Systems of categorizing gifts are prolific. One researcher lists 12 different methods and notes that even when the categories are similar, different authors have not agreed on which gifts to include in each category[1]. Following are typical examples of gift classification.
Ebbie Smith[2]
Leslie Flynn[3]
James W. Zackrison[4]
Useful Categories
Most categories of the sort listed above could be considered “useful” categories, and they are designed to aid in understanding the gifts[5], not to create hard divisions. Principles and rules in scripture that apply to one category will also apply to the others. Many of these authors would probably tell you that they are not implying anything inherent in the text, but are only creating categories to aid in the learning process.
Fundamental Categories
There is, however, a completely different type of classification used by both “charismatic” and “conservative” authors. These categories divide the gifts according to “fundamental” differences. “Fundamental” meaning that the rules, admonitions, analogies, and basic principles that apply to one category of gifts might not apply to the other categories at all. If the useful categories are “man’s categories”, then these fundamental divisions are an attempt to define “God’s categories,” or those that are inherently present in scripture. There are only two major methods of categorizing gifts into fundamental categories.
1. Miraculous / Non-Miraculous Categories[6]
a. Defining miraculous. The first step in creating a miraculous category is to define miraculous. Any gift can produce miraculous results with the Holy Spirit working through it, so we must be more specific. Instead of wading through the technical discussions on this topic, we can borrow a practical definition from theologian Wayne Grudem. Grudem’s common sense distinction of miraculous as “that which arouses awe and wonder[7]” is clear and to the point. Certain gifts clearly produce “awe and wonder” while others don’t. This is why searching for gifts such as healing and tongues in church history is much easier than searching for the gifts of service or mercy. The former produce awe and wonder, and reports of their use are therefore more likely to make their way into historical records. In fact, historical reports before 1850 of the less spectacular gifts may be virtually non-existent.
b. Distinguishing miraculous from non-miraculous gifts[8] . How can we distinguish the gifts that are always supernatural? Some gifts might have supernatural potential, but most gifts can be defined apart from any miraculous element. These gifts can be considered for comparison with personality types. Some disputed gifts are faith, prophecy, discernment, knowledge, and wisdom. Although many define these gifts as completely supernatural, many other writers define these gifts as typically natural. There is then a clear dividing line. Some gifts can be defined naturally and others cannot. The four gifts that cannot be defined naturally are inherently supernatural. These gifts are meaningless and incoherent[9] apart from an overtly miraculous nature, and cannot be exercised without producing “awe and wonder” in those who observe the gifts in use. These gifts fall under the distinction of “miraculous by definition.” The gifts that fall under this category are only detected by supernatural results and cannot be connected with personality types because the results do not derive from any known personality characteristics. This detachment from personality means that we have nothing recognizable in the natural world to attribute the results to, and so we infer a beyond natural or “supernatural” cause. This disconnect from the natural world of cause and effect and the inference of a supernatural source produces “awe and wonder” in observers.
• Miracles. This gift may include several possibilities. It has been limited solely to exorcisms[10], has been attributed to raising the dead[11], or may be interpreted as any manifestation that is beyond the ordinary[12].
• Healing. Every biblical example of healing is unmistakably supernatural.
• Tongues. Both views of tongues, that of an unlearned language, and that of personal communication with God, are overtly supernatural.
• Interpretation of tongues. This is the supernatural accompaniment to the gift of tongues, whereby a listener understands and interprets an unlearned language.
Each of these gifts[13] becomes meaningless when the miraculous is removed. This gives us one clear line of demarcation by which we can divide the gifts according to their nature.
2. Three-List View.
The second fundamental category view divides the three lists of Ephesians 4, Romans 12, and I Corinthians 12 into three categories which each contain very different kinds of gifts. The Romans list contains gifts that we possess, called “motivational” or “ministry” gifts. The Ephesian list contains “office gifts,” which are positions in the church which only some believers are called to fill, and the Corinthian list contains “manifestation” gifts, those we should be ready to “manifest” at any time. Perhaps 15 to 20 percent of the popular literature divides the gifts in this manner. Someone coming from this perspective would only search the list of Romans 12 to identify any gifts they might possess. The rest of the church would consider all three lists to be applicable to spiritual gifts discovery. Discussions between these two sides can be difficult because the vocabulary for each side is different, and the same word may mean something different to each. The following graphic is a visual summary of the three-list view.
Of the views listed above, the three-list view is the most significant for the gift-type theory, and there are some legitimate reasons for not dismissing it too quickly.
