Cessationism Interview With Dr. Tom Pennington

Welcome to the program, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Justin Peters. I hope that this finds you and your family doing well today. I want to thank you so much for joining me for the program. Today, it is a special privilege and honor to be able to interview Dr. Tom Pennington.

He is the pastor of Countryside Bible Church in South Lake, Texas, and he has written a book entitled A Biblical Case for Cessationism, Why the Miraculous Gifts of the Spirit Have Ended. So I'm going to be interviewing him today about his book, the arguments he makes, as well as asking him about some of the pushback.

There have been some counter-arguments marshaled against his position, and so we're going to talk about those and give him a chance to answer those objections. I think that this interview will be helpful for you and by God's grace profitable.

So without any further delay, here's my interview with Dr. Tom Pennington. Well, Tom, let's talk about your book a little bit. It is titled A Biblical Case for Cessationism, Why the Miraculous Gifts of the Spirit Have Ended.

First, tell us a little bit, kind of in a general sense, about the book. What is and what is not cessationism, and what led you to write this book?

Yeah, no, that's a great place to start because I think there is so much misunderstanding. I think a lot of people who are dealing with this issue, struggling with this issue, they have a caricature in their mind of what cessationism is.

They think that it means that somehow we believe that the spirit is no longer at work. It's like Pentecost happened and then the spirit left, and after the early church, he's not around anymore, he's not benefiting the church, and nothing could be farther from the truth.

We simply would say this, I would say that anything eternal that happens today is the work of the spirit. So, every conversion, every step of growth in an individual Christian's life, every point of conviction that's brought through the scripture to bear on the heart of an unbeliever, all of those things, and every other spiritual benefit that has any eternal value is the work of the spirit.

So, we are fully and completely dependent on the spirit for everything. The question is, how does the spirit work? And of course, I would say primarily in the scripture implies this very strongly and states it very strongly in the New Testament through his word.

So, the key question about cessationism has to do with the exercise of the miraculous gifts that were present in the first century church. The question is, are those normative? It's not even, can they happen?

A lot of people caricature cessationism as saying, well, you're putting God in a box, the spirit, you're saying he can't do what he wants to do. Of course, he's God. The spirit can do whatever he chooses to do.

That's not the question. The question is, is it normative today for believers and local churches to have the same miraculous gifts that were present in the first century church in the time of the apostles?

That's the question. And the continuationist answer to that is, yes, we should seek those things, albeit they're different. They define them differently, but we should seek them. The cessationist answer to that is based on the scripture, no.

Those served a particular purpose. They were real. The spirit was doing miraculous things through individuals he gifted to do those miraculous things. That was for a particular purpose, and that purpose has ended with the completed scripture.

And there is teaching to that effect. There's implication to that effect. There's church history to that effect that.

Underscores it. Right. And Tom, when we talk about the miraculous gifts, specifically,.

What are those gifts? Yeah. When you look at the four lists of the spiritual gifts in the New Testament, and when you look at those gifts, you find that there are some that are clearly what I would call, and many would call, permanent edifying gifts.

That is, they're non-miraculous. They're gifts that individual Christians can have. The gift of administration, gift of teaching, those would be examples of those permanent edifying gifts. And there are others.

I think when you look at the list, and I detail these in the book, but I think there are eight gifts that are listed in the New Testament that are clearly non-miraculous and seem to continue through the New Testament record.

The other 10 gifts that are listed in the New Testament, in those four lists, there are 10 other gifts. I would say that those gifts are miraculous gifts because they involve something that is not a normal expression of the human natural capacities exercised through the Spirit.

In other words, it's not simply teaching. That's miraculous. Everyone would agree that teaching itself is not miraculous. Now, the fruit of that in the heart of an individual may be miraculous, but the actual exercise of that gift, administration, giving, those are not miracles, and those are not miraculous powers.

Those are normal human activities. But when you look at those other 10 miraculous gifts in the list in the New Testament, what you discover is that they are not normal natural capacities and abilities.

