The following is a brief digest of Dr. Richard B. Gaffin Jr.’s case for cessationism made in Perspectives on Pentecost¹. Dr. Gaffin presents a case for the cessasionist view of prophecy and tongues based on their foundational character. The apostolic witness, prophecy and tongues were bound up with the foundation of the church following the ascension of Christ, and therefore, since the foundation has been laid, have no purpose for today.

Gaffin starts by explaining the foundational character of the apostolate and how the office of this specially gifted group of people has ceased. Gaffin lists three reasons for this: 1) to be an apostle one must be an eye/ear witness of Christ 2) Paul uses the word “last” to refer to himself as an apostle, and 3) Paul taught Timothy as a personal successor, but never called him an apostle.

The fundamental activity of the apostles is witness to Christ. In Ephesians 2:19ff Paul calls the apostles, alongside Christ, the cornerstone of the church. The apostles act as the spokesmen for Christ’s work. This foundational aspect underscores the unity of Jew and Gentile who are both being built upon the same foundation. The church does not continually lay foundations, but builds the “superstructure” upon the foundation that was laid by Christ and the apostles. Therefore the office of apostle has ceased.

Gaffin argues that prophecy also has a foundational character. Ephesians 2:20 “associates ‘prophets’ with the apostles in the activity of foundational witness or word ministry.”² Some have interpreted “prophets” to be the Old Testament prophets, but Gaffin gives three reasons this position is unlikely. 1) the ordering of the words does not suggest this position 2) the context stresses newness, especially the inclusion of Gentiles and 3) a little later in 3:5, “prophets” refer to the present life of the church. Given these points and the distinction Paul draws between prophets and apostles in 1 Corinthians 12:28 it is most likely a group of New Testament prophets in view. The foundation of the church then, alongside Christ, is the apostles and the New Testament prophets.

Gaffin continues by arguing for the temporary nature of the function of apostle and prophet. First, Gaffin places much weight on Ephesians 2:20 because it was most likely a circular letter and has a broader scope of teaching as compared to the specific nature of 1 Corinthians (chapter 14 especially). Secondly, Gaffin argues that the general function of prophet has ceased, not just its foundational role. Revelation is covenantal and redemptive-historical. It is the authority for our lives, spoken once for all. “Scripture leaves no place for privatized, localized revelations for specific individual needs and circumstances.”³ New Testament canon is meant to permanently serve the church whereas prophecy was meant for the church in the prophet’s time as the foundation was laid. This demonstrates the broader circle of authoritative revelation at this time. The church at the time did not possess “sufficient” Scripture – placing more emphasis on temporary prophecy. Once the canon was closed, the purpose of prophecy ceased. If prophecy still continues, the canon would not be considered complete.⁴

The activity of speaking in tongues is closely linked to prophecy. Gaffin builds his case by examining 1 Corinthians 14:20-25. Paul shows that tongues are a sign against unbelievers. First, Paul quotes Isaiah 28:11f – a passage set in God’s judgment. Second, verses 23-25 exclude an evangelizing role for tongues. Finally, the context indicates Paul will say something sobering about tongues.

Gaffin writes that tongues show God’s rejection of unbelief. Further, Gaffin argues that tongues are primarily a sign against unrepentant Israel. Similarly to the effect of parables, tongues divide people into two groups: believers and unbelievers. The broader contexts and imagery of Isaiah 28 and passages such as 1 Peter 2:6, Ephesians 2:20, and Romans 9:33 speak of God laying a foundation in Zion and pronouncing judgment upon Zion. “Tongues mark the fulfillment of the prophecy, reinforced by Simeon at Christ’s birth, that ‘this child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be rejected’”.⁵ This mode of revelation is temporary and ceases. Speaking of 1 Corinthians 12:8-13, Gaffin says there is a termination of “fragmentary knowledge based on temporary modes of revelation when ‘the perfect comes’”.⁶

Although arguing for the cessation of prophecy and tongues, Gaffin finds no biblical case for the cessation of healing and related gifts, because healing and related gifts do not raise the issues word-gifts raise. Healing, especially in response to prayer, should be insisted on as continuing. Gaffin stresses one qualification: God’s ability to heal does not mean He desires to heal all, or even most, cases of illness. Gaffin presents 2 Corinthians 12:7-9 (the thorn in Paul’s flesh) and Matthew 26:44 (Jesus’ threefold praying in the garden) as examples of this qualification. Failure to acknowledge this qualification leads to an erosion of faith and the downplaying of God’s blessing and provision for those in distress.

1. Gaffin, Richard B., Jr. Perspectives on Pentecost (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1979), 89-116.↩
2. Ibid., 93.↩
3. Ibid., 98.↩
4. Ibid., 100.↩
5. Ibid., 108.↩
6. Ibid., 111.↩