PDA

View Full Version : Have the Gifts of the Spirit Ceased?



Pages : [1] 2

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 05:38 AM
Having been inspired by another thread which I did not wish to hijack, I've been thinking of this in conjunction with other things.
During the times of the Apostles, you had quite a lot of things going on, being gifts of the Spirit...prophecy, healing, miracles, casting out demons, raising the dead, speaking in tongues, and such.

After the time of the Apostles (which I'd probably mark around AD 70 or so, as that's a major date), it appeared these gifts came to cease. And from that time, they continued to cease. Even Paul seemed to predict these things:

1 Corinthians 13:8-12 (ESV)
8 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

And from what it appears to be, these gifts did cease. What prophecy has come forth since then that bore any truth? We no longer see healings...the dead are not raised, and we do not see people possessed by demons like in the NT nor do we see them cast out of people.
As for tongues, well, I don't personally think that happens anymore either. I once encountered a person who I was told was speaking in tongues while in prayer...and it had to be one of the fakest things I'd heard.

So essentially, I think the gifts of the Spirit ceased long ago. Compounded with that, I don't believe demons (unclean spirits, not fallen angels) possessed people after that time either. Something made them cease as well, and this wasn't just ceasing something they liked to do...seemed more like something they needed to do.

Any thoughts?

mattlad22
Dec 7th 2005, 05:46 AM
well i would say it obviously has slowed down alot..if almost completely.
why? i cant say i really care on a carnal basis, i know who controls and i know through Jesus Christ i am His, and i shall change, death has no part in me through Jesus...so i suppose moreso my interest on the matter is the global reaction, the impact it will have in the world when those things on a larger more world-wide basis occur again.

for example..when the 2 witnesses first begin thier witnessing..the first reaction of people...i know the near end and end reaction is and its not good....for sure.

rmt0005
Dec 7th 2005, 05:53 AM
Having been inspired by another thread which I did not wish to hijack, I've been thinking of this in conjunction with other things.
During the times of the Apostles, you had quite a lot of things going on, being gifts of the Spirit...prophecy, healing, miracles, casting out demons, raising the dead, speaking in tongues, and such.

After the time of the Apostles (which I'd probably mark around AD 70 or so, as that's a major date), it appeared these gifts came to cease. And from that time, they continued to cease. Even Paul seemed to predict these things:

1 Corinthians 13:8-12 (ESV)
8 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

And from what it appears to be, these gifts did cease. What prophecy has come forth since then that bore any truth? We no longer see healings...the dead are not raised, and we do not see people possessed by demons like in the NT nor do we see them cast out of people.
As for tongues, well, I don't personally think that happens anymore either. I once encountered a person who I was told was speaking in tongues while in prayer...and it had to one of the fakest things I'd heard.

So essentially, I think the gifts of the Spirit ceased long ago. Compounded with that, I don't believe demons (unclean spirits, not fallen angels) possessed people after that time either. Something made them cease as well, and this wasn't just ceasing something they liked to do...seemed more like something they needed to do.

Any thoughts?

I Cor 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

Paul is telling us, if you can't understand whats being said, what's the point? I was listening to a very well-known preacher baptizing some of his congregation and he was telling them how to speak in tongues. It was such a cringe moment because he had to keep prodding certain people to blurt out non-sensical sounds as "proof" that they now had the Holy Spirit in them. Speaking in tongues as it is known today is a carnal display of the flesh.

humbled
Dec 7th 2005, 06:55 AM
This is a very interesting topic. I for one am a semi-cessasionist (if there is such a term) I believe that some gifts are active today, but they are more of the practical gifts. (teaching, discernment, exhortation, etc.)

The gifts that are inactive are the sign gifts used to establish the church (healing, tongues, etc.)

Don't get me wrong, God can heal whomever HE chooses, He can speak through whomever HE chooses, but as for people walking around with these gifts actively? I don't believe so.

This (http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/spiritualgifts.html) is a site that has several good articles concerning this topic. The bottom has several from John MacArthur...who I believe hits the nail on the head. ;)

watchinginawe
Dec 7th 2005, 02:05 PM
Having been inspired by another thread which I did not wish to hijack, I've been thinking of this in conjunction with other things.
During the times of the Apostles, you had quite a lot of things going on, being gifts of the Spirit...prophecy, healing, miracles, casting out demons, raising the dead, speaking in tongues, and such.

After the time of the Apostles (which I'd probably mark around AD 70 or so, as that's a major date), it appeared these gifts came to cease. And from that time, they continued to cease. Even Paul seemed to predict these things:

1 Corinthians 13:8-12 (ESV)
8 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

And from what it appears to be, these gifts did cease. What prophecy has come forth since then that bore any truth? We no longer see healings...the dead are not raised, and we do not see people possessed by demons like in the NT nor do we see them cast out of people.
As for tongues, well, I don't personally think that happens anymore either. I once encountered a person who I was told was speaking in tongues while in prayer...and it had to be one of the fakest things I'd heard.

So essentially, I think the gifts of the Spirit ceased long ago. Compounded with that, I don't believe demons (unclean spirits, not fallen angels) possessed people after that time either. Something made them cease as well, and this wasn't just ceasing something they liked to do...seemed more like something they needed to do.

Any thoughts?We must realize that there is not a different Holy Ghost now than there was in the first century Church. I suppose the single biggest reason people believe the Gifts have ceased is because otherwise they would have to believe tongues continue. It must be because that is always what these discussions seem to center on. Then we have others that pick and choose which gifts God sees fit to continue in. Others that believe the Gifts are no longer needed. Others yet who dwell on the prophetic nature of the Gifts and how they aren't needed anymore. Or how the Gifts were only exhibited only by the Apostles to start the Church.

I will post the whole of Chapter 12 of I Corinthians and ask why would these Gifts in the body of Christ have ceased or would no longer be needed or useful in the body? Is Paul instructing the Apostles regarding Gifts of the Spirit or the Church?

I Corinthians 12:
1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.

2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.

3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.

5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.

6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;

10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

14 For the body is not one member, but many.

15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?

18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:

23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.

24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked.

25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.

26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.

27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?

30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

God Bless!

MAC702
Dec 7th 2005, 02:52 PM
1 Corinthians 13:8-12 (ESV)
8 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.
I emphasized what I think to be a key part of the scripture you mentioned. Only after the writings of the apostle John do we have the complete (or, "perfect") Bible to use in our ministry. We use it instead of having miracles performed directly through us. This is NOT to say that God's Holy Spirit isn't actively involved in the worldwide preaching work; it most certainly is, but the "gifts" Paul spoke about are no longer needed, just as he prophesied that they would no longer be.

watchinginawe
Dec 7th 2005, 03:09 PM
I beleive that we all can find agreement in that the fruit of the Spirit has not ceased. Remember that the Holy Ghost is of itself a Gift of God. Insomuch that the Spirit is a Gift of God, the fruts thereof are manifestations of that Gift.

Galatians 5:
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.


Luke 11:
11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?

12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?

13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?


John 4:
10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.


Acts 11:
15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?


God Bless!

watchinginawe
Dec 7th 2005, 03:27 PM
I emphasized what I think to be a key part of the scripture you mentioned. Only after the writings of the apostle John do we have the complete (or, "perfect") Bible to use in our ministry. We use it instead of having miracles performed directly through us. This is NOT to say that God's Holy Spirit isn't actively involved in the worldwide preaching work; it most certainly is, but the "gifts" Paul spoke about are no longer needed, just as he prophesied that they would no longer be.MAC702, I would like to ask you when you believe the Revelation was written (or given)?

:hmm: Also, I wonder if it was upon completion of the Book of Revelation that God saw fit to remove the Gifts of the Spirit or after the writings were compiled into what we now know as the Bible? If we suppose that the active working of the Holy Ghost "passed away" along with knowledge, etc. at the time of this writing, then I wonder by what inspiration we can say the Bible was compiled? At what time was the Bible complete? What Bible should be used in our ministry?

If the Gifts fell silent after John was given the Revelation, was there a Bible already in circulation among the body of Christ?

God Bless!

grahamc3
Dec 7th 2005, 03:30 PM
Has it ceased? Are you serious? I would have to post 10 pages about all the stuff I've seen just in my own family. Of course, you didn't see this with your own eyes. You would have to take my word for it. But you name it, I've seen it (even the dead raised). God is still working the miraculous, but here's the catch, for those WHO BELIEVE. You keep saying "we" don't see this or that. But "we" sounds more like you personally.

millerrod
Dec 7th 2005, 03:52 PM
The only thing that has changed are we his followers. We have allowed ourselves to become filled with vanity, decenseitized and with blindness toward the Gifts of the Spirit. Usually in the defense of OUR doctrine, if we allow ourselves to beleive in the gift of tounges then , well that other church must be right and we are wrong in our beliefs. and how can there be those who have demons because you know that other church the one we all look down on well you know they believe in casting out demons and if we see and believe then well maybe there doctrine is right and we are wrong. and you know there are those churches that claim miracles but surely God would not bless that church with miricles and if we believe then why have we not recieved such a blessing. The gifts of the spirit continue but we do not see them, when we accept ALL who believe in Christ and except them as brothers and sisters. then we shall see. Dont let our vanity of doctrine belief continue to blind us.

MAC702
Dec 7th 2005, 04:18 PM
MAC702, I would like to ask you when you believe the Revelation was written (or given)?
I've always heard somewhere just before the end of the 1st century, maybe even a few years before John wrote his gospel.

grahamc3
Dec 7th 2005, 04:20 PM
Dark...also I want to point out something interesting I just found in scripture.

Mark 16:17-18
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Notice he is speaking to the apostles. Now if He wanted the miraculous to end with them, wouldn't he have said "YOU" will do this in my name and not "THEY"? Who are the "THEY" He is referring to? He obviously isnt talking to them. My opinion is that we are supposed to be "they". The prophecy that Christ made was not about the apostles particularly, but it obviously didn't exclude them, since they did all of the things mentioned above in the book of Acts.

MAC702
Dec 7th 2005, 04:25 PM
Has it ceased? Are you serious? I would have to post 10 pages about all the stuff I've seen just in my own family. Of course, you didn't see this with your own eyes. You would have to take my word for it. But you name it, I've seen it (even the dead raised). God is still working the miraculous, but here's the catch, for those WHO BELIEVE. You keep saying "we" don't see this or that. But "we" sounds more like you personally.I think it's significant that there is a difference (at least, I think so, let me know if you disagree) between the gifts of the spirit and other types of miracles. Certainly I agree that miracles still occur and that the Holy Spirit is active with Christians worldwide. But I don't think that has to mean that the gifts of the spirit that Paul mentions must still be here. Otherwise, I should think we would have active healings done by faithful Christians everyday to the extent that it would make unbelievers into believers, because that's what the gifts did back then; they weren't just for the believers!

But shortly after those days, the message reached the entire civilized world with mounds of eyewitness accounts, and the complete (or, perfect) Bible was being used for authentication and teaching, and the gifts were no longer necessary.

After all, Paul does say they would come to an end, yet he implies that when they do, prophesying, etc would still be needed, so he can't be talking about after Armageddon.

If they are still active in your belief, when do you believe that they will end?

MAC702
Dec 7th 2005, 04:31 PM
Dark...also I want to point out something interesting I just found in scripture.

Mark 16:17-18
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Notice he is speaking to the apostles. Now if He wanted the miraculous to end with them, wouldn't he have said "YOU" will do this in my name and not "THEY"? Who are the "THEY" He is referring to? He obviously isnt talking to them. My opinion is that we are supposed to be "they". The prophecy that Christ made was not about the apostles particularly, but it obviously didn't exclude them, since they did all of the things mentioned above in the book of Acts.
Be careful how you apply the conclusion to Mark's gospel. Most manuscripts didn't contain that version. But assuming it's correct, are you saying that TODAY a true Christian, with all his faith, cannot be poisoned?

Illumined
Dec 7th 2005, 04:54 PM
But you name it, I've seen it (even the dead raised). God is still working the miraculous, but here's the catch, for those WHO BELIEVE.

Now you have me most curious!!

Please elaborate on that event that you have seen firsthand.

grahamc3
Dec 7th 2005, 05:03 PM
"I think it's significant that there is a difference (at least, I think so, let me know if you disagree) between the gifts of the spirit and other types of miracles."

I don't think there's a difference. Look at this scripture.
1 Cor. 12:4, 8-10
Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another [divers] kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:


"After all, Paul does say they would come to an end, yet he implies that when they do, prophesying, etc would still be needed, so he can't be talking about after Armageddon.
If they are still active in your belief, when do you believe that they will end?"

Propecy is two-fold. The prophets of God in His word have fortold everything (world-wide) even until the end. So true, that kind of prophecy is not seen today, nor is it really necessary since the all the grounds have been covered. Then, there are prophecies that are more individualistic. i have had prophets tell me things that would blow my mind. They could see things in my mind, that I have never uttered to anybody. This is need for the perfecting of the church.
Eph. 4:11-12
And he gave some, apostles; and some, PROPHETS; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

This part of prophecy will also cease. When the lord returns for you and you are in heaven, why would you need a prophecy? You have reached your destination. The Bible says you speak in an unknown tongue to strenghten yourself. But why would you need to be strengthened when you are already in heaven? These things that we do now, will eventually be useless to us. That's what I think the scripture about prophecy ceasing means. Eventually, all these things will be done away with, because we will no longer need them. But I do not feel that the time has already come. Not by a long-shot.

Centurionoflight
Dec 7th 2005, 05:18 PM
I think when people are running around looking at gifts, they are not looking at Christ.

When one states many gifts are not in use today, tongues, revelation, healing, knowledge, all the opening party tricks.

What we are left with are the gifts needed to run the church.

If the focus is on Christ would that matter?

If the focus is on man. The the "carry on" about who has what, and who has seen what will occur and Doctrine will be ignored.


It would be like a adult going back to grade school so he could finger paint. Finger painting had its time in his life that it served a purpose. The "Party gifts" of the spirit had their time in the Church to serve a purpose.
As we gave up finger painting to move on to more adult ways of thinking it was no longer needed. As the church grew more established, and the scripture was completed some of the Gifts was no longer needed.

Again the focus is to be on Christ, not some smiting of the spirit, not the gifts.

grahamc3
Dec 7th 2005, 05:28 PM
Now you have me most curious!!

Please elaborate on that event that you have seen firsthand.
In a nutshell, I had a family member who suffered with Lupus and she actually died. No pulse. No breathing. No CPR, but the family prayed and she came to. A skeptic would argue that she still had brain wave activity even though her heart wasn't beating. Therefore, if someone is not "brain dead", they are not actually dead. We had no access to technology to look at her brain waves. We were at home. lol But one could argue the same about Jesus raising the damsel who had just passed away.
But we knew she was dead. The doctor had expected her to die pretty soon. Minutes before the miracle, she even said, "This is it. I'm dying."

MAC702
Dec 7th 2005, 05:45 PM
In a nutshell, I had a family member who suffered with Lupus and she actually died. No pulse. No breathing. No CPR, but the family prayed and she came to. A skeptic would argue that she still had brain wave activity even though her heart wasn't beating. Therefore, if someone is not "brain dead", they are not actually dead. We had no access to technology to look at her brain waves. We were at home. lol But one could argue the same about Jesus raising the damsel who had just passed away.
But we knew she was dead. The doctor had expected her to die pretty soon. Minutes before the miracle, she even said, "This is it. I'm dying."
Please don't take this as insensitivity about your sick relative.

When those in the Scriptures died and were resurrected, did they still have the sickness that killed them? Does your relative still have Lupus? I am hoping that she is still alive and it hasn't killed her again.

The are accounts, just as vivid and descriptive as yours, about patients in hospitals coming back from seeming death, yet many of them had nothing to do with Christianity or prayer.

This is still NOT to say that it was not a miracle. I still believe it absolutely COULD be a miracle, and yet not be because the family members were using a gift of the Holy Spirit.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 05:58 PM
Having been inspired by another thread which I did not wish to hijack, I've been thinking of this in conjunction with other things.
During the times of the Apostles, you had quite a lot of things going on, being gifts of the Spirit...prophecy, healing, miracles, casting out demons, raising the dead, speaking in tongues, and such.

After the time of the Apostles (which I'd probably mark around AD 70 or so, as that's a major date), it appeared these gifts came to cease. And from that time, they continued to cease. Even Paul seemed to predict these things:

1 Corinthians 13:8-12 (ESV)
8 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

And from what it appears to be, these gifts did cease. What prophecy has come forth since then that bore any truth? We no longer see healings...the dead are not raised, and we do not see people possessed by demons like in the NT nor do we see them cast out of people.
As for tongues, well, I don't personally think that happens anymore either. I once encountered a person who I was told was speaking in tongues while in prayer...and it had to be one of the fakest things I'd heard.

So essentially, I think the gifts of the Spirit ceased long ago. Compounded with that, I don't believe demons (unclean spirits, not fallen angels) possessed people after that time either. Something made them cease as well, and this wasn't just ceasing something they liked to do...seemed more like something they needed to do.

Any thoughts?So what was the "perfect" that came which brought the end of these gifts?

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 06:09 PM
I Cor 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

Paul is telling us, if you can't understand whats being said, what's the point? I was listening to a very well-known preacher baptizing some of his congregation and he was telling them how to speak in tongues. It was such a cringe moment because he had to keep prodding certain people to blurt out non-sensical sounds as "proof" that they now had the Holy Spirit in them. Speaking in tongues as it is known today is a carnal display of the flesh.
In many, even most perhaps, instances I agree that it is flesh. But then okay... does that fact make the gift any less a reality?

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 06:11 PM
This is a very interesting topic. I for one am a semi-cessasionist (if there is such a term) I believe that some gifts are active today, but they are more of the practical gifts. (teaching, discernment, exhortation, etc.)

The gifts that are inactive are the sign gifts used to establish the church (healing, tongues, etc.)

Don't get me wrong, God can heal whomever HE chooses, He can speak through whomever HE chooses, but as for people walking around with these gifts actively? I don't believe so.

This (http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/spiritualgifts.html) is a site that has several good articles concerning this topic. The bottom has several from John MacArthur...who I believe hits the nail on the head. ;)But doesn't that seem convenient? These gifts are still good but these are done away with because we like these better than the others or we practice these but not the others... I mean who makes the decision on what was done away with and what wasn't? It isn't written that this is the case but that is assumed by many to be the case because that is a common teaching. But how does one draw this conclusion biblically?

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 06:14 PM
We must realize that there is not a different Holy Ghost now than there was in the first century Church. I suppose the single biggest reason people believe the Gifts have ceased is because otherwise they would have to believe tongues continue. It must be because that is always what these discussions seem to center on. Then we have others that pick and choose which gifts God sees fit to continue in. Others that believe the Gifts are no longer needed. Others yet who dwell on the prophetic nature of the Gifts and how they aren't needed anymore. Or how the Gifts were only exhibited only by the Apostles to start the Church.

I will post the whole of Chapter 12 of I Corinthians and ask why would these Gifts in the body of Christ have ceased or would no longer be needed or useful in the body? Is Paul instructing the Apostles regarding Gifts of the Spirit or the Church?

I Corinthians 12:
1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.

2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.

3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.

5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.

6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;

10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

14 For the body is not one member, but many.

15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?

18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:

23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.

24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked.

25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.

26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.

27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?

30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

God Bless!
It is also picking and choosing which parts of the Bible one wants to believe and which parts they choose to discard as not applicable. I mean even 1 Corinthians 13 makes little sense if the gifts are no longer active. So we can just toss out the 12th, 13th and 14th Chapters from that epistle because it is no longer applicable for the most part because it is about those gifts and how folks were to operate in those gifts.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 06:17 PM
I think it's significant that there is a difference (at least, I think so, let me know if you disagree) between the gifts of the spirit and other types of miracles. Certainly I agree that miracles still occur and that the Holy Spirit is active with Christians worldwide. But I don't think that has to mean that the gifts of the spirit that Paul mentions must still be here. Otherwise, I should think we would have active healings done by faithful Christians everyday to the extent that it would make unbelievers into believers, because that's what the gifts did back then; they weren't just for the believers!

