Reformed view on gifts of spirit in apostolic times vs now

Hey i wanted to ask what the scriptural understandings are behind the view some reformed have over some gifts only being for apostolic times and some still here today? What makes it apostolic and which ones do they believe we still have?

The Reformed community has not spoken unanimously on the question of the charismatic gifts. Three major positions exist:

1. Cessation: The most common position is that the "spectacular" or "sign" gifts (prophecy, miraculous healing, tongues, etc.) ceased with the apostolic age. These gifts were manifested for the purpose of validating the gospel and apostolic authority. Once the apostles' ministry had been sufficiently validated, the Spirit ceased to give these gifts. This view appeals in part to the phrase "foundation of the apostles and prophets" in Ephesians 2:20. From this phrase, it argues that the prophetic gifts were "foundational," pertaining only to the foundational period of the church, that is, to the apostolic period (from "apostles and prophets"), though some extend this period until the formal closure of the Canon. It also appeals to the evidence in the New Testament that the more spectacular gifts seemed to be on the decline even while the apostles were still ministering. This position tends to limit its list of gifts to those mentioned in the New Testament (Rom. 12; 1 Cor. 12; 14; Eph. 4).

2. Continuation: This position is probably the least common within the Reformed community. It asserts the continuing validity of all the gifts. However, it does not generally assert the necessary manifestation of any or all of the spectacular/sign gifts in any person, place or time. Rather, it merely asserts that God can do whatever he wants whenever he wants, and is not bound never to manifest these gifts simply because the apostolic age has passed. A fully practising charismatic position would also fall under this category, but these are few and far between in Reformed circles. This position tends to limit its list of gifts to those mentioned in the New Testament (Rom. 12; 1 Cor. 12-14; Eph. 4), though those of a fully charismatic persuasion sometimes claim the manifestation of new gifts as well.

3. Modification: Somewhere between the cessation and continuation positions in popularity, this position argues that the gifts have been modified. They have not necessarily ceased, but are now normally manifested somewhat differently than they were during the apostolic age. For example, those who hold this position may argue for the continuation of the gift of prophecy, but assert that it is now limited to the proclamation of existing special revelation (i.e. Scripture), and that it excludes the reception and proclamation of new special revelation. Like the other positions, modification tends to limit its discussion of gifts to those listed in the New Testament. Some of those who hold to modification, however, believe that the gifts listed in the New Testament were only samples or examples of the types of gifts that were manifested during the apostolic age. They argue for this point in part by noting that the lists in Romans 12, 1 Corinthians 12-14, and Ephesians 4 differ from one another, and by pointing out that lists in the Bible are frequently not exhaustive (e.g., "love" is not limited to those manifestatins listed in 1 Cor. 13). Thus, this modification subposition argues for the continuation of "gifting," without specifically arguing for or against the continuation of any particular manifestation in any given person, place or time, and without limiting potential gifts to those listed in the Bible.

Regarding the nature of the Canon, one cannot be properly called "Reformed" without adhering to sola Scriptura ("Scripture alone"), which states that Scripture alone is the final authority in all matters of doctrine and religion. If one argues that special revelation (e.g. dreams, visions, spectacular prophecies) has not ceased, and that current special revelation is authoritative (i.e. on the level with Scripture), then one necessarily rejects sola Scriptura. One may still adhere to a Calvinistic system of salvation (i.e. the Five Points), and to covenant theology, but these in and of themselves are not sufficient to classify one as "Reformed."

There are people, however, who believe in the actual or potential post-apostolic presence of spectacular gifts of special revelation, but who do not believe this new special revelation to be authoritative. These, while accepting new revelation, do not challenge sola Scriptura. Generally, they argue that new special revelation is fallible, unlike biblical special revelation, and therefore that it is not as authoritative as Scripture.

A somewhat different version of the position is that new special revelation is true because it comes from God, and therefore it is infallible. It is not, however, authoritative. That is to say, infallibility/truth is not the source of authority -- God is. Because God has not commissioned any new authoritative covenant emissaries (the apostles were the last), there cannot be any new authoritative revelation. Thus, not only must all new special revelation be subjected to the judgment of Scripture to judge its truth, but it also must submit to the authority of Scripture. New special revelation does not in and of itself have the authority to bind believers or their consciences -- even if the new revelation is true. This may have been the case with non-apostolic prophecy even in the New Testament (1 Cor. 14:29).

So, there are a couple different possible scenarios in which one might believe in the modern manifestation of spectacular gifts like prophecy and tongues, yet still affirm sola Scriptura by saying that there is no new authoritative/canonical revelation. If one affirms sola Scriptura and the closure of the Canon, then there is no inherent inconsistency in also believing in the continuation or modification of the gifts.

R McLaughlin

A summary of Jonathan Edward's view of the gifts of the spirit - by Philip Craig

Though building on the foundation begun by John Calvin and John Owen, Jonathan Edwards took the development of the Reformed doctrine of cessationism to new heights. The depth and breadth of the arguments Edwards has marshalled against restorationism (the belief in the restoration of apostolic sign-gifts such as prophecy) marks out the apogee of cessationism, which is indeed one of the main themes of his writing and a matter of urgent concern for him.

Edwards clearly considered the revival of prophecy, or new revelation, as the gravest threat to the continued revival of the church, which he hoped would usher in the glorious times. This error threatened to undo, for all eternity, "great multitudes" and to make the Bible of little account in the eyes of the average professor.

Edwards's many arguments against the restoration of prophecy can be summarized as follows.

First, in discussing spiritual enlightenment, he presses home the Puritan Reformed view that the Spirit works in, by and through the word, not by new revelation.

