Miraculous Gifts: Their Nature And Purpose

by Johnston, Brian, D. | Category: The Holy Spirit: | Aug 1993

Should we expect to speak in tongues today? After all, they are Biblical, are they not? Inasmuch as they are recorded in our Bibles as having genuinely occurred, they are indeed Biblical.

The real question, however, is how do we distinguish between what once happened and Still ought to take place; and those things for which it is no longer God's will that they should continue? In other words: "Among those things that are Biblical, what is applicable today?" That is a vital question in relation to our subject of miraculous gifts.

Three Important Questions

In coming to an understanding of any part of the Bible, we need to ask ourselves: "What does it mean? What is its context? How does it apply to me?" By the time we understand what we are looking at, and have got it in perspective, then we are atready a long way towards applying it. At that point three choices face us: namely to apply it either in practice, or in principle; or, indeed, not to apply it at all.

The Case of Acts 2

The content of Acts 2 is wellknown and therefore a good test-bed. In relation to those early converts, we are familiar with the steps of salvation, baptism and obedience, the latter expressed in addition to the Church of God at Jerusalem. Is this merely descriptive, or also prescriptive? In using the framework suggested above,

we understand those terms to mean being made free from condemnation, then being baptized by immersion in water as identifying with the Lord Jesus, and subsequently submiuing to the Lord's teaching for disciples in collective Christian service. It is impossible to ignore the Bible-wide context taking us back to the Exodus story which features the rescue from slavery; the sea-passage through the Red Sea (see 1 Corinthians 10:2); and then the commitment to obey the Word of God at Mount Sinai. In the epistles there is also further coffoboration that these fundamental truths are applicable throughout this present age of grace. So we understand them to be prescribed for our practice today.

The Issue

However, in the same chapter (Acts 2) we read of the phenomenon of speaking in tongues. Should this also be applied today? Can we pick and choose what we wish to apply? No, we must return to our framework (of meaning, context, and application).

What is meant by "Tongues"?

The New Testament records tongues as occurring in four locations, namely Jerusalem, Caesarea, Ephesus and Corinth. The words used in Acts

2:4,6 to describe this event of speakmg in tongues strongly support the view that they were ordinary languages. These were understood by the multinational gathering in Acts 2, but required interpretation to those unfamiliar with the languages in the Corinth church setting. Despite their association with multilingual centres, there is little or no evidence from which to infer that tongues normally had a missionary purpose in overcoming foreign language barriers. Indeed, 1 Corinthians 14:2 states categorically that the speaking was "not unto men, but unto God". This was exactly the situation in Acts 2:11 when they were speaking the mighty works of God. The tongues phenomenon had attracted the attention of the unbelieving, but the communication of the gospel from v.14 was delivered by Peter in the lingua franca of the Diaspora~

The Context of "Tongues"

Bible-wide, short periods of miraculous gifts are noted in the days of Moses and Joshua, as well as in the times of Elijah and Elisha. These were set between long timespans when human agency was not chosen by God for miraculous activity. In a previous time of recovering spiritual service in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah there was no hint of a miraculous ministry. Old Testament indications, however, were given of the coming miraculous period of the Lord and the apostles. Peter, at Pentecost, quoted Joel's prophecy. More interesting is the reference to Isaiah 28 in the context of

tongues (1 Cor. 14:21). This would appear to be a typical example of the dual fulfilment of prophecy. Firstly, the Babylonians with their foreign tongue would "speak against" Israel in judgement, taking them away into captivity. Then, at Corinth, where there was a local Jewish community and trade centre, the New Testament phenomenon of tongues was also seen as a fulfilment of this prophecy. This may indicate that God's primary purpose in the use of tongues was directed towards unbelieving Jews. A survey of Acts tends to support this (think of the proselytes in Acts 2; Peter in Acts 10; and John's disciples in Acts 19). This points to a specific divine purpose at that time. It seems that those of the 'old order' were given this sign to attest that the new revelation was of God. Of the three recorded instances of tongues in Acts, we find in chapter 2 that it is the sign that marks the descent of the Holy Spirit at the beginning of the new era that was then dawning. In chapter 10, it is the sign that marks the further extension to Gentiles in this new era, and, in chapter 19, it is the sign that marks the further revelation to John's disciples concerning the new era.