But shortly after those days, the message reached the entire civilized world with mounds of eyewitness accounts, and the complete (or, perfect) Bible was being used for authentication and teaching, and the gifts were no longer necessary.

After all, Paul does say they would come to an end, yet he implies that when they do, prophesying, etc would still be needed, so he can't be talking about after Armageddon.

If they are still active in your belief, when do you believe that they will end?When do you think that this "complete and perfect Bible" was made available in any sort of a wide scale to the people on this earth?

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 06:21 PM
I think when people are running around looking at gifts, they are not looking at Christ.

Was Paul in error when he penned these words?

1 Corinthians 14:1 Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy.

Centurionoflight
Dec 7th 2005, 06:39 PM
ProjectPeter (http://member.php?u=6174)


Was Paul in error when he penned these words?

1 Corinthians 14:1Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy.
Where is that passage that states we should look for sparkle and show, and ignore Christ.
I have yet to see that passage posted.

Centurionoflight
Dec 7th 2005, 06:43 PM
ProjectPeter

When do you think that this "complete and perfect Bible" was made available in any sort of a wide scale to the people on this earth?
Thousands of fragments and many manuscripts of the books of the bible, yet some people are in denial of it being widespread.

Why would one do that.?

How many printed bibles of today would survive for 2000 or more years?

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 06:49 PM
Ah, a lot of replies since I last checked. ;)

grahamc3: Sure, some of my view on it is based upon my own personal experience, but the rest is just what is obvious in the world.

Not to be insensitive about your relative's recovery, but I must express some skepticism about it exactly. For instance, how long was she "dead"? While it's true the young man Paul revived had been dead for only a few minutes...other raisings involved people that had been dead for a while...which meant they were definitely dead, and were not going to come back.
Yours sounds more like a medical miracle, in the absence of any doctors...and as well, as another asked already, does she still possess the disease? Or did she lose it immediately?

One a separate note there are many people who believe, and believe earnestly, yet do not possess these gifts. Because of this, the Christian faith can look weaker to unbelievers because they wonder where all these gifts were that were frequent in the days of the Apostles went, and we can't give them an answer.

With what I'm saying, something actually happened to make them cease, cause seriously, if they were still occurring it'd be all over the place, and people would convert left and right. That was the purpose of such miracles in those days, those who saw them instantly believed in Jesus. Those few who refused to or relegated them to parlor tricks blasphemed against the Spirit as of such.

And as I said, we do not see demoniacs anymore. Somehow I don't think the demons on their own would have decided to leave humans alone, when their nature creates a need to possess others.
Many innocent people and animals died in the Middle Ages because everyone believed demons still possessed people. And while in the Apostles day's it took about a minute to cast out demons, as time went on afterwards, elaborate rituals were made up to combat imaginary demons. These excorcisms could takes months at a time too. Sad thing is, those being excorcised were most likely just mentally ill.

I think Revelation was written before AD 70. I mark the AD 70 area as where most likely the Apostolic era truly ended, as most likely all of the apostles were dead, with the slim exception of John maybe, and with Revelation received, and Jerusalem judged, things entered a new era, one purely of faith, and not based upon viewing miracles.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 06:55 PM
ProjectPeter (http://member.php?u=6174)


Where is that passage that states we should look for sparkle and show, and ignore Christ.
I have yet to see that passage posted.You've also not seen posted "sparkle and show" Centurion. So once more here we are with the intellectual dishonesty because you know that isn't what I am speaking of. Why do you do this in every thread? It really is getting rather tiring eh?

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 07:01 PM
ProjectPeter

Thousands of fragments and many manuscripts of the books of the bible, yet some people are in denial of it being widespread.

Why would one do that.?

How many printed bibles of today would survive for 2000 or more years?Uh... fragments are fragments and not the complete perfect Bible eh?

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 07:10 PM
Not to be insensitive about your relative's recovery, but I must express some skepticism about it exactly. For instance, how long was she "dead"? While it's true the young man Paul revived had been dead for only a few minutes...other raisings involved people that had been dead for a while...which meant they were definitely dead, and were not going to come back.
Yours sounds more like a medical miracle, in the absence of any doctors...and as well, as another asked already, does she still possess the disease? Or did she lose it immediately?But then in all honesty isn't it safe to say that whatever anyone said that they have witnessed you would still express some skepticism simply because you don't believe it happens?

humbled
Dec 7th 2005, 07:20 PM
Ah, a lot of replies since I last checked. ;)

grahamc3: Sure, some of my view on it is based upon my own personal experience, but the rest is just what is obvious in the world.

Not to be insensitive about your relative's recovery, but I must express some skepticism about it exactly. For instance, how long was she "dead"? While it's true the young man Paul revived had been dead for only a few minutes...other raisings involved people that had been dead for a while...which meant they were definitely dead, and were not going to come back.
Yours sounds more like a medical miracle, in the absence of any doctors...and as well, as another asked already, does she still possess the disease? Or did she lose it immediately?

One a separate note there are many people who believe, and believe earnestly, yet do not possess these gifts. Because of this, the Christian faith can look weaker to unbelievers because they wonder where all these gifts were that were frequent in the days of the Apostles went, and we can't give them an answer.

With what I'm saying, something actually happened to make them cease, cause seriously, if they were still occurring it'd be all over the place, and people would convert left and right. That was the purpose of such miracles in those days, those who saw them instantly believed in Jesus. Those few who refused to or relegated them to parlor tricks blasphemed against the Spirit as of such.

And as I said, we do not see demoniacs anymore. Somehow I don't think the demons on their own would have decided to leave humans alone, when their nature creates a need to possess others.
Many innocent people and animals died in the Middle Ages because everyone believed demons still possessed people. And while in the Apostles day's it took about a minute to cast out demons, as time went on afterwards, elaborate rituals were made up to combat imaginary demons. These excorcisms could takes months at a time too. Sad thing is, those being excorcised were most likely just mentally ill.

I think Revelation was written before AD 70. I mark the AD 70 area as where most likely the Apostolic era truly ended, as most likely all of the apostles were dead, with the slim exception of John maybe, and with Revelation received, and Jerusalem judged, things entered a new era, one purely of faith, and not based upon viewing miracles.lol...looks like you and I finally agree on something! :) I found a site once that described the BIBLICAL account of the cessation of "miracles" like in the NT. (I believe in miracles, btw, but not in the abundance we witness in the NT)
I wish I knew where to find it, but in a nutshell (and I do very little justice to the article) it said how the chronology of the epistles shows a reduction and eventual stop of Apostolic miracles, (healing, casting out of demons) and it was pretty thorough. I know this isn't evidence for some, but neither are experiences today.

"Lord, did we not perform miracles and cast out demons in Your Name?" And I will reply, "Away from Me! I never knew you you workers of lawlessness!" - (loose translation)

Shows how there WILL be miracles but they will NOT be from God!

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 07:31 PM
In this day and age I must express skepticism about certain things. And when one claims to have seen the dead actually raised, I must be skeptical about it, and ask questions.

One should also note the miracles of that day were performed in plain public...a modern equilavent would be going into Times Square and starting to heal people. It could not be denied.

humbled: Heh, yes, appears we do agree on this at least. I myself have also thought I saw gradual reductions in miracles being performed throughout the epistles. And then you have Paul saying that they will stop completely eventually.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 07:42 PM
In this day and age I must express skepticism about certain things. And when one claims to have seen the dead actually raised, I must be skeptical about it, and ask questions.I understand that sure enough. But when does that skepticism turn into outright disbelief and no longer really skepticism?



One should also note the miracles of that day were performed in plain public...a modern equilavent would be going into Times Square and starting to heal people. It could not be denied.Not always the case at all. You will see several instances where Jesus did miracles in private as well as Peter raising Tabatha from the dead was done in private. Others were done in gatherings but not necessarily in that Times Square sort of setting so what you are saying isn't going to hold up with the Scripture very well.



humbled: Heh, yes, appears we do agree on this at least. I myself have also thought I saw gradual reductions in miracles being performed throughout the epistles. And then you have Paul saying that they will stop completely eventually.I suppose I have a hard time seeing this supposed decline other than the fact that in the epistles they weren't giving accounts of personalities but were giving direction to the church. The only chronological account you can go with would be the book of Acts and Paul's shipwreck in Greece was pretty active in regard to miracles and that was nearing the end of his ministry and life. So I guess I don't see how folks can come to this idea that they were petering out there in the end.

humbled
Dec 7th 2005, 07:45 PM
I suppose I have a hard time seeing this supposed decline other than the fact that in the epistles they weren't giving accounts of personalities but were giving direction to the church. The only chronological account you can go with would be the book of Acts and Paul's shipwreck in Greece was pretty active in regard to miracles and that was nearing the end of his ministry and life. So I guess I don't see how folks can come to this idea that they were petering out there in the end.Exactly the response I expected, and exactly the reason I wish I could find that article! ahh...too bad, I guess. There IS an excellent study by John MacArthur about the cessation of the Apostolic SIGN gifts. I think I posted the link in a previous post on this thread.

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 08:01 PM
ProjectPeter: Well, skepticism gets blown away by obviously real things. For example, skepticism about Bigfoot would vanish over night if one was plunked down in front of everyone. Until then, skepticism abounds about ol' Bigfoot.

And it's true that that not every single miracle was done in public, but most were, because that was part of their purpose.

Incidentally, what is your opinion on the demon issue I was speaking of?

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 08:01 PM
Exactly the response I expected, and exactly the reason I wish I could find that article! ahh...too bad, I guess. There IS an excellent study by John MacArthur about the cessation of the Apostolic SIGN gifts. I think I posted the link in a previous post on this thread.I've read Mac as well as have heard him teach on this topic. But that doesn't mean Mac is correct on this. Like many, he still teaches within his doctrinal boundaries and for him to say it exist today... he steps way out of that boundary.

I guess though... I am speaking Scripturally. Just because Timothy was told to take a little wine for his stomach doesn't mean he had a tumor that wasn't healed. Could have been along the line of me going to Mexico and drinking only water there... probably not a good plan. Not really proof conclusive that healing stopped is it?

Then there was the other that was sick near to death... Epaphroditus... but that tells us that God had grace on him... healed him? Doesn't say that specifically other than God had grace on him. I figure that could just as well mean he was healed as it would mean he just got better. So that isn't proof conclusive to the case either I would figure.

Yet sure enough... in Greece there were quite a few miracles that took place which is proof conclusive that Paul was still operating in that gift. So regardless that some great men such as MacArthur teach it dwindled and ceased... Scripture doesn't really bear much witness to that.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 08:05 PM
ProjectPeter: Well, skepticism gets blown away by obviously real things. For example, skepticism about Bigfoot would vanish over night if one was plunked down in front of everyone. Until then, skepticism abounds about ol' Bigfoot.

And it's true that that not every single miracle was done in public, but most were, because that was part of their purpose.

Incidentally, what is your opinion on the demon issue I was speaking of?But then hold the phone a sec! If I were to give you an example of someone that was healed and even medical reports of such... one would simply say that it was a miracle of medical science or one would say that it was just one of those things or whatever. Even with proof... there would still be the skepticism because you would be skeptical of the proof. It is pretty much a no win situation for someone that simply doesn't believe.

And then you would have to ask... why would God show someone that doesn't believe much of anything? Didn't work for the folks in Jesus' hometown and that was with Jesus doing the miracles. Rest assured there isn't anyone more anointed than He so I don't suppose it is going to work where you are either eh?

As to demons... sure they are still doing what they do. But then what could I tell you that wouldn't bring about your skepticism since you don't believe?

Centurionoflight
Dec 7th 2005, 08:14 PM
ProjectPeter


You've also not seen posted "sparkle and show" Centurion. So once more here we are with the intellectual dishonesty because you know that isn't what I am speaking of.[1] Why do you do this in every thread? It really is getting rather tiring eh?

And true to form with every thread you make it personal, and go about the name calling and discrediting.

Is that a attempt to bait people into a personal response?
Then the disussion would be off the doctrine, why would one wish for that to occur?


[1] - Also what makes you think I KNOW what you speak of?

I cant read you mind.
Lay out your points in a solid manner then perhaps a better response would be givin then.





Uh... fragments are fragments and not the complete perfect Bible eh?

The doctrine with in the scriptures is perfect.
They had the tools to teach the doctrine.
The fragments are of the tools.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 08:20 PM
ProjectPeter

And true to form with every thread you make it personal, and go about the name calling and discrediting.

Is that a attempt to bait people into a personal response?
Then the disussion would be off the doctrine, why would one wish for that to occur?
Perhaps that has something to do with assuming? We are speaking of the gifts of the Spirit. Not pony shows. If you would like to make this about the pony shows that go on today then start a thread and I would wager you'll get all the AMEN's you can handle.




[1] - Also what makes you think I KNOW what you speak of?

I cant read you mind.
Lay out your points in a solid manner then perhaps a better response would be givin then.

The doctrine with in the scriptures is perfect.
They had the tools to teach the doctrine.
The fragments are of the tools.Here's a novel idea! Stop reading into post what isn't in post. Then you don't have to assume and in doing that you will not add to stuff what isn't actually there. One should do the same when reading the Scripture... but sometimes the practice runs over into all things I guess.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 08:22 PM
The doctrine with in the scriptures is perfect.
They had the tools to teach the doctrine.
The fragments are of the tools.Fragments may well be a tool but it ain't the whole toolbox. If that which is perfect is in fact the Scripture then it would have to be the Scripture as a whole. If it was just fragments of Scripture then it isn't complete which means it ain't yet perfect.

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 08:26 PM
ProjectPeter: I shall give you an example. Let's say you have a person who has been, say, dead for 4 days. Then a person comes up to them and simply says "Live.", and they wake up, restored. That's definitely not a medical miracle. But it is something that would be like what happened in the NT.
An event like that blows away reasonable skepticism.

As for Jesus' hometown...this is in line with Jesus having said only in a prophet's hometown is he without honor. He could have performed miracles there, but chose not to in light of their unbelief and how offended they were by him.

As for the demons...they are still possessing people like they did back then? People in the Middle Ages thought so...and I've already discussed that. And by possessing, I mean taking them over.
Which would stand to follow of course, there'd still be people casting them out too.

grahamc3
Dec 7th 2005, 08:47 PM
Please don't take this as insensitivity about your sick relative.
When those in the Scriptures died and were resurrected, did they still have the sickness that killed them? Does your relative still have Lupus? I am hoping that she is still alive and it hasn't killed her again.


My cousin was not supposed to live past 20 and is now in her 40's. Does she still have it? That all depends on the perspective. According to doctors, it's a lifelong illness that she will always live with whether she has flair-ups or not. But she is as healthy as a horse. So according to us, she's ok.

grahamc3
Dec 7th 2005, 09:00 PM
"Not to be insensitive about your relative's recovery, but I must express some skepticism about it exactly. For instance, how long was she "dead"?"

I don't know. Like 5-10 minutes maybe. The other questions are answered in the other post.

"One a separate note there are many people who believe, and believe earnestly, yet do not possess these gifts. Because of this, the Christian faith can look weaker to unbelievers because they wonder where all these gifts were that were frequent in the days of the Apostles went, and we can't give them an answer."

How do we know if someone "earnestly" believes? We are not God. We don't know the hearts of men. We can only assume that by what they say, and how reliable is that?

With what I'm saying, something actually happened to make them cease, cause seriously, if they were still occurring it'd be all over the place, and people would convert left and right. That was the purpose of such miracles in those days, those who saw them instantly believed in Jesus. Those few who refused to or relegated them to parlor tricks blasphemed against the Spirit as of such.

Do you think that it doesn't happen as frequently, because many people think like you, that the time for miracles is over?? I'm not being a smarty, but there are many who share your opinion. People feel that it won't happen, and therefore it doesn't because it would only happen by faith in the first place. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and a cycle. Maybe that's why we don't see the miraculous as often as we could.

And as I said, we do not see demoniacs anymore. Somehow I don't think the demons on their own would have decided to leave humans alone, when their nature creates a need to possess others.
Many innocent people and animals died in the Middle Ages because everyone believed demons still possessed people. And while in the Apostles day's it took about a minute to cast out demons, as time went on afterwards, elaborate rituals were made up to combat imaginary demons. These excorcisms could takes months at a time too. Sad thing is, those being excorcised were most likely just mentally ill.

I believe that demons influence mental illness. So for me, it's a little bit of both.

Marlee
Dec 7th 2005, 09:03 PM
We must realize that there is not a different Holy Ghost now than there was in the first century Church. I suppose the single biggest reason people believe the Gifts have ceased is because otherwise they would have to believe tongues continue. It must be because that is always what these discussions seem to center on. Then we have others that pick and choose which gifts God sees fit to continue in. Others that believe the Gifts are no longer needed. Others yet who dwell on the prophetic nature of the Gifts and how they aren't needed anymore. Or how the Gifts were only exhibited only by the Apostles to start the Church.

I will post the whole of Chapter 12 of I Corinthians and ask why would these Gifts in the body of Christ have ceased or would no longer be needed or useful in the body? Is Paul instructing the Apostles regarding Gifts of the Spirit or the Church?

I Corinthians 12:
1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.

2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.

3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.

5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.

6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;

10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

14 For the body is not one member, but many.

15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?

18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:

23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.

24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked.

25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.

26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.

27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?

30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

God Bless!

I agree with this post. The Holy Spirit is the same. Why would the gifts stop? God said he was the same yesterday, today and forever. This is such a frustrating topic for me b/c if these gifts are still for today and of the Lord, we must really be grieving Him by our lack of faith. And what of all the thousands/millions of Christians who speak in tongues or claim to have the gift of laying on of hands, prophecy, etc? Are they really Christians? How do all of them speak in tongues? God wouldn't give something bad to His kids...and I just can't believe they aren't Christians. These are just my thoughts...I don't want to argue with anyone. I just think we need to be careful in saying they aren't for today, etc. We need to say if they are God's way and His will, so be it and if not, so be it. His will be done in all things.

humbled
Dec 7th 2005, 09:12 PM
I've read Mac as well as have heard him teach on this topic. But that doesn't mean Mac is correct on this. Like many, he still teaches within his doctrinal boundaries and for him to say it exist today... he steps way out of that boundary.

I guess though... I am speaking Scripturally. Just because Timothy was told to take a little wine for his stomach doesn't mean he had a tumor that wasn't healed. Could have been along the line of me going to Mexico and drinking only water there... probably not a good plan. Not really proof conclusive that healing stopped is it?

Then there was the other that was sick near to death... Epaphroditus... but that tells us that God had grace on him... healed him? Doesn't say that specifically other than God had grace on him. I figure that could just as well mean he was healed as it would mean he just got better. So that isn't proof conclusive to the case either I would figure.

Yet sure enough... in Greece there were quite a few miracles that took place which is proof conclusive that Paul was still operating in that gift. So regardless that some great men such as MacArthur teach it dwindled and ceased... Scripture doesn't really bear much witness to that.
I think you're confusing the miracle of healing with the gift of healing. Who healed Epaphroditus(if he was indeed healed and didn't just "get better")? GOD. Why didn't He use Paul?
These signs are for those who do not believe, not those who believe(1Cor14:22) I know this verse speaks specifically about tongues, but ask yourself...did ANYONE get healed when the witnesses didn't get saved?

Even when Jesus healed, at least ONE person was saved from witnessing that miracle.

That gift was a sign to those who do not believe. It was a sign that “bore witness” to the person performing the sign that they were indeed speaking for God.
The healing took place...drew crowds...the gospel was preached....salvation resulted.

When it happened in smaller groups, or individually, it was usually the healed person who was saved.
Scripture bears witness to that!

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 09:13 PM
ProjectPeter: I shall give you an example. Let's say you have a person who has been, say, dead for 4 days. Then a person comes up to them and simply says "Live.", and they wake up, restored. That's definitely not a medical miracle. But it is something that would be like what happened in the NT.
An event like that blows away reasonable skepticism.

As for Jesus' hometown...this is in line with Jesus having said only in a prophet's hometown is he without honor. He could have performed miracles there, but chose not to in light of their unbelief and how offended they were by him.

As for the demons...they are still possessing people like they did back then? People in the Middle Ages thought so...and I've already discussed that. And by possessing, I mean taking them over.
Which would stand to follow of course, there'd still be people casting them out too.I know what you are asking... I just don't see God showing it to you because of unbelief. I suppose you wouldn't hang out much with churches or folk that believed in healing today so it is not very likely that you'd ever witness it happening. Believing doesn't require seeing... not biblical believing anyway.