Secondly, prophecy was a temporary and extraordinary gift, given only to support the church in its infancy before the canon was completed and to authenticate the new revelation given the apostles.

Third, the canon closed with the death of the apostles, has remained closed for over 1600 years, and Scripture gives us no reason to expect new revelation or any new dispensation.

Fourth, the sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit are what will glorify the church and fit it for heaven, not extraordinary gifts; prophecy, far from glorifying the church, is a stumbling block to further revival.

Fifth, Scripture is a sufficient and perfect rule for Christian life and faith.

Sixth, preaching, not prophecy is the prime means of grace appointed by God for the extension of His kingdom.

Seventh, failed prophecies abounded during The Great Awakening, often with disastrous results.

Eighth, church history as well as Edwards's experience demonstrates that the elevation of prophecy causes the denigration of Scripture: the church stops following the sure polestar of Scripture and wanders after the jack-o'-lantern of prophecy

Finally, the so-called direct witness of the Holy Spirit had "eternally undone" what he described as "great multitudes" in the Great Awakening by leading them to presume assurance of salvation without any evidence of Christian practice. Indeed, Edwards believes this teaching is producing a counterfeit evangelical Christianity.

With his Puritan Reformed heritage, Edwards takes great pains to reaffirm an emphasis sadly lacking in contemporary evangelicalism, the primacy of the preached word. As Edwards made clear in A Treatise Concerning Religious Affections, it is not prophecy, but preaching that God has appointed to "impress upon sinners their misery and need of a Savior and the glory and sufficiency of Christ."'

The gifts of the Spirit ceased at the death of the apostles or at the completion of the New Testament. This, of course, is a doctrine without a syllable of Biblical authority back of it. The result of this erroneous teaching is that spiritually gifted persons are ominously few among us..

It seems some years ago a ancient paper was discovered in a archives room at Gordon-Conwell Seminary. In the ancient reference was a statement written by Theodore Beza who was a close confidant of John Calvin. In this writing Beza makes a reference to Calvin telling him that during some of his (Calvin) devotional times that Calvin, esteemed by many as the Prince of the Reformers, found himself speaking in languages he had not learned and could not understand. Hmmm is all I can think since I believe in the gifts for then and now. I find myself wishing Calvin hadn't been so intellectual about it and trying to figure it out but had recognized it for what I believe it was. The article is as follows below:

Did John Calvin Speak In Tongues?

Here is an interesting article from the archives of "The Paper", a student publication of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. On page 6 of the March 24, 1975 issue is a short piece by Quent Warford, “Calvin Speaks In Unknown Tongue.”

Forasmuch as there has been much inquiry concerning the discovery at the Episcopal Divinity School, I feel obligated to shed what light that I can on the matter. After, all, molehills do have a way of being made into mountains, given enough discussion.

Quite frankly, I personally find any notion preposterous, to the effect that Calvin experienced glossolalia. Therefore, the only logical thing to do is to take the advice of my dear Church History professor, and go to the primary source.

The volume which allegedly contains the account of Calvin’s ecstatic utterances is in the library at the Episcopal Divinity School. It is his biography by his friend and confidant, Theodore Beza, entitled De Vitam Iohannes Cauvin. It is contained in The Vault, the Rare Book Room at E.D.S. Entering The Vault involves a great deal of red tape, and the invocation of the higher powers of the B.T.I. Prof. Hiles’ dining-hall pass also came in handy.

De Vitam Ihohannes Cauvin was published posthumously by Beza. All it contains concerning glossolalia is a small entry, confided to Beza by Calvin, shortly before the latter’s death. On several oc­casions, Calvin, in his devotions, found himself uttering a "lingua non nota et cognota mini". That is, the language was not known or understood by him.

Himself a skilled linguist, Calvin set about to discover the orthography of the utterance. Unable to trace it, he confided to Beza that although the language was Hebraic in character, he yet feared that he had spoken a "lingua barbarorum". That is, he feared having spoken in an accursed tongue, such as what was spoken by the Canaanites.

The matter was only a minor one to Beza, who allots it only a few sentences in De Vitam Iohannes Cauvin. Calvin’s concern was only a matter of linguistics. Therefore, there is not enough primary source material to build a case one way or the other.

My roommate, Ken Macari, was most helpful to me in interpreting this passage from Beza, since Latin is more native to him than to me. Yet I must say, however, that I found Calvin’s Latin to be very smooth, elegant, and Vergilian.

If John Calvin found himself on several devotional occasions speaking in a language he did not know or understand — well, that certainly sounds to me very much like speaking in tongues. (END)

See http://www.holyspiritmiracles.com/2010/04/did-john-calvin-speak-in-tongues.html

Sermonindex - Moderator Greg said,

"Reformed brothers believe in the fruit of the Spirit but ALL of the gifts ended with the apostles except the gift of prophesying the Gospel."

Greg, please cite "reformed brothers" to affirm the statement you have written to be true.

Sermonindex - Moderator Greg said,

"For many reformed preachers even talking of the Holy Spirit was considered a bad thing, it was a substance and not a living person in you."

Greg, please cite the "many reformed preachers" who say such things,to affirm the statement you have written to be true.

Thanks.

///The gifts of the Spirit ceased at the death of the apostles or at the completion of the New Testament. This, of course, is a doctrine without a syllable of Biblical authority back of it. The result of this erroneous teaching is that spiritually gifted persons are ominously few among us..///

Very Well Said!

what would be awesome is if sum reformed brothers or sisters could actually respond and tell us what their tradition teaches instead of non-reformed brothers and sisters telling us what their opposition believes. its sort of like asking the north korean government what its like to grow up in America. I don’t put much stock in their opinions on the matter.

Hey thanks all for taking time to respond they were very helpful!

Evangel