Category Archives: cessationism

Four Scriptures From Cessationists

by Scott

When discussing the gifts of the Spirit as found in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10, or what some might identify as ‘sign gifts’ (i.e. healings, miracles, prophecy, tongues), the continuationist claims that all of these gifts are to continue through until Christ’s return. Whatever the label for these gifts, Christ meant for them to continue until He returns to make all things new. On the other hand, the cessationist might either say the necessity of these gifts have ceased or that they could still possibly be used, but they are not normative or regular for the church today.

The arguments from the cessationist side are usually centred around four passages of Scripture, as listed below:

  1. 1 Corinthians 13:8-12
  2. 2 Corinthians 12:12
  3. Hebrews 1:1-2
  4. Hebrews 2:3-4

Though there are definitely other passages of Scripture that might arise in the discussions about such gifts as miracles, healings, prophecy, tongues, etc, we might say these are the focus of much discussion. Again, it doesn’t all boil down to debating four passages from the Biblical text, as it is more about developing a holistic theology on the topic. Still, these four passages are very worth the consideration as one approaches the discussion of the work of the Spirit today.

So, let’s consider carefully what these passages say and, even more, what they are communicating.

1 Corinthians 13:8-12

Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

I know Marv recently posted an article looking at this verse as well, but I thought I would share some of my own thoughts on this Corinthian passage.

To be honest, in the present-day, most cessationists will now agree that this passage in Corinthians is found lacking in support of their view.

Still, some cessationists use this passage to claim that the ‘perfect’ in these verses is the New Testament canon that would be completed by the end of the first century. And, since we have this perfect revelation of God as now complete in the entire Bible, we no longer need such gifts of the Spirit, since they were given to confirm the gospel message in the first century. When the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. That gospel is now firmly and solidly found in the Bible.

Yet, though I definitely believe that the New Testament canon is God-breathed and from the Spirit, we must realise that the ‘perfect’ of this passage is by no means speaking of the New Testament. We must read the passage carefully, the key being found in vs12:

Now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

Though vs10 states, ‘but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away,’ again, this is not speaking of the completion of the New Testament canon. Vs12 shows that it is speaking of the final eschaton when Christ comes and completes all, making all things new.

Who will we see face to face? Christ. Paul goes on to say that he would know fully, even as he had been fully known. Known by whom? Christ.

‘When the perfect comes’ is in reference to the final consummation at Christ’s return. Therefore, this passage teaches that we will no longer need such signs and gifts of the Spirit once Christ returns. We still have a lot to accomplish, and all of God’s gifts (healings, miracles, teaching, giving, leading, etc) are needed to advance God’s kingdom.

2 Corinthians 12:12

The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works.

Some cessationists would claim this verse is proof that signs and wonders were only performed through apostles. Not only that, but because apostles no longer exist, signs and wonders no longer exist. But, what we must first do is distinguish between the two uses of the word ‘signs’ in this passage, for it is used in two different manners. Go back and read the verse and you will see this.

The first time the word signs is used, it does not refer to miraculous signs. Rather, it is in reference to the phrase ‘signs of a true apostle’. What does this phrase mean? What are the signs of a true apostle?

Paul uses this phrase to contrast his work as a true apostle with the selfish ways of the false ‘super-apostles’ (see 2 Corinthians 12:11). Paul had just spent chapters 10-11 defending his apostleship and in doing so he tells of all the things he has been through for the Corinthians, mainly his suffering on their behalf. This is how the word, signs, is first used. Paul had come with the signs of a true apostle – having a servant heart for them, even willing to suffer for them.

He, then, goes on to say that he was also used in signs, wonders and mighty works’. The second use of the word is in reference to miraculous signs.

This verse does not teach that signs, wonders and miraculous works are only limited to apostles. And, thus, we cannot bring forth that argument that says such has ceased because apostles no longer exist. The phrase, ‘signs of a true apostle’, is about having a servant heart for the people with whom an apostle works, willing to lay down their lives for the people. And, as Paul came with those true signs with utmost patience, he was also being utilised in things like miracles, healings, etc. That’s the biblical context of this verse.

Hebrews 1:1-2

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.