They are, to use the words of both Testaments, they are miracles, they are signs, or in the Old Testament, they're wonders. And they are things that are supernatural, that are given by the Spirit, a supernatural ability to do something.

And I think when you look at those miraculous gifts, they divide into two categories, essentially. One of them is revelation. A lot of the miraculous gifts are revelation, prophecy. Those are the tongues.

There is revelation involved, speaking from God, fresh revelation, or some other form of revelation related to that. When you look at the confirming miraculous gifts, they somehow confirm the message.

That would be the gift of healing, for example. It's not revelation, but it is a miraculous gift confirming the revelation.

Of the messenger. Correct. Yes. Okay. All right. Tom, one of the arguments you forward in your book, and I found it compelling, and it's also in the film, cessationism film, that miracles, a lot of people think of, oh, miracles were happening all the time in the Bible.

I mean, cover to cover, start to finish, you know, there's a miracle just about on every page, but that's actually not the case. Miracles were primarily compared, or confined rather, to three periods, Moses and Joshua, Elijah and Elisha.

And then, so two periods in the Old Testament, and then one in the New Testament, of course, with Jesus and the apostles. But the people who differ with you, and one example would be Gavin Ortland. He's done a video trying to rebut the principles, both in the book and in the film.

But he says that scripture does not limit miracles to those three periods, and he gives a few examples. He says, well, what about the translation of Enoch? What about the flood of Noah? Which, ironically, he doesn't even think was a global flood, but that's for another discussion.

The Tower of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah, walls of Jericho falling down, those kind of things. You know, he says those miracles happen outside of those three periods.

So what would your reply be to that argument? Well, that's not an uncommon argument that he's bringing up. But my response would be to read the book, because I think he's responding primarily to the movie, and that documentary is very helpful, but obviously doesn't have a chance to develop every argument.

I think when you look at the book, and when you look at the New Testament, and you look at the Old Testament scriptures as well, you have to start by differentiating, and this is a key differentiation.

God does work many miracles directly without the use of human instruments. Those are scattered throughout the scripture. And frankly, I would argue those still happen today. Regeneration, every time a dead sinner experiences the new birth, that is a miracle of the Holy Spirit.

The same thing happens, I believe, from time to time today with miraculous healing. I think God directly intervenes in answer to the prayers of his people, and heals a person without the use of ordinary means, whether their immune system, or medicine, or doctors, or whatever.

And so those are direct divine interventions. Those are direct miracles from God. Of course, those litter the pages of scripture. We find those in other time periods, but that's not the discussion. And I think this is where we have to remind ourselves.

We're talking about God giving humans the capacity to work miracles. Again, I know you know this. I just want to make sure those listening know and differentiate, because there's a lot of confusion about that.

Of course, God directly acts and produces the miraculous, and he does that in other time periods. Although even that isn't on every page. It's scattered throughout biblical history. When you look at God giving humans the capacity to work miracles, you won't find any exceptions to those three epics that you mentioned earlier.

And so that would be my answer. Go look for those exceptions. They don't exist. When you're looking for God giving human beings,.

Men, the capacity to work miracles. Yes, indeed. Indeed. Yeah, that's exactly right. And that's one of the things that struck me when I was watching his video. Yes, he was naming miracles, but they were primarily direct sovereign acts of God, not through a human instrument.

That's just stuff that God did. So, yeah. All right. And another one of the pushbacks, Tom, is the argument that the sign gifts faded. As we go through the New Testament chronologically, which of course, the books in our Bibles are not necessarily ordered chronologically, but as you go through them chronologically, as according to the events that they record, then you say that those miracles faded away fairly quickly, like the healings on the island of Malta about the year AD 58.

And after that, there's no more mention of miraculous gifts. There's no more mention of true miracles, like raising the dead or healing the sick. And you point out that the apostle Paul wrote nine other epistles, not to mention the epistles of the apostles Peter and John.

