The goal of this brief post is not to make an argument for or against either cessationism or continuationism. I believe there are good arguments on both sides of the debate. For the cessationist, the argument for the foundational role of certain gifts and offices in the church is strong. For the continuationist, the argument from the exegesis of 1 Corinthians 12-14 is equally strong. I am simply writing to ask both sides to quit making an argument for their position based upon the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture. In particular, I am asking cessationist to quit suggesting that the continuation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit in the church calls into question the sufficiency of Scripture.
Why am I making this request? Because every time this argument is made, it assumes that Scripture was not sufficient until it was either canonized or completely written. The sufficiency of Scripture does not depend upon the early church’s recognition of a canon. Sufficiency is a characteristic of Scripture itself. At every point in redemptive history, Scripture has always been sufficient. To suggest otherwise is suggest that the God-Breathed Word gained something when it was recognized by the early church. Scripture gained nothing when it was canonized. No authority was conferred to the Old or New Testament documents. Instead, an authority was recognized. In fact, that authority was recognized in various New Testament churches during the time that Scripture was still being written. Scripture always had a more authoritative role in the life of the early church than the personal revelations, tongues, and prophecies of its church members. It was the standard by which all things were to be tested.
So, whatever argument you employ in this debate, please quit suggesting that continuationist are calling into question the sufficiency of Scripture. If the gifts of the Holy Spirit, including prophecy and tongues, were operative during the first-century while the Scriptures were being read and written, then it is simply false that a belief in Holy Spirit’s gifting necessarily calls into question the sufficiency of the very Scriptures that reveal that such gifts were present in the church. The only way that this argument could be true would be if the Scriptures only became sufficient after their canonization.
To be fair, that might be your argument, but that is not an evangelical understanding of the doctrine of Scripture. God’s Word has always been sufficient. If it wasn’t sufficient prior to canonization, how could we ever arrive at a doctrine of Scripture’s sufficiency?
CBH
