The Cesspool of Cessationism

Upon what basis would we limit this or that in the New Testament covenant to only the 1st century?

 

Context, I was informed.  Stay in the context.  Stay in the time zone.  Stay with the audience.  Paul was not talking to us, or about us. His letters were not to us, but to them.  Preterism is based on understanding the time zone, audience relevance, and context.  Paul is directing his remarks to those in the 1st century.  No one else.

 

The list of things that supposedly ceased back then varies greatly according to different cessationists.  But it includes: the miraculous charismatic gifts, Satan, demons, Satan’s kingdom, operation of angels, ministry of the Holy Spirit, water baptism, the Lord’s Supper, doctrine of rewards and punishment for believers, even the Church itself.

 

But here’s the BIG PROBLEM – none of the epistles written back then and canonized in the New Testament was talking or written to us.

 

So if we subscribe to such a cessationist hermeneutic, why not get rid of everything in the NT covenant – including the moral requirements?  By what hermeneutic can we pick and chose what ceases from what continues post A.D. 70?

 

Personally, I believe cessation theology is an abomination and anathema to our “once-for-all-delivered faith” (Jude 3) and ever-increasing kingdom (Isa. 9:6-7; Luke 1:33).

 

What do you think?

 

For more, see “Teachings” and “Doing the Works of Jesus.”

For my responses to 13 preterist objections to continuance (non-cessationism), click on “Podcasts” and “Preterist Cessationism.”