As to casting out demons... it happens. But then you wouldn't believe that either because you don't believe it... simple as that really. I'm not sure what one could say to make you believe. Scripture doesn't say that it stopped or that demons no longer possess people but still there are those that believe it no longer happens. But hey... it ultimately boils down to you and what you choose to beleive.

Centurionoflight
Dec 7th 2005, 09:17 PM
ProjectPeter


Perhaps that has something to do with assuming? We are speaking of the gifts of the Spirit. Not pony shows. If you would like to make this about the pony shows that go on today then start a thread and I would wager you'll get all the AMEN's you can handle.

Some of the gifts was for the pony show, the party, the lights shining into the sky...

Example when you open a busienss there is a bash, a starting celebration, to get the buisness off the ground and to let the public know that you are open.

THE SAME IT WAS WITH THE EARLY CHURCH.

They had the party, that being tongues, the rank of apostles, the gift of prophecy, the gift of knowledge, healing, and a few others.

The party ended when John finished revelations, now its day to day buisness.

The problem with many christians is they still think they are in the opening party.

It would be like walking into a Walmart, and seeing some employee start dancing and yelling about how great it is to be starting buisness, yet walmart has been in buisness for many years. odd? So are Christians who pretend the church is just now opening its doors.

We have been in buisness close to 2000 years now, the grand opening party is long over.



Fragments may well be a tool but it ain't the whole toolbox. If that which is perfect is in fact the Scripture then it would have to be the Scripture as a whole. If it was just fragments of Scripture then it isn't complete which means it ain't yet perfect.

That which is perfect is the doctrine of scripture.. the mind of Christ.
The COMPLETE doctrine of scripture was come. We have all we need to grow to maturity.
We dont need the gift of prophecy, we dont need the gift of knowledge, we turn to scripture.
The scripture is complete.
1 cor 13
9For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

They KNEW in part, they did prophesy in part.
We dont know in part we dont have prophesy in part, we have the complete, the perfect.

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 09:27 PM
Jesus fed 5000 people from a few pieces of food. No doubt many at first did not believe this could happen. I'm sure they were surprised at the end. Before this, he healed their sick, out of his compassion.

If you are suggesting these miracles only occur when there is strictly faith going on from people, then many of the miracles in the NT should not have occurred, as their purpose was in fact to make unbelievers believe in Jesus.

And if these miracles come only to the super faithful...then surely we must all be a faithless bunch.
In those days a person would bring a sick person to Jesus and he would heal them. Only time he questioned a person was if they were not a Jew. But in these days we must have the right amount of faith for a chance of being healed? And then, who in these churches does these healings? A person, or God himself, as in, not involving a person?

I've heard some say that demons have changed from possessing people to just influencing them...what could have brought such a change in ways?
Demons can cause things similar to mental illness and other ailments...yet in the NT there were definite differences between lunatics and demoniacs.
In the NT days they seemed to everywhere, and doing many things. And what now, only a few are doing anything?
And as well, now it takes rituals and loads of time to cast demons out?
We also must remember the episode of the 7 men who tried to use Jesus' name, and were soundly beaten by a single demoniac.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 09:28 PM
I think you're confusing the miracle of healing with the gift of healing. Who healed Epaphroditus(if he was indeed healed and didn't just "get better")? GOD. Why didn't He use Paul?We can only assume. Perhaps Paul wasn't available to lay hands on the guy when he got sick originally... who knows? I am not confusing the two... just saying that this passage, which is used as "proof" that healings waned... is really not conclusive proof at all.



These signs are for those who do not believe, not those who believe(1Cor14:22) I know this verse speaks specifically about tongues, but ask yourself...did ANYONE get healed when the witnesses didn't get saved?You are right... it is speaking specifically of tongues and trying to turn it into speaking of healing is taking the passage way out of context.

As to folks getting healed who didn't get saved... not sure because again Scripture doesn't say specifically. I suppose one could figure when Jesus healed the ten lepers and only the one came back and worshipped him... the nine may have had issues. But it doesn't specifically say. But nevertheless what about those that witnessed the healings? They saw it with their own eyes but did they all get saved? We know that the answer to that is no... and that would be much more appropriate with the line of discussion we are having here I would think.


Even when Jesus healed, at least ONE person was saved from witnessing that miracle.You don't know that at all. You can only guess that to be so. I suppose I am not going to build a doctrine around assumption.


That gift was a sign to those who do not believe. It was a sign that “bore witness” to the person performing the sign that they were indeed speaking for God.
The healing took place...drew crowds...the gospel was preached....salvation resulted.Again... it didn't always work out like that.

John 2:23 ¶Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in His name, beholding His signs which He was doing.
24 But Jesus, on His part, was not entrusting Himself to them, for He knew all men,
25 and because He did not need anyone to bear witness concerning man for He Himself knew what was in man.

Does it sound as if they were saved after seeing what Jesus did? I figure if they were in fact saved then Jesus would have entrusted himself to them eh?


When it happened in smaller groups, or individually, it was usually the healed person who was saved.
Scripture bears witness to that!No... Scripture doesn't bear witness to that in all cases. Take the guy at the pool of Bethesda. Jesus healed his withered hand for a purpose which was to show that healing on the Sabbath was not the sin that the Pharisee made it out to be. It wasn't until later that Jesus approached the guy and talked to him about salvation if you will.

Then there are other Scripture that speak of those same kind of healings where it was done for a purpose or done purely out of compassion. Nothing tells us a thing about their salvation at all. Again... to say they were would only be assumption on our part.

And then take into consideration the multitudes of people that Jesus healed. Yet when it was all said and done and Jesus was crucified... it wasn't multitudes that continued in that belief... even those closest to Him. Then add to that fact that on Pentecost... it was only 3000 counted among the saved and that is a far cry from the multitudes of people healed during Jesus' ministry time. So again... I wouldn't say that Scripture bears witness to what you are saying at all.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 09:34 PM
ProjectPeter

Some of the gifts was for the pony show, the party, the lights shining into the sky...

Example when you open a busienss there is a bash, a starting celebration, to get the buisness off the ground and to let the public know that you are open.

THE SAME IT WAS WITH THE EARLY CHURCH.

They had the party, that being tongues, the rank of apostles, the gift of prophecy, the gift of knowledge, healing, and a few others.

The party ended when John finished revelations, now its day to day buisness.

The problem with many christians is they still think they are in the opening party.

It would be like walking into a Walmart, and seeing some employee start dancing and yelling about how great it is to be starting buisness, yet walmart has been in buisness for many years. odd? So are Christians who pretend the church is just now opening its doors.

We have been in buisness close to 2000 years now, the grand opening party is long over.Uh... perfect example where an analogy is poorly used because it is looked upon with worldly eyes.



That which is perfect is the doctrine of scripture.. the mind of Christ.
The COMPLETE doctrine of scripture was come. We have all we need to grow to maturity.
We dont need the gift of prophecy, we dont need the gift of knowledge, we turn to scripture.
The scripture is complete.
1 cor 13
9For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

They KNEW in part, they did prophesy in part.
We dont know in part we dont have prophesy in part, we have the complete, the perfect.And when did this begin Centurion? When did that which is perfect actually become perfected? Again... the printed Word wasn't done via printing press until Luther. That was a while back mind you but sure enough not in 70AD.

Not every believer and not even every church would have had a copy of all of Paul's letters to the various churches or even Peter's or John's few. History bears witness to that fact hence the reason Luther found it vital that the Scripture be put into print for everyone.

Or perhaps that which is perfect is actually speaking of something else? Paul didn't say it was the Word did he?

StevenC
Dec 7th 2005, 09:35 PM
These gifts are not manifest for our purpose but for God's. Many believed by the miracles that were performed by the Apostles. It was to grow the church and for the glory of God that these things are performed.

Millerrod made a good point when he said we are too into pushing our own doctrines. I have yet to find a Church doctrine that isn't flawed in atleast three respects. If the leaders of churches put more stock in their doctrines and do not accept the truth than why should we expect the God to grow the church through gifts of the Spirit?

If we place our faith in money and medicines for healing then why should we expect that God should do miracles for us.

I believe that healing and the other gifts still exist, but are made manifest through God alone in the name of Jesus Christ and by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The fact that they aren't widely experienced here in the USA would have more to do with unbelief and church agendas than it would be the lack of ability to be made manifest.

-Steven

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 09:43 PM
Jesus fed 5000 people from a few pieces of food. No doubt many at first did not believe this could happen. I'm sure they were surprised at the end. Before this, he healed their sick, out of his compassion.

If you are suggesting these miracles only occur when there is strictly faith going on from people, then many of the miracles in the NT should not have occurred, as their purpose was in fact to make unbelievers believe in Jesus.What I am saying is that if you don't believe... then I figure you aren't going to believe. I didn't say that Jesus only healed those that believed and you can take a gander at the healing thread active now and see where I have argued against that. But that isn't the point here at all. We are speaking of the various gifts given by the Spirit. If you don't believe they exist today... then one thing you can count on. For you... they won't exist. You don't believe it.


And if these miracles come only to the super faithful...then surely we must all be a faithless bunch.I think that is actually evident in many ways.



In those days a person would bring a sick person to Jesus and he would heal them. Only time he questioned a person was if they were not a Jew. But in these days we must have the right amount of faith for a chance of being healed? And then, who in these churches does these healings? A person, or God himself, as in, not involving a person?Well actually there were those Jesus asked... do you believe? Just as there were some Jesus healed for a purpose... there were some that were healed because of their faith and by their faith they were healed.


I've heard some say that demons have changed from possessing people to just influencing them...what could have brought such a change in ways? I don't say that so I can't answer that other than I believe much of it just because they are in doctrinal error.


Demons can cause things similar to mental illness and other ailments...yet in the NT there were definite differences between lunatics and demoniacs.
In the NT days they seemed to everywhere, and doing many things. And what now, only a few are doing anything?
And as well, now it takes rituals and loads of time to cast demons out?
We also must remember the episode of the 7 men who tried to use Jesus' name, and were soundly beaten by a single demoniac.Who says they are only doing a few things? You see someone you think is just nuts... you say they have psychological issues... you don't believe in possessions so you wouldn't entertain the thought of that. Even someone mad... you would just say they are nuts. The thought that they are possessed doesn't enter your mind because you don't believe in that. I see demonic influence and possession in plenty of places. It is probably even more prevailant today than then simply because there are times more folk walking the planet.

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 09:52 PM
Well, as I said, in the NT days there was a differentiation between lunatics and demoniacs.

You say their activity is everywhere, and that perhaps it is more than it was back then. Are you suggesting mentally ill people should be excorcised, and not helped in some other way?
We should remember what happened to Anneliese Michel (AKA Emily Rose).

Truly, if people were casting out demons like in the NT, why the need for all the time, ritual, and pomp? Back then, it took a moment.

humbled
Dec 7th 2005, 09:54 PM
As to folks getting healed who didn't get saved... not sure because again Scripture doesn't say specifically. I suppose one could figure when Jesus healed the ten lepers and only the one came back and worshipped him... the nine may have had issues. But it doesn't specifically say. But nevertheless what about those that witnessed the healings? They saw it with their own eyes but did they all get saved? We know that the answer to that is no... and that would be much more appropriate with the line of discussion we are having here I would think.Perhaps I should re-word it? Its not salvation ALONE that was the result, but the people were either saved, or it was Jesus or the Apostles declaring that they were speaking for God.
And this is not assumption...it is biblical. The Bible states it clearly that one of two things happened when a sign was performed. 1) At least one person believed and was saved. 2) Someone questioned the claim the one who "performed" the miracle was making, ie: "This was done so that you would know that the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath" (memory)


Again... it didn't always work out like that.

John 2:23 ¶Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in His name, beholding His signs which He was doing.
24 But Jesus, on His part, was not entrusting Himself to them, for He knew all men,
25 and because He did not need anyone to bear witness concerning man for He Himself knew what was in man.

Does it sound as if they were saved after seeing what Jesus did? I figure if they were in fact saved then Jesus would have entrusted himself to them eh?From my re-wording, I believe I've answered this point as well :)


No... Scripture doesn't bear witness to that in all cases. Take the guy at the pool of Bethesda. Jesus healed his withered hand for a purpose which was to show that healing on the Sabbath was not the sin that the Pharisee made it out to be. It wasn't until later that Jesus approached the guy and talked to him about salvation if you will.Ask yourself...would the man have listened had he NOT been healed? (I know...another assumption, but they're good assumptions!) :P



My brother, I will try not to rub these correct "assumptions" in too much when we are both in heaven :P:P

Centurionoflight
Dec 7th 2005, 09:59 PM
ProjectPeter


Uh... perfect example where an analogy is poorly used because it is looked upon with worldly eyes.

I fail to see your point.



And when did this begin Centurion? When did that which is perfect actually become perfected? Again... the printed Word wasn't done via printing press until Luther. That was a while back mind you but sure enough not in 70AD.

Not every believer and not even every church would have had a copy of all of Paul's letters to the various churches or even Peter's or John's few. History bears witness to that fact hence the reason Luther found it vital that the Scripture be put into print for everyone.

Or perhaps that which is perfect is actually speaking of something else? Paul didn't say it was the Word did he?

Once again.

That which is perfect is the DOCTRINE of scripture the mind of Christ, was totally complete as of the final book, called revelations. There is NO doctrine we lack, for growth, life, and reprovement on to maturity.

What they had was doctrine IN PART.

We have it complete.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 10:02 PM
Well, as I said, in the NT days there was a differentiation between lunatics and demoniacs.

You say their activity is everywhere, and that perhaps it is more than it was back then. Are you suggesting mentally ill people should be excorcised, and not helped in some other way?
We should remember what happened to Anneliese Michel (AKA Emily Rose).

Truly, if people were casting out demons like in the NT, why the need for all the time, ritual, and pomp? Back then, it took a moment.I am saying that in some, maybe even many, of those cases that it is certainly a possibility. We know that there are diseases that cause some to be mentally disabled and whatnot... but that isn't the case with all by any stretch of the imagination. Some are just insane. That being the case too... not every insane person has the traits of a mentally ill person. Many are far from it actually and are classified as a genius. But they are still nuttier than a fruitcake.

As to Emily Rose... don't know much about Emily Rose so I can't tell you about what happened to her.

As to the ritual... again you can take a gander at the search engine for the forum and find threads to do with demonology and you will find that I holler the most about the pony show that people put on. But just because people put on pony shows doesn't make demons and demonic actions phoney.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 10:11 PM
Perhaps I should re-word it? Its not salvation ALONE that was the result, but the people were either saved, or it was Jesus or the Apostles declaring that they were speaking for God.
And this is not assumption...it is biblical. The Bible states it clearly that one of two things happened when a sign was performed. 1) At least one person believed and was saved. 2) Someone questioned the claim the one who "performed" the miracle was making, ie: "This was done so that you would know that the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath" (memory)And don't forget the healing done simply out of compassion. No point made... no sermon preached. Jesus simply felt compassion for a person. Perhaps you might do another re-wording? ;)



Ask yourself...would the man have listened had he NOT been healed? (I know...another assumption, but they're good assumptions!) :PI don't know. Apparently the man that Paul healed when he saw that he had the faith to be healed listened prior to his healing. So I'd say I have a biblical example without assuming... ;)

Acts 14:8 ¶And at Lystra there was sitting a certain man, without strength in his feet, lame from his mother's womb, who had never walked.
9 This man was listening to Paul as he spoke, who, when he had fixed his gaze upon him, and had seen that he had faith to be made well,
10 said with a loud voice, "Stand upright on your feet." And he leaped up and began to walk.




My brother, I will try not to rub these correct "assumptions" in too much when we are both in heaven :P:PYou won't have to worry about that... you'll be too busy listening to me rub it in! :lol:

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 10:13 PM
ProjectPeter

I fail to see your point.I'm sure.




Once again.

That which is perfect is the DOCTRINE of scripture the mind of Christ, was totally complete as of the final book, called revelations. There is NO doctrine we lack, for growth, life, and reprovement on to maturity.

What they had was doctrine IN PART.

We have it complete.So when did we have it complete? Did they come out with a way to mass produce handwritten scrolls by then that I am not aware of?

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 10:20 PM
ProjectPeter: So in effect, you believe people today are casting out demons in the same fashion as in the time of the Apostles? Or would you say people's faith is so weak now that it now takes long periods of time to do it?
Have these "demons" actually spoken to such people as they did to the Apostles and such? In other words...their lies tended to vanish.
And again, the Middle Ages tended to view mentally ill people as possessed...with bad results.

I was thinking too...what could have differentiated the lunatics and demoniacs was that they simply appeared mentally ill, and that there must have been some of kind of manifestation that identified them as such too, that is missing these days, since the demons would no longer be present. After all, the demons themselves were not insane, but carrying out their own needs.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 10:30 PM
ProjectPeter: So in effect, you believe people today are casting out demons in the same fashion as in the time of the Apostles? Or would you say people's faith is so weak now that it now takes long periods of time to do it? Some do yes. As to folks faith... in this area where does your faith stand?

As to time... it isn't always something that happens straight way and we have biblical evidence to that with the guy in the tombs. I think it safe to say that he had quite a few more issues than some with just a demon or two or seven. Jesus had already commanded the demons to come out of the man and yet that didn't happen straight way. They still spent a period of time negotiating with Jesus to be allowed to go into the pigs. So there is nothing that leads us to believe that it will always happen immediately. I would say though that this should be the case more so than not. It isn't everyone that is eat up with demons like the man in the tombs.


Have these "demons" actually spoken to such people as they did to the Apostles and such? In other words...their lies tended to vanish.Sure.


And again, the Middle Ages tended to view mentally ill people as possessed...with bad results.And again... so what? Just because some folks treated it wrong doesn't disprove demons or their activity today or even then.



I was thinking too...what could have differentiated the lunatics and demoniacs was that they simply appeared mentally ill, and that there must have been some of kind of manifestation that identified them as such too, that is missing these days, since the demons would no longer be present. After all, the demons themselves were not insane, but carrying out their own needs.Some cried out... some took discernment I am sure. I never said the demons were insane but was responding to your comment about mentally ill folk. I simply said that in some cases sure. But in carrying out the will of the demons... I think it safe to say that the folks figured the demoniac in the tombs was stark-raving nuts eh? It is apparent that many thought him just nuts because of his actions. To them, there was no cure. Jesus knew the real issue. He provided the cure.

Centurionoflight
Dec 7th 2005, 10:51 PM
ProjectPeter


So when did we have it complete? Did they come out with a way to mass produce handwritten scrolls by then that I am not aware of?

So what is missing then?

2 tim 3

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be PERFECT, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Answer: Nothing.

That which is perfect is come, that being the complete doctrine for the spiritul life.

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 10:57 PM
ProjectPeter: Hmm...welll, it's true in the case of Legion for some reason they were able to stop and beg for some kind of mercy. In other cases the demons would come right out when told to. I can't say what governs that, but in either case neither took very long. Certainly unlike excorcisms I have heard of, especially where they have to stop and resume later on.

Concerning demons speaking to these people that you talk of...this isn't the "Hitler and Nero are in here with us" sort of speak, is it? Perhaps you could point me towards a documented account or two.

Essentially, another point to be made, is that if the gifts of the Spirit were removed in the past, but yet demons were allowed possess people...there would be no real way to cast them out.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 11:13 PM
ProjectPeter

So what is missing then?

2 tim 3

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be PERFECT, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Answer: Nothing.

That which is perfect is come, that being the complete doctrine for the spiritul life.
That's doesn't say that the Word is "that which is perfect" though... does it?

Isn't it pretty safe to say that 1 Corinthians 13 is speaking about love? I'd go so far as to make that contextual leap.

You know love... that perfect bond of unity.

Let's just show the context of the passage here.

