The Spiritual Gifts of the Holy Spirit - Did They Cease When the Apostles Died?

I. INTRODUCTION

However "objective" or however presuppositionless we conservative evangelicals may think we are, or try to be in our interpretation of Scripture, any knowledgeable student will know that this idea is a myth. In approaching this particular subject we need to understand that there is no area of Scripture interpretation more affected by our background and tradition than this one. If, during my first twentyfive years as a Christian, I had been asked the question - 'are the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit for today?' - I would have answered (or my teachers would told me) "No, they ceased after the Apostolic age." That was the orthodox teaching, and I would have believed that the answer was drawn from Scripture. My experience and belief was identical to most Christians in Reformed circles.

I would have preferred to have been able to say that this conclusion was drawn from my study of Scripture. But it is not so. My stance on this matter was based on three things. One was blind acceptance of what my teachers told me. The other was that I had never seen the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit in use. The third, arising out of the first two, was sheer prejudice - and prejudice can rarely be overcome by discussion. It took a revelation (dread word for cessationists!) from the Lord to change my understanding. So I intend that this essay should be in the form of an autobiographical narrative, and hope that it will resonate with the experience of many. Nevertheless, consideration of the Scriptures will point many to what I have since come to believe correctly interprets the NT and brings a thoroughly biblical dimension, that for many is missing, into Christian living.

II. BEGINNINGS

I am profoundly thankful that, by the grace of God, during my 'teens in the 1940's, my roots were planted into the fertile soil of the (open) Plymouth Brethren. For we were nourished on a rich diet of evangelical teaching concerning our redemption, illustrated profusely by typology drawn largely from the Pentateuch. Whatever distortion of Scripture our views may have contained, at least it was not caused by any excess of liturgy or encrustation of centuries of tradition. Moreover, a wealth of literature from our founding fathers in the 19th C, and those who followed in the same genre both inside and outside the denomination were obtainable as reprints or secondhand. And THAT 'Dispensational Truth'! Unquestionably, their works on these subjects have influenced evangelical thought down to the present day. For a young man, aspiring to minister, all this, superimposed upon a Reformed theology, was indeed heady stuff.

We prized, almost alone amongst evangelicals, the doctrine of the 'priesthood of all believers' and the assemblies (as we called them) not having an ordained minister were open to all males to 'minister' the Word of God. Every encouragement was given to those so inclined to 'study to show [themselves] approved unto God' (II Tim.2:15) and to so minister. With such rich resources there was little need to fellowship with Christians outside our own circle, and this resulted in an insularity from all but the like-minded.

I was a product of the Sunday School, being under the wing of Christian neighbours whose son, Norman, was my friend, and in my 'teens I duly "got saved", and we both were baptised by immersion and "received into fellowship". Brethren were a sturdy people in those days. Most of us met for morning and evening Sunday meetings and helped with a flourishing Sunday School in the afternoon. There were two weekday evening meetings one for teaching and the other for prayer. But there was little time or inclination to interact with neighbours. This would have been considered as 'separation from the world.' There was real commitment for most of us, but for me it was all decidedly cerebral. But the grace of God was working in my life, for my "profession" has stood the test of years.

Yes, we prized the Word of God. Yet it is now clear that its authority came from our teachers. Typical of this was the esteem with which the Scofield Reference Bible was held. It set forth the norms of orthodoxy. I studied it assiduously, and even today, can remember its very format and teachings. I never met any in those earlier days who challenged its findings!

No doubt the Spirit of God used the Word to build much that was of Christ into us. Yet, looking back it is clear that though we knew God as our Father, and the Son as our Saviour, the Spirit of God was thought of in terms of a doctrine - the 'Person and Work of the Holy Spirit'. We never expected to see any works of the Spirit other than in the conversion of sinners. We did pray diligently for this - for those at home and for missionary work abroad. But I never met anybody who encouraged us to believe that God would work supernaturally in our everyday lives. Yet we were not without role models of men of faith.. For who can forget the celebrated George Mueller of Bristol, who never advertised or made his needs known to any but God, supported thousands of orphans, yet received gifts totalling nearly two million pounds between the years 1836 and 1898 when he died? (Dr. A T Pierson George Muller of Bristol Pickering and Inglis Ltd London n.d. p.377). Or who can forget those like Anthony Norris Groves, (G H Lang Anthony Norris Groves - Saint and Pioneer Paternoster Press 1939 and art. Anthony Norris Groves The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church ed. J D Douglas Pub. Paternoster Press Exeter and Zondervan Corp. Grand Rapids 1974) who went to the far ends of the earth to preach the Gospel, depending upon the support of folks at home in the days before cameras, magazines, newsletters and modern communications facilitated requests for prayer and funds? And for many generations the 'Brethren' were foremost in sending missionaries to the ends of the earth. But for all their devotion even unto death, in common with the majority of evangelicals whilst they recognised God's timely provision for their needs, they had little if any expectation of supernatural miracles of the Holy Spirit in everyday life. Certainly, we knew there were such people as 'Pentecostals', but there was no Pentecostal Church in the Essex suburb of London where I lived, and, anyway, the grass was too green on our side of the fence for us to bother considering them or their strange doctrines.

True, I can remember from those 'teen years a young lady being healed of a polyp in her nose prior to intended surgery in response to prayer by the elders. And in later years a young mother of four children being healed of chronic lung and bowel disorders after, in desperation, asking to be prayed for by the elders. But in both cases the initiative came from the sufferers. Indeed, the elders had little option but to respond to the requests to obey the exhortation of James to pray for the sick. But God is merciful, and in response to the faith of the sufferers and the obedience of the elders, was in both cases pleased to heal. But two such examples in twenty five years could hardly commend the abilities of the Spirit of God to move regularly among his people.

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that doctrine had to fit the experience of those years. After all, if the supernatural working of the Spirit of God was never seen, how could a Biblical doctrine of His workings be formulated? So, instead, was formulated the doctrine of the cessation at the end of the Apostolic Age of spiritual gifts, miracles, and signs and wonders of the Holy Spirit. The doctrine was, at least, endorsed in the 1917 Edition of the Scofield Reference Bible (p.1224 n.1) and a definitive study was made by B B Warfield and published in the following year, and reprinted under the title Counterfeit Miracles, reprinted as Miracles: Today and Yesterday Grand Rapids Mi 1965 and by Banner of Truth Trust in 1983. These influential works sealed it into the conservative evangelical psyche without further question. This was all part of my stock-in-trade.