In none of those letters, epistles, is there any mention of how to walk in these sign gifts, perform these sign gifts, and yet these were written as instructions for the churches. And he would say that you can't make an argument from silence, because one of the examples he gives is the Lord's Supper.

Well, Paul doesn't mention the Lord's Supper after 1 Corinthians, and yet.

We still do the Lord's Supper. So what would your reply be to that? Well, let's start with the last one, the Lord's Supper. I mean, clearly there's a difference between something that is commanded forever to the church, which Christ did.

You have the three gospel records. You have 1 Corinthians, all commanding that ordinance to be practiced in the church. So how many times does God have to command something for us to do it? So I would say that's at a different level than the outfolding of the purpose of God in the Book of Acts, which is narrative.

It is descriptive, not prescriptive. But when you come to the epistles where it is prescriptive, and particularly the pastoral epistles, as you mentioned, where we're told how to do life in the church, you don't find those things occurring.

You find all the other things we do as a church in corporate worship, but you don't find that. So that's where I would start. But back to the, you can't make a case for this gradual fading of the miraculous.

Let me just put that in context, because you need to remember that in the book, and particularly in the book, but in the Strange Fire Conference, where I first dealt with this biblical case, I make seven arguments.

This is part of one. It's the last argument, and that is relating to church history. What do we see happening in church history with the miraculous gifts? And I start in the New Testament era making the point that even in the New Testament scriptures, we begin to see a decline of the miraculous, and I make that point several different ways.

You've already touched on them, but let me just enumerate them. First of all, you clearly have a decline in the mention in the letters as they unfold. The fourth letter Paul wrote was 1 Corinthians. That's the last mention we have of the gift of tongues, for example.

He wrote nine other letters, and he never mentions that again. I would add, even more importantly, in the pastoral epistles where we are told how to do church. He writes to Timothy in 1 Timothy 3 .15, in case I'm late, I'm writing these things to you so that you would know how one ought to conduct himself in the church, the household of God.

So this is about church, and everything else is there, but there's no miraculous expression in those books. In addition to that, in the last letters Paul writes to his sons in the faith, in particular to Timothy, he references the fact that he had to leave Trophimus sick, and he encourages Timothy to take something for his frequent ailments—non-miraculous.

So you already see that sort of decline, even in the ministry of Paul. I would add to that the book of Hebrews. I think if you look at Hebrews—and I'll just turn there because I think it's such a foundational passage— Hebrews chapter 2.

We know that Hebrews was written shortly before the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. So we're looking, because the destruction of the temple isn't mentioned here in a book that talks about the destruction of that system, clearly it would have been.

And so you come to chapter 2, and here's what the author of Hebrews writes. He said, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After that salvation, was it first spoken through the Lord?

There's the first generation, the Lord spoke. And then he says, it was confirmed to us by those who heard. So he's talking about those who heard being the apostles in that generation. And then he says, it was confirmed to us.

So now you're in another generation removed, and he's saying that message of the gospel was spoken to the Lord, to the apostles, and then to us. And he adds, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, God testifying with them both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to his will.

So the writer of Hebrews, writing shortly before 70 AD, says by his time, he's looking back and saying, the apostles were given this power, this capacity to confirm the message the Lord had given them by their working, signs, wonders, and miracles, and it was confirmed to us who heard.

And there's no evidence that at his generation, in that time period, it was still happening. It's a very clear.

Pattern when you look at that text. Yeah, that's right. I agree 100%. They would say when Paul left Trophimus sick at Miletus, that was an indication not that the gift of healing was fading away, but rather they just didn't have the ability to wield that gift at will.

It was just kind of sporadic, hit or miss. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Yeah, I wouldn't.

Agree with that last part, but I don't think that the gift of miracles meant that someone could heal whenever they chose. I think it was always under the direction of the Spirit, but you still have...