8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part;
10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.
11 When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.
12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I shall know fully just as I also have been fully known.
13 But now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Yet in all of this... Paul starts talking about the finished Scripture? Why can't Paul actually be talking about love? Seems to fit in context doesn't it?

millerrod
Dec 7th 2005, 11:15 PM
there is no bible fact to support that the gifts of the spirit are removed.
The problem must then fall squarely on our lack of true faith

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 11:21 PM
ProjectPeter: Hmm...welll, it's true in the case of Legion for some reason they were able to stop and beg for some kind of mercy. In other cases the demons would come right out when told to. I can't say what governs that, but in either case neither took very long. Certainly unlike excorcisms I have heard of, especially where they have to stop and resume later on.Point is... there is Scripture to back what I said.



Concerning demons speaking to these people that you talk of...this isn't the "Hitler and Nero are in here with us" sort of speak, is it? Perhaps you could point me towards a documented account or two.Uh... I have no clue what you are talking about with the Hitler and Nero thing. That would seem a bit silly to me.

As to pointing you to a document... Try Matthew, Mark and Luke? Anything else that I pointed to you would just be met with skepticism by your own admission, right?



Essentially, another point to be made, is that if the gifts of the Spirit were removed in the past, but yet demons were allowed possess people...there would be no real way to cast them out.Well... you have yet to show where the gifts of the Spirit were done away with. Scripture doesn't say that therefore there is still a way to cast them out. Then there is the fact that casting out demons isn't a "gift of the Spirit" but was simply something a believer could do in Jesus name. We could say that simply falls under the authority of a believer in the name of Jesus Christ but then perhaps that is a technicality.

DarkMajin
Dec 7th 2005, 11:34 PM
ProjectPeter: To a point there is...though the time difference is perhaps a moment or two more in question...not weeks, or months.

An interesting case that did happen in the Gospels was when the disciples found a man casting out demons in Jesus' name, yet the man was not one of them. And Jesus said not to forbid the man. Too bad nothing more was said of the man. But obviously, he must have been casting out through the Spirit...since Jesus' name isn't a magic word, and does not necessarily repel a demon.

Concerning the talking example I gave...the accounts of exorcisms I have heard of in the past always had the demons cursing, and going on about what spirits were in them, etc, rather outrageous things...which is a far cry to how they acted in the NT when presented to Jesus or the Apostles.
Are there any modern examples from a casting out where the demon acted as they did in the NT?

And since casting out demons is through the Spirit, stands to reason it is a gift of the Spirit.

ProjectPeter
Dec 7th 2005, 11:47 PM
ProjectPeter: To a point there is...though the time difference is perhaps a moment or two more in question...not weeks, or months.Again though... you are talking the pony shows when talking about all that stuff or the Bob Larson type 12 hour exercism for 69.95! I am not speaking of that junk because it is simply nonsense. I am just saying... it isn't a given that they are just going to fly out of a person. Many times, Scripturally, they made a bit of a scene.



An interesting case that did happen in the Gospels was when the disciples found a man casting out demons in Jesus' name, yet the man was not one of them. And Jesus said not to forbid the man. Too bad nothing more was said of the man. But obviously, he must have been casting out through the Spirit...since Jesus' name isn't a magic word, and does not necessarily repel a demon.Jesus' name was the only authority by which they needed at that time. It had nothing to do with the "gifting of the Spirit" nor does it now. Casting out demons was not a gift of the Spirit.


Concerning the talking example I gave...the accounts of excorcisms I have heard of in the past always had the demons cursing, and going on about what spirits were in them, etc, rather outrageous things...which is a far cry to how they acted in the NT when presented to Jesus or the Apostles.That's the Bob Larson stuff I am speaking of. Most of that is just show and I put no stock in it.


Are there any modern examples from a casting out where the demon acted as they did in the NT?Sure but then again... those that do this sort of thing righteously aren't going to be filming it with camera's and whatnot and rarely will they discuss it to any great degree publically.


And since casting out demons is through the Spirit, stands to reason it is a gift of the Spirit.It is an issue of authority. The disciples weren't "gifted" with this nor was the man you spoke of earlier. They simply believed and used their authority in Christ.

DarkMajin
Dec 8th 2005, 12:03 AM
ProejectPeter: Well, ok, at least we're not talking about the rather fake kind of stuff. ;)

And yes, I do believe it takes belief in Jesus to be able to cast out a demon and all, as those 7 Jewish excorcists learned the hard way. It's not simply the name itself.

As for these exorcisms you talk of...it'd be mightily helpful if they were done in such a way that people could know of them...the NT ones often were either seen, or known about. And while I can understand a lack of desire for publicity, it doesn't exactly make it more convincing either.
Otherwise...there are no records of them then in this modern time. There are no accounts at all that you know of? Even just in writing? I'd much like to see anything about them.

And apparently, healing and raising the dead would also not be gifts of the Spirit, by your logic, since they were doing that before Pentecost. Do you concur with that?

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 12:04 AM
ProjectPeter



You know love... that perfect bond of unity.

Let's just show the context of the passage here.

8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part;
10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.
11 When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.
12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I shall know fully just as I also have been fully known.
13 But now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Yet in all of this... Paul starts talking about the finished Scripture? Why can't Paul actually be talking about love? Seems to fit in context doesn't it?



So when love comes the partial knowledge and prophecy will be done away?
That is not the context of the partial.

Why do you ignore.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part
In part is not complete, is not perfect. there fore the topic of verse 10 is "partial knowledge and prophecy".

What is complete in knowledge and prophecy?
The complete doctrine of the Bible.

The point is LOVE doenst fail.,

if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away;
If there are tongues, they will cease;
if there is knowledge, it will be done away.

The future tense is in connection with the coming of "the perfect" which is the completed New Testament.

Compare That to "the perfect law" which in context is "the word"; cp. Jam.1:22,23,25.
Furthermore. 1Cor.13:12 and Jam.1:23 where "mirror" is used as a figure for the Word of God.

Love in No way fits the context of;
1] The "perfect" law
2] The mirror
3] The child-adult analogy to illustrate the cessation of certain gifts.

To even think it is, is to be way off context.

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 12:18 AM
ProejectPeter: Well, ok, at least we're not talking about the rather fake kind of stuff. ;)

And yes, I do believe it takes belief in Jesus to be able to cast out a demon and all, as those 7 Jewish excorcists learned the hard way. It's not simply the name itself.They didn't operate in faith nor authority in Christ. Go back and read what they said.... " the Jesus that Paul preaches".... a bit lacking in authority.


As for these exorcisms you talk of...it'd be mightily helpful if they were done in such a way that people could know of them...the NT ones often were either seen, or known about. And while I can understand a lack of desire for publicity, it doesn't exactly make it more convincing either.
Otherwise...there are no records of them then in this modern time. There are no accounts at all that you know of? Even just in writing? I'd much like to see anything about them.But then you wouldn't believe them. There are writings of such as this out there and many are done publically. It isn't that difficult to find stuff on this subject although if you use the web you are likely going to have to wade through a bunch of nonsense too.


And apparently, healing and raising the dead would also not be gifts of the Spirit, by your logic, since they were doing that before Pentecost. Do you concur with that?At the time of the apostles that was too done with the authority of Christ and not a gift of the Spirit. The Spirit had yet come on the apostles and that didn't happen until Jesus came. That is clearly in the Scripture. We aren't walking with Christ in the physical sense now... we walk in His Spirit just as the apostles did after Christ was gone. The Helper had come in other words.

Anything that a disciple does today in the sense of healings, miracles and even discerning of spirits... they do by the Spirit.

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 12:25 AM
ProjectPeter



So when love comes the partial knowledge and prophecy will be done away?
That is not the context of the partial.

Why do you ignore.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part
In part is not complete, is not perfect. there fore the topic of verse 10 is "partial knowledge and prophecy".

What is complete in knowledge and prophecy?
The complete doctrine of the Bible.

The point is LOVE doenst fail.,

if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away;
If there are tongues, they will cease;
if there is knowledge, it will be done away.

The future tense is in connection with the coming of "the perfect" which is the completed New Testament.

Compare That to "the perfect law" which in context is "the word"; cp. Jam.1:22,23,25.
Furthermore. 1Cor.13:12 and Jam.1:23 where "mirror" is used as a figure for the Word of God.

Love in No way fits the context of;
1] The "perfect" law
2] The mirror
3] The child-adult analogy to illustrate the cessation of certain gifts.

To even think it is, is to be way off context.Off context eh? Imagine that considering the entire passage is about love from beginning to end. But then hey... what's context! Can't make it fit our doctrine if we actually paid attention to that!

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 12:39 AM
ProjectPeter


Off context eh? Imagine that considering the entire passage is about love from beginning to end. But then hey... what's context! Can't make it fit our doctrine if we actually paid attention to that!

Your point is unsupported.


Context.

Love never fails, but those other things do.
Why ?
Paul went into why.

You still fail to explain.,.


9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part

In part is not complete, is not perfect. there fore the topic of verse 10 is "partial knowledge and prophecy".

Or how love fits the context of

Love in No way fits the context of;
1] The "perfect" law
2] The mirror
3] The child-adult analogy to illustrate the cessation of certain gifts.

Try enforcing your position, cause I am not seeing how you come to your position.

DarkMajin
Dec 8th 2005, 01:17 AM
ProjectPeter: This is true. The demon in question replied that it knew Jesus and it knew Paul, but not them. Incidentally, that section also mentioned miracles being wrought by items Paul had simply touched.

As for materials relating to these exorcisms you have spoken of, I cannot say whether I would believe them or not without seeing something about them. If no one knows about them, they might as well not exist.
I can search myself but if you have any shortcuts to such materials, feel free to share them.

As for your last statements there...then we could say that casting out demons is a gift of the Spirit, as you say healing and raising also became them too.

millerrod
Dec 8th 2005, 01:48 AM
maybe these ? should be asked.
Is it he that does the miricle or is it he who believes the miricle happened?
Is it he who cast out a demon or is it he who had the demon, his belief that the demon was cast out.
Is it he who speaks in tounges or is it he who hears tounges?
Is it the belief of the giver or the belief of the receiver?
OR could it be the belief of two wear Gods gifts are seen?

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 01:54 AM
ProjectPeter

Your point is unsupported.Unsupported? Have you actually read 1 Corinthians 13?



Context.Goodness... you go on about context but then you can't figure this is speaking of love when that's what the whole todo is about?


Love never fails, but those other things do.
Why ?Uh.... perhaps because love is perfect? Imagine that eh?



Paul went into why.

You still fail to explain.,.


9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part

In part is not complete, is not perfect. there fore the topic of verse 10 is "partial knowledge and prophecy".It is apparent that you are missing much of what I am saying.


Or how love fits the context of

Love in No way fits the context of;
1] The "perfect" law
2] The mirror
3] The child-adult analogy to illustrate the cessation of certain gifts.

Try enforcing your position, cause I am not seeing how you come to your position.How does it not fit? Love is perfect is it not? Pay attention to the Greek here. Agape tells us much eh?

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 02:06 AM
ProjectPeter: This is true. The demon in question replied that it knew Jesus and it knew Paul, but not them. Incidentally, that section also mentioned miracles being wrought by items Paul had simply touched.

As for materials relating to these exorcisms you have spoken of, I cannot say whether I would believe them or not without seeing something about them. If no one knows about them, they might as well not exist.
I can search myself but if you have any shortcuts to such materials, feel free to share them.

As for your last statements there...then we could say that casting out demons is a gift of the Spirit, as you say healing and raising also became them too.it's all ultimately the Spirit of God DarkMajin He is our helper. We can cut through all the mess and come right to that point I think eh?

As to shortcuts to that material... I can't help you. You have to read the Scripture and either believe according to what it actually says or not. That's all God ask of any of us. If you find yourself where you can read the Scripture and believe... rest assured... I won't have to show you a thing.

MAC702
Dec 8th 2005, 02:29 AM
Let's talk more about the "speaking in tongues." What is this, really? It started at Pentecost 33 CE, with the disciples in Jerusalem speaking tongues (foreign languages) to the visiting Jews from other parts of the then-known world.

What is it today?

There is no need for "speaking in the tongues of angels" to preach the good news is there? Are there not already Christians preaching in most languages so as to reach the whole world? Is the gift of "tongues" actually being used today to preach the good news in a legitimate foreign language to a person who understands it, but by a Christian who doesn't know the language until the Holy Spirit just gave it to him?

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 02:33 AM
Let's talk more about the "speaking in tongues." What is this, really? It started at Pentecost 33 CE, with the disciples in Jerusalem speaking tongues (foreign languages) to the visiting Jews from other parts of the then-known world.

What is it today?

There is no need for "speaking in the tongues of angels" to preach the good news is there? Are there not already Christians preaching in most languages so as to reach the whole world? Is the gift of "tongues" actually being used today to preach the good news in a legitimate foreign language to a person who understands it, but by a Christian who doesn't know the language until the Holy Spirit just gave it to him?
Would you believe it if I said yes?

Armistead14
Dec 8th 2005, 03:01 AM
I think some gifts have been done away with, after the bible ws completed.
Certain gifts had to be there, since the bible had not yet been written.

Speaking in languages, I agree have ben done done away with for the most part, simply not needed. However, I believe if needed, it could happen again.

The most important thing is that we operate with love.

DarkMajin
Dec 8th 2005, 03:56 AM
ProjectPeter: Well, the Scriptures tell me that they were occurring back then...and when I look at the world now, they don't appear to be happening anymore.

And without any accounts, or any proof...these supposed casting outings of today do not resemble the ones of old. They were not kept secret.

So, seems we'll just have to stand on different bridges concerning that. ;)

So all in all it leads me back to thinking back then something made the demons cease, or they were put somewhere.

Zechariah 13:1-6
13:1 “On that day there shall be a fountain opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and uncleanness. 2 “And on that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will cut off the names of the idols from the land, so that they shall be remembered no more. And also I will remove from the land the prophets and the spirit of uncleanness. 3 And if anyone again prophesies, his father and mother who bore him will say to him, ‘You shall not live, for you speak lies in the name of the Lord.’ And his father and mother who bore him shall pierce him through when he prophesies.
4 “On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies. He will not put on a hairy cloak in order to deceive, 5 but he will say, ‘I am no prophet, I am a worker of the soil, for a man sold me in my youth.’6 And if one asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your back?’he will say, ‘The wounds I received in the house of my friends.’

These passages may have had something to do with it, or not.

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 04:31 AM
ProjectPeter: Well, the Scriptures tell me that they were occurring back then...and when I look at the world now, they don't appear to be happening anymore.

And without any accounts, or any proof...these supposed casting outings of today do not resemble the ones of old. They were not kept secret.

So, seems we'll just have to stand on different bridges concerning that. ;)

So all in all it leads me back to thinking back then something made the demons cease, or they were put somewhere.

Zechariah 13:1-6
13:1 “On that day there shall be a fountain opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and uncleanness. 2 “And on that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will cut off the names of the idols from the land, so that they shall be remembered no more. And also I will remove from the land the prophets and the spirit of uncleanness. 3 And if anyone again prophesies, his father and mother who bore him will say to him, ‘You shall not live, for you speak lies in the name of the Lord.’ And his father and mother who bore him shall pierce him through when he prophesies.
4 “On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies. He will not put on a hairy cloak in order to deceive, 5 but he will say, ‘I am no prophet, I am a worker of the soil, for a man sold me in my youth.’6 And if one asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your back?’he will say, ‘The wounds I received in the house of my friends.’

These passages may have had something to do with it, or not.
No one said they were kept secret today. I simply said they weren't advertised as the many examples you are laying out there. The advertisor's are bogus for the most part. That was my point... not that it was "secret".

As to the passage in Zechariah.... certainly that has its place today as do many of the other passages in the Prophets.

DarkMajin
Dec 8th 2005, 05:17 AM
ProjectPeter: You were right, I did a cursory search and all I found were the typical old accounts (including the typical ones where Satan possessed a person...oh boy, and of course, that demons were the source of mental and physical diseases).

Who does these exorcisms then? Are they done in this country, or elsewhere?
Do you know who they are and have knowledge about these acts, or...do you not know much about them either?
I would think if anyone were able to prove the existence of demons to the outside world, I would think they would. After all, any proof of the supernatural would lead in certain directions.

watchinginawe
Dec 8th 2005, 05:32 AM
ProjectPeter: Well, skepticism gets blown away by obviously real things. For example, skepticism about Bigfoot would vanish over night if one was plunked down in front of everyone. Until then, skepticism abounds about ol' Bigfoot.Just for the record, there would be plenty of people today to line up with skepticism of the miracles done by Jesus and indeed even of his resurrection. Thomas didn't even believe it till he had seen the resurrected Lord. So there is plenty of skepticism abounding regarding Christianity. What evidence do you have to provide someone skeptical of your Christian experience? Are you completely without testimony? Do you expect everyone to accept what you have to say happened to you?

Just some thoughts.

God Bless!

DarkMajin
Dec 8th 2005, 05:51 AM
watchiginawe: Well, I actually mean by that that if someone were performing miracles in say Times Square, sure there would be some skepticism at first...but soon enough you'd have the entire city following after that person once it became plain it was real.

watchinginawe
Dec 8th 2005, 06:04 AM
I found a site once that described the BIBLICAL account of the cessation of "miracles" like in the NT. (I believe in miracles, btw, but not in the abundance we witness in the NT)
I wish I knew where to find it, but in a nutshell (and I do very little justice to the article) it said how the chronology of the epistles shows a reduction and eventual stop of Apostolic miracles, (healing, casting out of demons) and it was pretty thorough. I know this isn't evidence for some, but neither are experiences today.John, I would challenge you to do the same study on water baptisms and even conversions and see if they didn't "wind down" chronologically also. Maybe even more drastically than the Gifts of the Spirit since they operated within the Body of Christ.

God Bless!

Christinme
Dec 8th 2005, 08:19 AM
The future tense is in connection with the coming of "the perfect" which is the completed New Testament.I don't think it is the completed Scripture that is "the perfect" that is to come. As a matter of fact I'm pretty positive you are wrong.

1 Corinthians 13:8-12 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.

There will be a time when prophecies will be done away with and then naturally that will be when prophets will no longer be needed. If we look at Ephesians 4 we can see what is "the perfect" that is to come.

Ephesians 4:12-15 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head Christ from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

And what do you know even the child-adult analogy is in those verses.


John also talks about the coming of "the perfect":

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 05:00 PM
ProjectPeter


Unsupported? Have you actually read 1 Corinthians 13?


Explain it . Dont just say have you read it.


Goodness... you go on about context but then you can't figure this is speaking of love when that's what the whole todo is about?


Once again explain it.
Verse by verse, line upon line.





It is apparent that you are missing much of what I am saying.




It is more apparent you are not posting your point in a manner where it could be caught.



How does it not fit? Love is perfect is it not? Pay attention to the Greek here. Agape tells us much eh?


Ok then explain how "Agape" fits

1] The "perfect" law
2] The mirror
3] The child-adult analogy to illustrate the cessation of certain gifts.

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 05:04 PM
ProjectPeter: You were right, I did a cursory search and all I found were the typical old accounts (including the typical ones where Satan possessed a person...oh boy, and of course, that demons were the source of mental and physical diseases).Cool... thanks for taking the time to study that out. That makes the thread worth it in my book.


Who does these exorcisms then? Are they done in this country, or elsewhere?Well... I for one don't much care for the exorcism word because of all the ado because of the movie and lore that is attached to the word. Mind you I am being technical here because certainly that is by definition what takes place. Just wanted to clarify though for everyone reading... it ain't all that movie stuff and that's not what I am speaking of.

Any disciple of Christ has the authority to cast out demons. It doesn't have to be the preacher. Yes.... they are done here in this country and done in others as well. Some countries have some pretty serious stuff going on such as Haiti and Africa. So it is more evident in some places than others I think is fair to say.


Do you know who they are and have knowledge about these acts, or...do you not know much about them either?Sure... I know some who have really dealt with this and I have dealt with it myself a time or two or three over the years.


I would think if anyone were able to prove the existence of demons to the outside world, I would think they would. After all, any proof of the supernatural would lead in certain directions.Why do you think that? Jesus showed it to the outside world and while it fascinated a lot of folks... and I am sure some even believed in Him because of it... more didn't than did.

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 05:07 PM
I don't think it is the completed Scripture that is "the perfect" that is to come. As a matter of fact I'm pretty positive you are wrong.

1 Corinthians 13:8-12 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.

There will be a time when prophecies will be done away with and then naturally that will be when prophets will no longer be needed. If we look at Ephesians 4 we can see what is "the perfect" that is to come.

Ephesians 4:12-15 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head Christ from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

And what do you know even the child-adult analogy is in those verses.


John also talks about the coming of "the perfect":

1 John 3: Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.Good post Christinme.

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 05:09 PM
ProjectPeter


Explain it . Dont just say have you read it.

Once again explain it. Verse by verse, line upon line.

It is more apparent you are not posting your point in a manner where it could be caught.

Ok then explain how "Agape" fits

1] The "perfect" law
2] The mirror
3] The child-adult analogy to illustrate the cessation of certain gifts.See the post by Christinme. She explained it just fine.

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 05:35 PM
Christinme


I don't think it is the completed Scripture that is "the perfect" that is to come. As a matter of fact I'm pretty positive you are wrong.


There will be a time when prophecies will be done away with and then naturally that will be when prophets will no longer be needed. If we look at Ephesians 4 we can see what is "the perfect" that is to come.



To say “That which is perfect” is “the perfect state of all things, to be ushered in bythe return of Christ from heaven” is not in context. There is nothing in the context of the passage to indicates this interpretation.

1 cor 13

8 The love doth never fail; and whether [there be] prophecies, they shall become useless; whether tongues, they shall cease; whether knowledge, it shall become useless;
9 for in part we know, and in part we prophecy;
10 and when that which is perfect may come, then that which [is] in part shall become useless.


The Phrase “That whish is Perfect” is translated from a single Greek word which means: full grown, mature, complete, finished, perfect. It signifies “that which has reached it’s end.”


The context is clearly speaking of spiritual gifts.

In ICor 13:8-13 Paul is contrasting the permanence of love with the non-permanent gifts of tongues knowledge, and prophecy

Love is one of the fruits of the Spirit whereas tongues, prophecy and the word of knowledge are gifts of the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit is permanent, but the gifts are temporary



The Word of God itself answers what “That which is Perfect” is where it says,



James 1

21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.

22But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:

24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.

25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.


The Greek word translated “perfect” in James 1:25 is the same word as in ICor 13:10.

“That which is Perfect” is “The Perfect Law of Liberty,” the Word of God.

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 05:46 PM
Christinme


Ephesians 4:12-15 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head Christ from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

And what do you know even the child-adult analogy is in those verses.


His topic there is about the run to spiritual maturity, and the support and staying on course. His point is not about non-permanent gifts of the spirit, or the completeness of what "known in part and prophesy in part;".


It would be out of context to even try and link the two.

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 05:56 PM
Christinme

You also didnt address the mirror.


“For now we see through a glass[mirror], darkly, but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as I am known.” (I Corinthians 13:12)


The glass in this verse is the mirror of the Word of God:

“For if any be a hearer of the Word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: for he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But whoso looketh into the Perfect Law of Liberty, and continue therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.” (James 1:23-25)


James defined “That which is Perfect” as the Word of God, and here he defines the “glass” also as the Word of God.

The word “glass,” meaning mirror, appears only one other time in the New Testament, and the context there again proves it to mean the Word of God.

In II Corinthians 3:5-16 Paul is contrasting the New Testament with the Old Testament (both are the Word of God), and concludes that when one turns his heart to Christ he is liberated and changed by the Spirit of the Lord (II Corinthians 3:14-18).

Paul says that believers “all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord.” (II Corinthians 3:18; cf. Romans 8:29; Colossians 3:10)

Paul, a personification of the church (generically speaking), was saying, “... now [around 56 A.D.] we see [understand] through a glass [the Word], darkly [obscurely, because the Word is not yet complete]; but then [when the Word is complete] face to face: now [56 A.D.] I know in part [have only bits and peaces of the revelation]; but then [around 96 A.D. when the Word is completed] I shall know even as I am known.” (I Corinthians 13:12 )

To be sure the complete and perfect Word of God is like a mirror that we come “face to face” both with the sinner that we are, and “the glory of the Lord.”

Let us use God’s glass to get our selves cleaned up (James 1:21), and changed into the image of Christ (II Corinthians 3:18; Colossians 3:10; Romans 8:29).

So now we have two words (perfect, and glass) in the context of I Corinthians 13:8-12 that are shown, in James 1:23-25, and II Corinthians 3:17-18 (note the word “liberty” in these passages also), to mean “the Word of God."

The context too indicates that in Paul’s day the revelation was not yet complete (perfect) and so only an obscure (dark) reflection could be seen then, but now we have come “face to face” with the Truth of God's breathed out, complete, holy, perfect, infallible, and final Word (I Corinthians 13:12; II Corinthians 3:18; James 1:23).

Research source: http://www.geocities.com/LandmarkBibleBaptist/Heresies/tongues.html

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 06:38 PM
Christinme

You also didnt address the mirror.


“For now we see through a glass[mirror], darkly, but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as I am known.” (I Corinthians 13:12)


The glass in this verse is the mirror of the Word of God:



And who would you think the "then face to face" means?

If the mirror is the word and it is perfect why do we see through it darkly? What we see darkly we see now right hence the "now" we see through...?

The same now is used when it says "now" I know in part.

Then you have "but then" face to face and then after that colon you have "but then" shall I know even as I am known.

So which is now? The mirror... the Word? What is the "but then"? This would be when that which is perfect has come eh?

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 06:49 PM
And who would you think the "then face to face" means?

If the mirror is the word and it is perfect why do we see through it darkly? What we see darkly we see now right hence the "now" we see through...?

The same now is used when it says "now" I know in part.

Then you have "but then" face to face and then after that colon you have "but then" shall I know even as I am known.

So which is now? The mirror... the Word? What is the "but then"? This would be when that which is perfect has come eh?


If you had read the whole post, Paul wrote this at a time when the word was not complete...

“... now [around 56 A.D.] we see [understand] through a glass [the Word], darkly [obscurely, because the Word is not yet complete]; but then [when the Word is complete] face to face: now [56 A.D.] I know in part [have only bits and peaces of the revelation]; but then [around 96 A.D. when the Word is completed] I shall know even as I am known.” (I Corinthians 13:12 )

When Paul wrote the Word was not yet complete, hence why it was dark. When it was complete, it would be clear as face to face. Which is what occurs in the mirror, your face with the face in the mirror, hence face to face.

Christinme
Dec 8th 2005, 07:10 PM
So you think the 1 Corinthians 13 and Ephesians 4 verse aren't in anyway connected.


The Phrase “That whish is Perfect” is translated from a single Greek word which means: full grown, mature, complete, finished, perfect. It signifies “that which has reached it’s end.”Yes the Greek word is TELEIOS, it's also used in the Ephesians 4 verses:

Ephesians 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature (TELEIOS) man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. (NAS)

1 Corinthians 13:10 but when the perfect (TELEIOS) comes, the partial will be done away. (NAS)

and another translation:

Ephesians 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect (TELEIOS) man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: (KJV)

1 Corinthians 13:10 But when that which is perfect (TELEIOS) is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. (KJv)


The Greek word translated “perfect” in James 1:25 is the same word as in ICor 13:10.

“That which is Perfect” is “The Perfect Law of Liberty,” the Word of God.As I said above Ephesians 4 also uses the Greek word TELEIOS. And concerning the Word of God, I'm sure you probably remember these verses:

John 1:1-14 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. ... And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Christinme
Dec 8th 2005, 07:12 PM
Christinme

You also didnt address the mirror.


“For now we see through a glass[mirror], darkly, but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as I am known.” (I Corinthians 13:12)


The glass in this verse is the mirror of the Word of God:

“For if any be a hearer of the Word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: for he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But whoso looketh into the Perfect Law of Liberty, and continue therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.” (James 1:23-25)


James defined “That which is Perfect” as the Word of God, and here he defines the “glass” also as the Word of God.

The word “glass,” meaning mirror, appears only one other time in the New Testament, and the context there again proves it to mean the Word of God. I agree with the glass/mirror being the Word of God - now we see through a glass/mirror (WRITTEN WORD OF GOD), but then FACE TO FACE (THE WORD OF GOD) and the WORD OF GOD that we will be face to face with will be:

John 1:1-14 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. ... And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

and more on the face to face:

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.

ProjectPeter
Dec 8th 2005, 07:20 PM
If you had read the whole post, Paul wrote this at a time when the word was not complete...

“... now [around 56 A.D.] we see [understand] through a glass [the Word], darkly [obscurely, because the Word is not yet complete]; but then [when the Word is complete] face to face: now [56 A.D.] I know in part [have only bits and peaces of the revelation]; but then [around 96 A.D. when the Word is completed] I shall know even as I am known.” (I Corinthians 13:12 )

When Paul wrote the Word was not yet complete, hence why it was dark. When it was complete, it would be clear as face to face. Which is what occurs in the mirror, your face with the face in the mirror, hence face to face.
It is speaking of Christ Centurion. He is love and shoot... He's the Word too. Paul wasn't speaking of what we call "the Bible" in that passage.

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 07:58 PM
Christinme


Yes the Greek word is TELEIOS, it's also used in the Ephesians 4 verses:

Ephesians 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature (TELEIOS) man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. (NAS)

1 Corinthians 13:10 but when the perfect (TELEIOS) comes, the partial will be done away. (NAS)

and another translation:

Ephesians 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect (TELEIOS) man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: (KJV)

1 Corinthians 13:10 But when that which is perfect (TELEIOS) is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. (KJv)


ProjectPeter


It is speaking of Christ Centurion. He is love and shoot... He's the Word too. Paul wasn't speaking of what we call "the Bible" in that passage.
Again the context of that being Christ just is not there.



The gender gets you.
It is in the neuter gender, it cannot refer to the coming of the person of Christ, a masculine noun. It has to refer to a object of no gender. there is no masculine article thus it is not Christ.

It refers to the complete revelation of the Cannon of Scripture.
Once the whole Cannon was in writing, the gifts of prophecy and knowledge that had gradually revealed portions of mystery doctrine would be terminated.

Again

We must notice that the gender of the Greek to teleion will not allow this interpretation.
It is a neuter noun, which means that it cannot be translated as referring to an adult person or a “that which.”

Jesus, as an adult, was always referred to in the masculine gender.
He is a person, not a thing.
Thus, He is not a “that” but a “He.”

Christinme
Dec 8th 2005, 08:43 PM
And the Greek word for scripture GRAPHE is a feminine noun so I "guess" the gender won't allow that interpretation.

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 09:00 PM
And the Greek word for scripture GRAPHE is a feminine noun so I "guess" the gender won't allow that interpretation.
Again:

How a word is used with other words determines alot on its context.

There is no masculine article, thus this does not refer to Christ.


Again:


1 Corinthians 13:10


“but” is a conjunction of contrast, and the contrast is between the pre-canon period and the post-canon period. In verse 9 you have knowledge in the pre-canon period. The Bible isn’t complete, your knowledge isn’t complete. We don’t have all the information yet because the canon isn’t finished. “But” is the contrast between the partial knowledge in the pre-canon period to full knowledge now. Full knowledge doesn’t mean that everyone understands everything, it just means that it is all available in writing.

“when that which is perfect,” it doesn’t say in the Greek, “that which is perfect.” The Greek says, “but when the perfect is come.” This is not a reference to Jesus Christ, He is never referred to in the neuter gender. The word “perfect” is in the neuter gender, if it doesn’t refer to a person it can only refer to a thing. In 45 AD the book of James was written. James 1:25 explains what the “perfect” in the neuter means. James calls the Bible the “perfect” law of liberty. The “perfect” here refers to the Bible.

“but when the perfect is come,” nominative singular neuter. It is neuter gender which means it refers to a thing. It is in the singular which means it refers to one thing. It is in the nominative case which means it is the subject.

“is come,” is an aorist active subjunctive. The aorist tense refers to the point of time when the canon of scripture is completed. The active voice means that it will be completed, it is the part moving to the whole. The subjunctive mood indicates that it is not yet completed and its completion is a potential factor.

“then that which is in part shall be done away,” in other words, once we have a completed canon of scripture we will no longer be under partial knowledge, it will be under completed knowledge. The part refers to the temporary spiritual gifts which take up the slack for the canon of scripture which was then incomplete. There is no verb here and it should be translated “the part.” The removal of the temporary gifts does not mean the removal of the filling of the Spirit.

DarkMajin
Dec 8th 2005, 09:04 PM
ProjectPeter: Indeed, in the past I have heard that Haiti and Africa were supposedly hot spots...though all I ever heard were again the typical old stories...or as well, that it was not possessions at all. I honestly cannot recall a case of possession in America in modern times that had the possibility of being real...so if there have been some, a tight lid must have been kept on it.

If they are still numerous...well, I would think someone out there would have found out about it by now, and wrote about it.

You say you have dealt with it yourself...perhaps you could supply an account of one of your experiences?

And why I say it would be fruitful to people to prove the existence of demons, is that this present world desperately wishes that the supernatural is real. Why do you think people flock to Mary statues? Or devote themselves to UFO's? Overall, our society believes in the supernatural less than past ones, and as of such, have a stronger desire for it to be real.
And I brought up the Middle Ages earlier on, because back then they treated mental illness as possessions. If we did the same today, how can we say we wouldn't have the same terrible results?

On a separate note, not directed specifically at you...one telltale sign of the gifts having ceased is that prophecy has ceased. There were many people prophecying back during the Apostle's times...whereas all prophecies since those times have been lies.
Simpy put, there are no more true prophecies. If a person says God has spoken to them...well, we know better than to believe them.

Christinme
Dec 8th 2005, 09:44 PM
How a word is used with other words determines alot on its context.Yes it sure does. Also in this specific use it is an adjective functioning as a noun. When used in the singular accusative case the "ending" for the masculine and neuter are the same TELEION. And when used in the plural Genitive case the "ending" for the masculine, feminine and neuter are all the same TELEION.

And let's look here:

Ephesians 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

TELEION is used here as an adjective to a masculine noun, and adjectives have to agree in gender with the noun they are describing. So are you really so sure that gender rules out this interpretation?

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 10:15 PM
Christinme

The passage is 1 Corinthians 13:10.
There is no referance to Christ there for its in the neuter gender.
You pulling verses to and fro in other passages does not change that.

Why is this so complex that one must jump around in a panic to fit what ever piece in there they can. If Paul was refering to Christ he would have used gender.


Paul is stating
1) Love will endure
2) Tongues and Partial knowledge Partial prophecy; Will end.
a) when will knowledge and prophecy end?

b) when the complete knowledge and prophecy is finished, that being the PERFECT law of Liberty. We call it the New Teastament.
Now why is that such a hard concept to understand?
Its logical makes sense and fits the context of the passage.

Now then out side the passage we have other referances
1) In james

In 45 AD the book of James was written. James 1:25 explains what the “perfect” in the neuter means. James calls the Bible the “perfect” law of liberty. The “perfect” here refers to the Bible. The SAME neuter means that Paul uses

2) The mirror bring used to reflect to us Christ.
Verse 12 “But now we see by means of a mirror, an obscure form.”

jam 1
25But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

The same perfect neutral, and the reflection.


The perfect again is the doctrine of Christ, the scripture of God.

Which is now complete for us to use.
Now for the problem

If the partial is complete then all these other "party gifts" like partial knowledge and prophecy and tongues would have ended.

And that would really cut into the emotional worship of some.
So its a fight to keep their emotional worship on the level, so to speak, by making emotion truth.
Then their focus is to justify their emotion, rather than focus on truth.

Christinme
Dec 8th 2005, 10:43 PM
There is no referance to Christ there for its in the neuter gender.How do you know it is the neuter gender?

Centurionoflight
Dec 8th 2005, 10:50 PM
How do you know it is the neuter gender?

There is no gender on “but when the perfect is come.” in the greek.

Christinme
Dec 8th 2005, 11:11 PM
There is no gender on “but when the perfect is come.” in the greek.We are talking specifically about the word TELEION and by no gender I suppose you mean neuter gender which is no gender. So how do you know the word TELEION here has no gender IOW neuter gender?

Banzy
Dec 8th 2005, 11:29 PM
I must say that I'm rather surprised by this thread. I can't even imagine the gifts are in question. Cessationism is one of the worst teachings to ever come into the Body of Christ. They are His giftings, and I think He can distribute them as He pleases.

Why would Paul tell the Corinthian church to "pursue and desire spiritual gifts"? Why Paul, you must be mistaken, you are the one writing the New Testament(at least 2/3 of it), don't you know that when you finish writing it, the gifts will cease.:rofl:

Using the logic that the completion of the Bible was the perfect, then you can throw out parts of it that don't exist anymore. Yeah, that makes sense.:lol: I mean we can just tear out the pages in Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Galatians, etc. etc. etc.

That which is perfect has come... "till we all come to the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ..." Eph. 4:13

This has not happened. Why? Because of the very next verse. We are still "children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine..." Eph. 4:14

DarkMajin
Dec 8th 2005, 11:37 PM
Well, I think that's part of the problem...today's Christians can't imagine the gifts not being in play anymore...yet...they cannot say they have truly experienced them, or seen them.
Those that say they have...well, their accounts have to be examined. That's all I can say about those.

This is a pertinent question I feel, for it would provide an answer to unbelievers, instead of just saying "Well, sure, they still exist, just I've never seen one, or done one...but I'm pretty sure they're out there."

And again, the only prophets since those days have been false ones.

In the case of Paul at one point, mere pieces of cloth he'd touched were causing miracles. This also has not been seen since.

dancedwithdolphin
Dec 9th 2005, 01:03 AM
How could any Christian in their right heart and mind ever say the Spirit of God has ceased? Perhaps we just do not know what a gift is.

The Spirit of our Lord guides and directs our paths everyday. He teaches us, and helps us, is a light to us, strength when we are weak.

Many people try and define gift by speaking in tongues, or healings, or prophecy, ect... but there are other gifts that Jesus brought, love, hope, forgiveness, faith, meekness, goodness, compassion, mercy, grace, ect...

Do you think these things are any easier to accomplish without the Holy Spirit? How easy was it do you suppose for Stephen to look into the eyes of those who were stoning him and ask God the Father to forgive them? And not hold it against them? (Could you love instead of hate? in that moment).

These particular gifts are still very much alive today. For those who are treasure seekers. Who desire the riches of the kingdom of God.

The way I see it, the other things can be added unto you.

But so few of us master love. And it is key.

The disciples had to learn this first. (Maybe that is why we see so very few who achieve this level of discipline. To whom much is given much is required).

God Bless :hug:

millerrod
Dec 9th 2005, 01:41 AM
but so few master Love and it is key. AMEN

watchinginawe
Dec 9th 2005, 05:01 AM
Well, I think that's part of the problem...today's Christians can't imagine the gifts not being in play anymore...yet...they cannot say they have truly experienced them, or seen them.
Those that say they have...well, their accounts have to be examined. That's all I can say about those.

This is a pertinent question I feel, for it would provide an answer to unbelievers, instead of just saying "Well, sure, they still exist, just I've never seen one, or done one...but I'm pretty sure they're out there."Graham gave you an account, but as you say, you felt it needed examined. I will also share an account with you if I can tell it in writing. I do not consider this a "gift" per se but I think it applies to what you are talking about here. This happened about 15 years ago.

I was at a site as a consultant and the day had already turned late. Most of the people in the plant had left and there was just a handful of us there finishing out what we were working on. Suddenly one of the mechanics burst into the conference room yelling hysterically for everyone to come help, that Doug had gotten his foot stuck in the truck. That didn't make much sense to any of us there but we all ran out to see if we could be of assistance.

Now the truck in question was a panel truck that had a hydraulic lift gate installed. This lift gate had been rigged such that when you put the lever in the store position the gate would collapse on itself, fold itself under the truck, and then clamp the lift and turn off the hydralic unit when it made a switch.

Anyway, we all ran out there to find Doug with his foot somehow caught in the collapsing liftgate. He had been up inside the truck and reached down and turned the lever to put up the gate. In this process he somehow got one of his feet too low and the gate folded right up onto it. There were two unmistakable sounds at the instant of our arriving: The sheer terror of Doug crying out loud and the hydraulic motor whining and not letting loose of the folding lift gate. Doug's foot was in the way of the gate finding it's switch and the gate would not relinquish.