Supporting Arguments for the Three-List View
1. Each of the three lists of gifts focuses on a different member of the Trinity.
(a.) Romans 12 looks to God the Father as the giver of gifts (Rom. 12:3).
(b.) In Ephesians 4 the focus is on Christ: “But each of us was given grace according to the measure of Christ’s gift” (Eph. 4:7, NRSV).
(c.) I Corinthians has a clear focus on the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 12: 7-11).
2. Each list carries a different tone in the types of gifts that are named:
(a.) Ephesians contains a list of five gifts which appear to be leadership oriented. Three of these gifts, apostle, prophet, and teacher, are the three mentioned in I Cor. 12:28 as the three that are most edifying to the church. The other two, pastor and evangelist, are known as prominent roles in the modern church, and were possibly so in the early church as well. To some commentators the “list in Ephesians 4 is exclusively concerned with gifts for ministry[14].”
(b.) I Corinthians contains a list of nine gifts which are clearly more supernatural than either the Romans or Ephesians list. Four of the nine were mentioned earlier as being “miraculous by definition: Miracles, healing, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. The other five have a more supernatural “feel” to them and are more often given a supernatural definition than the gifts in the other lists. Prophecy involved revelation at least some of the time. The fact that the gifts of knowledge and wisdom are literally written “word of knowledge” and “word of wisdom” invites speculation that both are characterized by direct revelation or a “word from God.” The gift of faith brings to mind the faith to move mountains or produce miracles, and discernment of spirits could imply beyond natural insight into the spirit realm.
(c.) The Romans list contains gifts which, except for prophecy, are more ordinary than the other two lists, and even with the gift of prophecy the revelatory aspect was not a necessary element in every instance.
3. I Corinthians 12:4-6 gives a break down of the whole subject of gifts that is strikingly similar to that of the three-list view. “There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all” (NKJV). This division would match the gifts to Romans 12, the ministries to Ephesians 4, and the activities to I Corinthians 12.
Arguments against the Three-List View
1. The gift of prophecy occurs in all three lists implying that we must differentiate three different prophecy gifts for the three list view to be consistent. If, on the other hand, there is only one prophecy gift, then it ties all three lists together as referring to one type of gifting.
2. In I Corinthians 12: 28-29 Paul lists gifts and gifted people together as part of the Body of Christ.
3. The Body of Christ is the central theme of each passage with our gifts representing our role in the body (Rom. 12: 4-6; I Cor. 12: 12-30; Eph. 4: 4-16). In the body metaphor, every part has a fixed position. This is inconsistent with a transitory or manifestational view of the I Corinthian gifts. Even the office view of the Ephesians gifts does not convey the same sense of permanancy that comes across in the body analogy.
There is some weight to both the arguments for and against the three-list view, but it would seem that both sides cannot be correct. Is it possible, though, that both explanations hold truth and that a resolution could be found at another level? The following proposal (layered-category view) is one attempt to solve the dilemma.
References
[1] Kenneth John Stone, “Relationship Between Personality and Spiritual Gifts”, PsyD. Diss., (George Fox College: University Microfilms International, 1991), 22.
[2] Ebbie Smith, Member’s booklet: Discovering Your Spiritual Gifts (The Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention: 1981)
[3] Leslie Flynn, 19 Gifts of the Spirit (Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1994), 39.
[4] James W. Zackrison, Practical Spiritual Gifts (Boise, ID: Pacific Press Publishing, 1996), 56-108.
[5] Cf. Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, Spiritual Gifts (St. Louis: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, 1995), 12.
[6] Often a set of categories that are generally “useful” will have a separate category for the miraculous gifts as Flynn does above.
[7] Wayne Grudem, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2000), 109.
[8] This distinction was apparently made by the Puritans, who according to James Gorden King, Jr. “tried to distinguish between gifts which were characteristically supernatural and those which were not.” From “An Examination of Prevailing Beliefs Regarding Gift of the Spirit Immediately Preceding the 20th Century Pentecostal Revival,” a conference paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies at Fuller Seminary, Nov. 18-20, 1982, 6. King, however, provides no specific references.
[9] There have been attempts to define every gift naturally: Healing as psychological healing; miracles as seeing the miraculous in everday life; but these definitions are not taken seriously by most scholars.
[10] John MacArthur, Jr., Charismatic Chaos (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992), 245-246.
[11] Harley H. Schmitt, Many Gifts One Lord (Fairfax, VA: Xulon Press, 2002), 106.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Leslie Flynn comes to the same division of gifts from another perspective. He notes that the gifts of miracles, healing, and tongues, do not have commands associated with them as do most of the other gifts, 41.