My point is, when you look at the overall data that I just laid out, look at the New Testament in chronological order, you can and do see a decline of the miraculous so that by the time you get past the mid -50s AD, you don't see the miraculous again.

That is incontrovertible. That's not an argument from silence. That's an argument from what's on the pages of Scripture. That's something that they have to deal with and really respond to and present an argument against, and I've not heard a valid argument other than you can't argue from silence.

Well, it's really not from silence because you're dealing with books that are addressing.

Life in the church. That's exactly right. What we see today in the charismatic movement, Tom, bears no resemblance to what we see in the book of Acts. I agree with your point that we're not saying that the apostles could go up to just every single sick person at will and heal them, but that having been said, what we do see is when they had that unction, when they had that leading direction from the Holy Spirit to exercise that gift,.

It worked 100 of the time. Absolutely. Immediately, incontrovertibly, fully.

We never see an example of an apostle going up to someone, whether it's Peter, whether it's John, whether it's Paul, and they healed many, many people. Going up to someone and commanding a sick person to be healed, and it's like, well, sorry, it didn't work for you.

Absolutely not. They knew with 100 certainty that that sick person was about to be healed. Acts 3, the man born lame from his mother's womb, there was no question. Yeah, Peter knew what was about to.

Happen. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, you're absolutely right. It's a dodge, isn't it? I mean, you've had to say about this. It's an absolute dodge to throw it back on the person, because when you look at the New Testament, those who had the power to work miracles, and specifically the gift of healing, they healed 100 of the time.

It was verifiable, incontrovertible. Even the enemies of the gospel had to recognize its reality and were trying to somehow excuse it, but they couldn't.

Because it was so obvious and clear. That's right. It is so different from what we see today. As you said, the enemies, you read Acts chapter 3, Acts chapter 4, after Peter and John healed the man born lame from his mother's womb, they were trying to put a lid on this thing, the enemies of the gospel, the Pharisees.

They were trying to cover it up, and they said, what are we going to do with this? We cannot deny that a notable miracle, notable sign has taken place. We cannot deny it.

And like the apostles, of course, their Lord. I mean, I love John 11, where there was no question. There was not a, well, I heard from somebody on the other side of the world that somebody was raised from the dead.

I mean, Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead two miles from Jerusalem, and they know it happened. They're not arguing that it didn't happen, and they're just saying the only thing we can do is kill Lazarus who was raised and kill Jesus who raised him.

I mean, so that's the kind of miracles you see in the New Testament. That's right. That's right.

Yeah, I've told people, and people don't like this, but it's true. The very fact that there is a debate today as to whether or not these sign gifts continue to be in operation is self-evident.

Proof that they're not. You're absolutely right. And that goes back, doesn't it? I was thinking of this a moment ago when you were talking. It goes back to the purpose of the sign gifts. They are to confirm the messenger.

What good is a sign gift that doesn't work? It doesn't work for nothing. So if I have to say it didn't work, and it's your fault, how in the world does that confirm anything? It confirms, honestly, that I'm a false prophet.

I mean, that's what it confirms.

That's right. That's exactly right. And even some of the Charismatics, some of them, would admit, in fact, Gavin Ortlin admits this, that there are no more capital-A Apostles today, as in people holding that office with the same apostolic authority as the 12 or the 13, depending on what you do with Matthias.

And I find that fascinating when I hear Charismatics make that admission, because isn't being an apostle, and to differentiate from general, the word apostle just means people who are sent, one who's sent, that's all it means.

So there's a general sense in people sending out from the church. But then there's what we denote with a capital-A office of being an apostle, as in your name is written on the 12 foundation stone, being an apostle.

Exactly. They would admit that there are no more of those guys anymore that have that authority. Well, isn't being an Apostle, capital-A Apostle, isn't that.