Moving the lever around did nothing, the circuit was sealed and the gate was going to the switch no matter what. One of the managers told the mechanic to run and get the toolbox, others were frantically trying to find a way to disarm the lift gate in some way. Doug all the while was just yelling and he began to ask if anyone there was a praying person and please God let a prayer get through. He went on like this wailing for about 30 seconds putting us all to shame when finally I closed my eyes, said a prayer (as I am sure others did), and then looked at him and said "Doug, I just sent one up". In perfect time of my saying the word "up", two things happened. First, Doug's foot came loose out of the lift gate. Second, just as the foot was released, the lift gate finished folding up under the truck and turned off the hydralic motor. There was utter silence. It was truly an awkward moment for everyone there.

They loaded up Doug and took him to the hospital to get treatment. I didn't know these people and they didn't know me outside of our professional relationship so we thanked God and went back to work. To punctuate the event, when Doug got back from the hospital (his foot was bruised but not broken), he immediately searched us out to tell us about how God had saved his foot as an answer to prayer and how he was going to change his life.

A strong witness was given to the unbelievers and the believers that evening. Was it all just a big coincidence? I believe that was an evening God answered prayer in a miraculous way, in other words, a miracle.

Examine the account if you wish but there were no doubters present at the scene, believers or not.

God Bless!

DarkMajin
Dec 9th 2005, 05:28 AM
watchinginawe: That is quite an account...and I have no doubts about it. I am quite sure God did have a hand in it. I believe things like that do occur, and have never doubted those types occur.
I also do not doubt the Spirit still is working, and that certain gifts are still quite alive.

However, the specific ones I listed out...and those types were not isolated ones, as they usually involved a single person performing many miracles, are the ones I mean we don't see anymore.

watchinginawe
Dec 9th 2005, 05:57 AM
watchinginawe: That is quite an account...and I have no doubts about it. I am quite sure God did have a hand in it. I believe things like that do occur, and have never doubted those types occur.
I also do not doubt the Spirit still is working, and that certain gifts are still quite alive.

However, the specific ones I listed out...and those types were not isolated ones, as they usually involved a single person performing many miracles, are the ones I mean we don't see anymore.Granted, we don't have the Apostle Paul with us today annointing handkerchiefs, but as I Corinthians 12 instructs, the Gifts are given to the body at large. Perhaps it is your expectations of these Gifts that is overstated.

Regarding what has passed away, we know that the scripture and prophecies were fulfilled and closed with the incarnation of Jesus Christ and by the ministry of the Apostles and thus the foundation finished:

Epesians 2:
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:

22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.


We aren't to lay another foundation but rather are called to build upon that which has already been laid. So in that since, the Apostolic authority that the Apostles had is already laid in scripture. However, to take this as far as to say that what Paul taught in his Apostolic authority has also passed away is a different matter altogether. As Banzy mentioned, why would the scripture be filled with instruction that would pass away once it was written? The Gifts are a result of the foundation, even a doctrine of the foundation, but not the foundation itself.

This has been a good thread.

God Bless!

DarkMajin
Dec 9th 2005, 08:29 AM
watchingawe: No, my expectations concerning the gifts I listed are not overstated, I myself am not sorely focused upon them having to exist...but it's a pertinent question I think when unbelievers look around and see supposed "gifts" being employed in what is essentially shams or delusions, and such things reflect poorly upon the faith, I feel. As of such, it would be relevant for believers to know and be able to tell an unbeliever if these certain gifts and miracles are still in effect or not.

This also goes hand in hand with whether or not unclean spirits or demons are still active in how they were in NT, as again, the lack of such possessions these days has led many to believe the ones of those days were merely mental illnesses, which cuts short in a few ways what Jesus and the Apostles did.

I myself don't think the gifts I listed are still in play, which is not to say miracles don't happen, but there are no longer men one can go to who can heal the deaf or blind or ill.
As for demon possessions and casting outings...until I can find the existence of credible possessions and such castings, I have to conclude that such spirits are inactive, for some reason or another.

Centurionoflight
Dec 9th 2005, 05:08 PM
Banzy


I must say that I'm rather surprised by this thread. I can't even imagine the gifts are in question. Cessationism is one of the worst teachings to ever come into the Body of Christ. They are His giftings, and I think He can distribute them as He pleases.


And he stated how he distributed them, that being some gifts faded after the Law of Liberty was completed.




Why would Paul tell the Corinthian church to "pursue and desire spiritual gifts"? Why Paul, you must be mistaken, you are the one writing the New Testament(at least 2/3 of it), don't you know that when you finish writing it, the gifts will cease.


Becuase at that time those gifts was active and to be used.



Using the logic that the completion of the Bible was the perfect, then you can throw out parts of it that don't exist anymore. Yeah, that makes sense. I mean we can just tear out the pages in Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Galatians, etc. etc. etc.


Why Post some thing way absurd and then think that negates a legit point on doctrine.


Is the doctrine of Christ complete?
If not then what is it lacking?

Centurionoflight
Dec 9th 2005, 05:24 PM
Christinme



We are talking specifically about the word TELEION and by no gender I suppose you mean neuter gender which is no gender. So how do you know the word TELEION here has no gender IOW neuter gender?

The word translated "perfect" is TELEION.


It is in the
1) nominative case
2) singular number
3) in the neuter gender

the original: to teleion (tò téleion).

Without going into detail about téleion as to declension and thus establish the gender, you can immediately identify the gender by the definite article.

If you revisit the declension of the article, you will see that tò has to be either nominative singular neuter or accusative singular neuter. However, there is no doubt about the neuter gender being the gender.

Hence, téleion is perfect thing.

Kahtar
Dec 9th 2005, 07:29 PM
1Co 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
So we are to understand this verse as follows:
For now we see (doctrine) through a glass, darkly; but (when doctrine is complete) face to face: now I know (doctrine) in part; but then shall I know (doctrine) even as also I am known( by doctrine).
I was not aware that doctrine, or the written word, had a face, or that it was capable of knowing me.
Or perhaps you mean that when doctrine or the written word is completed that we will then see clearly, and we shall know Christ even as He knows us.
The problem with that concept is clearly displayed on this message board. Even with the completed Word, we STILL do not see clearly, nor do we know Christ even as He knows us.
It is clear that we are, or were, waiting for something to become complete.
My personal understanding is that the redemption of mankind, spoken of throughout the entire scripture, Genesis to Revelation, is what we are waiting for. And when that is complete, then we will most certainly see clearly, and know Him even as He knows us.
And, 'redemption' also fits quite nicely into your whole 'neuter' thing, as it is not a person, but a thing.
And until the redemption of mankind is complete, there will still be the need to share to gospel, people will still get sick and be in need of healing, and so forth.
But we do know that faith, and hope, and love shall continue on. And the greatest of these is LOVE.

Centurionoflight
Dec 9th 2005, 09:27 PM
Kahtar


1Co 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
So we are to understand this verse as follows:
For now we see (doctrine) through a glass, darkly; but (when doctrine is complete) face to face: now I know (doctrine) in part; but then shall I know (doctrine) even as also I am known( by doctrine).


The Correct ranslation..

“But now we see by means of a mirror, an obscure form.”

That form being Christ, the "obscure" mirror being the "in part" word of God in THAT DAY.

Why was it "obscure"? The Word of God at that TIME, was not complete yet.

The mirror is the Word of God and the only way you can see Christ in this world at all is through the Word of God. And the more you know about the Word the more you know about Christ. The less you know about the Word the less you know about Christ. The whole point is that we can only see Christ through the Word.



“now I know in part, but then I shall know even as He knows me.”

Then with the complete word one can know God, even as God knows us.




I was not aware that doctrine, or the written word, had a face, or that it was capable of knowing me.
Or perhaps you mean that when doctrine or the written word is completed that we will then see clearly, and we shall know Christ even as He knows us.

If you dont see Christ thru the word you cant know him.
The bible is the mirror used to see Christ.

James 1:25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.




The problem with that concept is clearly displayed on this message board. Even with the completed Word, we STILL do not see clearly, nor do we know Christ even as He knows us.

That is why one must study, and grow. Be a doer of the word rather than just a hearer. ie Apply the doctrine we learn to our spiritual life.
One must look on the word of God and study it to know Christ.


It is clear that we are, or were, waiting for something to become complete.

It was completed long ago.
Unless one has a position that the doctrine of Christ is not complete, thus one can not grow to maturity because he lacks the tools.
What tools or doctrines are lacking?




My personal understanding is that the redemption of mankind, spoken of throughout the entire scripture, Genesis to Revelation, is what we are waiting for. And when that is complete, then we will most certainly see clearly, and know Him even as He knows us.
And, 'redemption' also fits quite nicely into your whole 'neuter' thing, as it is not a person, but a thing.
And until the redemption of mankind is complete, there will still be the need to share to gospel, people will still get sick and be in need of healing, and so forth.
But we do know that faith, and hope, and love shall continue on. And the greatest of these is LOVE.


Umm "redemption of mankind" is not even in the context of these spiritual gifts, not sure how one links it into that.
Plus man was redeemed thru Christ.

The coming of “that which is perfect” is in a age of when faith and hope abide that tongues, prophecies, and other gifts, were to be ‘done away.’

That such is in this age of the church, is when faith and hope abide.

Faith, in the next life, will end in sight, it is the ‘conviction of things not seen’ (Heb. 11:1);

Hope will end in realization when heaven and eternal life are finally possessed.

Paul Stated that one does not hope for that which he has (Rom. 8:24).

It is therefore, in this age, while faith and hope abide, that the gifts peculiar to the early church were to be abolished, and the time marked by the appearance of the perfect (complete) revelation that being the Completed scipture.”

So that view of "waitng for the redemption of mankind" as described is way out of context, and seems out of line with many other doctrines.

Man is redeemed thru faith on Christ.
John 3

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Banzy
Dec 9th 2005, 09:40 PM
Absolutely Kahtar. The fact that there are so many interpretations, so many denominations etc. clearly shows that the "perfect" has not come yet.

"O foolish (Christians), Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth....This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?...Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Gal. 3:1-5

What I hear time and time again from these cessationists is: Show me. Show me some miracles, then I will believe. That is not how faith works. Believe and then you will see. It is almost exactly like the Pharisees.

ProjectPeter
Dec 9th 2005, 09:49 PM
ProjectPeter
Again the context of that being Christ just is not there.



The gender gets you.
It is in the neuter gender, it cannot refer to the coming of the person of Christ, a masculine noun. It has to refer to a object of no gender. there is no masculine article thus it is not Christ.

It refers to the complete revelation of the Cannon of Scripture.
Once the whole Cannon was in writing, the gifts of prophecy and knowledge that had gradually revealed portions of mystery doctrine would be terminated.

Again

We must notice that the gender of the Greek to teleion will not allow this interpretation.
It is a neuter noun, which means that it cannot be translated as referring to an adult person or a “that which.”

Jesus, as an adult, was always referred to in the masculine gender.
He is a person, not a thing.
Thus, He is not a “that” but a “He.”That's the problem with self-professed Greekism! The rock (which was Jesus) in 1 Corinthians 10 is a feminine noun and the text itself tells us exactly who that rock was... twas Christ.

1 Corinthians 10:1 For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea;
2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3 and all ate the same spiritual food;
4 and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ.

Your rule is broken Centurian.

Centurionoflight
Dec 9th 2005, 09:54 PM
Banzy


Absolutely Kahtar. The fact that there are so many interpretations, so many denominations etc. clearly shows that the "perfect" has not come yet.
The perfect is here that being the complete revelation of God, like a mirror. People can not look into it, cloud it up with filth. Does that make the mirror any less of a mirror, because man uses it wrong?

Also by default;
Are you saying the bible, Gods word, is lacking?



What I hear time and time again from these cessationists is: Show me. Show me some miracles, then I will believe. That is not how faith works. Believe and then you will see. It is almost exactly like the Pharisees.

What of those who believe with out any "shows"?
Plus I havent really seen a bunch of Calls for "miracles", what I do see is some ploping out their "miracles" and experiences as some form of pillar to build their doctrine on. Like I should take their word on things,because they had some "experience", over what the Bible states.

Those who build on the foundation of Christ, have no need for experiences, they have faith.
And with Faith one does not need to see any thing to believe, or to continue to believe.

Matthew 16:4 - A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign;

If one looks for signs their focus is not on Christ, and they are lead astray quickly.

2 Cor 11

14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

If one is looking for the light, the good, rather than at doctrine, they can fall quickly into satanic doctrine.

Centurionoflight
Dec 9th 2005, 09:59 PM
That's the problem with self-professed Greekism! The rock (which was Jesus) in 1 Corinthians 10 is a feminine noun and the text itself tells us exactly who that rock was... twas Christ.

1 Corinthians 10:1 For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea;
2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3 and all ate the same spiritual food;
4 and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ.

Your rule is broken Centurian.
Subject is 1 Corinthians 13.

In there is no "and the Perfect was Christ."

Stick with the topic.

ProjectPeter
Dec 9th 2005, 10:11 PM
ProjectPeter: Indeed, in the past I have heard that Haiti and Africa were supposedly hot spots...though all I ever heard were again the typical old stories...or as well, that it was not possessions at all. I honestly cannot recall a case of possession in America in modern times that had the possibility of being real...so if there have been some, a tight lid must have been kept on it.There's plenty of testimonies of demonic possession. Much of it is junk mind you but not all. But what do you expect a church or minister or whomever to do? Call a news crew? I guess that's the thing here... what do you expect for documentation?




If they are still numerous...well, I would think someone out there would have found out about it by now, and wrote about it.[QUOTE]Oh goodness... there is plenty of writing about it. Just because you haven't read it or seen it that's another thing all together. I figure if you did an couple of google searches on demonic possession you would have enough to read to last a lifetime. But keep in mind... just because it is written that doesn't make it fact but the flip side... doesn't make it fiction either. Discernment would certainly be a key factor in this.

[QUOTE]You say you have dealt with it yourself...perhaps you could supply an account of one of your experiences?Simple account would be they were possessed coming in and free going out. Specifics aren't going to help prove anything I don't suppose.


And why I say it would be fruitful to people to prove the existence of demons, is that this present world desperately wishes that the supernatural is real. Why do you think people flock to Mary statues? Or devote themselves to UFO's? Overall, our society believes in the supernatural less than past ones, and as of such, have a stronger desire for it to be real.And had God worked that way... I suppose no one would have denied that Jesus was the Son of God because God would have made it clear eh?


And I brought up the Middle Ages earlier on, because back then they treated mental illness as possessions. If we did the same today, how can we say we wouldn't have the same terrible results?We can't say for a number of reasons but the biggest being we aren't God and "what ifs" pretty much are simply an exercise in futility.


On a separate note, not directed specifically at you...one telltale sign of the gifts having ceased is that prophecy has ceased. There were many people prophecying back during the Apostle's times...whereas all prophecies since those times have been lies.

Simpy put, there are no more true prophecies. If a person says God has spoken to them...well, we know better than to believe them.But then you base that on your belief that the gifts have ceased. The gift of prophecy is still very much active. Again though... there are many that aren't of God sure enough... but that doesn't make them all not of God.

ProjectPeter
Dec 9th 2005, 10:15 PM
Well, I think that's part of the problem...today's Christians can't imagine the gifts not being in play anymore...yet...they cannot say they have truly experienced them, or seen them.
Those that say they have...well, their accounts have to be examined. That's all I can say about those.

This is a pertinent question I feel, for it would provide an answer to unbelievers, instead of just saying "Well, sure, they still exist, just I've never seen one, or done one...but I'm pretty sure they're out there."

And again, the only prophets since those days have been false ones.

In the case of Paul at one point, mere pieces of cloth he'd touched were causing miracles. This also has not been seen since.You say they haven't experienced them or seen them and that isn't true at all. What you could say is that you don't believe them because you believe they have ceased... that would be much more accurate of a statement. But I say that to say... just because you don't believe it doesn't make it not real. Also just because you haven't seen it or experienced doesn't make it false either.

ProjectPeter
Dec 9th 2005, 10:23 PM
Subject is 1 Corinthians 13.

In there is no "and the Perfect was Christ."

Stick with the topic.
It was certainly sticking with the topic. You are trying to play with the Greek words to make it fit your doctrine and you laid out the rule that if it was speaking of Christ then it had to be a "masculine noun" word otherwise it isn't speaking of Christ.

That passage in ten proves your rule is flawed does it not? In that passage the rock is a feminine noun but yet it depicts Christ and the text itself makes that totally clear.

Centurionoflight
Dec 9th 2005, 10:28 PM
It was certainly sticking with the topic. You are trying to play with the Greek words to make it fit your doctrine and you laid out the rule that if it was speaking of Christ then it had to be a "masculine noun" word otherwise it isn't speaking of Christ.

That passage in ten proves your rule is flawed does it not? In that passage the rock is a feminine noun but yet it depicts Christ and the text itself makes that totally clear.

There is still no ""and the Perfect was Christ."" in 1 cor 13, I will keep looking at it and let you know when it occurs.

When one occurs at that point you will have the bases of a point.

Until then you are baseless.

ProjectPeter
Dec 9th 2005, 10:31 PM
There is still no ""and the Perfect was Christ."" in 1 cor 13, I will keep looking at it and let you know when it occurs.

When one occurs at that point you will have the bases of a point.

Until then you are baseless.
You say that it has to be a masculine noun if it is speaking of Christ. Now that you have been shown that is not correct then are you willing to at least concede that your rule of interpretation had a flaw?

Centurionoflight
Dec 9th 2005, 10:36 PM
You say that it has to be a masculine noun if it is speaking of Christ. Now that you have been shown that is not correct then are you willing to at least concede that your rule of interpretation had a flaw?

There is no flaw.

Context of each passage is quite clear.

Is Christ actally Rock or was he being compared to a Rock, in a effort to teach someone a point of doctrine?

Again you have no point or base.
Nice try.,
But empty.

ProjectPeter
Dec 9th 2005, 10:48 PM
There is no flaw.

Context of each passage is quite clear.

Is Christ actally Rock or was he being compared to a Rock, in a effort to teach someone a point of doctrine?

Again you have no point or base.
Nice try.,
But empty.
I see. Well the beauty of it is this Centurion... you may think it baseless but you know it isn't. Your rule of interpreting Scripture is broken regardless of whether you are able to come to grips with it. But others will see it clearly and that's all that is important to me. You are going to be how you are and nothing that I can say to you is going to get through to you. That's no worry of mine.

The rock was speaking of Christ as the text clearly tells us. You can't tap dance around that fact. It is a feminine noun which disproves your rule of interpretation therefore it is not only flawed but outright wrong. Folks can discern for themselves what to do with your teaching at this point in time.

Centurionoflight
Dec 9th 2005, 11:25 PM
The rock was speaking of Christ as the text clearly tells us. You can't tap dance around that fact. It is a feminine noun which disproves your rule of interpretation therefore it is not only flawed but outright wrong. Folks can discern for themselves what to do with your teaching at this point in time.

Again is Christ a real rock, or is he just compared to one as a teaching point?

Again nice try.

ProjectPeter
Dec 9th 2005, 11:30 PM
Again is Christ a real rock, or is he just compared to one as a teaching point?

Again nice try.
And again... you are dodging the point made. Christ is called this rock and the rock is not a masculine noun. I am not arguing the comparison of Christ to that rock... I am simply showing that your interpretation of Scripture is flawed in that you stated clearly that if it depicts Christ then it has to be a masculine noun.

If your interpretation is flawed based on an incorrect idea that Christ can only be referred to with a word that is a masculine noun... then your going on about the word perfect not being a masculine noun is equally flawed because it is dependent on your rule of interpretation. That rule of interpretation has been shown to be incorrect. Deal with that or don't deal with that. That's entirely up to you.

Christinme
Dec 9th 2005, 11:40 PM
Without going into detail about téleion as to declension and thus establish the gender, you can immediately identify the gender by the definite article.

If you revisit the declension of the article, you will see that tò has to be either nominative singular neuter or accusative singular neuter. However, there is no doubt about the neuter gender being the gender.I've been studying because I do not have great knowledge in Greek and I think you are right here. Thanks for the lesson in Greek :) . I'm thinking though, since it is an adjective functioning as a noun and the noun is purposely left out (possibly so it is ambigious), maybe that could be why it is neuter gender.

ALSO concerning your posts to ProjectPeter:



Subject is 1 Corinthians 13.

In there is no "and the Perfect was Christ."

Stick with the topic.
There is still no ""and the Perfect was Christ."" in 1 cor 13, I will keep looking at it and let you know when it occurs.

When one occurs at that point you will have the bases of a point.

Until then you are baseless.As I said earlier it is my understanding that Ephesians 4 is speaking about the same subject as 1 Corinthians 13 and here we do have the Perfect being referred to as the fullness of Christ:

Ephesians 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

And really Centurionoflight, are you going to want to deny that the one and only Perfect is Christ? I see scripture as being a "shadow" of "Christ". It is like a mirror that we look into and see Christ, however scripture isn't Christ, Christ is Christ.

And you can say that that's not 1 Corinthians 13 it's Ephesians 4, however there is not "the perfect law of liberty" in 1 Corinthians 13 either and you have to go to James for that.

Christinme
Dec 10th 2005, 12:57 AM
And also Ephesians 4 talks about when prophets are no longer needed and 1 Corinthians 13 talks about when prophecy stops, now how can prophecy stop and we still have prophets. When prophets stop (Ephesians 4) prophecy stops (1 Corinthians 13). I don't see how Ephesians 4 CANNOT be related to 1 Corinthians 13.

DarkMajin
Dec 10th 2005, 02:51 AM
ProjectPeter: It's quite true I have never encountered anything of these gifts...but that is not the basis my questioning, as that would be unwise. It's simply a fact, that you do not see people traveling around healing the sick, the blind, the deaf, and casting out demons. More than myself would attest to that.

In terms of documentation, I'm not expecting a film crew, a video, or whatever...what I would expect though is written testimony concerning what occurred.
How can anyone expect anyone to believe such stories without even being allowed to know anything about them? If you want people to believe in something, there has to be more than just "It happened."
Or would you rather no one believe in such things?

I myself have only encountered a case of supposed tongues, and I was not impressed. I found it highly fake. That is my only personal experience with such things.

In all my years, I have never found a modern account of demon possession that appeared to be real.

And you really believe prophecy is alive and well? With whom then? Every prophecy and every prophet since those times has turned out to be false.

ProjectPeter
Dec 10th 2005, 03:04 AM
ProjectPeter: It's quite true I have never encountered anything of these gifts...but that is not the basis my questioning, as that would be unwise. It's simply a fact, that you do not see people traveling around healing the sick, the blind, the deaf, and casting out demons. More than myself would attest to that.

In terms of documentation, I'm not expecting a film crew, a video, or whatever...what I would expect though is written testimony concerning what occurred.

How can anyone expect anyone to believe such stories without even being allowed to know anything about them? If you want people to believe in something, there has to be more than just "It happened."
Or would you rather no one believe in such things?Again... there is plenty of documentation and testimonies out there. With the use of the Internet you should be able to find more accounts than you can likely read with whatever time you have left on the planet. But what would it take to prove it to you? I can tell you accounts though until the cows come home. What in that account is going to be the thing that makes you say AHA... now I agree! Nothing right... still going to boil down to you are going to have to see it, measure it, then either believe it or not.



I myself have only encountered a case of supposed tongues, and I was not impressed. I found it highly fake. That is my only personal experience with such things.There's a lot of folks "speaking in tongues" and they are sure enough fleshly tongues and that's all. But once again... that doesn't make tongues fake. Just the "tongue" that person spoke in was fake. No different than the other gifts for that matter.


In all my years, I have never found a modern account of demon possession that appeared to be real.Okay. So what? Does that make demon possession not real? Do you have the gift of discerning of spirits? Without that gift are you so sure they aren't there today or do you just not have the ability to discern it?


And you really believe prophecy is alive and well? With whom then? Every prophecy and every prophet since those times has turned out to be false.And I suppose you know of everyone that has been called a prophet since the days of the Bible? You know that everyone that has ever been called or claimed to be a prophet has always given a false prophecy because you know every prophecy they gave? You'll have to excuse me but I kind of doubt that. What you likely mean is that every person that you have heard of turned out to give false prophecy right... and there is a rather large difference eh?

I know of a few that truly have that gift out of many that claim to have it. But then not much I could do to "prove it" to you. I don't have every prophecy that they have ever given written down nor do I figure they have written every one of them down over the years. But yes... it is alive and well.

DarkMajin
Dec 10th 2005, 03:17 AM
ProjectPeter: Certainly I can...but as you said as well, they are simply what we'd see in movies. So why would I waste my time reading more things I have read before?

I don't see any reason why such such accounts should not be presented for other Christians to be aware of, not just for me to read, but others as well. And you say I rather would have to experience it myself? Well, I wouldn't know where to look, I'm afraid. But that appears to be a bit secretive too.

You've made me curious though...are you a mainstream Christian? Talk of discerning spirits and new prophecies being given to people seems a bit outside of it's typical jargon (not that I'm not outside of it, mind you, heh, but I am curious as to you.)

ProjectPeter
Dec 10th 2005, 03:32 AM
ProjectPeter: Certainly I can...but as you said as well, they are simply what we'd see in movies. So why would I waste my time reading more things I have read before?

I don't see any reason why such such accounts should not be presented for other Christians to be aware of, not just for me to read, but others as well. And you say I rather would have to experience it myself? Well, I wouldn't know where to look, I'm afraid. But that appears to be a bit secretive too. Not sure how to make it clear that there are plenty of accounts out there for a person to read... but then I read your last sentence in that first paragraph and that's where I see the problem... you say there should be accounts to read but before that say why would you waste time reading more of the same things you've read before. Perhaps I was just discerning that attitude all along and keeping with the same theme in my post? ;)




You've made me curious though...are you a mainstream Christian? Talk of discerning spirits and new prophecies being given to people seems a bit outside of it's typical jargon (not that I'm not outside of it, mind you, heh, but I am curious as to you.)Well... some would say yes and some would say no I guess. Depends on who you ask. As to my talk of discerning spirits... that's one of the gifts mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12... so not sure why you'd think that out of mainstream. As to my believing that the gift of prophecy is still active is true... you are going to have to explain what you mean by "new prophecy" because that could be mighty loaded so I'll just make that clarification now.

If by new prophecy you mean someone could stand up and give me a prophecy telling me that if I go to this street corner tomorrow and I will be arrested... then that would be a new prophecy and yes... I believe that sure enough.

If by "new prophecy" you are meaning something new in regard to salvation or something different than Scripture... then the answer is no I don't believe that at all.

I never used the term "new prophecy" so I figure you likely think of it as something different than I.

DarkMajin
Dec 10th 2005, 04:32 AM
ProjectPeter: So I'm wrong in wishing to know of true accounts, and not reading false ones of the type I've pointed out?

Is there another reason why you will not relate such accounts, other than "it won't make you believe it anyways."?
By dancing around it, and avoiding answering such things, you simply foster more unbelief concerning it. Is that what you desire?
As for your personal experiences...I certainly hope they don't involve you somehow casting demons out of yourself or something like that...for that definitely did not occur in NT times.

I do believe we seem to be viewing what prophecy is in different ways. I'm beginning to feel the same concerning what demon possession is as well.

ProjectPeter
Dec 10th 2005, 05:00 AM
ProjectPeter: So I'm wrong in wishing to know of true accounts, and not reading false ones of the type I've pointed out?

Is there another reason why you will not relate such accounts, other than "it won't make you believe it anyways."?
By dancing around it, and avoiding answering such things, you simply foster more unbelief concerning it. Is that what you desire?
As for your personal experiences...I certainly hope they don't involve you somehow casting demons out of yourself or something like that...for that definitely did not occur in NT times.

I do believe we seem to be viewing what prophecy is in different ways. I'm beginning to feel the same concerning what demon possession is as well.Uh... no. Casting demons out of oneself is far from biblical. As to true accounts... not sure how you can say that when you have been pretty much consistent with the idea that there are no true accounts eh? Since you don't even want to entertain that thought... what could I tell you in an account that would change your mind on this?

I've asked already and no one has really answered... where in Scripture does it say that this has stopped? It isn't there... but yet alot of folks seem so certain that it has. Some believe that some of the gifts still exist but some don't. That's even more of a problem because I want to know where it broke the list apart as gifts to be done away with and gifts to remain? That is another question no one will answer ... not with Scripture anyway.

So I am really trying to understand what it is that you expect me to say. You seem pretty set in your opinion on this so if I relate an account then you get to just post back saying... I doubt it. That's the point I guess. Anything I would say you would still doubt.

DarkMajin
Dec 10th 2005, 05:14 AM
ProjectPeter: Well, the bits of Scripture I've seen that suggest they have ceased depend on one having a certain viewpoint on it (since one reference I have considered is actually from Revelation). I can present such a viewpoint if it is desired.

I'm quite open to entertaining the idea they still exist, I myself have quite an open mind. My primary position put forth they do not happen anymore because the evidence does not seem to point that way.
If there is evidence that they have been still occurring, I would consider it quite well. Not immediately doubt it as you say, unless of course, it resembles the kind from movies. ;)

ProjectPeter
Dec 10th 2005, 05:16 PM
ProjectPeter: Well, the bits of Scripture I've seen that suggest they have ceased depend on one having a certain viewpoint on it (since one reference I have considered is actually from Revelation). I can present such a viewpoint if it is desired.Sure... present it and let's see where it goes.



I'm quite open to entertaining the idea they still exist, I myself have quite an open mind. My primary position put forth they do not happen anymore because the evidence does not seem to point that way.
If there is evidence that they have been still occurring, I would consider it quite well. Not immediately doubt it as you say, unless of course, it resembles the kind from movies. ;)But again we are back to the same question really. What sort of evidence would it take? You can't catch one of those boogers and put them in a jar. So what would it take other than Scripture speaks of them so by that you know they at least existed at some time? I don't understand what it is that I could show you that would give you "proof" that demons are still out there doing what demons do/did.

Banzy
Dec 10th 2005, 09:34 PM
To centurian: What are these "shows" you keep referring to? Did you have some sort of bad experience with the prophetic or healings or something?

To DarkMajin: Ever hear of Smith Wigglesworth, or John G. Lake? I have a couple of books about Wigglesworth, he had an amazing gift of healing. There are many well documented healings that have come through his ministry.

Personally, I have seen healings take place in my own church. I also have been given prophecies and have prophesied myself. No big deal because He is an awesome God we serve. I know that God changed my life because of the prophetic. I'll give a little testimony.

I was attending a Mennonite church at the time(grew up mennonite). It was the winter and early spring of 97-98. My parents were going to another church and every Sunday they would come home and say how awesome it was and everything that was going in there. I said that I was just fine where I was(I'm quite stubborn:D ) Anyway, this went on for a couple of months but I stayed at the Mennonite church. Then Easter '98 rolled around and I figured I'd make my mom happy and attend their church. Looking back, that Easter day was one of the most signifcant days of my life. They had a guest speaker that day, and I'm probably sure that I wouldn't have gone back if he wasn't there. Thats how accurate God works. If it wasn't Easter, I wouldn't have been there. If the guest speaker wasn't there, I probably wouldn't have gone back. Anyway, he spoke a powerful message unlike any I've heard. But then after the message he was up front and was just praying aloud. And for some reason, I knew he was going to call me out. Mind you that I had never seen anything prophetic ever done before. But for some reason, I knew he was going to call me out, and I began to shake a little bit. Well, he walked over in front of where I was sitting(among about 150 people) and pointed to me and said young man will you please come forward. Boy, I didn't know what to think. Like I said, I had never been in that situation before. I went up front and he just began to pray then he spoke things about my life. And it was actually like he had a book about my life in front of him and he was reading the pages. I mean accurate things that no one could know(especially not him since he never seen me). After he finished, I was just so amazed that the Lord cared for me so much that he would speak things to me. I felt such a love that is very hard to describe, it was absolutely incredible. And since that time, I have had such a tremendous desire to know Him. I have had a thirst to study His Word. And I have grown so much. We serve such an awesome God. And He loves us so much. And I think the prophetic can touch people in some amazing ways as I have seen over the last 7 years.

DarkMajin
Dec 10th 2005, 09:59 PM
Banzy: No, haven't heard of those two guys, but I shall research them out. And thank you for your testimony too, I found it quite interesting. Must have been quite an experience. ;)
One question though...when you speak of "prophetic" do you mean predicting something in the future will happen?

ProjectPeter: Well, all I really want to see is an account of a casting out that has the demons acting the way they did in the NT times. I have never seen a single account have that, and I've read a lot of stuff...just have never seen it.
And if the demons were as active as they once were...there would be a lot of them happening, yet...well, the record seems silent.

Concerning my view that they have stopped, I will say I hold a partial preterist view on Revelation (though I'm still learning within it and all), and as of such, I view Mystery Babylon as having been Jerusalem. So the fall of Mystery Babylon was the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. Course, you have to hold this view to for this be acceptable. This passage in Revelation I found to be highly interesting:

Revelation 18:2 (YLT)
and he did cry in might -- a great voice, saying, `Fall, fall did Babylon the great, and she became a habitation of demons, and a hold of every unclean spirit, and a hold of every unclean and hateful bird,

Notice how it says Mystery Babylon became a hold (or prison or jail) for every unclean spirit when she fell? That is how I see the demons having been sealed up back in AD 70. Where? In Israel, yes.

I use this in conjunction with the Zechariah passages I listed before, as these passages seem to refer to a time after Christ's death and resurrection, thus pointing towards AD 70.

Zechariah 13:1-6 (ESV)
13:1 “On that day there shall be a fountain opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and uncleanness. 2 “And on that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will cut off the names of the idols from the land, so that they shall be remembered no more. And also I will remove from the land the prophets and the spirit of uncleanness. 3 And if anyone again prophesies, his father and mother who bore him will say to him, ‘You shall not live, for you speak lies in the name of the Lord.’ And his father and mother who bore him shall pierce him through when he prophesies.
4 “On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies. He will not put on a hairy cloak in order to deceive, 5 but he will say, ‘I am no prophet, I am a worker of the soil, for a man sold me in my youth.’6 And if one asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your back?’he will say, ‘The wounds I received in the house of my friends.’

There may be more that suggests it in the Bible...but right now I just have these.

Banzy
Dec 11th 2005, 10:57 PM
To DarkMajin: In speaking about the prophetic it covers a variety of areas. For me personally, I have a number of prophecies about my calling and purpose. Also, I have heard the prophetic concerning future events. But all of them concern the purposes of God for the earth and for people.

Hopefully this won't take up too much space, but I'll give a testimony of the first time I prophesied.

My family(Dad,Mom,Bro,Myself) went to a conference where a guy was speaking about the prophetic. He did the best job I have heard to date explaining the prophetic. How it was very practical, how he heard from God, etc. etc. He and his wife do this as a team. He explained to us just one example from early on when he began his prophetic ministry.

He and his wife were counselors. One day this woman came into their office to seek advice on whether or not she should get married.(It would have been her third marriage) So, this guy said that he would pray and see if the Lord showed him anything. As he was praying, he saw a old barn with a barn door that was open on the top but closed on the bottom. He thought that was strange and kind of shrugged it off and started over. Well, as he was praying again, he saw the same image, an old barn with the door open on top and closed underneith. So, he wondered, was this God trying to show him something. So, he prayed again and saw the same image.

So, he said to the woman, I don't know if this means anything to you, but I see an image of an old barn with the barn door open on the top with the bottom of it closed. As soon as he said this, the woman began to cry and literally broke down right in front of them. So this guy asked what the image meant. She said that way back when she was just a kid, her father had her and her sister out one day, and on the way home her father stopped at a bar, and was in there most of the day leaving her and her sister outside in the car. After a while, he came out and proceded to drive home. On the way home he got into an accident and she ended up pinned on top of her sister who had been killed in the accident. After the accident they towed the car back to their place and placed it in thier barn. She said that everyday she would walk out to that barn, peek over the barn door and look at the car and say that I hate my father and all men.

Therefore, because of this image the Lord provided to this guy, he was able to see where her problem with men developed. It was only something her and the Lord would know. Then this guy and his wife were able to counsel her to forgive her father and she went on to have a successful marriage.

That was just one of several accounts that he gave of the prophetic. But then he turned to us and said, its your turn. So we were to find someone in the crowd, that we never knew(which was easy for us since we knew no one) and pray for them and see if the Lord gave us anything for them, but only for edification not any life changing things. Well, I turned around to a girl, we held hands and I began to pray. After a couple minutes of praying I shared with her what I thought the Lord was saying. I couldn't believe it but she that was exactly what she had been going through over the last couple of months. I thought, man, thats pretty cool. So, we did it again with someone else. This time this guy said to be more specific and see if you get anything for their ministry. Once again, I began to pray and after a couple of minutes I shared with her what I thought the Lord gave me. This lady began to weep and I thought that I had did something wrong. But she said, no, no, you won't believe it but I have been praying about that for sometime now. And then we did it a third time. For this third guy I actually got an image of him like he was a point guard on a basketball team. He was distributing the ball and making his teammates very successful. So, I explained what I saw to the guy and once again, it was accurate for him. He was actually leading a ministry and was concerned if the decisions he was making were going to lead them in the right direction.

I tell you what that was an quite an eye opening conference. It was truly amazing. I hope that wasn't too long. There are many more examples that I could give that I have seen over the last 7 years. God is working in truly amazing ways, and I'm just glad that I am apart of it.:pp

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 02:32 AM
ProjectPeter: Well, all I really want to see is an account of a casting out that has the demons acting the way they did in the NT times. I have never seen a single account have that, and I've read a lot of stuff...just have never seen it.Sure you have seen it written in this very thread. I wrote it quite a few post back and it was pretty much the same biblical way. Short, made the point. Demon in there, demon out. If you'd like to have a tossed to the floor thrashing around... that's happened as well. No muss... not a lot of fuss... it is done.

How do you see the demons "acting in the NT times?" Folks had some physical infirmities... some acting completly insane... some did witchcraft... some just cried out when Jesus was near. That's a pretty wide group of things we are speaking of.


And if the demons were as active as they once were...there would be a lot of them happening, yet...well, the record seems silent.Again... the record might be quite in the church you hang out in... doubtful they believe in it, just as you don't. Rest assured if you don't believe in it then you ain't going to see it. You wouldn't even be looking for it in the first place to find it.


Concerning my view that they have stopped, I will say I hold a partial preterist view on Revelation (though I'm still learning within it and all), and as of such, I view Mystery Babylon as having been Jerusalem. So the fall of Mystery Babylon was the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. Course, you have to hold this view to for this be acceptable. This passage in Revelation I found to be highly interesting:

Revelation 18:2 (YLT)
and he did cry in might -- a great voice, saying, `Fall, fall did Babylon the great, and she became a habitation of demons, and a hold of every unclean spirit, and a hold of every unclean and hateful bird,

Notice how it says Mystery Babylon became a hold (or prison or jail) for every unclean spirit when she fell? That is how I see the demons having been sealed up back in AD 70. Where? In Israel, yes.

I use this in conjunction with the Zechariah passages I listed before, as these passages seem to refer to a time after Christ's death and resurrection, thus pointing towards AD 70.

Zechariah 13:1-6 (ESV)
13:1 “On that day there shall be a fountain opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and uncleanness. 2 “And on that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will cut off the names of the idols from the land, so that they shall be remembered no more. And also I will remove from the land the prophets and the spirit of uncleanness. 3 And if anyone again prophesies, his father and mother who bore him will say to him, ‘You shall not live, for you speak lies in the name of the Lord.’ And his father and mother who bore him shall pierce him through when he prophesies.
4 “On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies. He will not put on a hairy cloak in order to deceive, 5 but he will say, ‘I am no prophet, I am a worker of the soil, for a man sold me in my youth.’6 And if one asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your back?’he will say, ‘The wounds I received in the house of my friends.’

There may be more that suggests it in the Bible...but right now I just have these.Nothing much I am going to say on this view... this would likely derail the thread pretty badly.