In fact, I can remember writing in the 60's to one of the two Brethren monthly magazines (I forget whether it was The Witness or The Harvester) submitting a study which concluded that the present day manifestation of 'tongues' was demonic. The first rumblings of the charismatic movement must have prompted the study, but it was published and must, therefore, have reflected a view which commended itself to the editor and to the majority among us.

III. QUESTIONINGS

But I had a holy dissatisfaction with my cerebral Christianity, and in the outworking of which I was (or, more precisely, was not) experiencing. There seemed from that same Word so much more of which I had no experience. As to a form, our assemblies were very NT, we felt. But I was very conscious of a deficiency of emotion toward my God, and a lack of zest in my spiritual life. The Lord used a twofold prong to crack this situation. The first prong related to my disillusionment with the scheme of prophetic interpretation initiated by one of the foremost early 'Brethren' - J N Darby, which fruited into fully blown 'Dispensational Truth' much loved by most evangelicals, and the Brethren in particular. It was while living in Glasgow in the mid - 50's that the first chink of light as to the unsound principles upon which this scheme was based came from Archibald Hughes' A New Heaven and a New Earth (Marshall, Morgan and Scott, Edinburgh 2nd. printing 1962), an A-millennial exposition of Biblical prophecy and critique of the Scofield Reference Bible. Its bibliography led me to many such volumes, and helped to loosen my bondage to unbiblical concepts, which would extend into the realm of life changing views of Scripture and through it, an experience of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps at this point I should admit that I had, and still have, a wife. The start of these prophetic studies came while living in Glasgow. I am afraid these, with all their 'isms, bored my wife to distraction - more of this later. But if the Brethren were so disastrously wrong on this subject, what other skeletons was I likely to find in the cupboard?

The second "prong" (more like "links in a chain") was contact with those outside of my own denomination whose experience of the Holy Spirit was very much other than my own. I can remember that while in my teens I travelled daily to the City (of London) and on returning to Essex after an evening shift I usually saw a group of young people get on the London Underground train a few stations short of mine and travel a stop or two. They were obviously Christians, and they had a quality of joy and spontaneity about them that I rather envied. I suspected that they went to the Pentecostal Church that advertised its meetings at the station where they boarded. No doubt this was all part of the secret purposes of the Lord to point to the joy that was His for me, and to bring me into a more biblical experience of the Holy Spirit. But these purposes still lay many years ahead - for was I not just 'getting into' all these marvellous Dispensational Truth studies? A further link in this chain was that during the 60's, living in metropolitan Kent, we had once or twice a year for our midweek 'ministry' a missionary with the London City Mission. Dermod (an Irishman!), an able fellow about my own age, I respected, and the respect held in spite of his public admission that he used 'tongues' privately.

The final link in the chain of introducing me to the things of the Spirit of God was Brian, who, though in fellowship with a nearby Brethren meeting, regularly visited St Mark's Anglican Church in Gillingham, Kent. This Church was '...the first Anglican parish to be corporately influenced by this move of the Spirit and the first parish to which sympathetic enquirers were directed to see this renewal in action.' (Peter Hocken Streams of Renewal Paternoster Press 1986 ch.14 p.99 ff.) The late 60's were years during which an approximation to revival was taking place in that Church under its minister John Collins, and in schools and other places influenced by those in church fellowship. But, still ensconced in the Brethren I knew nothing of this at the time. But, more of Brian's involvement later.

But, to go back a short time, our assembly enjoyed a midweek visit from a group of four or five young men, accompanied by an older man. Among the group was Roger Forster, who was in the Brethren in those days, and is widely known today as the leader of the Ichthus Group of Churches in this country. But even in those early days of the charismatic movement (how fully they had come into that, I do not know) their ministry was refreshing, full of the life of the Spirit, and the Lord used it to challenge me to the roots of my being. I heard in the testimonies of this group what NT Christianity really is. We invited them home for refreshments and I had an earnest talk with a fellow during the time I gave him a lift home. But, however challenged I may have been on my return journey, evidently I had not determined to do anything about it before going to bed......

IV. A DIVINE VISITATION

Having crept into bed and got to sleep without disturbing my wife it must have been the Lord who woke me about 4 am, and I can remember committing myself to Him in a way that I had never done before. Quite unexpectedly, there was a tremendous inner sensation of light, with joy welling up from a very deep level, and I knew that the Lord had done something quite powerful in my experience. How long it lasted I do not know, but I woke my wife to tell her that I had been 'baptised in the Holy Spirit' (revealing language concerning the progress of my studies - obviously not 'Brethren' orthodoxy!) But she was not interested. To her, this was just another of my 'Isms'! There was no further sleep for me that morning, so as soon as it was light I went for a country walk and it felt as if I was walking on air. Of course, there was no 'tongues.' Had there been I would have equated the experience as something from the very devil himself! After several weeks life seemed to return to normal again, though I had a sense of wanting to serve others.

Returning to the matter of my friend Brian who fellowshipped at St. Mark's Gillingham, I regularly preached on Sunday evenings once or twice a year at his fellowship in one of the Medway towns and we usually had serious conversation afterward. He had noticed a quality in my preaching that was not there before, and he asked me if anything had happened, and the only explanation I could give was the encounter with the Lord mentioned above.

In common with a number of Anglican parishes a monthly Friday night of prayer for world-wide revival was held in a hostel run by St. Mark's. My testimony must have emboldened Brian to invite me to come to one such evening - though he later said that at the time his heart was in his mouth! Out of respect for him - for he had told me nothing of the charismatic nature of the prayer meeting, I went to this Anglican event. It was as orderly and as low-key as any of my Brethren morning meetings, but it was there I heard things which had never been uttered (in my hearing!) before. The supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit were freely in use, and when I heard 'tongues' for the first time I instantly recognised that it was of the Lord, whether used privately or publicly with interpretation. (So much for my prejudiced essay upon the demonic origin of modern tongues!) It was there that I heard little girls (I'm not sure where the little boys were!) in their 'teens praying with an intimacy and spiritual understanding that far exceeded mine. (I had never even heard a woman pray in public before, believe it or not!). It was there that I heard 'pictures' being shared, prophecies giving encouragement, and all that I saw and heard over several visits convinced me that this approximated to what was related in the Scriptures and therefore what I was looking for. I can only say that I am thankful to the Lord that it was in the quiet orderliness of this Anglican charismatic meeting, and not in a noisy chandelier-swinging Pentecostal (if there are such!) meeting that I heard and saw the Holy Spirit working. Otherwise I would probably been put off from such things for life. 'Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgements, and his ways past finding out!....For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be the glory for ever. Amen. (Rom.11:33-36.)

From there things moved rather swiftly. My taste for change had been whetted. The Scriptures had become pregnant with new life in the Spirit of Christ, and I publicly and privately encouraged my brothers in the assembly to explore these issues with me. They were resistant, though gracious. No such exercises of heart had come their way. There really was no future for us in the 'Brethren', and in common with several couples in another assembly nearby we had to leave for fellowship where we could move on with our God. I can only say that I am profoundly grateful for the foundations that were laid while in fellowship with them, and still value highly the fellowship of sincere folks amongst them..

V. A NEW LANGUAGE

So by the early 70's we found sanctuary in a nearby ex-Brethren house fellowship in Maidstone where we enjoyed the ministry of many nationally known speakers. By then I could see both from Scripture and observation that there were many spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit available, and I was ready by then to receive a new language. Prayer had been made over me to receive this, but it came privately, gradually and quite unemotionally - a 'clothing' of my use of the vocal chords with a language of the Spirit, which, for me, turned the key in the lock to enter into the realm of the power of the Kingdom of God, and to be able to receive many spiritual gifts for use as appropriate. (I am pleased to say that soon after this my wife received these gifts, and we have been partners in the work of Christ ever since.)

VI. CONSOLIDATION

I had always prayed publicly in Elizabethan English. That was the 'best' Brethren style(!) One of the first things I noticed was that quite unconsciously and instantly this deeply ingrained habit ceased and I began to use normal English. (Some of you may think I need delivering from the use of the KJV (AV) of the Scriptures!) The reason that I mention it first is not that it was the most important change, but that it was so evident. I suppose if I had wanted to I could have changed my language by conscious effort, but what I am saying is that such a thought never occurred to me - it just happened; by the agency of the Holy Spirit I have no doubt.

Of greatest importance was that whole new vistas of understanding of both the Scripture and the meaning of life came about. Firstly I had a fresh revelation not only of the Holy Spirit, but also of Jesus himself. I had known Him as Saviour, but He now had a far wider involvement in the details of my life and experience. For, after all, is not this the very work of the Holy Spirit to reveal Him? (John 16:14,15). The second effect was to receive faith to enter into the realm of the workings of the Spirit of God, and to co-operate with Him in the mending of people's lives. I was experiencing use of the gifts of the Holy Spirit - more of this later. I don't know that life has been easier - there have been many challenges, and I suppose there always will be. After all, we do have an enemy who opposes the works of God. But life has been infinitely more meaningful, and without question we have been used to the blessing of many over the years. The third significant fact is that my new life in the Spirit did not 'evaporate' as it had done previously. Well, after all, the Scripture does say 'He that speaks in a tongue edifies [builds up] himself' (I Cor.14:4) doesn't it?

I have already referred to my dismissive attitude toward the demonic in connection with 'tongues', although I do not remember what theology of the matter I held. Probably it was that the manifestation of the Son of God in incarnation provoked the demonic (no doubt true). But such did not happen now, and that spiritualistic mediumship was fraud. Certainly, I would have acknowledged that demons manifested themselves in the heathen through shamans and witch doctors. But in England? And influencing Christians? Never!!! No doubt many even now adopt this doctrinaire position. How did it change for me? I remember being with the founder of our Maidstone fellowship talking with an Arts College student who had been on drugs but had been converted to Christ. We were encouraging him to 'confess with [his] mouth Jesus as Lord' (Rom.10:9) but he struggled and struggled and the words would not come. I remember 'instinctively' addressing what I must have realised was a spiritual force that was binding him, commanding it to be gone and releasing the student in the Name of Jesus Christ. We were both astonished when the student let out a mighty roar like an express train going by ( I was reminded of the scene pictured by Luke 4:41), and he suddenly easily found release and liberty to speak freely. So again, any neat theology I had was strewn to the winds!

VII. THE GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

Once I had received a release of the Holy Spirit very little experience in seeking to help Christians is needed before I realised that many problems that refuse to yield to 'normal' Christian teaching methods and responses can have their roots in demonic bondage. These roots can be established from pre-conversion dabbling in the occult, from curses put on lives by occult practitioners, from drug abuse and addiction which usually has demonic roots, or even from parental associations with Freemasonry, Spiritualism or cults. But especially is it caused by sin that is persisted in - the handing over of our wills to sin will invite demonic control of our will (I Sam.15:23). Where there is recognition of these roots, and identification with repentance and renunciation, and expulsion if needed, together with a fresh commitment to Christ and filling with the Holy Spirit, complete freedom is achieved. How illuminating all this was to the power of Jesus Christ to establish His Kingdom in the lives of His people!

But suppose there is either blindness or wilful refusal to uncover the origin of roots of bondage? All who have engaged in counselling will know the hours that can be wasted by failure to identify the source of the root of bondage in Christian or non-Christian lives. Sometimes they want to be free, but not reveal the cause of their captivity where this is, perhaps adultery, or the like. Sometimes they themselves do not know. But how 'efficient' the Holy Spirit demonstrates Himself to be when this badly needed key is revealed supernaturally to the counsellor by a 'word of knowledge'! (I Cor.12:8). (Confidences would be respected, of course). Similarly 'efficient' is the 'word of wisdom' (I Cor.12:8), perhaps as to how to handle a situation. Both are 'snippets' of God's information from his vast store.

The 'word of knowledge' is also often used to identify disease or bodily disorder that the Lord wants to heal. I know that to say someone present in the gathering has a 'headache' or 'backache' or 'stomach ache' is not particularly impressive. But of those who respond, many obtain relief. But how can we not recognise the Divine origin of specific revelation relating to specific persons, for example, the 'third vertebrae up' or even a word I do not remember hearing before - 'spondylitis'? - to both of which there were specific responses and early relief. Some who move powerfully in this gift receive the names of sufferers, or specifically where they are sitting. Often detail of proposed surgery is revealed. The Holy Spirit goes to extraordinary lengths to encourage faith in the sufferer to be healed.

And the 'discerning of spirits' (v.10) - even Christians are often 'actors', their behaviour originating from deep insecurity, and seeking to portray an image which is false, to say nothing of impostors who are not even Christians. Perhaps most of this type of psychiatric abnormality is not occultly exaggerated, but where deep and longstanding it can be, and where is, it is often impossible to resolve without dealing with the source of the bondage. With the use of this gentle gift hours and hours of wasted counselling time can be avoided. . Efficiency, in these cases also, is the hallmark of the works of the Holy Spirit. I wish I could claim that we were able to use all these gifts so effectively that our charismatic churches were full of mature well balanced Christians. But as long as we are reaching out into a troubled and sick community, I guess, like the poor, we will always have these folks to help. This also points up another feature of charismatic churches - the healing process often involves bizarre behaviour, and our cessationist 'friends' use this as a stick with which to beat us and 'prove' that the supernatural gifts of the Spirit are counterfeit. I shall have to return to this aspect of things later.

In the NT there are several lists of spiritual gifts, but that in I Corinthians 12:8-10, listing nine, is the most definitive. This essay is not a primer on every aspect of these gifts (space precludes this, and there are many excellent books published for those who wish to pursue the subject). I merely wish to highlight their valuable uses, and then examine some of the objections to their use. That meets the need of the title of our study. We have looked at three gifts so far - the 'word of knowledge' the 'word of wisdom' and the 'discerning of spirits'. This triplet can be classed as Gifts of Revelation. That is, as explained by Dennis and Rita Bennett in The Holy Spirit and You (Logos Int'l USA and Coverdale House Pub. London and Eastbourne 1971) p.83, the power to know. Then we have the second triplet of gifts giving the power to do. These are the gift of 'healings' the working of 'miracles' and the gift of 'faith'. In dealing with certain aspects of the first triplet, we have already touched on healings, and probably miracles also, for surely, however you define a miracle (not easy) some healings will come into this category. In my own limited experience of supernatural happenings outside of healings I have been able, for instance, in a case of a left-at-home touring caravan key, after prayer, to use a key not made for the particular lock. Does someone say that that is trivial? A missing caravan key may not have been life threatening, but it was not trivial. God is concerned with every detail of our lives. And - as a matter of interest, afterward (by then having the correct key), to find that the key we used would not operate the lock again!

Cessationists decry the validity of miracles today by saying that they are not in the same category as those of the NT, i.e. where are the fully documented raising from the dead, for instance? Jack Deere has found that certain of these writers do not really want to know of such evidence, and reject the opportunity of inspecting it even when it is available. And available it is. In Dennis and Rita Bennett's The Holy Spirit and You they state that from Indonesia 'Well-documented reports...Thousands have been miraculously fed...water has been turned to wine...walked on water...many even raised from the dead.' (p.128). They further write 'Three years ago there were already thirty-three thoroughly documented cases of the raising of the dead on the Island of Timor. When David duPlessis visited Indonesia this year he told us that when he asked how many dead had been raised to date, they replied: "We've lost count - besides no one believes us, anyway!" (p.137). Many such volumes are available today. Another such is Mahesh Chavda's Only Love can make a Miracle; see further below.

The gift of 'faith' seems to relate to any occasion when one is given an unassailable conviction that God is going to work in a particular situation. 'Faith', by definition, relates to things 'unseen' (Rom.8:24-25). But the gift of faith seems to go beyond this. Not only do we believe by the Spirit of God that we should engage in a certain action, but we have an unshakeable assurance that He will act to bring the situation to what is needed.

The final triplet relates to the 'inspirational' gifts of 'tongues', 'interpretation' and 'prophecy' - the power to say. I have touched on tongues in the biographical section. Its chief value when used privately is to recharge one's spiritual batteries - it 'edifies'. Its use in prayer could very well explain the meaning of Romans 8:26-27 ('...for we know not what we should pray for as we ought; but the Spirit himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered...') and I Cor.14:14-15 ('For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.') Tongues can also be used publicly, provided there is interpretation (I Cor.14:5), which seems to be equivalent to prophecy. If it be asked, what, if this is so, is the value of public tongues, my answer is that whilst I do not know, its effect is usually to indicate that everyone should focus their thoughts on something important that the Lord has to say. This is not to say that there are unimportant things the Lord says, but rather, accommodating our human weaknesses, he calls us to attention.

Concerning 'interpretation' it must be borne in mind that it is not 'translation'. That is, it expresses the thought and gist of what the Lord may be saying. Therefore the length of the interpretation may differ considerably from that of the utterance in tongues. Paul admonishes us to use a tongue when interpretation is available. Presumably some will be known to be able to exercise that gift. If not, says Paul, the user of public tongues "should pray that he may interpret" (I Cor.14:13). Well, Paul exhorts us to earnestly desire spiritual gifts, and this is one of his methods! (I Cor.14:1,5).

Those in churches where the gifts are used will know that the gifts can be used with only a little faith (Rom.12:6). If it were otherwise, where would beginners start? And the Lord may give a prophecy as simple as 'I love you'. In case we are inclined to dismiss such a simple statement, let us remember that often people really need to hear that. The purpose of prophecy is (I Cor.14:3) building up, bucking up, and cheering up! For those who may be apprehensive as to the use of the gift, perhaps I should say three things. Firstly that we are very cautious about receiving directive prophecy. Misuse, by uncritical acceptance of such has led to troubles. God can and does sometimes so direct. But it would be carefully evaluated in the light of who gave it, and whether there were at least several other independent factors also provided by the Lord. This is, after all, part of the process of 'judging' prophecy (I Cor:14:29). Secondly, although prophecy is inspirational, we do not equate it with Scripture which is infallible and inerrant. More on this later. Thirdly, I would discourage the use of the phrase "Thus says the Lord." It is sometimes used by insecure people who feel they need to support what they have to say by this or a similar phrase. But the acceptance of any prophecy is not governed by the use such a phrase. Also, its use makes the questioning of any part of a prophecy, if needed, that much more difficult.

This brings to an end what I see as an introduction to the reception and use of the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit, and an encouragement to evaluate as to whether they really have ceased since the deaths of the Apostles. The purpose of this paper is to encourage you in further exploration and full length treatments will be found in Dr. Jack Deere's Surprised by the Power of the Spirit published by Kingsway Publications Eastbourne 1993 and in The Kingdom and the Power (are healing and the spiritual gifts used by Jesus and the early Church meant for the Church today?) edited by Gary S Grieg and Kevin Springer with contributions by J I Packer, Wayne Grudem, John White and others. Published by Regal Books 1993. The first volume is powerful narrative theology, the second a definitive theological approach to the subject.

But, as we know, there are many books also that have been written supporting a view that such gifts are not for today, and that, having served their purpose by the time of the death of the Apostles of our Lord, they have now ceased and are not needed. We will now look at this question. As in the above section, my treatment can only be introductory to the subject.

VIII. OBJECTIONS FROM SCRIPTURE?

As mentioned earlier in the penultimate paragraph under heading #II. B B Warfield crystallised in his 1918 volume Counterfeit Miracles Reformed thought on the view that the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit have ceased, and are not needed. Many similar books have in recent years been produced from that camp. What have we to say about their objections?

The Church Fathers acknowledged the validity of these gifts, but due to formalisation and hierarchical control such spontaneity in the use of spiritual gifts in the churches was lost, and miracle traditions associated with Saints took their place . In the time of the Reformers the Catholic Church rebutted the Reformer's doctrines by stating that God confirmed (Catholic) dogma by the miracles of the Saints - but He has not done so for your doctrines. The Reformers, although rejecting unbiblical Catholicism nevertheless retained church structures which did not favour the use of the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit. To justify their position they sought to show from Scripture that such gifts had ceased and that Catholic miracles therefore were not valid. (Surprised by the Power of the Spirit p.99f.). In other words, the Reformers' doctrine was rooted in their experience. So it is with their offspring today.

That these books are rooted in experience, or perhaps we should say lack of, or rejection of experience, may come as a surprise to some. For are they not soundly based on Scripture? are their arguments not very close and very conclusive?

Let us first ask ourselves, then, do our opposers give a Scripture or Scriptures that clearly state that when the canon of Scripture was completed by the last Apostle, that miracles and signs and wonders, which, according to them, authenticated either the Apostles or their writings, were to cease? The answer is, emphatically, no. There just is not such a Scripture. Some Scriptures have been pressed into use, and I will examine a selection. For a full length treatment I can only refer you to the volume I mentioned earlier - The Kingdom and the Power by eds. Grieg and Springer.

1. The best-known and most used Scripture I Cor.13:8-12. How strong in support of the cessationist position is it? The relevant sections are ('...whether there be prophecies...tongues...knowledge, [they] shall be done away.....etc'. When will these gifts cease? Our Scripture says (1) "when perfection comes" (2) when "we shall see face to face" and (3) When "I shall know fully, even as I am fully known." Certainly, "perfection" can mean "maturity". But when will the Church come to maturity and not need the gifts? Surely, "when we shall see face to face" and when we "shall know fully" even as we are now "fully known" i.e. when the Lord comes! The meaning clearly is that these gifts will remain with the Church until Christ comes. Neither can "perfection" mean the completed canon of Scripture. There is nothing in the context to suggest this. Even if it were so, the Church cannot, nor ever yet could, be said to fulfil the terms of (2) and (3). This awaits Christ's coming. Do our opposers really suggest that whilst Paul saw "as in a mirror", and "darkly", we see "face to face"? Or he "in part", but we "fully know"? The difficulties in using this Scripture are insuperable.

2. Another Scripture used is Hebrews 2:3-4 which says "...how shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation? which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing witness, both with signs and wonders, and with diverse miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit..." Cessationists tell us four things about these verses. (a) that it was the Apostles who heard the Lord. (b) The miracles authenticated (confirmed) their ministry (c) In view of (b) only apostles wrought miracles and worked signs and operated gifts (the purpose of which was to authenticate their ministry) and (d) when the Apostles' ministry was complete, obviously, the confirmatory miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit were no longer needed.

How does this stand up to sound exegetical principles? Alas, it does not. Concerning (a) it is absolutely unwarranted to say that only the Apostles heard Christ. Does not Luke 10:1ff. tell us that Jesus commissioned seventy to go out and preach? John 6:60-70 tells us that Jesus had many, many disciples, some of whom deserted him. In fact, Paul tells us in I Cor.15:6 that Jesus after his resurrection appeared to more than five hundred "brethren". Concerning (b) the word bebaioo is used for God or Christ strengthening His people, both directly and through His Word. For this see I Cor.1:8, II Cor.1:21, Col.2:7, Hebrews 13:9 and see Rom.15:8 for Christ confirming the promises of God to the patriarchs. To suggest that miracles authenticate Scripture stands Scripture on its head. Perhaps this idea was adopted because the KJV (AV) speaks of "God bearing them witness..." But there is no word in the Greek corresponding to the word "them" and modern translations do not give the sense. The text actually says that the message was confirmed by signs, wonders and miracles together with gifts of the Holy Spirit. That this is one of the main reasons for signs, wonders, miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit we shall see in more detail later. Concerning (c) For the working of miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit to authenticate the Apostles' ministry, clearly, such working must be confined to them. Does this theory stand up to Scripture? Even a limited knowledge of the Bible tells a different story. For we are told that Stephen wrought great wonders and signs (Acts 6:8), Philip also (Acts 8:6-7), Ananias healed and prophesied (Acts 9:17-18, 22:13). Gifts of miracles are encouraged to be part of the ministry of a local church (I Cor.12:10,28); "miracles" are actually distinguished from "apostles" in I Cor.12:28. Miracles were being worked in the Galatian churches (Gal.3:5) and Corinth abounded in spiritual gifts. Therefore, the conclusion (d) falls flat on its face.

If, by way of explanation, we are told that Stephen and Philip were associates of the Apostles, or commissioned by them by the laying on of hands, it still totally undermines the cessationists' position. For how could miracles authenticate the Apostles if others also were working them? We need to notice also that Ananias (Acts 9:10ff.) was a relatively unknown Christian, but he it was who laid hands on Paul imparting to him the Holy Spirit(!), and healed him of blindness. One is beginning to get the feeling that an attempt has been made to manufacture a case from Scripture for an indefensible position. But we shall look at a few more typical objections.

3a. Jesus said according to Matthew 16:4 "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah." This is interpreted as meaning that we should not seek for miracles - rather, only the sign of Jonah, that is, the death and resurrection of Jesus Himself. The context in verse 1 shows that it was unbelieving Pharisees and Sadducees who came to test Him and ask for a sign from heaven - to which he would not respond. This challenge merely repeats that of the hostile scribes and Pharisees recorded in Matthew 12:38-45, to which Jesus gave the same reply. Clearly, no such response was given by Jesus to either genuine seekers or those who suffered - He responded so often with whatever was necessary to bring relief. Did not the disciples pray for the Lord to manifest Himself in signs and wonders as recorded in Acts 4:30? The book of Acts is full of the miracles, signs and wonders that the Lord was pleased to work in response to their faith. b. Our objectors have also used exactly the same sort of argument when Paul says (I Cor.1:22-23) "...the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness..." But a context similar to the Matthew verses indicates a blindness similar to that of the scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees to which such evidence by the Holy Spirit would carry no weight. But that Paul was not backward in working signs and wonders he reminds the Romans in chapter 15 verse 18-19. "For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has wrought through me to win obedience from the Gentiles, by word and deed, by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Holy Spirit, so that from Jerusalem and as far round as Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ."

4. Does not Paul say that miracles were the "signs of an apostle" in II Cor.12:12? The full Scripture says "The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles..." (NIV). Answer. If the signs were miracles, then what sense would the Scripture make to say that the signs and miracles and wonders of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles? Obviously, the signs that Paul referred to were not wonders and miracles. It would seem that Paul was referring to the quality of his Christian life and profession among them. He had to write to the Corinthian Christians to combat false apostles, and the immediate context is his arguments repeatedly referring to his impeccable behaviour among them and, particularly, his trials and sufferings (chaps 11 and 12). These were the signs of his apostleship.

I am afraid that such examples remind me too much of the age old joke about the person who, seeking guidance opened his Bible at random and found "[Judas] went and hanged himself", then, on opening again, "Go and do thou likewise." Needing, really, to check this out he opened his Bible a third time and was told "What you do, do quickly." Our objector's know that their exegesis is just as poor and weak, so they also seek to argue from a theological standpoint. Does this fare any better?

IX. OBJECTIONS FROM THEOLOGY?

1. Our detractors say "If we say that miracles should accompany the Gospel today, does that not cheapen the Gospel? After all, the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ is powerful enough to convince and convert without miracles being needed." Question. If the working of miracles would cheapen the Gospel today, why did it not cheapen the Gospel in Apostolic times? This objection is a case of being wise above what is written.

2. Our objectors also ask "What do miracles prove, anyway? Can not false prophets and the demonic work miracles"? Question. Where does this objection leave the cessationist's claim that miracles were given to authenticate the Apostles, or to validate Scripture? The Scriptures indicate that true believers have no difficulty in distinguishing true from false miracles, or doctrine, if it comes to that. It is unbelieving scribes, Pharisees or others who are deceived. We have already seen that Paul used signs and wonders, by the power of the Holy Spirit to win the obedience of the Gentiles (Rom.15:18-19). We are told, too, in Hebrews 2:4 that it is God Himself who "bore witness" to the Gospel by signs and wonders and various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his own will" (Heb.2:4). What? are these people beginning to fight against God also, as well as us? A Gamaliel-like attitude (Acts 5:38-39) would be more appropriate, if they cannot do any better.

3. Walter Bodine in his chapter six contribution to The Kingdom and the Power draws attention to a book review in which it is stated that "the New Testament epistles show...slight interest in miracles" with the conclusion drawn that this indicates the "temporary nature" of the "sign gifts". But it just is not true that the Epistles show "slight interest" in such matters. For five of the epistles devote explicit attention to the gifts of the Holy Spirit (Rom.12:3-8; I Cor.12-14; Eph.4:1-16; I Thess.5:19-22; I Pet.4:10-11). We do recognise, of course, that the focus of the epistles is on character building and godly living. But this no more suggests cessation of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit than it suggests cessation of evangelism, the Lord's Supper or gifts to the poor (p.197ff.).

4. From Appendix 1 of the same volume another objection is noticed. "...when the focus is on...signs and wonders, rather than on the rational content of the gospel, confusion as to the main features of that message is bound to arise." We answer "Did Jesus' miracles confuse His, or His hearer's, focus? Did Peters' miracles confuse the focus? Was the apostles' focus confused? Or Paul or Barnabus, maybe? Or maybe God was confused when He did extraordinary miracles through Paul in Ephesus? Was God confused when He testified to the message according to the writer to the Hebrews (2:3,4)?

5. One other theological device is used to argue the non validity of the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit. A typical example is that of O Palmer Robertson in his The Final Word (Banner of Truth 1993). The trick is to closely define your NT subject - he starts with prophecy which he exactly equates with OT revelation now incorporated into the canon of Scripture. From there it is easy to argue that since, (what we all agree) such revelation has ceased, therefore there is no such thing as NT prophecy. He will not allow what we have already discussed that there are levels of faith in the operation of all giftings. Nor will he allow that there is any kind of revelation from God that is other than fit to be incorporated into Scripture. The answer to all this is, if one builds upon a narrow enough base, and ignores the rest of the subject (i.e. the totality of miracles and gifts in the NT) anything can be taught. I will not bore my readers further. It is time for me to make some additional positive statements of the view of Scripture on the question of signs, wonders and miracles today.

X. AFFIRMATIONS

The Scripture clearly states that miracles are subject to Scripture. (Deut.13:1ff. Matt.7:15-23). Miracles do not affirm or validate Scripture. No writer of Scripture ever claimed this. Question. Why do our objectors focus upon the Apostles as writers of Scripture, (with miracles to authenticate), when many writers of Scripture were not apostles? The authors of Mark, Acts, Luke, Jude and (almost certainly Hebrews) were not apostles, and, with the exception of Jude they wrote substantial portions of Holy Writ. It makes no sense.

There were many reasons why God chose to work miracles in NT times, and the same reasons apply down throughout the Church age. Here are just a few.

1. God heals because it flows out of the compassion of His nature. One of many typical Scriptures is Matt.14:14. "...and Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick." See also e.g. Mk.1:41-42; Mk.9:22; Luke 7:11-17; Matt.15:32. Is God less compassionate today?

2. It brings glory to God. Concerning the sickness (which would result in the death) of His friend Lazarus, we read in John 11:4 "When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby." See also e.g. John 11:40; Acts 3:12-13; Acts 4:21 NASB; Luke 5:24-26; 7:16; 13:13,17;19:37; John 2:11. Miracles of all sorts still bring glory to Christ and His Father.

3. God's Word encourages faith, and He is pleased to respond to it. See for example Jesus' word to the woman who touched the edge of His garment "Take heart, daughter, your faith has healed you." See also the following Scriptures. Acts 14:8-10; Matt.9:28; 8:2,3; Mark 9:22-23; Matt.21:21-22.

4. God heals in response to his own promise. In James 5:14-16 we read "Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall save the sick..." The validity of this promise I have already demonstrated from my own experience in the earlier part of this paper. Were those healings not from God?

