On September 22 of this year a full-length documentary film was released under the title, Cessationist. It features numerous individuals on both sides of the debate concerning the continuation or cessation of certain spiritual gifts described in Scripture. Given the fact that I am cited (and criticized) perhaps more frequently than any other charismatic/continuationist, it seems only fitting that I should respond to the film.

My response will be unavoidably lengthy, so it will be released in several installments.

I want to begin by making an appeal to the cessationists behind this film as well as those who appear in it. Please, hear me well. If you can find fault with any of the biblical interpretations that I present, notify me of them. If your criticisms are valid and substantive, I will repent openly on this blog and in public. But I would also ask that, if you cannot find fault with how I understand the biblical text, you will repent and forever cease to make use of such arguments in the defense of your position. With that understood, let’s begin.

Although it doesn’t appear at the beginning of the film, I want to bring clarity to one massive misstatement on the part of the producers of the documentary. I, together with Wayne Grudem, John Piper, and D. A. Carson, am referred to as one who takes an “open but cautious” approach to the issue of spiritual gifts today. That is completely and utterly false. I won’t speak for my three friends, but only on my own behalf. Merely to be “open” to miraculous gifts of the Spirit is far short of what the Bible commands. Paul clearly and repeatedly says something altogether different:

“But earnestly desire the higher gifts” (1 Cor. 12:31).

“Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy” (1 Cor. 14:1).

“So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit [and Paul nowhere tells them or us that such eagerness if misguided, far less that it is sinful], strive to excel in building up the church” (1 Cor. 14:12).

“So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues” (1 Cor. 14:39).

So, no, I’m decidedly not open but cautious. I’m eager and hungry and desperate for all that the Spirit makes available to the people of God. Openness counts for very little, if anything at all. Earnest desire is God’s will for us all. And to suggest that I’m “cautious” about spiritual gifts is massively misguided. “Cautious” implies danger ahead. “Cautious” suggests that spiritual gifts are a threat and we need to be careful. But where do we find any such statement in Scripture? Nowhere. Spiritual gifts are a blessing from God and we are to earnestly and passionately and prayerfully to seek them.

In the film, a clip of me citing these texts is shown, after which I say, “If you are not earnestly desiring spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy, you are sinning.”

Dr. Sam Waldron responds to my statement in the only way a cessationist can. He reminds us all that every command in Scripture is set within its own context, and on occasion those contexts are unrepeatable and cannot be reproduced. He gives one example from Matthew 10. There Jesus told his disciples, “Acquire no gold or silver or copper for your belts, no bag for your journey, or two tunics or sandals or a staff, for the laborer deserves his food” (Matt. 10:9-10). No one, says Waldron, is obligated to abide by this exhortation, and he’s perfectly correct in that. But why? The answer is obvious from the historical context in which it appeared and the immediate counsel of Jesus that his disciples “go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 10:5b-6).

Our Lord’s command is explicitly tied to that stage in redemptive history when the offer of the kingdom was restricted to “the house of Israel” (v. 6b). But we know from other explicit texts of Scripture that at the close of his earthly ministry Jesus changed the strategy for his followers. It is in Matthew’s gospel that he commanded us all to “make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:19), and not just among the people of Israel. The reason why we no longer obey the command of Matthew 10 is because of the command of Matthew 28 (and Luke 24:47 and Acts 1:8).

But where in any context, be it 1 Corinthians or any other NT book, are we told that the command to “earnestly desire spiritual gifts, especially that we might prophesy” (1 Cor. 14:1, 39) has been rescinded? Where are we told that we are no longer under obligation to obey Paul’s words? The answer is, nowhere. If a cessationist can show me a text where it clearly says the gift of prophecy is no longer valid today, I’ll join ranks with them in releasing all Christians from any obligation to obey Paul’s mandate.

Waldron has one more thing to say about this command in 1 Cor. 14. He simply argues that the spiritual gift of prophecy is no longer being imparted to Christians by the Spirit (and he says this in the complete absence of any text that says so). In other words, he declares himself free to disobey the command because prophecy is no longer a gift valid for today. All I can say, in the words of the Church Lady from SNL, is “Well, now isn’t that convenient!” I apologize if my sarcasm strikes you the wrong way. I don’t intend to sound snarky, but seriously, how else can one justify disobeying a clear command of Scripture if not by simply saying what we are commanded to do is something God no longer does.

So, I remain committed to striving in the power of the Spirit to obeying what the Spirit inspired Paul to say. My definition of sin, as I suspect yours is as well, is willful disobedience to an explicit command of Scripture. And I don’t know how Paul could have been more explicit than he is in 1 Cor. 14:1,39, etc. So, I stand by my statement, “If you are not earnestly desiring spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy,” you are sinning.

To be continued . . . (like the gifts!)