From this passage, it can sometimes be argued that, in the past, God spoke through prophets. But now, in these last days, He only speaks through His Son. And it is the New Testament canon which faithfully, finally and fully testifies of the Son. Thus, prophecy is no longer needed.

Well, there is no doubt that the ‘last days’ are the entire time between Christ’s first and second advent (I even write about this more here). But, an interesting fact to consider is that, while the writer to the Hebrews was penning these words, prophets and prophecy were alive and well. The last days had come, the Son had spoken, but prophets and prophecy were continuing to function amongst God’s people.

So, why was prophecy still active in people like Agabus, Philip’s four daughters, the Corinthian church, the Thessalonian church, the leaders who prayed for Timothy, etc? Because it was still needed and it was never there to contradict or replace the God-breathed Scripture.

By no means can this verse be used to say that prophecy has ceased because we now have a New Testament canon. I believe that, to claim such, we would have to bring a specific viewpoint and read it back into this passage. That is called eisegesis, which is opposed to the proper study of Scripture through exegesis.

It is a true statement that it is the last days, and it has been for almost 2000 years. And God has chosen to speak through His Son. But such continues to be accomplished through the Spirit of Christ acting amongst the body of Christ. Remember, we are called to be Christ in the earth today. No prophecy will contradict the teaching of Scripture and we have such as our helpful measuring standard for what we proclaim and prophesy today. But Hebrews 1:1-2 cannot be utilised to say that prophecy has somehow ceased with the completion of a New Testament canon. The passage never states such.

Hebrews 2:3-4

How shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

Finally, as with 2 Corinthians 12:12, some cessationists will use this verse to show that the apostles and the apostles alone were the ones who had their message attested to and confirmed by signs, wonders, miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit. But, with the completion of the New Testament canon, which recorded the apostolic gospel message, there would no longer be a need for such things to attest to the gospel message. We now have the revelation of God’s finalised canon of Scripture, so what else do we need, right?

But, as we have seen with the other passages above, we need to carefully reflect on the words of Hebrews 2:3-4, for they might not say what we initially thought they said.

To understand the context more clearly, we need to closely consider the details of vs3: ‘How shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard.’

The first thing we note is that the ‘it’ of vs3 (referred to twice) is our ‘great salvation’. Therefore, vs3 declares that the Lord Jesus Himself first proclaimed this great salvation message. And, then, those who heard Him, presumably the first apostles, were also able to attest to that salvation message.

Therefore, the ‘attesting’ in vs3 refers back to the actual salvation message first proclaimed by Jesus. This is not speaking about attesting to the message through signs and wonders, etc. Rather, it was about proclaiming (attesting to) the message that they heard from Jesus Himself. It was truly reassuring that those first apostles could affirm and attest to the truth of the salvation message. That was one of their great callings. They had heard it first hand. They were the starting point for this gospel message!

But, on top of that, vs4 tells us that God also bore witness to their message by signs, wonders, miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit. The attesting was to the salvation message. And, with that, God was also bearing witness to that message through signs, wonders, miracles, and gifts of the Spirit.

‘Ah,’ one might say. ‘There you have that these signs and wonders were given to attest to and bear witness to the truth of the message. That is why they were given.’

Well, hold on a minute. Let’s think this through.

Of course, the first apostles were used in signs, wonders, miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit in confirming the gospel message. All one has to do is read the book of Acts to see such. Yet, we must be willing to admit that the Holy Spirit also used others in signs, wonders, miracles and gifts of the Spirit. Here are a few people who were used in such:

We must also remember that tongues and prophecy are gifts of the Spirit, and it does mention ‘gifts of the Holy Spirit’ in Hebrews 2:3-4. We can see that the Scripture records that many others were used with gifts of the Spirit (including miracles and other similar things) besides the first apostles.

Thus, the wider church has always been used in all gifts of the Spirit. Some are not solely related to apostles or solely to a particular time period pre-canon formation. Such is not supported in Scripture, nor in the subsequent 1900 years of the activity of God’s Spirit amongst His people.

As a side comment, one of the first major cessationist works that looked to build the case that miracles were only performed by Jesus and the first apostles, and would subsequently cease with the completion of canon, was B.B. Warfield’s The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. Yet, Max Turner handles such a cessationist argument well in his book, The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts: Then and Now (which I also review here). Here we quote a few words:

That miracles were thought to attest God’s messengers need not be doubted; but that that was their prime, if not exclusive, purpose was in no way demonstrated by Warfield (nor by his cessationist successors). As we have seen, within Jesus’ proclamation, healings and exorcisms were regarded as expressions of the salvation announced. Similarly, the prophecy and tongues of the apostolic church were not related to the preparation of Scripture, nor understood as ‘sign gifts’ in an evidentialist sense. They performed a wide range of beneficial functions within the church, and in individual discipleship, and were not in any way rendered significantly less ‘needed’ (nor less desirable) by the completion of the canon (as cessationists claim).

Later on, Turner declares:

As we have seen…, nothing in the New Testament suggests that healings would cease, and Warfield’s attempt to restrict their function to apostolic accreditation is baseless and reductionist. For the New Testament writers, the healings were not [solely] externally attesting signs, but part of the scope of the salvation announced, which reached beyond the merely spiritual to the psychological and physical.

Therefore, we must guard against making a hard-lined connection between apostles and miracles, healings, etc. While many have been used in such, there is no formula here of solely tying the two together.

Therefore, I am fervently convinced that none of these four passages can be quoted in support of a cessationist position. And, even with a passage like 1 Corinthians 13:8-12, the continuationist is convinced that Scripture itself points to the need and utilisation of these gifts until the return of Christ Himself. What a blessing to continue to see these gifts enacted by the Spirit of God. What an opportunity to see the Spirit-empowered saints moved by God’s Spirit, all with a desire to not contradict Scripture, but that we might edify the body and tough lives for Christ.

Cessationism and the Authority of Personal Assumption

By Marv

I’m not sure whether Daniel Wallace’s recent post on Parchment and Pen, Charismata and the Authority of Personal Experience, was intended to coincide with the annual celebration of the world’s most famous irrational number, π, but it did in fact appear on “Pi Day” (3/14/2010) and does seem to hit the theme of what he considers to be irrational. If it otherwise appeared to you, as it did to me, oddly out of date, this is because it is in fact a repost of an older article. On reading it, I estimated that the references sounded on the nature of fifteen years old. In fact, the Word version available on bible.org is dated 1997, though I suspect the original composition is a tad earlier.

The article calls for a response, I’m afraid, but before I begin, I want to make clear what profound regard and respect I hold for Dr. Wallace. He is not only—literally—the man who “wrote the book” on New Testament Greek, but he was my own teacher and, yes, a personal hero. The fact is that I found my way to both Parchment and Pen and Theologica through hunting down his online writings.

Yet I am going to be so bold as to disagree with some of what he writes, while agreeing with much of it. I have a few slightly-more-than-quibbles to get out of the way first. I find the opening references to “psychic hotlines” and UFOs unnecessarily disobliging. The phenomena under discussion, such as healing and prophecy, are after all such as he agrees genuinely occurred among the Church of the first century, not occulta from beyond the fringe.

Also it is misleading to refer to the continuationist perspective he has in view as “charismatic.” He explicitly aligns the people he refers to with the Vineyard movement, which is part of what is commonly called “Third Wave.” Since the second of the “waves” in question is the Charismatic Movement, there is a significant distinction there that he ignores.

More importantly, however, he allows himself to go beyond commentary on the facts and proposes to offer a psychological explanation for a change in belief, and even more importantly casts this change as an abandonment of basic evangelical principle. He states: “their final authority is no longer reasoning about the Scriptures; now it is personal experience.” I do not believe that he is justified in doing either, and that his conclusion is wrong in both instances.

One may wish to ask how Dr. Wallace, coming from an outsider’s perspective, can be as confident as he appears to be in regard to the psyche of others. May I suggest, from an insider’s perspective, that he has significantly misread the situation. My claim to an inside perspective is based on the fact that: (a) some the individuals he almost certainly has chiefly in mind were also my own teachers and I have some familiarity with them both before and after their “paradigm shift”; (b) I myself fall generally into the lines of the events he describes. As the song says: “apart from the names and a few other changes, the story’s the same one”; and (c) I have spent two decades in the Vineyard milieu, and so know something whereof I speak.

So I can attest that, so far from being swayed by mere experience, these people have made the decision: (1) to believe something that the Bible clearly teaches, specific works of the Holy Spirit in the Body of Christ, and (2) to disbelieve something they find nowhere in the Bible, that particular aspects of the Spirit’s work ceased after the first (or second) generation of the Church. I am not quite sure how this constitutes substituting “personal experience” for the Scriptures as final authority. It is rather quite the opposite.

On the other hand, a typical cessationist charge is “Can you honestly tell me you’ve seen genuine New Testament quality miracles.” Now, which side is clinging to experience as authority?

What about experience, though? Yes, odd as it may seem, what we are told in the Bible does turn out to be true. Paul describes the effects of prophecy, for example, in terms of “upbuilding and encouragement and consolation.” (1 Cor. 14:3) and also having “the secrets of [one’s] heart…disclosed” (1 Cor. 14:25). I can attest to this effect, as I think anyone who has taken the Biblical teaching on prophecy as valid for today could. Yes, these are subjective matters for the most part, difficult to demonstrate to others. Dr. Wallace puts scare quotes around “prophet,” and dismisses such instances as cold reading.

What am I supposed to believe when apostolic, Scriptural authority teaches me to not to despise prophetic utterances (1 Thes. 5:20)? I know what cold reading is, and I know charlatans have used it to simulate genuine prophecy. However, I’ve also received prophecies the details of which rule out cold reading, and given prophecies which to the best of my ability to discern were in no way instances of cold reading. Still it isn’t the experience that tells me prophecy is a work of the Holy Spirit; it is the Bible.

It is also true that such “paradigm shifts” are often occasioned by personal crises. Dr. Wallace is quite correct that imbalance in Christian life, such as excessive focus on the intellectual aspects, is deleterious to joy in Christ. It is Dr. Wallace’s final paragraph that is at once the most laudable part of his essay, and the most lamentable. It is laudable for the truth of his statement: “the trilogy of authority can be seen this way: both personal experience and reason are vital means to accessing revelation. We are to embrace Christ, as revealed in the Word, with mind and heart.” What is lamentable, is that by making the statement he is implying that continuationists do not understand this.

In fact, Dr. Wallace is describing what may be the single greatest lesson I have learned in embracing continuationism. We have to do not primarily with knowledge or feeling, but with a blessed Person, who has given us His Word and has given us His Spirit, and sent us as He was sent, as is with us until the end of the age. It is in Him that we are to place our faith. I’ve been taught the very same truth by the very people Dr. Wallace suggest have missed it. So while Dr. Wallace’s prescription is on target, I believe his diagnosis is considerably wide of the mark.

The Case For Continuationism (Part 2) – Sam Storms

Here is the second and final article from guest poster, Sam Storms, head of Enjoying God Ministries. The first article consisted of twelve bad reasons for being a cessationist. This post now concerns the positive (biblical and theological) perspective of being a continuationist. Both of these posts were originally posted at Sam’s ministry website here.

12 Good Reasons for Being a Continuationist

1. The first good reason for being a continuationist is the 12 bad reasons for being a cessationist.

2. A second good reason for being a continuationist is the consistent, indeed pervasive, and altogether positive presence throughout the NT of all spiritual gifts.

3. A third good reason for being a continuationist is the extensive NT evidence of the operation of so-called miraculous gifts among Christians who are not apostles. In other words, numerous non-apostolic men and women, young and old, across the breadth of the Roman Empire consistently exercised these gifts of the Spirit (and Stephen and Philip ministered in the power of signs and wonders).

4. A fourth good reason for being a continuationist is the explicit and oft-repeated purpose of the charismata: namely, the edification of the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:7; 14:3,26).

5. The fifth good reason for being a continuationist is the fundamental continuity or spiritually organic relationship between the church in Acts and the church in subsequent centuries.

6. Very much related to the fifth point, a sixth good reason for being a continuationist is because of what Peter (Luke) says in Acts 2 concerning the operation of so-called miraculous gifts as characteristic of the New Covenant age of the Church.

