The Cessation of Special Revelation, Part 2

[Dr. Bob Gonzales]

Brothers,

In Part 1 of this series, we noted that many believers today debate the question of whether God is continuing to confer on the NT church the the gifts of prophecy and tongues. Some say, “Yes” (continuationists). Others respond, “No” (cessationists). And a third group cautiously answer, “Maybe” (open-but-cautious). I’d like to provide an argument for the cessation of tongues and prophecy in the form of a syllogism:

Major Premise: All divinely authoritative special revelation (canonical) has been completed and has, therefore, ceased.
Minor Premise: NT prophecy and tongues are forms of divinely authoritative (canonical) special revelation.
Conclusion: Therefore, tongues and prophecy have ceased.
​

In this segment of our series, we’ll begin to develop the major premise, namely, that all divinely authoritative special revelation (canonical) has been completed and has, therefore, ceased. First, we’ll have to identity and establish the boundaries of that corpora of inspired literature known as the Old Testament. Along the way, we’ll briefly lists some reasons why we don’t include the Jewish apocryphal books as part of the Old Testament canon. Then, in Part 3, we’ll identify the NT canon. The NT canon brings special redemptive revelation to its final form and historical goal, we’ll argue in Part 4, which will establish our first major premise.

The Cessation of Special Revelation: A Humble Argument for the Cessation of Prophecy and Tongues, Part 2

Enjoy!

Your servant,

 

[Dearly Bought]

You're definitely right on that last point about the Apocrypha. When I taught on the Belgic Confession's doctrine of canon for a Sunday School class, I had the class members read sections of the Apocrypha (and other extra-canonical writings). The side-by-side comparison of Bel and the Dragon to the canonical Daniel leaves no doubt as to the truly inspired text.

 

[Jimmy the Greek]

Bob,
Good work. I'm getting ahead of you, but want to challenge your thinking in regard to your Minor Premise. To support the conclusion, the Minor Premise must say that NT tongues and prophecy were exclusively used to convey "canonical" special revelation.

Is that really demonstrable from Scripture? E.g. could not tongues function as a supernatural witness to the gospel without necessarily "adding" to special revelation?

If so, then the conclusion does not necessarily follow, at least regarding tongues. I'm not contending here, merely thinking out loud.

 

[Dearly Bought]

Bob,
Good work. I'm getting ahead of you, but want to challenge your thinking in regard to your Minor Premise. To support the conclusion, the Minor Premise must say that NT tongues and prophecy were exclusively used to convey "canonical" special revelation.

Is that really demonstrable from Scripture? E.g. could not tongues function as a supernatural witness to the gospel without necessarily "adding" to special revelation?

If so, then the conclusion does not necessarily follow, at least regarding tongues. I'm not contending here, merely thinking out loud.

From what I remember, if you follow O. Palmer Robertson's arguments in The Final Word then tongues are a subset of prophecy. Prophecy with a twist, so to speak.

 

[Dr. Bob Gonzales]

Bob,
Good work. I'm getting ahead of you, but want to challenge your thinking in regard to your Minor Premise. To support the conclusion, the Minor Premise must say that NT tongues and prophecy were exclusively used to convey "canonical" special revelation.

Is that really demonstrable from Scripture? E.g. could not tongues function as a supernatural witness to the gospel without necessarily "adding" to special revelation?

If so, then the conclusion does not necessarily follow, at least regarding tongues. I'm not contending here, merely thinking out loud.

Jim,

Thanks for raising this issue. I do believe that certain modes of special revelation functioned as "signs" that in turn validated the message of the man of God. This would include things like divinely appointed sacraments or symbols, theophanies, the Urim and Thummim, and, as you point out, even tongues. Nevertheless, as Bryan suggests above, I will interpret tongues as a forms of prophecy, which, in turn, is a facet of canonical (in the sense of divinely authoritative) revelation. Hence, even if prophecy and tongues served as "signs," the fact that they're forms of special revelation (which remains to be proved) and the fact that special revelation has ceased until Christ's return (which remains to be proved) still, I think, leaves the minor premise intact. Feel free, however, to offer further criticisms along the way if you're not sure I've proven a point.

Your servant,

 

[Jimmy the Greek]

Thanks for the clarification, Bob. I look forward to your treatment of the issue.

 

[LawrenceU]

What about the prophets that existed as recorded in the NT, such as the daughters of Phillip and the others who prophesied regarding Paul's coming imprisonment? Are all the words that they spoke canonical?

 

[Dr. Bob Gonzales]

What about the prophets that existed as recorded in the NT, such as the daughters of Phillip and the others who prophesied regarding Paul's coming imprisonment? Are all the words that they spoke canonical?

Thanks for the questions. Actually, I was using the term “canonical” equivocally, that is, to refer to two different but related concepts. The term is most commonly used to delimit those writings considered to be inspired by God, i.e., Scripture, which is one form of special revelation. The term may also be used more broadly to refer to special revelation itself as opposed to general revelation. For example, when Paul writes, "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter" (2 Thess. 2:15), he expected these believers to treat his teaching whether oral or written as canonical, that is, divinely authoritative and normative for the covenant community. I intend this latter sense in both the major and minor premises. I intend the former sense when speaking of the corpora of the Old and New Testaments. Nevertheless, to avoid confusion, I have reworded my premises above. Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity.

 

[Jimmy the Greek]

Bob,
Please see R. Bruce Compton's treatment of the Cessation of Miraculous Gifts in The Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal (Fall, 2004).

He interacts extensively with Gordon Fee, Wayne Grudem, Gaffin and others and seemingly ends up where you are aiming. I've only give a cursory read so far, but it looks good.

It is online here;
http://www.dbts.edu/journals/2004/Compton.pdf

 

[Claudiu]

Brothers,

In Part 1 of this series, we noted that many believers today debate the question of whether God is continuing to confer on the NT church the the gifts of prophecy and tongues. Some say, “Yes” (continuationists). Others respond, “No” (cessationists). And a third group cautiously answer, “Maybe” (open-but-cautious). I’d like to provide an argument for the cessation of tongues and prophecy in the form of a syllogism:

Major Premise: All divinely authoritative special revelation (canonical) has been completed and has, therefore, ceased.
Minor Premise: NT prophecy and tongues are forms of divinely authoritative (canonical) special revelation.
Conclusion: Therefore, tongues and prophecy have ceased.
​

In this segment of our series, we’ll begin to develop the major premise, namely, that all divinely authoritative special revelation (canonical) has been completed and has, therefore, ceased. First, we’ll have to identity and establish the boundaries of that corpora of inspired literature known as the Old Testament. Along the way, we’ll briefly lists some reasons why we don’t include the Jewish apocryphal books as part of the Old Testament canon. Then, in Part 3, we’ll identify the NT canon. The NT canon brings special redemptive revelation to its final form and historical goal, we’ll argue in Part 4, which will establish our first major premise.

The Cessation of Special Revelation: A Humble Argument for the Cessation of Prophecy and Tongues, Part 2

Enjoy!

Your servant,

I am covering syllogisms and enthymemes in my writing class...this will be interesting to see. I am looking forward to see the argument.