In and of itself a gift of the Spirit? Absolutely. And it's listed that way. In Ephesians 4, it's clear that the gift of apostleship is just that, a gift from Christ to His church. And once you have admitted that the chief, perhaps, miraculous gift in the New Testament, the gift of apostleship has ceased, then you have admitted in that moment that there was a major shift from the apostolic era to the post-apostolic era, which is what they want to deny.

But by admitting what they just said, what you just quoted them as saying, they are admitting that very reality. That's right. And what's interesting to me is that happens. That is, the gift of capital-A Apostleship ends without any obvious announcement of it in Scripture, and they would admit that.

And yet they want to say, well, there's no announcement that the gift of tongues is going to cease, so it must not have ceased. Well, the biggest miraculous gift in the New Testament ceased without an announcement that it was going to cease.

That's right. That's an.

Excellent point. Absolutely. So in admitting that, and again, some would say, no, there are capital-A apostles today. It's a new apostolic reformation. But even those charismatics who would say that that gift, capital-A Apostle, has ceased, I'm like, okay, say that again slowly.

You've just.

Admitted to the whole premise of cessationism. Absolutely. Absolutely. I think that is the finger in the dike. And that's why, frankly, in part, I think some want to say, no, no, there are now capital-A Apostles.

It's because there's some realization that that is the finger in the dike. And if you do that, it's like the whole thing collapses. Yes, it does. It surely.

Does. Absolutely. Absolutely. And Tom, another one of the pushbacks, they would say, well, God, when we as cessationists say that God is not speaking in a direct, quotable sense outside of Scripture, because if that were true, then that would logically lead to an open canon of Scripture because whatever God says should be just as authoritative as anything He said in Scripture.

And they say, well, God still speaks today, but it's not as authoritative in the same authoritative way that He spoke in the Bible. Is that a tenable position? And the answer to that.

Is, let's define terms. If you mean that God is still speaking through His Word by granting the illumination the Spirit brings to the believer's mind as they read the Scripture, and you're now understanding the Scripture in a deeper, more profound way, if that's what you mean, then amen and amen.

But if you mean that God is communicating something directly to your mind, what amounts to direct revelation, then I would say there's no biblical evidence for that. In fact, I would argue the evidence is absolutely contrary to that.

We have, to use Peter's language, we have this more sure Word that's been given to us in the Scripture, so we don't need something external. I grew up in a circle where there was a lot of mysticism—not so much the Charismatic movement, but this mystical idea that God speaks to me.

And I think that's a dangerous door to open, because I think, first of all, it's not biblical. There's not evidence of that. But I think beyond that, that becomes so subjective, it's impossible to know.

I'm sure you've had the same thing. I'll sit with people in my office counseling them, and the man will look across the desk at me and say, Tom, God told me He wants me to divorce my wife. And it's like, well, you don't have biblical grounds.

Well, God told me. Well, my response to that is, how? You mean like you heard a voice? Oh, no, Tom. I don't mean like I heard a voice, although some would say that. I mean that I just had this sense, this impression.

And my immediate response to that is, how do you know that was God? How do you know that wasn't your flesh? How do you know that wasn't some worldly influence that you've read somewhere that's coming to bear on your mind?

You have no way in the world to know that's God. Not one way. And that's true with any extra biblical revelation. That's why I love what Luther said in the Reformation. He said the beauty of the Scripture is we have the external word.

We have the words of God to us in black and white on the page. There's no subjectivity. We don't have to wonder if this is what God said. It's there. And so that would be my admonition to somebody who's thinking like that is you don't really treasure what you have.

You have the external word. You don't have to wonder if this is God or not. Yeah. I tell people, I don't know.

If you've heard me say this or not, but I tell people if you have to wonder whether or not God.

Spoke to you,. He didn't. He didn't. That's exactly right. God doesn't whisper. That's right.

God doesn't whisper. That's exactly right. Tom, one of the pushbacks I've seen is from 1 Peter 4 .11, and this ties into what you were talking about. I know where you're going to go with this, but 1 Peter 4 .11, Gavin Ortland brought up this point.