7. The seventh good reason for being a continuationist is 1 Corinthians 13:8-12.

8. The eighth good reason for being a continuationist is Ephesians 4:11-13.

9. A ninth good reason for being a continuationist is the description in Revelation 11 of the ministry of the Two Witnesses.

10. A tenth good reason for being a continuationist is because the Holy Spirit in Christ is the Holy Spirit in Christians. We are indwelt, anointed, filled, and empowered by the same Spirit as was Jesus. His ministry is (with certain obvious limitations) the model for our ministry (cf. Acts 10:38).

11. An eleventh reason to be a continuationist is the absence of any explicit or implicit notion that we should view spiritual gifts any differently than we do other NT practices and ministries that are portrayed as essential for the life and well-being of the Church.

12. The twelfth and final good reason for being a continuationist is the testimony throughout most of church history concerning the operation of the miraculous gifts of the Spirit.

[Although it is technically not a reason or argument for being a continuationist like the previous twelve, I cannot ignore personal experience. The fact is that I’ve seen all spiritual gifts in operation, tested and confirmed them, and experienced them first-hand on countless occasions. As stated, this is less a reason to become a continuationist and more a confirmation (although not an infallible one) of the validity of that decision. Experience, in isolation from the biblical text, proves little. But experience must be noted, especially if it illustrates or embodies what we see in the biblical text.]

A Tale of Two Professors

By Marv

Warning:  the following is subjective, anecdotal, experiential.  If you are allergic to such things, please don’t read.

I attended seminary in an earlier century, and amid now-forgotten forms and paradigms lost, a few unforgettable moments stand out.  A contrastive pair of these played a supporting role in my journey from cessationism to continuationism.

It is a tale of two professors:  Prof A and Prof Z.  The former is designated A because he was my favorite professor, and because of a singularly epiphanic moment associated with him.  Professor Z, on the other hand, remains memorable due to a crass comment of his that shocked even me, afficionado of twisted and dark humor that I am.

He was making reference to a past theologian who, I admit, showed little sign of being regenerate.  Now this theologian had died a half century earlier, but I don’t think Prof Z needed to say, when mentioning his name: “…who has been in hell for 50 years now…”

True enough perhaps, but a bit beyond the pale for jocularity.

The other moment, with Professor A, was during a lecture in a historical survey course.  He was discoursing on some very brutal practices inflicted by one ancient conquering empire on their unfortunate victims.  A few hands went up.  One student in asking a question, happened to make a wry comment about the situation–graveyard humor, perhaps.  These happened, after all, very long ago and far away.

I have to admit, I was not particularly shocked this time.  Perhaps I even laughed.  But Prof A didn’t laugh.  In fact it seemed as if someone had punched him in the gut, so viscerally did he react to the remark.  I am certain he had no wish to embarrass the student; he simply was unable to proceed for several minutes.

A light went on:  these were real people for him, not just figures from history, academic subjects.  Why weren’t they for me?  That realization lingered with me, worked me over.

I was a cessationist then.  Prof A was on his way to leaving cessationism, though I didn’t quite pick up on passing statements he would make in that regard.  It wan’t until five years after graduation that I found myself, too, moving toward continuationism.

In the intervening years, Prof A had left the seminary over the issue of his embracing continuationism.  So too had yet another professor I’ll call B, my second favorite teacher.  Both were and are brilliant men.   They didn’t go “that way” due to lack of intellect.

During the same time, Prof Z became one of the most outspoken critics on the faculty of the “Signs and Wonders” movement, and continuationism in general.  (He also eventually left the school, over a different issue.) I read the articles he had written in both journals and popular periodicals, looking for reasons to hold fast. 

Now, I am most certainly not making any kind of general observation about the character of cessationists vs. continuationists.  But as I was wrestling with accepting the various rational and exegetical arguments involved, I could not help recalling those two moments and asking myself whom I most wanted to emulate.

There was a second epiphany from Professor A.  You really cannot understand it, if you do not appreciate the effect academic study of the Bible can have over time, if one is not careful.  Voluminous reading, vocabulary memorization, theological terminology, paper upon paper.  One day, in the middle of it all, he asked us students, “Don’t you ever take the time–just to be with Jesus?”