[14] Donald Bridge and David Phypers. Spiritual Gifts and the Church (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1974), 46.
Ebbie Smith[2]
Leslie Flynn[3]
James W. Zackrison[4]
Useful vs. Fundamental Categories
Useful Categories
Most categories of the sort listed above could be considered “useful” categories, and they are designed to aid in understanding the gifts[5], not to create hard divisions. Principles and rules in scripture that apply to one category will also apply to the others. Many of these authors would probably tell you that they are not implying anything inherent in the text, but are only creating categories to aid in the learning process.
Fundamental Categories
There is, however, a completely different type of classification used by both “charismatic” and “conservative” authors. These categories divide the gifts according to “fundamental” differences. “Fundamental” meaning that the rules, admonitions, analogies, and basic principles that apply to one category of gifts might not apply to the other categories at all. If the useful categories are “man’s categories”, then these fundamental divisions are an attempt to define “God’s categories,” or those that are inherently present in scripture. There are only two major methods of categorizing gifts into fundamental categories.
1. Miraculous / Non-Miraculous Categories[6]
a. Defining miraculous. The first step in creating a miraculous category is to define miraculous. Any gift can produce miraculous results with the Holy Spirit working through it, so we must be more specific. Instead of wading through the technical discussions on this topic, we can borrow a practical definition from theologian Wayne Grudem. Grudem’s common sense distinction of miraculous as “that which arouses awe and wonder[7]” is clear and to the point. Certain gifts clearly produce “awe and wonder” while others don’t. This is why searching for gifts such as healing and tongues in church history is much easier than searching for the gifts of service or mercy. The former produce awe and wonder, and reports of their use are therefore more likely to make their way into historical records. In fact, historical reports before 1850 of the less spectacular gifts may be virtually non-existent.
b. Distinguishing miraculous from non-miraculous gifts[8] . How can we distinguish the gifts that are always supernatural? Some gifts might have supernatural potential, but most gifts can be defined apart from any miraculous element. These gifts can be considered for comparison with personality types. Some disputed gifts are faith, prophecy, discernment, knowledge, and wisdom. Although many define these gifts as completely supernatural, many other writers define these gifts as typically natural. There is then a clear dividing line. Some gifts can be defined naturally and others cannot. The four gifts that cannot be defined naturally are inherently supernatural. These gifts are meaningless and incoherent[9] apart from an overtly miraculous nature, and cannot be exercised without producing “awe and wonder” in those who observe the gifts in use. These gifts fall under the distinction of “miraculous by definition.” The gifts that fall under this category are only detected by supernatural results and cannot be connected with personality types because the results do not derive from any known personality characteristics. This detachment from personality means that we have nothing recognizable in the natural world to attribute the results to, and so we infer a beyond natural or “supernatural” cause. This disconnect from the natural world of cause and effect and the inference of a supernatural source produces “awe and wonder” in observers.
• Miracles. This gift may include several possibilities. It has been limited solely to exorcisms[10], has been attributed to raising the dead[11], or may be interpreted as any manifestation that is beyond the ordinary[12].
• Healing. Every biblical example of healing is unmistakably supernatural.
• Tongues. Both views of tongues, that of an unlearned language, and that of personal communication with God, are overtly supernatural.
• Interpretation of tongues. This is the supernatural accompaniment to the gift of tongues, whereby a listener understands and interprets an unlearned language.
Each of these gifts[13] becomes meaningless when the miraculous is removed. This gives us one clear line of demarcation by which we can divide the gifts according to their nature.
2. Three-List View.
The second fundamental category view divides the three lists of Ephesians 4, Romans 12, and I Corinthians 12 into three categories which each contain very different kinds of gifts. The Romans list contains gifts that we possess, called “motivational” or “ministry” gifts. The Ephesian list contains “office gifts,” which are positions in the church which only some believers are called to fill, and the Corinthian list contains “manifestation” gifts, those we should be ready to “manifest” at any time. Perhaps 15 to 20 percent of the popular literature divides the gifts in this manner. Someone coming from this perspective would only search the list of Romans 12 to identify any gifts they might possess. The rest of the church would consider all three lists to be applicable to spiritual gifts discovery. Discussions between these two sides can be difficult because the vocabulary for each side is different, and the same word may mean something different to each. The following graphic is a visual summary of the three-list view.
Of the views listed above, the three-list view is the most significant for the gift-type theory, and there are some legitimate reasons for not dismissing it too quickly.
Supporting Arguments for the Three-List View
1. Each of the three lists of gifts focuses on a different member of the Trinity.
(a.) Romans 12 looks to God the Father as the giver of gifts (Rom. 12:3).