It says, as each one has received a gift, employ it in serving one another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God, whoever speaks as one speaking the oracles of God. And they would say, well, here's the Apostle Peter.

This is after we, a cessation to say those, the revelatory signed gifts have ceased. And yet he's talking about a gift, it's in verse 10, and whoever's speaking, speaking the oracles of God. So isn't this a reference to God giving new revelation, people speaking for God or God speaking through people in a way that's not recorded in scripture.

Or even on par with scripture? Yeah. No, I would have two responses to that. I mean, first of all, just look at the context. What Peter is clearly doing is he's telling people how to live in the midst of times of difficulty and persecution and suffering, and he's talking about exercising your spiritual gift as each one has received a special gift employed in serving one another.

So he's talking about all believers, and all he does is divide the spiritual gifts that are extant at that time into two categories, into speaking gifts and serving gifts. And so it's clear, and nobody would argue in terms of when he says serving, he's talking about all the serving gifts, it's a category.

And he says, make sure you don't do that in your own strength, which is a temptation for people who have serving gifts. You make sure you do that in the strength of the spirit, you serve by the strength with God's supplies.

And then he says, if you have a speaking gift, then make sure it's the same kind of admonition. If you're going to have a speaking gift, make sure you're not speaking your words. You're speaking the oracles of God.

That Greek word is used of revelation, but in context, it's used of the revelation that's here. I mean, if you look at Peter, you know, what does Peter talk about? He talks about even back in chapter one of 1 Peter, he says, you've been born again, not of the seed, which is perishable, but imperishable through the living and enduring word of God.

You've been born again by the word of God. And then he goes on to say, and you grow by like a newborn baby, desiring the milk of the word that you can grow. So that's how he frames it. You go to his second letter.

And what does he say in chapter one of his second letter? He says, we have this word of prophecy more sure in the scriptures. It's better than the experience I had on the Mount of Transfiguration. It's better to have the word of God than to have been on the Mount of Transfiguration and to see the glorified revelation of Christ.

That's what Peter says. And so that's the context in which he's making this point. You have to take it out of the context of first and second Peter to make it something more than you. If you have a serving gift, then serve by the strength, which God supplies.

If you have a speaking gift, then make sure it's not your words, but God's words. Those two applicational points are parallel and you have to take them in their context.

Yes, exactly right. This is not God downloading direct divine revelation, something new that has not been known before. This is not a prophetic in the sense of Isaiah or Jeremiah or even apostolic in the sense of these are the direct words.

He's simply saying, if you have a speaking gift, don't give your own advice. Don't give your own opinion. Give godly advice. Give advice that is congruent with the teaching of Scripture.

Absolutely. He's taking all the speaking gifts into that category. As you just pointed out, if you have the gift of exhortation, you're giving advice and counsel, then make sure it's based on the Scripture.

If you're a public teacher, if you're standing in that role, then make sure you're not talking to people and giving your own ideas, your own TED talk. Instead, you are teaching the very oracles of God.

You are explaining his word. Of course, that's exactly what Paul said to Timothy, right? Preach the word. That's all Peter's saying. He's saying, serve through the strength God supplies. If you have the serving gift, you have a teaching gift, use the tool he's given to teachers, which is his word.

Yes, indeed. Indeed. Well, Tom, this next question could probably be a whole hour in and of itself easily or more, but talk to us just a little bit. What does the testimony of church history tell us about cessationism?

As we look through, let's say we get past the apostolic era, at least, and the closing of the canon from that point forward in the last almost 2 ,000 years or so. Do we see these signed gifts continue in the church, or what can we learn from church history?

Well, the truth is, as you know, church history poses a huge problem for our continuationist friends because they have to do one of two things. When you look at church history, a continuationist either has to say that in little pockets here and there, the miraculous gifts have continued unabated since the early church, or they have to say, well, we have to admit when we look at the flow of church history that they largely went away and declined, but now at the direction of the Spirit, they've reappeared in the beginning of the 20th century.

I mean, those are the two approaches they have to take because when you look at the flow of church history and the main voices that we look to primarily for other doctrines, they are saying that the gifts ceased.

The reason that matters, and I make this point, obviously, the most important arguments are biblical arguments, but as a student of Scripture, and you know this as someone who teaches often, one of the last things I do before I go to teach God's people and before I put the finishing touches on a given sermon is I check my own interpretation against godly saints who have spoken on this issue before because we believe if it's the truth, if we're really teaching what's in the Scripture, then the Holy Spirit has brought us to the same conclusion that he's brought others before us to that conclusion.

And so it's not that church history is equal to Scripture. Rather, we're looking at church history to say what have other saints concluded this passage teaches because that's another check or a test. When you do that, when you look back and you start looking, as you said, at the post-apostolic era, from the early days of the church fathers, you see a united voice.

There are exceptions, and I'll admit that, occasionally continuationists will cite those individuals, but they have to do that. They have to find little pockets of that, and often they were people whose theology was very flawed in other ways as well.

But when you look at the flow of men like Augustine on so much of our doctrine of salvation is built on understanding the Scriptures even as he understood them. You work your way through church history, you see again and again.

John Chrysostom, one of the great expositors of that early era, you look then, you move forward, and there was a time of darkness in a lot of ways, including the eclipse of the Scripture through the Middle Ages, but you see it covered with the Reformation, and you see them again wholeheartedly affirming.

And there's a quote I think Gavin may bring up, a quote from Luther that seems to imply that maybe the gifts continue, but you have to look at that in its context. When you look at the Reformers and their overarching statements about this issue, and I've included a number in the book, when you do that, you discover that they were with one voice saying the miraculous gifts had ceased with the first century.

And you move on through church history. The greatest theologian America has probably ever produced, Jonathan Edwards, makes this point. Spurgeon, I know a man that many of us who have a Baptist background appreciate and admire.

On and on it goes. I mean, again, I just give a sampling in that chapter in the book, and the great voices of the church speak with one voice on this issue.

Yeah. So Tom, one other thing. You know, we talk about this issue, cessationism, continuism. Why is it such a big deal? I think I speak for you. In fact, I know I do. Neither one of us would say that if you're charismatic, that means you're lost.

We're not saying that. So it's not a primary gospel issue, but at least in my book, as far as the secondary issues, it's top tier secondary because of so many ripple effects and a number of other issues as well.

But why spend so much time talking about this? Why write a book? Why do a conference about it? What are the implications of this? What's.

The dangers of the charismatic position? Yeah. Well, first of all, that's a great question. I think it's a key question. I try to address that. But I would say you have to think about it in two parts.

I agree with you that if someone is right on the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, the person of Christ, the person of God, the biblical gospel, those key issues, then they're a brother in Christ.

And I'm going to respond to them differently on this issue than I would to others. But I think it's also important to acknowledge that the charismatic movement claims some, I think it's 667 million charismatics in the world.

That sounds impressive until you start dissecting that. And while you can be a charismatic and be a genuine born-again Christian, you need to understand, I know you do understand this, I just speak to those who might be listening, that there are many professing charismatics, most professing charismatics, who are not genuine Christians.

How do I know? Well, you've got 195 million of those are Roman Catholics, most of whom don't understand the biblical gospel and who have embraced a false gospel. Then you've got, I think you have 25 million.

One is Pentecostals who have rejected the biblical God and therefore are under the anathema of Scripture. You have on top of that, and by the charismatic movement's own admission, some 40 of their movement is into the prosperity gospel, which isn't a biblical gospel at all.

And so you start doing the math and pretty soon, well over 50%, and some would estimate as high as 70 or more of professing charismatics across the world, and you have to look at it worldwide, are in fact not born-again Bible-believing Christians because they don't understand the biblical gospel.