I wonder, if after all this, those Scriptures which speak of the non-healing of Trophimus, and Epaphroditus' sickness, and Timothy's stomach weakness, to say nothing of Paul's "thorn in the flesh", still bother you? (I know that they have been used to argue that healing had ceased by then. What - even before Paul's first Roman imprisonment?) But, nearly every book on healing deals with those questions, and if you have read thus far I am sure you will forgive me for not using space on these questions. They have been answered again and again, and you will find those answers elsewhere very easily.

5. Our detractors ask 'Where are the raising from the dead?', 'Why do some healings relapse?', 'Why are they not all instantaneous, as Jesus' were?' Or, 'Jesus never failed to heal'

We answer, you recognise that there are degrees of effectiveness in other giftings, such as preaching and teaching. Then why do you not allow the same in the use of spiritual gifts? The Scripture does say that we 'prophesy according to the measure of our faith' (Rom.12:5). Also, have you not read books on the work of the Spirit of God outside of our culture where raisings from the dead have taken place? One such is Only Love can make a Miracle by Mahesh Chavda pub. by Kingsway Pubs. Eastbourne 1990 p13, where a raising took place in 1985 in Zaire (Congo). Over the last thirty or forty years many such raisings and remarkable healings have been testified to. It would be humility to acknowledge one's ignorance of them. It is sheer perversity to deny their occurrence.

As to why some healings relapse. There are a number of reasons. One such could be because of fresh sin. This reason is, moreover, Scriptural (John 5:14). Anyway, it is sheer assumption that Bible healings never relapsed. As to Biblical healings all being instantaneous, was not the healing of the blind man by Jesus in Mark 8:22-26 in stages?

'Jesus never failed to heal'? Is the implication that we should be able to go in and empty hospitals? But we read in Matt.13:58 and Mark 6:5 that Jesus could do no mighty works there because of unbelief. Again, it was only one man Jesus chose to heal at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1ff.). Both in Jesus' day and Apostolic times there were many reasons for no healings or other miracles taking place.

I trust that I have written sufficiently to encourage us to believe that we should be prepared to have faith in the example of the NT and God's promises and to see Him sovereignly work.

XI. CONCERNS

We may well ask why men who have had a theological training, whose skills are supposed to be able to navigate the more abstruse problems of exegesis and hermeneutics, adopt such outlandish approaches to what are among the clearest statements of Scripture.

Kirk Bottomly wrote chapter ten of The Kingdom and the Power. It is entitled Coming out of the Hangar -The Confessions of an Evangelical Deist. In answer to the question of our last paragraph he says "Among evangelical and mainline pastors and church leaders, there is a fear and distrust of supernatural ministry, an underlying disbelief and a tremendous professional insecurity about it. If you are a pastor, and healing, deliverance, and supernatural gifts are not part of your Christian experience, you seem to be stuck with an awkward choice: either those experiences are sub-Christian (phony or self-induced) or YOU are sub-Christian. Do you see the dilemma?" (p.259).

What, then, are my concerns. My concerns are these. Under the umbrella of a fanatical devotion to the Scriptures, they are, nevertheless prepared to distort the plain meaning of the Word of God to get themselves off the hook that Kirk Bottomly describes. They have brought themselves into the category of those persons whom James in his epistle describes as deceived. Their self deception arises out of their unwillingness to do the Word of God after hearing it (James 1:22). How else can they espouse such palpably stupid interpretations? Remember. Their interpretation does not come out of Scripture. As I have repeatedly reminded us their interpretations are made in support of their lack of experience. And they must at all costs justify their position. This is, at least, "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof" (II Tim.3:5) if they do not actually "..wrest...the... Scriptures, unto their own destruction." (II Pet.3:16).

I am not referring to those who do not understand the use of these gifts, but welcome the Holy Spirit into their midst as far as He has been revealed to them. There are many such churches which have healing prayer as part of Holy Communion. In many cases these ministers or pastors have only a little understanding and even less faith in God's willingness and ability to heal. But God honours that obedience and often they experience His touch in healing or other provision. Or, even if Christians and churches do not have such meetings, if they are not opposed to supernatural ministry, then, the Lord will reward them according to their obedience and their response to His will as it is presented to them.

Out of this concern for our opposers I want to further explore the implications of James 1:22, II Tim.3:5 and II Peter3:16. If the approach of those writers who so object to supernatural ministries is akin to that described by Kirk Bottomly (last paragraph of previous page), then there will be this fear and distrust. This skewed approach to these ministries is seen in John MacArthur's Charismatic Chaos, and highlighted in Surprised by the Power of the Spirit (p.274 n.1). It is evident, says Jack Deere, that MacArthur leads his readers to believe that it is true of the majority of groups that practice the gifts of the Spirit for them to be typified by serious abuses in the operation of these gifts. Deere, whose familiarity with such groups internationally is wide denies that he has found this is so. He states that MacArthur and his researchers have simply used tele-evangelism in its worst tradition and trawled through charismatic/Pentecostal literature looking for the bizarre. It concerns me that MacArthur, who is noted for his volume of high quality evangelical exposition, can, by his dishonest approach, deny the moral principles which he would claim to espouse.

Undoubtedly, because help can be given, charismatic churches do attract folks with problems, and sometimes mistakes are made. Demand often outstrips our ability to receive the 'supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ' (Phil.1:19). But Deere's extensive experience shows that such mistakes are normally quickly recognised and corrected. We are, therefore, vulnerable to the risk of being misrepresented by dishonest evaluators. That, however, is preferable to our opposers stance of, while rejecting the supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit, adopting a 'position' supposedly from Scripture of claiming that we receive a baptism in the Holy Spirit when we get converted, and that we are all growing and maturing as we should from the Biblical diet we get from fellowship and private devotions. Clearly, for those who have eyes to see, that just is not true.

I need to follow up this dishonesty and highlight the dangers into which our opposers put themselves and their readers and hearers. At the mildest level I came across the following account which illustrates the fact that a diet largely of Bible teaching does not produce maturity. I read recently the well known book The Railway Man by Eric Lomax (Jonathan Cape 1995) - he was a prisoner of the Japanese on the Burma Railway in WW2 and suffered torture at their hands. Both before and after his captivity, he attended the Edinburgh church of the prolific Bible teacher and author Sidlow Baxter. For me, a sad part of the book, even against the background of life and death on the Burma Railway, was, after his return, the pettiness and smallmindedness of so many Christians in that famous Edinburgh centre of Bible teaching, which was such as to repel him and cause him to leave. We may blame his own immaturity. But if we are honest I believe we would recognise many character faults which are deliberately ignored, or even hidden, in our conservative evangelical churches. I am not claiming that there are no moral defects among charismatic Christians (we only have to think of the moral failure of certain prominent charismatic USA tele-evangelists) - what I am highlighting is the rejection of the Biblical means of dealing with the whole area of character change. Where spiritual gifts are freely operating there is a holy fear of God - there should not be too many hidden Ananias' and Sapphiras'! (Acts 5:1-11).

An unbalanced preoccupation with the study of the Scriptures suggests two things. One is that we are very satisfied with what, rejecting the supernatural aspects of life and ministry in Christ, is virtually a psychological experience. Moreover, satisfaction is a dangerous mental state in which to be - particularly when, having set oneself in opposition to an aspect of Christian life and ministry, there cannot be any advance in that direction. Denial of the works of the Holy Spirit seems to have no solution (Matt.12:31-32). The second thing is that this "deistic" approach to Scripture spoken of by Kirk Bottomly at the beginning of this section seems to encourage an insulation from real life. They rarely get involved with drug addicts, alcoholics, occultly affected people, Freemasons or ex-Freemasons, people with psychiatric problems, or the like. They live in a Christian ghetto where, apparently, the written Word answers all their very limited needs. The charismatic movement has been continuing now for nearly forty years in the UK and USA. Conservative evangelicals really have little excuse for a ghetto mentality in ignoring what has been going on for so long. It is sad that we usually read the works of those who write or preach only to criticise. But the lid of such sub-normal Christianity is sometimes taken off, and its sterility is revealed.

Having taken off the lid, what more do we see in the vessel? At a more dangerous level Jack Deere describes (p.80ff.) how that while he was a professor at Dallas Seminary he met a student who felt strongly about Fuller Seminary's unwillingness to affirm the doctrine of biblical inerrancy, even to the point of anger. Yet that same student later revealed that he had a fifteen year struggle with addiction to pornography and during the time he had been attending seminary had visited prostitutes three times. He was married, had children and pastored a church. What amazed Deere was the fact that the student showed far greater emotional intensity over Fuller's view of inerrancy than he did his own continuing adultery. Also, while being prayed for he became extremely upset at someone who prayed in tongues. I would suspect that there was demonic bondage in this case. Deere's concern was that he valued doctrine more highly than his moral life. Another example Deere quotes is that of a man who for many years, both during and after his days as a seminary student, led a double life as a homosexual engaging in their worst practices. Following vows made to the Lord during a life-threatening illness he was completely delivered of his perversion. But, he had caught AIDS. This prodigal returned to the Lord and the church, but Deere recounts how that some of the elders doubted if he was a believer; they asked him to leave the church, and they even refused to pray for him and his healing. As he dejectedly left the church some would not shake his hand for fear of catching AIDS. Yet, such is the tendency where doctrine is valued above doing. Deere goes on to state that such stories are not isolated; this kind of incident is not at all uncommon in this wing of the church which puts high value, perhaps the highest value, upon Bible doctrine. In fact, over the space of twenty years in that wing of the church he accumulated enough detail of these kind of abuses "to fill several books." He goes on to state (p.85) "I have seen much more wickedness and secret sin among authoritarian fundamentalist churches than anywhere else among the spectrum of Christian churches today." Even J I Packer acknowledged the dangers of this doctrinaire approach to Scripture. He says ( p.83ff. quoting "The Comfort of Conservatism" in Power Religion, ed. Michael Horton pub. Moody Press 1992 p.286).

In spite of their disdain for the "traditions of men," the insistence of many conservative Christians in demanding that adults accept traditions of faith and practice in the manner of children who are told to shut their eyes, open their mouths, and swallow whatever is tipped in is not a maturing thing; at best it leads to bigotry, at worst it leads to cultism.

Deere continues

The part of the church that Packer was describing would undoubtedly mock the idea of papal infallibility. Yet they treat their own interpretive and expository tradition as infallible. And they further dishonour the Scripture by giving controversial passages the most ludicrous interpretation whenever those passages disagree with their own practices or interpretations...The purpose of this chapter is not to excuse charismatic or Pentecostal abuses or to condemn the abuses of some traditional churches. Rather, we need to cultivate a godly and scriptural attitude toward spiritual abuses-no matter where they occur.

Such believers, in specifically rejecting the sometimes supernatural cause (demonic) and supernatural remedy (use of our authority by the Spirit of God over the powers of darkness), shape their doctrine to cover their experience. This is very akin to 'making Christ the minister of sin' (Gal.2:17). To reject the works of the Holy Spirit, and publicly propagate this position supposedly supported by Scripture, is very akin to those Pharisees who did precisely the same in Jesus' day (John 7:20, 8:48, 9:39-41).

Please clearly understand that by pointing out such matters I am not thereby seeking to validate my case. I am pointing out the moral dangers to which our opposers open themselves by adopting a doctrinaire view of Scripture, and failing to emulate the example of Scripture. As Deere points out, he would prefer the worst, the crassest form of emotionalism, or some wrong doctrines and humility, than right doctrines and no humility, with the kind of coldhearted Pharisaism that so many display. The former can be corrected: the Lord opposes the latter (p.86).

XII. AN INVITATION

"But beloved, [I] am persuaded of better things of you..." (Heb.6:9). Perhaps I have encouraged someone to look more objectively into the things of which I write. Perhaps, like myself, and so many others who have come from the fundamentalist camp, you know from Scripture that God has so much more on offer; things that will glorify him in our lives. May I recommend that you open your heart to the Lord and ask Him to show you if there is any secret sin you are harbouring Psalm 51:23-24. Then determine to find a company of His people who are open to the gifts of the Holy Spirit, in a style that does not offend you, and visit them. Identify what you see and hear with Scripture. Seek the fellowship of those with whom you can have a rapport in the things of the Lord. Be prepared to abandon your prejudices. Seek in humility to understand the Word of God in regard to His supernatural gifts.

Finally, determine to follow wherever He may lead (Rev.14:4). I can only say that those like myself who have sought the Lord in these matters have come into a life that is abundant life. The Lord desires to bless all His children, and, I am persuaded, will similarly bless you also.

* * * * * * *

Alan Nairne Easter 2001

Commentary on Revelation
Home	Commentary Contents	Eschatology Articles	Downloads

Commentary on Revelation
Home	Commentary Contents	Eschatology Articles	Downloads