Did Spiritual Gifts Like Tongues Cease with the Apostles?

What is the consensus among Reformed Christians regarding spiritual gifts? Here’s a summary along with some biblical reasons.

Most Reformed theologians have held that the Spirit grants extraordinary gifts as miraculous confirmations of major transitions in redemptive history, such as changes to the structure of covenant life or whenever fresh revelation is added to Scripture. During apostolic times, for instance, the Spirit gifted people with a supernatural ability to speak unlearned human languages (i.e., "tongues"), to heal upon command, foretell future events, and compose scripture. These unusual gifts served as signs certifying God’s hand in these momentous changes. Because we are no longer in such a period of transition, we should not expect extraordinary gifting to occur, any more than we look for new apostles or additions to the Bible.

The confirmatory nature of extraordinary gifts in the New Testament is highlighted by an often overlooked fact. The Bible provides no instance of the Spirit having ever granted them to anyone apart from the presence of an apostle, whose authority the gifts served to confirm. A key text demonstrating this is Acts 8:14-20:

Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. 18 Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, 19 saying, “Give me this power also, so that anyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.” 

Note, the text describes how certain Samaritans had come to faith and were baptized, yet in order for these believers to receive sign-gifts it was necessary for apostles to be dispatched from Jerusalem. Only after Peter and John had come to them in person did the Spirit pour out the gifts. The implication, which Simon Magus seems to have clearly understood, is it was impossible to receive "the powers of the age to come" apart from having come into physical proximity with an apostle.

The purpose of such gifts, then, was primarily to testify to the unique authority which Christ conferred upon the apostles as founders of the New Covenant church and agents of special revelation. This understanding leads naturally to a conclusion: extraordinary gifts persisted in the church only as long as that first generation of Christians who received them among the apostles survived. Notably, this is exactly the situation which Augustine, writing in the fourth century, describes:

I said (chap. xxv), “These miracles were not permitted to last till our times, lest the soul should always seek visible things, and the human race should grow cold by becoming accustomed to things which stirred it when they were novel.” That is true. When hands are laid on in Baptism people do not receive the Holy Spirit in such a way that they speak with the tongues of all the nations. Nor are the sick now healed by the shadow of Christ’s preachers as they pass by. Clearly such things which happened then have later ceased. But I should not be understood to mean that to-day no miracles are to be believed to happen in the name of Christ. (Retractions 1,13)

With respect to the last sentence, Nathan Businitz observes,

Augustine’s miracle accounts do not involve miracle workers who possessed the gift of healing. Instead, these accounts are presented as unexpected and providential acts of God which were not dependent on an intermediary healer. In that sense, they are categorically different than the type of healing miracles that are described in the Gospels or the book of Acts. Nothing in Augustine’s account suggests that the “gift of healing” was involved in the episodes he recounted.

To be clear, the cessation of extraordinary gifts should not be misunderstood as discounting the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit. God continues to answer the prayers of believers for miraculous healing. He simply does so without, as Businitz put it, “an intermediary healer” who says authoritatively, “be healed!” Having withdrawn gifts suited to a transitional period in redemptive history, the Holy Spirit continues to empower believers today with diverse gifts for edification and mission such as preaching, teaching, administration, and—above all—love.

As for the "unknown tongues" mentioned by Paul in 1 Cor, I agree with the Reformed consensus. Paul should be understood as speaking rhetorically of the ability to speak angelic languages. His phrase, "though I speak in the tongues of men and angels," should not be taken as either confirming or denying the real possibility of speaking unknown or angelic tongues. Rather, he contrasts others' supposed boasting with the much higher place given to intelligible words spoken in love. To put it differently, Paul means, “even if I were able to speak every conceivable language, including that of angels, it wouldn’t matter if I did so without love.” Since this is the only text I’m aware of which can possibly be taken as referring to unknown tongues, it seems the doctrine of glossolalia as practiced by many charismatic churches sits on weak foundations.

Should We Try to Convert Non-Reformed Christians to Calvinism?

