Sign Gifts--For Today?

This is the third and final of my position papers from my Theological Foundations class. This time, the topic is the Sign Gifts--Are they for today or not? Enjoy!


The Charismatic gifts of the Spirit are a very controversial topic among Christians today. Do the sign gifts still operate today, or did they cease somewhere around the end of the first century? Honestly, this topic is one that I’m not completely convinced on. I would consider myself a cessationist, rather than a continuationist; but this is definitely not the most convincing position that I hold. The Scripture that I would use in order to justify the cessationist argument would be examples from the book of Acts. In Acts 2, the Spirit is poured out on the 120 who were gathered in the room, and it is said that they all “spoke in other tongues.” John MacArthur notes that the word used for “other tongues” is the word for “known languages.” I think this is further evidenced by the fact that there is a list of locations from which the people who heard and understood the languages were from. They all understood the languages that were being spoken in their own dialect—they weren’t being spoken to in an unknown, ecstatic language. Secondly, the tongues are only used 3 times, and each time they are used, it is by a different group of individuals—Jews in Chapter 2, Gentiles in Chapter 10, and the disciples of John the Baptist in Chapter 19. These are 3 different groups of individuals, and they are given the sign gift of speaking in tongues to evidence that they are indwelt by the Holy Spirit. These gifts are said to be a gift that only edifies the individual, according to 1 Corinthians 14. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are meant to edify the church body as a whole. This seems to go against the use of the gifts laid out by Paul in 1 Corinthians. Also, the gift of tongues is prescribed by the Apostle Paul to have accompanying it an interpreter. If this gift is still in effect today, than the gift of interpretation of tongues should be in effect as well, and should be used along with it. I know this isn’t the strongest Scriptural argument, and I’m willing to hear from the other side on this, but that’s where I find myself landing on the tongues issue.
With regards to prophecy—I believe prophecy in the sense of God speaking new words to us ended in the first century with the completion of the New Testament. The New Testament tells us in Revelation that if anyone adds to or subtracts from Holy Scripture, they will be inflicted with the torments found in it. If the Lord is still personally speaking to individuals, then it should follow, since every word of God proves true according to Proverbs 30:6, that we should tack in on to the back of the Bible that we have. If we are to receive “words from the Lord,” they should be held on the same level as Scripture. If the argument is made that we should test every “new word” by the “Inspired Word,” my question would be—why is it necessary to have a “new word.” I think it somewhat questions the sufficiency of Scripture, although I do not intend to accuse those who believe in this gift of thinking Scripture is insufficient. I believe that in the Scriptures we have all that we need for life and godliness, and that the gift of “prophecy” is now a role of forth-telling rather than fore-telling. A prophet today would be one who speaks forth the Word of God in order that God’s people would be edified and grow from it.
Miracles are a gift that is somewhat tricky to take a position on. I do believe that miracles happen continually today. Every unexplained cure is a miracle, but where did it come from? I believe that God still performs miracles every day, but I do not believe that God has gifted individuals in the way that He did in the first century to perform miracles. I don’t believe that there are individuals who can work miracles in the way that the apostles did in the book of Acts. I believe the book of Acts itself attests to that fact. There are fewer and fewer miracles listed in the book of Acts as it moves toward the end of the book. Paul mentions others that are sick, and himself being sick in his epistles. Paul could’ve used that gift to heal his friends or himself, but he didn’t—a strong indicator that the gift has begun to cease by the time that Paul is writing these letters.
I know that my views are not the strongest supported views on this topic of gifts, but I think this is the position which makes the most sense to me as I study the Scriptures and seek to know the truth in every area. I look forward to everyone’s comments!