As a matter of fact, no, I didn’t, not any more.  Martha-like, I and probably the majority of my classmates were far to busy for any sitting at His feet.

That was a shame, quite literally. 

So then, along with the evaporation of all the Biblical and logical reasons for holding to cessationism, there was the dawning awareness of His beauty and His sweetness.  It is by His desire, and His plan, that we are to enjoy an ongoing abiding relationship, communion that is far more, but not less than, communication.

The Case For Continuationism – Sam Storms

As we have noted in our About page, part of our desire is to regularly post articles by guest authors. Well, here is our first post from Sam Storms, head of Enjoying God Ministries. Sam has given us permission to post these next two articles, which can originally be found here.

The first article will deal with reasons why one should not be a cessationist and the second article will deal with the reasons why one should be a continuationist.

12 Bad Reasons for Being a Cessationist

1. The first bad reason for being a cessationist is an appeal to 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 on the assumption that the “perfect” is something other or less than the fullness of the eternal state ushered in at the second coming of Jesus Christ.

2. Another bad or illegitimate reason for being a cessationist is the belief that signs and wonders as well as certain spiritual gifts served only to confirm or authenticate the original company of apostles and that when the apostles passed away so also did the gifts.

a) No biblical text ever says that signs and wonders or spiritual gifts of a particular sort authenticated the apostles. Signs and wonders authenticated Jesus and the apostolic message about him. If signs and wonders were designed exclusively to authenticate apostles, why were non-apostolic believers (such as Philip and Stephen) empowered to perform them?

b) This is a good reason for being a cessationist only if you can demonstrate that authentication or attestation of the apostolic message was the sole and exclusive purpose of such displays of divine power. However, nowhere in the NT is the purpose/function of the miraculous or the charismata reduced to that of attestation.

3. A third bad reason for being a cessationist is the belief that since we now have the completed canon of Scripture we no longer need the operation of so-called miraculous gifts.

4. A fourth bad reason for being a cessationist is the belief that to embrace the validity of all spiritual gifts today requires that one embrace classical Pentecostalism and its belief in Spirit-baptism as separate from and subsequent to conversion, as well as their doctrine that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of having experienced this Spirit-baptism.

5. Another bad reason for being a cessationist is the idea that if one spiritual gift, such as apostleship, has ceased to be operative in the church that other, and perhaps all, miraculous gifts have ceased to be operative in the church.

6. A sixth bad reason for being a cessationist is the fear that to acknowledge the validity today of revelatory gifts such as prophecy and word of knowledge would necessarily undermine the finality and sufficiency of Holy Scripture.

7. A seventh bad reason for being a cessationist is the appeal to Ephesians 2:20 on the assumption that revelatory gifts such as prophecy were uniquely linked to the apostles and therefore designed to function only during the so-called foundational period in the early church.

8. An eighth bad reason for being a cessationist is the argument that since we typically don’t see today miracles or gifts equal in quality/intensity to those in the ministries of Jesus and the Apostles, God doesn’t intend for any miraculous gifts of a lesser quality/intensity to operate in the church among ordinary Christians (but cf. 1 Cor. 12-14; Rom. 12; 1 Thess. 5:19-22; James 5).

9. A ninth bad reason for being a cessationist is the so-called “cluster” argument.

[Note from Scott: I believe the ‘cluster’ argument referred to here is that miracles and other such gifts seem to ‘cluster’ around greater revelatory events. Since such great revelatory events no longer exist due to Christ’s coming and that we now have the full canon of Scripture, such miracles and gifts should not be expected.]

10. A tenth bad reason for being a cessationist is the appeal to the alleged absence of miraculous gifts in church history subsequent to the first century.

11. Eleventh, it is a bad reason to be a cessationist because of the absence of good experiences with spiritual gifts and the often fanatical excess of certain TV evangelists and some of those involved in the Word of Faith or Prosperity Gospel movements (as well as the anti-intellectualism often found in those movements).

12. Finally, a twelfth bad reason for being a Cessationist is fear of what embracing continuationism might entail for your life personally and the well-being of your church corporately.

The next post will look at 12 good reasons for being a continuationist.