About the Sign-Gifts Generally

Even more significant is the association of the sign-gifts with the aposdes. This seems to have been to authenticate their role as resurrection witnesses (Cp. Ex. 4:1-8). "So great salvation... was confirmed [note: past tense] unto us by them that heard; God also bearing witness with them, both

by signs and wonders . .. powers

and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will" (Heb. 2:3,4).

Who were those spokesmen who had been with the Lord? Our answer would certainly have to focus on the apostles. We use the term sign-gift to include tongues, interpretations, healings and miracles. A survey of the New Testament strongly supports their link with the apostles. Indeed, although others exercised them, there is no proof that the use of these signgifts was ever originally initiated independently of the personal ministry of the apostles. Of course, the gift of apostleship has itself ceased; one qualification had been that of having seen the Lord (1 Cor. 9:1). Is it not then to be expected that the sign-gifts themselves also ceased within the apostolic period? Ephesians 2:20 speaks of "the foundation of the apostles". The laying of a foundation is only the initial phase, and to this period the apostles belonged. The foundation once laid through their teaching, being the commandments of the Lord, is confirmed elsewhere as continuing in force, but the signs which marked the initial time of the laying of the foundation in apostolic days should not be expected to continue. It is the commandments themselves that are important and not certain unsolicited, sovereign manifestations of the Spirit which marked out that time as being new and special.

Tliis view of the sign-gifts having a specific purpose at a special time would tend to be confirmed by the

epistles. The pastoral epistles give qualifications and warnings relative to the use of continuing gifts such as ruling and teaching. James, in the only passage on healing apart from those dealing with the Lord, the apostles, and the seventy, lays the emphasis on the role of the prayer of faith in regard to healing in the will of the Lord. This is "healing" as distinct from "healers"; that is, those having the gift of healing. The procedure that he outlines is markedly different from that of modern "healers".

It Is the comn'andn'ents themselves that are important and not certain unsolicited, sovereign manifestations of the Spirit which marked that time as being new and seecial.

The Application

Ephesians 2:20 spoaks of the churches of God together forming the house of God on earth as being a temple for God in the Spirit (as distinct from the Church the Body). We must be careful not to quench Him, nor grieve Him, as we worship by Him in the unity He provides, in which the elderhood throughout the churches discern what seems good to the Spirit in leading the churches. In our daily lives His fulness and fruit are to be evidenced.

In concluding from the context that the four sign-gifts were bound up with the time-period of the apostles and God's special pupoose for them, we are not denying a present role for the other

New Testament gifts. Some of these previously had a miraculous expression, but did not require it. For example, gifts of prophecy (which included

"forth-telling"), and words of wisdom and knowledge can be expected to operate today in conjunction with the Word of God. Since prophets, equally with apostles, belonged to the early foundational period, the revelatory gift of prophecy, in the sense of uttering new anthoritative revelation, was also soon to cease, once the inspired Scril:tures were complete and their sufficiency attested to (Jude 3). How vital it is that we discern, develop and discharge the gifts we have as members of the Body of Christ.

"Miracles still happen", someone may say, and how thankful we are to see evidences of the Presence of a prayer-answering God! Equally, a greater proving of His Presence, and of our faith, can come through our being sustained in suffering rather than through experiencing healing.

How does our conclusion of nonapplicability, as defined above, square with present reality in terms of the contemporary religious scene? Certain published reviews of modern experience which compare this with the New Testament sign-gifts show a considerable discrepancy. This shows up

clearly in terms of contemporary "tongues" being characterized as:

mainly for private use; a learned technique; and a self-generated, unintelligible utterance unrelated to any known language. Medical studies today, even by Christian doctors, fail to show anything even remotely approaching the healings in apostolic times. Nowhere does Scripture teach that present physical healing is in the atonement, or, that our service should be modelled on the special bealing ministry of the Lord Jesus. Interviews with leading exponents of signs and wonders have even been known to uncover a basic unsoundness with regard to the gospel itself. While we defend our conlusion in the light of contemporary experience, it is necessary to acknowledge the commitment, fervour and evangelical results in evidence among "charismatics" today. It is thought-provoking to consider an illustration drawn from Moses' experience of striking the rock, rather than speaking to it as he was told to do (Numbers 20:8). Water neverthelesss flowed, showing God's power at work. The blessing that resulted, however, gave no authentification that what Moses did was the will ofGod, for he clearly went against the word of God.

Johnston, Brian, D. | Aug 1993
The Holy Spirit: