Sign Gifts and the History of Redemption

For some time now, I have been a member of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). I will not spend time here explaining the OPC, but those who wish to learn more about it can visit the OPC Web Site . I did not start out in the OPC, but for the formative years in my Christian life (perhaps equal to adolescence), I was a member of an Assemblies of God church (for equal access you can visit the AOG Web Site as well). It would be an understatement to say that these denominations are at very different places in the spectrum of Christian theology. One area that is discernibly different is the way the church today is seen in the context of church history. The reason for this is, I believe, the underlying paradigm that the Bible is understood within. The OPC would take what is called a covenant theology view, while the AOG would adopt a mostly dispensational view. A particular manifestation of the differences between these two views can be seen in the way the "sign gifts" are understood and whether or not they are viewed as being functional in the church today. It is this specific issue I want to look briefly at, while trying to stay focused on the idea of the history of redemption.

Let me first say that, at the present time, I hold to a cessationist view of the sign gifts. What this means is that I believe that the sign gifts are not a functional part of the Christian church today. What it does not mean is that God, in His sovereignty, cannot manifest these sign gifts as part of His special purposes. I hope I do not alienate my brothers and sisters who are convinced differently. I know that this issue can become very personal and debates on the subject are often emotionally charged. I would simply ask that my friends who disagree read my views carefully and stay open to the possibility of my argument being correct. Either way, there are no higher or lower classes of Christians based on their position on sign gifts, we are still one in Christ.

For the sake of the rest of this article, I will be limiting my comments to the normal operation of the church today. My position on this issue has shifted over the years as I have studied more and more. My change is not due to observed abuses in churches or even a my own personal experience, since I spoke in tongues while a member of the AOG church and did so sincerely.

My change of conviction on this subject is based on a recognition that there is a progression in the history of redemption and that God does not necessarily act the exact same way in one epoch as He does in another. I fully resonate with the desire to do and to experience all that God would have for us in our present time. I share in that desire. The question however is "what does God have for us?", which cannot be answered through our own personal experiences but through a careful study of the Word of God. The first objection that is usually raised to this view is that "Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever" (from Hebrews 13:8), which means that what God did for the first century church He must surely do for us. But is that what the writer of Hebrews means? I would suggest to the reader that the point the author is trying to convey is to exhort his audience to godly conduct by pointing them to the conduct of those who they had received the gospel from.

Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith. (Heb 13:7)

The exhortation is grounded in the fact that Christ is the same throughout all ages and the standard of godly conduct that they had learned is also the same.

Let's consider the following... was Christ incarnated once or do we have the second person of the Trinity taking on human flesh again with each successive generation? Was Christ's sacrifice on the cross a once-for-all-time event or is He daily finding Himself upon the cross? Did Christ really bodily rise from the dead 2000 years ago outside of Jerusalem or is the resurrection just a "spiritual resurrection" that happens again and again in our hearts? I hope that the fair minded reader will admit that there are a number of things that took place in God's redemptive plan that are not taking place in our day. So then it falls to us to understand which things are perpetual for the church and which are bound to history.

To use an analogy from my current profession, when you build a house, you first lay the foundation and then proceed to build the rest of the house upon it. You don't build the foundation over and over again, as that would be counter productive toward the goal of building a complete house. So what is required to build the foundation of a house? Concrete and a masonry contractor. The masonry contractor sets up the foundation and uses concrete to form the foundation. Once the foundation is finished, there is no further work required for the masonry contractor. From that point on an number of other workers are required, yet none does the same thing or uses the same tools that the contractor used in laying the foundation. Concrete is not needed to build the rest of the house. It would be rather odd if the roofing contractor arrived on the job site with a cement truck and declared that he was ready to put the roof on! So how does this analogy relate to our topic? The Bible uses the idea of foundation laying to explain the building up of the church.

So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit. (Eph 2:19-22)

So the foundation of the church (the church is composed of those who are united to Christ by faith) is built on the Apostles and Prophets, which Jesus Himself being the corner stone, or the beginning point or source of the rest of the foundation. So what do the Apostles have to do with the question of sign gifts? The signs and wonders that we read about in the Bible that took place in the early church were tied directly to the Apostles and served to validate their apostolic authority and the message they proclaimed.

For this reason we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away from it. For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just penalty, how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will. (Heb 2:1-4)

Here we have the writer of Hebrews warning his readers of not carefully paying heed to the preached word because it was the very word of those who heard our Lord and their message was testified to by God Himself with signs and wonders. But what about Paul, who had much to say about sign gifts, what did he say about this idea of signs and wonders being linked to the apostolic preaching of the gospel?

For I will not presume to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me, resulting in the obedience of the Gentiles by word and deed, in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of the Spirit; so that from Jerusalem and round about as far as Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ. (Rom 15:18-19)

The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles. (2Co 12:12)

Paul as well, it seems, understand signs and wonders to be part of his calling as an Apostle of Christ. So then I would argue that the sign gifts were were exercised in the early church were part of the apostolic signs and wonders that served to provide affirmation and validation of both the apolostic ministry and message to and within the first century church. We see that in the pastoral epistles, which teach about how the church elders and leaders are supposed to govern the church, no mention is made of how to deal with prophecy and tongues. We see Paul talk about widows and other pastoral guidance. Given the problem the sign gifts had become in Corinth, it seems implausible that direction would not be given to the successors to the Apostles in how to deal with the issue in their own ministries.

The objection may be raised at this point that there are still Apostles today and so signs and wonders and sign gifts are a valid part of their ministry. If there are modern day Apostles they they must meet the same criteria for the first century Apostles. Can it be demonstrated that those criteria cannot be met today? I believe that this is exactly what the Bible teaches us.

Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? (1Co 9:1)

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also. (1Co 15:3-8)

For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying) as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth. (1Ti 2:7)

Here Paul lays out for us a number of things regarding the Apostles. We learn that one quality of an Apostle is that he had seen the Lord either in His earthly ministry or between the resurrection and ascension. Next we learn that Paul was the last one to have seen Jesus in that way, and his was unlike even the other Apostles. Lastly we learn that being an Apostle is through appointment, and that by Christ. From this we can see that the ministry of the Apostles was limited to the first century church, which is why we have Scripture in the first place. The apostolic teaching is preserved for us in the Bible so that we are not lacking anything needed in the church. Paul makes this clear in his letter to Timothy...

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. (2Ti 3:16-17)

If the Scriptures are sufficient and if the Scripture we have is complete, then it stands to reason that those things which were needed prior to the preservation of the apostolic teaching in the Bible are not needed in our time. This does not mean that everything that was needed in the early church is not needed today, but those things which were related to the identifying of a teaching as truly apostolic through signs and wonders are simply not needed in our day.

I am sure that more exhaustive studies can and have been done on this subject, but given my own background and current disposition, I felt impressed upon to share my own thoughts. I hope they will be taken in the sense and attitude they were intended. God bless.