Here is a short interaction with the essay by Prof. Duguid in the volume for Vern Poythress.
Prof. Duguid stages his discussion between Gaffin and Grudem, representatives of cessationism and continuationism respectively. He makes a distinction between capital-P prophecy or "Thus saith the Lord" type activity and lowercase-p prophecy or a wider range of Spirit-inspired activities. He then proceeds to investigate the OT for the different uses of "prophecy" to substantiate this distinction.
One main argument is that there is a certain kind of activity which does not involve others listening to what is said, and this falls under the broader name of prophecy. These appear to be ecstatic statements. This has to be granted. And yet I cannot help but notice that this activity falls within a broader movement that is distinctly tied to "redemptive history." Peter gives expression to this overall prophetic thrust in Acts 3:24, "Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days." Even if no one is listening it seems to have a purpose related to the fact that revelation is progressive and the line of redemptive history is being marked out for the reader. This appears to me to be a significant point in this discussion which receives little to no attention.
The essay then turns to an examination of the NT. It is difficult to evaluate this section. It concludes with an "if" statement. But the "if" statement is the whole point in debate. Only if you allow the NT to reflect the diversity of what has been presented from the OT will the strictures of Gaffin's position be lifted. Here again I am struck by the fact that the NT is setting before us significant developments in the history of redemption, especially as the revelation of God branches out to incorporate the Gentiles.
Then we are introduced to the prophethood of all believers. Again we are faced with an "if" statement. Small p activity might be subsumed under this category. Of course there is one glaring problem here -- it now applies to "all" believers. In becoming universal it has ceased to be particular, and in ceasing to be particular it has ceased to describe the phenomenon we witness in either the OT or the NT. This poses a major problem. Why is small p prophecy particular in both testaments but universal now? Is this a "continuation?" No. A whole new feature has entered into it -- it can now serve no function in demarcating the development of revelation or the history of redemption. It is completely severed from this context.
I personally agree that there is a prophethood of all believers, which is nothing other than the anointing we have received from Christ to know all things necessary for our salvation, as taught in First John. But that is all it could be. It is the knowledge we share with one another on the basis of the Spirit's work in our lives bringing us to confess Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour. It cannot be anything more than that. As soon as it becomes more than that it becomes particular, and if it is particular it does not apply to all believers because it does not pertain to our "common salvation."
The knowledge we have of our common salvation -- the anointing we have received from Christ to be prophets -- must be regulated by Scripture from first to last. We often speak of not going beyond what is written. There is no room here for the type of knowledge that the "small p" prophets revealed. Hence the category of the prophethood of all believers, as intriguing as it might be, turns out to be a dead end.
I suppose that if there is to be a category of soft cessationism Prof. Duguid's essay is a good place to turn to give it some substance. But I am still left in the same place asking the same question I have always had -- How does something that ceased still continue? Every time someone tries to answer that question they end up introducing some new thing that had no place in the Scriptures, so it is not really a continuation of Scriptural phenomena.