I’ve been asked many times whether Reformed Christians should try to convert their non-Reformed brethren to Calvinism. It’s a good question. Indeed, it’s one I should have asked before attempting to convert all my companions, by which noble combat I soon forfeited the majority.

Having been reared in a setting where Reformed theology was equally misunderstood as it was opposed, I was “converted” to Calvinistic Christianity at age twenty-one. For two or three years after, I poured an ocean of polemics upon my corner of the Internet. Looking back, I find little fruit was gained for all my brave tilting at every Arminian windmill. I wish I had taken the advice I am about to give.

Overall, I've found it unhelpful to go out of the way to convince non-Reformed Christians of the Calvinistic doctrines of grace. This is not to say I hide or avoid these topics. Not at all. Especially if the other person brings them up. But I understand much better now that knowledge uncoupled from a demonstration of love comes off as a clanging gong. Demonstrating love takes time. Familiarity and trust must develop so that one’s brotherly intentions are understood, not just asserted. It is hard, if not impossible to achieve this over a few brief interactions, let alone from behind a social media handle.

What I have found effective

I have found greater success broaching these subjects in times when my non-Reformed brothers have confessed struggling with assurance, sanctification, and perseverance. My own bitter experience taught me that only the Reformed doctrines of grace can provide sure anchors against these storms. Thankfully, times of severe self-doubt are also ideal opportunities for pointing others away from themselves to the overcoming grace of God given in Christ.

I direct them to Bible verses such as,

I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. (Phil 1:6)

He who calls you is faithful; he will surely do it. (1 Thes 5:24)

The usual objections about “free” will are often disarmed by explaining that grace operates at a level deeper than will power. The Spirit goes to the root of our choices, to our very nature, and begins converting our corrupt hearts. Spiritual “new birth” and subsequent growth transforms people miraculously from within, like water into wine, so that our dispositions and preferences change.

Only sovereign grace can explain how die-hard sinners can go from unbelief and habitual sin to willing faith and holiness. Only sovereign grace can assure the downcast of finishing the race. Only sovereign grace can explain how it is that believers who sin every day will never choose to sin once they pass on to glory. Think about it. In the resurrection, God doesn’t have to take away “free” will to secure heaven from future sin. Rather, the Holy Spirit finishes his work of freeing us from corruption and temptation, so that we never will to sin again!

I find that in such times of anxious fear, these truths are readily received and savored by nearly all Christians. Rather than being theological abstractions, they come as practical correctives to self-assurance. Indeed, for those who feel themselves losing the battle, there is nothing more refreshing than to discover that salvation was always God’s victory, and is assured through Christ for all who believe.

Careful with That Sword

So, in conclusion, I would advise my Reformed brethren not to go spoiling for a fight or to make yourselves a holy nuisance. Especially if your abilities and doctrine have not been approved and encouraged by your pastor or elders. Many valiant but weak-handed warriors have mishandled this heavy sword, wounding the very ones they wanted to liberate. In addition to studying how best to communicate Reformed doctrine, Invest time in demonstrating your love and directing others to the gospel. Remember, Calvinism is not the gospel. The gospel is the good news that Christ Jesus saves all who trust him alone for salvation. Calvinism simply explains why the Gospel is always effective for the elect.

May the Lord bless your service for is kingdom.

Can You Make Your Election Sure?

Lately, our evening service has been going through the biblical doctrines of grace confessed in the Canons of Dort. This topic lends itself to many questions and opportunities to dig into the Word. For instance, a member wrote to ask how we should understand 2 Pet 1:1-10:

At the beginning of this passage, Peter makes it clear that all good things come from God's "divine power" and that "through them you may become partakers of the divine nature..."  He then lists a set of qualities that make us productive and fruitful members of God's kingdom.  It is clear that these things come only from God.  Later he says that we must "...be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure..."  What does it mean to  make our calling and election sure? The wording seems to assume that we can take action on our own that affects our election which would contradict the rest of scripture... Can you shed some light on that for me?

