbelievers are unsaved people who come to church or hear the gospel, not the unbelieving nation of Israel. And when there is an interpretation of tongues (or a prophesy), the secrets of the sinner’s heart is exposed, and he is led to repentance. That is how tongues is a sign to the unbeliever. Note there is not even a hint of judgement here, and it has nothing to do with the nation of Israel.
Why do cessationists believe foreign languages are a sign of judgement?
They cite the example of the tower of Babel where God confused the people’s languages. But there is no indication in Genesis 11 that there was any judgement from God. God simply wanted to scatter them abroad so instead of living in one place as they had purposed, they would replenish the earth as God had commanded. No judgement, just a redirection from God. And yes, the Babylonians and the Assyrians spoke a different language from Israel. But how does that imply that foreign languages a sign of God’s judgement?
Cessationist belief #5: 1 Corinthians 13:8 says tongues and prophesy will cease
1 Corinthians 14:8 Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.
This scripture clearly teaches that tongues will cease, and it also says when it will cease. The cessationist believes tongues will cease when the canon of scripture is complete. This is how they understand the phrase “when that which is perfect has come”. Once the last book of the Bible has been written, God’s revelation through the apostles to the church would have been completed, and there is no longer any need for tongues and prophesy.
The Truth
If anyone reads this scripture naturally, they will understand verse 10 to mean that tongues and prophesy will cease when Christ returns and sets up His kingdom. The gifts will no longer be needed, but love will always be there, because God is love. That is so straightforward, but so inconvenient to the cessationist. They would have preferred if Paul had said something like “tongues will cease when the last apostle has died, or when the last book of the Bible is written, or when Israel is judged in 70 AD.” But he didn’t. It then behoves the cessationist to alter the natural meaning of “when the perfect has come.”
WE need to be complete
Firstly, this scripture does not say that God’s revelation needs to be complete (or perfect), it says WE will be perfect or complete. I was a child, now I am a man. WE see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. WE know in part, then in full.
So that which is perfect has the effect of making us perfect. It is utterly naïve to think that happened when the last book of the Bible was written. That is more likely to be the case when we are glorified in heaven.
1 John 3:2 Beloved, now we are 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 Corinthians 15:52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
These scriptures seem to be a much better fulfillment for 1 Corinthians 13:10.
Early church depended on the apostles’ doctrine
Secondly, the cessationist argument assumes that the early church needed tongues and prophesy as an interim measure while the New Testament books were not yet written. They believe that the early church did not have a Bible, therefore they depended on prophesy and tongues to reveal doctrine to them. This is historical revisionism at its best.
The early church continued in the apostles’ doctrine (Acts 2:42). And as we have seen earlier, the purpose of tongues and prophesy was never for doctrine. 1 Corinthians 14 gave the example of an unbeliever walking into church and a prophesy exposes all the secrets of his heart. There are two prophesies that are spelled out in the book of Acts – both by Agabus. One of them said there will be a famine, the other one said Paul would be arrested in Jerusalem. None of these had anything to do with doctrine. Bottom line, prophesy was for non-doctrinal edification. Once again the cessationist is wrong.
God’s revelation was never incomplete
Thirdly, God’s revelation was never incomplete. James 1:21 spoke of the power of God’s word to transform you long before the last book of the Bible was written. Jude 3 spoke of the faith that was “once and for all delivered to the saints” before the last book was written. There was nothing incomplete about God’s revelation at any point in the early church. The content was all out there, it just wasn’t put down on paper as yet. The early church continued in the apostles’ doctrine (Acts 2:42), which has to be the same thing more or less as our New Testament. What else could it be? They early church did not have a completed Bible, but they had the same doctrinal content in verbal form. It was just as good, and by no means incomplete.
The natural meaning is usually the correct one
We must remember that the New Testament epistles were letters that were read aloud to the congregations, and then circulated to the other churches in a region. They didn’t have Bible apps and study tools like we do. The early Christians had to derive some kind of meaning from a casual hearing of the scriptures. It was never meant to be complicated. If you find the Bible complicated, it is because you are complicating it. The most natural meaning is usually the correct one. The most natural meaning of 1 Corinthians 13:8 is that prophecy will cease when Christ returns and we are glorified. The cessationist has to work too hard to read their meaning into the scripture. That’s a major red flag. Scripture is not that hard.
Conclusion
The doctrine of cessationism is not based on rightly dividing scripture. The real motivation behind cessationism is that they simply don’t want to be charismatic. Speak to a cessationist long enough, and he will eventually lose his cool and challenge you “Well speak in tongues, let me hear you. Do a miracle for me to see?” It is not hard to find the real motivation behind the doctrine.
Now I totally get it. I totally get why they don’t want to be charismatic. I am charismatic and I am ashamed of what goes on in many (but not all) charismatic churches. Believe me, I get it. But the solution to unbiblical practices is not rubbish doctrines. That’s where cessationism fails. What the charismatic church needs is a proper understanding of the gifts of the Spirit. This was Paul’s approach in 1 Corinthians. That should be our approach as well.
What’s the difference between 1 Corinthians and the doctrine of cessationism? 1 Corinthians is Biblical.
Array
Get our books on Amazon