(b.) In Ephesians 4 the focus is on Christ: “But each of us was given grace according to the measure of Christ’s gift” (Eph. 4:7, NRSV).
(c.) I Corinthians has a clear focus on the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 12: 7-11).
2. Each list carries a different tone in the types of gifts that are named:
(a.) Ephesians contains a list of five gifts which appear to be leadership oriented. Three of these gifts, apostle, prophet, and teacher, are the three mentioned in I Cor. 12:28 as the three that are most edifying to the church. The other two, pastor and evangelist, are known as prominent roles in the modern church, and were possibly so in the early church as well. To some commentators the “list in Ephesians 4 is exclusively concerned with gifts for ministry[14].”
(b.) I Corinthians contains a list of nine gifts which are clearly more supernatural than either the Romans or Ephesians list. Four of the nine were mentioned earlier as being “miraculous by definition: Miracles, healing, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. The other five have a more supernatural “feel” to them and are more often given a supernatural definition than the gifts in the other lists. Prophecy involved revelation at least some of the time. The fact that the gifts of knowledge and wisdom are literally written “word of knowledge” and “word of wisdom” invites speculation that both are characterized by direct revelation or a “word from God.” The gift of faith brings to mind the faith to move mountains or produce miracles, and discernment of spirits could imply beyond natural insight into the spirit realm.
(c.) The Romans list contains gifts which, except for prophecy, are more ordinary than the other two lists, and even with the gift of prophecy the revelatory aspect was not a necessary element in every instance.
3. I Corinthians 12:4-6 gives a break down of the whole subject of gifts that is strikingly similar to that of the three-list view. “There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all” (NKJV). This division would match the gifts to Romans 12, the ministries to Ephesians 4, and the activities to I Corinthians 12.
Arguments against the Three-List View
1. The gift of prophecy occurs in all three lists implying that we must differentiate three different prophecy gifts for the three list view to be consistent. If, on the other hand, there is only one prophecy gift, then it ties all three lists together as referring to one type of gifting.
2. In I Corinthians 12: 28-29 Paul lists gifts and gifted people together as part of the Body of Christ.
3. The Body of Christ is the central theme of each passage with our gifts representing our role in the body (Rom. 12: 4-6; I Cor. 12: 12-30; Eph. 4: 4-16). In the body metaphor, every part has a fixed position. This is inconsistent with a transitory or manifestational view of the I Corinthian gifts. Even the office view of the Ephesians gifts does not convey the same sense of permanancy that comes across in the body analogy.
There is some weight to both the arguments for and against the three-list view, but it would seem that both sides cannot be correct. Is it possible, though, that both explanations hold truth and that a resolution could be found at another level? The following proposal (layered-category view) is one attempt to solve the dilemma.
References
[1] Kenneth John Stone, “Relationship Between Personality and Spiritual Gifts”, PsyD. Diss., (George Fox College: University Microfilms International, 1991), 22.
[2] Ebbie Smith, Member’s booklet: Discovering Your Spiritual Gifts (The Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention: 1981)
[3] Leslie Flynn, 19 Gifts of the Spirit (Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1994), 39.
[4] James W. Zackrison, Practical Spiritual Gifts (Boise, ID: Pacific Press Publishing, 1996), 56-108.
[5] Cf. Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, Spiritual Gifts (St. Louis: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, 1995), 12.
[6] Often a set of categories that are generally “useful” will have a separate category for the miraculous gifts as Flynn does above.
[7] Wayne Grudem, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2000), 109.
[8] This distinction was apparently made by the Puritans, who according to James Gorden King, Jr. “tried to distinguish between gifts which were characteristically supernatural and those which were not.” From “An Examination of Prevailing Beliefs Regarding Gift of the Spirit Immediately Preceding the 20th Century Pentecostal Revival,” a conference paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies at Fuller Seminary, Nov. 18-20, 1982, 6. King, however, provides no specific references.
[9] There have been attempts to define every gift naturally: Healing as psychological healing; miracles as seeing the miraculous in everday life; but these definitions are not taken seriously by most scholars.
[10] John MacArthur, Jr., Charismatic Chaos (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992), 245-246.
[11] Harley H. Schmitt, Many Gifts One Lord (Fairfax, VA: Xulon Press, 2002), 106.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Leslie Flynn comes to the same division of gifts from another perspective. He notes that the gifts of miracles, healing, and tongues, do not have commands associated with them as do most of the other gifts, 41.
[14] Donald Bridge and David Phypers. Spiritual Gifts and the Church (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1974), 46.
powered by performancing firefox
No comments:
Post a Comment