THE DIVINE NATURE

First, let's sort out what is meant by, “you may become partakers of the divine nature." As mere creatures, we can never grasp, let alone partake in God's essential being. The “partaking” which Peter has in mind is the Spirit's impartation to us of God's communicable attributes, such as virtue, brotherly affection, self-control, etc.  Over time, the divine image comes to be reflected in us.

Unlike sin which results in spiritual bondage, this godly nature produces true freedom. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty” (2 Cor 3:17). Sanctification can therefore be described as a process of liberation from corrupt desires unto holy preferences. We are no longer simply depraved but are “being renewed in the spirit of your mind” (Eph 4:23). In this way, partaking in the divine nature means that believers can begin to sincerely will the good, albeit imperfectly.

MAKING YOUR ELECTION SURE

Now that we've been set free from sin unto godliness, one might wonder whether good works determine our final destination? Perhaps God's election is based on foreknowledge of how different people would use or abuse their liberty. Not at all! Growth, however vital as evidence of spiritual life, does not itself serve as the ground of God's eternal decision to elect and call certain people to salvation. Otherwise salvation would not be entirely of grace:

“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” (Eph 2:8-10, ESV)

So what might Peter have in mind when he tells us to “be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure” (NKJV)? This is one instance where confusion is largely resolved by comparing translations. The ESV, for instance, renders the text, “brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall.” 

First, the word translated “fall” (πταίσητέ) here means “to stumble or loose one's footing.” Elsewhere, we find this term descrbing believers in the midst of doubt or sin. James 3:3, for instance, admits “we all stumble in many ways.” When discussing apostasy, however, a different term is used for permanently “falling away” from the visible church (ἀποστῆναι). It is reasonable to presume the kind of descent Peter has in mind is not from profession of faith to denial, but from confidence in one's salvation to doubt.  The preceding verse highlights this by noting a person who has “forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins.” Clearly, he is elect and called, or else he would not be cleansed, yet he has become uncertain of his status.

Second, observe the phrase “confirm your calling.” Confirming doesn't have to mean earning or establishing the ground of something. Suppose a car accident leaves me and several passengers stranded. Geico assures me a tow truck is on the way. After fifteen minutes, I become impatient and doubtful. ‘Are they coming or not?’ So I contact the rental company to confirm. The operator assures me, “the driver left ten minutes ago. He will be there shortly.” In this case, my call to confirm did not initiate the tow truck's coming. He was already headed my way. What confirming did, however, is put me and my passengers at ease concerning the status of our situation. 

Even so, confirming one's election by growing in virtue does not influence God's objective and eternal choice. The Lord is already on the way to salvage his wrecked elect! Ongoing spiritual growth, however, settles doubts within ourselves and others concerning the reality of grace at work in us.

Peter's argument relates to the so-called Practical Syllogism common among Reformed theologians. Basically, the syllogism shows how one's election and calling, known directly by God, can be logically inferred by individuals. It goes like this:

1. Only elect people receive the Spirit through calling (regeneration). 
2. All those who receive the Spirit walk in newness of life (ongoing faith and repentance)
3. I walk in a way that evidences newness of life
4. Therefore, I have strong reason to believe I have been elected and called.

Conversely,

3. I am NOT walking in a way that evidences newness of life
4. Therefore, I have weak reason to believe I am elect and called.

While this argument does not replace faith in Christ's objective work as the primary basis of assurance, it can serve a secondary role in strengthening our hope. 

CONCLUSION

In light of all this, 2 Pet 1:10 can be understood as saying, “diligently pursue abundant fruits of the Spirit which prove the reality of your election and calling.” Essentially, Paul says the same thing in Rom 8:1-4, “there is therefore now no condemnation... to those who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit...” Walking after the Spirit is not why we are no longer condemned, but is proof we are forgiven. Becoming virtuous is not the ground of God's election, but a comforting confirmation of it.

PS: I'm glad to hear our members are pondering God's riches in the Word.