DarkMajin
Dec 12th 2005, 03:27 AM
ProjectPeter: The behavior of the demons I am talking about is how they spoke when they were cast out (when they had the chance to speak). They would actually come out and say Jesus was the Son of God (so much so that Jesus tended to quiet them). The woman who followed Paul kept yelling out that Paul was bringing word about the Son of the Most High (something to that effect).
In other words, when faced with such things, they seemed to lose their resistance, and their penchant for lying. Under different circumstances, they would deny Jesus existed at all, much less admit anything else.
That is the type of behavior I have been looking for in accounts, and I have never found it.

As for what you did say...well, that isn't enough detail I'm afraid. Anyone can say what you said...the truth as some might say, is in the details. Something else I would be curious about is what sort of people were these demoniacs you've encountered.

And it is true if I look at a mentally ill person, I don't think to myself they are demon possessed. There was a difference between lunatics and demoniacs...although I myself am not sure what it is as of yet, unless a demon plainly identifies itself and everything lines up right.

And for the record, I don't belong to a particular church.

As for the Revelation related view I expressed here, I expressed it just so it'd be known...there's no need of course to comment, which would end up off topic. ;)

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 03:48 AM
ProjectPeter: The behavior of the demons I am talking about is how they spoke when they were cast out (when they had the chance to speak). They would actually come out and say Jesus was the Son of God (so much so that Jesus tended to quiet them). The woman who followed Paul kept yelling out that Paul was bringing word about the Son of the Most High (something to that effect).
In other words, when faced with such things, they seemed to lose their resistance, and their penchant for lying. Under different circumstances, they would deny Jesus existed at all, much less admit anything else.
That is the type of behavior I have been looking for in accounts, and I have never found it.Truth be known... we don't have a lot on the various accounts. The whole they didn't lie thing... the accounts we have of Jesus... don't suppose they figured lying to Him would do much good anyway. But honestly... I wouldn't sit there and yap with a demon anyway. Wouldn't figure them much good in the conversation area.

As to the demons coming out saying Jesus was the Son of God... you might want to research that a bit more. They would recognize Jesus before He cast them out... but most accounts simply say they came out... at times they would toss the person down or whatever but they'd nonetheless come out.




As for what you did say...well, that isn't enough detail I'm afraid. Anyone can say what you said...the truth as some might say, is in the details. Something else I would be curious about is what sort of people were these demoniacs you've encountered.Not sure what to tell you on the details. Not much there to say really and certainly nothing that I would tell you that would change your belief on the matter.

As to the type people... no specific recipe for certain people that I know of. It could be anyone for a variety of reasons. Many of those reasons we'll likely never know.




And it is true if I look at a mentally ill person, I don't think to myself they are demon possessed. There was a difference between lunatics and demoniacs...although I myself am not sure what it is as of yet, unless a demon plainly identifies itself and everything lines up right.If you figure it out... let me know what you find.

DarkMajin
Dec 12th 2005, 03:57 AM
ProjectPeter: It's true we don't have many examples of it...just when Jesus spoke to Legion, and when the one woman spoke to Paul, I believe. I'm not saying they do it every time...but it would appear there would be certain circumstances where they did speak. And in both cases they spoke in similar ways.

As for further details...well, I will not ask anymore for any accounts from you...as you seem unwilling to relate them. You keep saying nothing you say will change my mind...you really don't know that, you know, you're simply assuming. I will take it then that you simply don't want people to know about them, or to believe in them either. After all, if you relate nothing to anyone, how would anyone ever know?

Incidentally, the impression I got from the NT was that demons perhaps were attracted to children and ascetics, perhaps.

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 04:18 AM
ProjectPeter: It's true we don't have many examples of it...just when Jesus spoke to Legion, and when the one woman spoke to Paul, I believe. I'm not saying they do it every time...but it would appear there would be certain circumstances where they did speak. And in both cases they spoke in similar ways.

As for further details...well, I will not ask anymore for any accounts from you...as you seem unwilling to relate them. You keep saying nothing you say will change my mind...you really don't know that, you know, you're simply assuming. I will take it then that you simply don't want people to know about them, or to believe in them either. After all, if you relate nothing to anyone, how would anyone ever know?

Incidentally, the impression I got from the NT was that demons perhaps were attracted to children and ascetics, perhaps.Actually the two accounts and what they spoke were very different. And I am sure there are circumstances where they speak sure enough.

I am not assuming you won't change your mind but simply going on the words you have used so far in the thread. As to wanting people to know about them... if that was the case then I figure I wouldn't have posted about this to you at all... let alone say that I've been involved with it before eh? As to wanting people to know they exist... I'd rather tell them about Jesus as opposed to demons sure enough and that is generally my means of discussion with folks. If something demonic crops up then I don't sit down over coffee and discuss demonology with them nor would I recommend folks do that. Deal with the demon and drive on telling them about Christ.

As to the attraction issue... not sure where you would think that because the Scripture doesn't speak of their religious dogma and the account of it being in children doesn't mean they were little kids and there were only a few accounts that mentioned children anyway. I think it much more reasonable to say that it was a wide variety of folks... from children to adults... from the religious to the heathen.

DarkMajin
Dec 12th 2005, 07:46 AM
Banzy: Thank you for that testimony you gave as well. Sounds quite interesting. And indeed, I think I was thinking a different sort of "prophetic" than what you were speaking. What you experienced I'd almost liken to a sort of mind connection through the Spirit.

ProjectPeter: Well, to compare the two...let's just put them up, shall we? ;)

Here's the woman Paul enountered:

Acts 16:16-18 (ESV)
16 As we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners much gain by fortune-telling. 17 She followed Paul and us, crying out, “These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation.” 18 And this she kept doing for many days. Paul, having become greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.

Mark 5:6-7
6 And when he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and fell down before him. 7 And crying out with a loud voice, he said, “What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I adjure you by God, do not torment me.”

Notice the similarities?

Now then, where I get my suggestion that demons seemed to prefer children and ascetics...I glean from a few snippets of scripture.

Now, I don't need to list to the areas where children were involved...since we know that happened.

Now, for their interest in ascetics, rather than say, sensual people...here's some interesting stuff:

Matthew 11:18-19
18 For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon.’ 19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds.”

Notice how demon possession seemed to be associated with a lack of eating or drinking (this includes alcohol).

And here about Legion:

Mark 5:3-5
3 He lived among the tombs. And no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain, 4 for he had often been bound with shackles and chains, but he wrenched the chains apart, and he broke the shackles in pieces. No one had the strength to subdue him. 5 Night and day among the tombs and on the mountains he was always crying out and bruising himself with stones.

Notice how it says he was brusing himself with stones? (on a separate note, we can observe it's possible he was not sleeping at all.)

This lines up quite a lot with asceticism...abstaining from drink, fasting, and once possessed imitating self-flagellation. The demons didn't go after the gluttonous, or the drunkards, or the lechers. They seemed to really like anyone who was holding ascetic qualities. Even Paul later warned against ascetic practices.
This may also point as to why Mary Magdalene had been possessed...since she was not a prostitute, as the church later painted her as.

Demoniacs have no interests in eating, drinking, or sensual pleasures.

Christinme
Dec 12th 2005, 09:01 AM
Here is an experience that I had:

It happened when I was about 10 or 11 and I know it was this age because it happened when I was in my bedroom that I had only during that time. It went on for I’m not sure, a few weeks to a few months. It started out as one voice and then became many voices. I did not recognize the voice/voices, it/they did not sound like my speaking voice or my thinking "voice". The voices seemed to come from outside me and not from within. I at 10 or 11 years old considered if it could be my subconscious and also wondered if it could be something demonic. I did not tell anyone, I thought that others would think I was crazy and I did know that I was not crazy or at least I was not going to allow myself to go crazy. When it started it was one voice and it had a condemning tone and would repeat over and over "You're bad". After some time maybe a couple weeks or so it changed to many voices and the tone was more enticing and they would repeat over and over "It's good to be bad, join us." I pretty much ignored the voices and was not really afraid of them. I didn't avoid going into my room. I did think it was very strange though. Finally one day I spoke to them and I did it outloud. I said something to the effect of "Look if you want to keep this up that's fine, however you are wasting your time because I am not going to listen to you and I am not going to join you. Maybe you might want to realize that and go away because you are wasting your time." After that I went back to ignoring them and finally the voices went away.

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 03:36 PM
The bible.org website is a great resource for questions like this one. I list the link below to an article by Bob Deffinbaugh, a solid writer. I also list his arguments concerning the 2 main texts used by those who argue over whether or not the charasmatic gifts were to cease (and have ceased) or not. (Personally, I am not one of those. I've got my opinions on it, which I'll share here eventually... hey, since when was I hesitant to share my opinion? But this is not a biggie for me.) I also listed his conclusion, FYI. I think he has a balanced approach:

http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=2248


1 Cor 13:8-10

1 Cor 13:8-10 says that gifts of prophecy will be done away, tongues will cease and knowledge will be done away ... when the perfect comes. Both sides use this verse for support. Charismatics say that the perfect is the return of Jesus at His second coming, therefore, tongues, prophecy, etc. will continue until that time. Some cessationists have taught that the perfect is the Bible (i.e., the completion of the canon). If you take it to mean the completion of the canon, that makes for a very neat package that proves cessationism, but it is very doubtful that Paul is talking about the completion of the canon. What Paul is talking about in the context is our imperfect knowledge and how that will change when the perfect comes. Understanding the “perfect” to be the completed canon implies that Scripture is only sufficient when we have the completed canon. Just having the OT or a few letters from Paul was not enough. I don’t think anyone wants to say that. I certainly don’t get that impression when I read the Psalms. And the prophets didn’t excuse the people’s wickedness because they didn’t have the completed canon. I doubt that Paul even had the concept that there would be a completed NT canon some day. He thought Jesus would be back in his life time. Also, in the context, it implies that when we have the completed canon, we will no longer know only partially. Our knowledge will then be complete. That obviously isn’t so. I think we have to conclude that “the perfect” refers to the return of Christ. Therefore, this verse doesn’t prove that miraculous gifts will cease when the last book is added to the Bible. BUT, and a very important BUT, it also doesn’t prove that they will continue until Jesus returns as Continuationists say. Paul does say these gifts “will pass away,” and the Greek emphasizes that tongues will “cease,” so I would say that it argues more for cessationism than for continuation, but that doesn’t tell us when they will pass away. It doesn’t say they will pass away in the first century. We will have to look elsewhere for support.



Heb 2:3-4

The context is this: These Jewish Christians are wanting to return to the old Jewish law. The writer of the book of Hebrews is trying to convince them not to. Part of his argument is that in the same way that the law was confirmed by supernatural signs (vs 2)19, so also was the gospel about Jesus confirmed by supernatural signs. Therefore it is also from God and supercedes the old.

Both Continuationists and Cessationists use this verse for support. The debate about the grammar in this verse. In the statement: “God, bearing witness by signs and wonders and various miracles…” the word “bearing witness” is a present participle. Continuationists argue that since this is a present participle, the miracles were still being worked among the readers of Hebrews.20 The problem with this is that 90% of the time, participles in a genitive absolute construction are temporal and linked to the main verb. Our main verb in this passage is the aorist verb “confirmed.” Aorist tense means past tense. Thus the “bearing witness” should be understood to be simultaneous with the apostles attestation of the message by signs and wonders. In other words, those who heard (the Lord first hand, i.e. the apostles) confirmed their message by performing signs and wonders.

What about the “us” in verse 3? Undoubtedly, there were many first generation believers in the congregation that had witnessed the miracles performed by the apostles. The “us” doesn’t require that all the people witnessed the miracles, just that some of them had.

So, the verse does refer to miracles worked among the readers of Hebrews. But it does not say that the miracles were still occurring. It also does not say that the Hebrew readers were performing signs and wonders. The emphasis is that this was all past tense.

In fact, the writer of Hebrews could have made his argument much stronger if he had just pointed to miracles currently taking place among the Hebrews. Instead, he can only point to miracles performed by the apostles. Since he didn’t point to their current experience, the logic is that miracles must have ceased by then. Compare Gal 3:5, written much earlier. There Paul points to miracles occurring among the readers as proof that the new system of faith is superior to the old system of law. Why didn’t the writer of Hebrews do the same? I recognize that this is an argument from silence, and we have to be very careful when making such an argument, because one can argue almost anything from silence, but to me this silence is deafening. The problem is Continuationists can’t hear it.

This verse is also significant in that it shows that the purpose of signs and wonders was one of authenticating that the messengers and their new revelation were from God.


Summary

Well, I’ve just shown that some of the most used verses to prove cessationism are also used to prove the continuation of the miraculous gifts. I think Hebrews 2:3-4 is pretty strong for cessationism, but it doesn’t prove it. What are we to do? I think we could look at the historical argument.


The Argument from the closed Canon

Continuationists argue that none of the spiritual gifts have ceased. At the same time mainstream Continuationists would all agree that we have a completed canon. No new inspired revelation is being given today to be added to the end of our Bible. The gift of apostle and prophet involved the giving of revelation which was recorded in scripture. If we aren’t receiving new revelation, then at the least there is some measure of discontinuity or cessationism. Either the revelatory gifts have changed in quality or they have ceased. If those gifts have ceased, then why can’t other gifts cease? Especially those gifts that typically accompanied the messenger and new message to authenticate them as being from God.

The continuationist argues that they haven’t ceased, they just changed in quality. That brings us to our next point.


Summary

We could discuss this issue for the next six months and not solve the debate. Our purpose is not to prove that miracles don’t happen. It is to put miracles in perspective. We must remember that God can do anything He wants, with anyone He wants, anytime He wants. There are plenty of modern day stories of miraculous events in which God obviously got directly involved in a situation. We need to be careful not to become pharisaical and say this is what God cannot do, what God can do, or what God must do, etc. Miraculous things do happen, even today, but the question is whether or not people are going around performing miracles at their will, receiving direct revelation from God or speaking in tongues.

After saying all this, I realize that if you have personally experienced or know someone who has experienced tongues, miraculous healing or visions from God, then none of what we’ve said matters. What I want you to walk away with is the emphasis of Scripture on the other gifts and on applying Scripture.

OK, now I'll post a few thoughts regarding the Greek involved here in the next post. But let me emphasize that I do not intend to get drawn into a debate on this... let's focus on the Word of God and seeing people brought to Christ. I can't know my charasmatic brotehr orsister's heart nor what they have experienced, and I'm certainly not going to attempt to judge it. IMO the question of whether the charasmatic gifts have ceased or not has not been absolutely answered in scripture. I also have an opinion that many gifts have ceased. The gift of prophecy, for one, has ceased. (Unless you do not believe in a closed canon or have a different definition of prophecy than I do, you'll agree with that.) I intend to focus on people and the Word of God, and I have absolutely no concern/fear of having "missed out" in some way. But the Word of God must be the standard we use in trying to deal with issues such as this one, and IMO it is not adamantly certain one way or another. Deffinbaugh resorted to the historical approach to draw his conclusion ultimately.

BD

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 03:38 PM
Christinme


ProjectPeter
Again the context of that being Christ just is not there.

The gender gets you.
It is in the neuter gender, it cannot refer to the coming of the person of Christ, a masculine noun. It has to refer to a object of no gender. there is no masculine article thus it is not Christ.

It refers to the complete revelation of the Cannon of Scripture.
Once the whole Cannon was in writing, the gifts of prophecy and knowledge that had gradually revealed portions of mystery doctrine would be terminated.

Again

We must notice that the gender of the Greek to teleion will not allow this interpretation.
It is a neuter noun, which means that it cannot be translated as referring to an adult person or a “that which.”

Jesus, as an adult, was always referred to in the masculine gender.
He is a person, not a thing.
Thus, He is not a “that” but a “He.”Centurionoflight,

There are a few issues here.

First, it is true that Christ (hO XRISTOS) is masculine in gender. (BTW, neuter is not the absence of gender, but is a gender itself) What Centurionofflight is referring to is the antecedent. The antecedent must agree in plurality and gender. I have used this argument to show that in Ephesians 2:8, 9 that it does not say that "faith" (PISTIS) is a gift, since it (PISTIS) is feminine and its antecedent must be the same. The pronoun used there is neuter. But in that instance there is no clear antecedent, which has led many to believe that it is referring to the concept of salvation, though the noun is not used there. I agree with this, since the neuter is often used to refer to concepts.

IMO that is what is happening here. Again there is no clear antecedent. Again the antecedent must be neuter. IMO it is neuter to refer to a concept. Now the fact that XRISTOS is masculine does not mean that it could not refer to Christ, and that is not even an antecedent available since it isn't used in the nearby context. Again here we do not find a clear-cut neuter antecedent.

A common view, as you have expressed, is that it refers to the Word of God being "complete." This is a legitimate possibility. But Deffinbaugh gave some good arguments for why this is not very likely. First, what that would mean is that we will never gain any more knowledge of God than we presently have! I think we would all agree that when we receive our new bodies at the return of Christ that we will know much more fully than it is possible for us to now know, so how could that be "that which is perfect?" 1 John 3:1ff deals with that.

Also, where in the context does the Word come in? Again, the expression "?` e?? µe´???? ?ata?????´seta?" - "that which is in part shall be done away with/cancelled/abolished/cease" seems to indicate an abrupt sort of change, which the 2nd coming would fit quite well. The canon was certainly not completed in such a manner. It is also argued that Paul himself likely did not anticipate the completion of inspired scripture. If he did, nothing in his writings would indicate that.

So the question remains, could this be referring to the return of Christ? Yes it could, and IMO that is probably the best fit here. You see, hO XRISTOS is masculine, but the return of Christ as an event would fit very nicely. As I said before, there are no neuter nouns in the context that could be the antecedent, so just as in Ephesians 2 we should look for some concept. The 2nd coming of Christ fits quite nicely, IMO.

It makes more sense that when Christ returns that the "perfect" will have come. (Perfect not referring to Christ necessarily, but to the knowledge we will gain then, or to the perfect knowledge of Christ which will be available to us then like never before.) But IMO one thing is clear... the Word of God is not the antecedent. (And note that both LOGOS and RHMA, the 2 words used in the NT to refer to the Word, are masculine, as is XRISTOS, so the same argument could be made for the Word not being the antecedent as you used for XRISTOS. If it's good for the gander it's good for the goose... oh, don't look for any goose or gander antecedents there... I was just trying to be humorous. And that's "gander," not "gender.") But the Word of God just doesn't make sense nor does it fit the context, IMO. It also makes us draw some illogical conclusions.

The neuter is often used to refer to a concept. In such a case, the gender of the antecedent is not present and it doesn't matter what the gender is. In the instance of Ephesians 2 I referenced before SWTNRIA is also feminine, not neuter. But that isn't an issue since the referent is a concept. (Some say it refers to the full-orb concept of being saved by grace through faith - my position there) IMO that is precisely what is happening here, since we also do not have a neuter antecedent to reference.

The concept to which it refers is the 2nd coming of Christ. Others say it refers to the final consummation the kingdom of God. That's a real possibility.

I have also heard the establishment of the church as that which is perfect. But again, does anyone really think that the existing body of Christ is... perfect?! :P

Another grammatical argument employed by those who say the the gifts have ceased is that the verb used to refer to the passing of prophecy and knowledge is passive in voice, while the term used for the ceasing of tongues is middle in voice. Some say that this must mean that tongues will cease after the days of the apostles but before the cessation of prophecy and knowledge. I think that's making too much of a middle voice. IMO the cessation arguments are more inferences than clear statements in scripture.

Others have argued that the languages spoken were all Jewish dialects and that tongues was prophesied for Jews to speak in Joel, and hence ceased after AD70 - the destruction of Jerusalem. But the Samaritans and Gentiles were introduced into the body of Christ through the evidence of tongues, right? So that argument won't work either, IMO.

So as I see it, we do not have grammar as either saying yah or nay.

That being said, I do agree with Centurionofflight that the charasmatic gifts do seem to have ceased, at least temporarily. They probably did cease around 70AD, or more likely after the death of the apostle John - the last apostle. But that's just my best guess. You guys ought to read Deffinbaugh's historical reasoning.

There are some hints here and there in scripture, but they're just hints. (It is my opinion that just prior to the rapture/2nd coming of Christ that they will return... just a guess there.) The danger of the charasmatic gifts is that there comes a tendency to look for something more supernatural or visually miraculous and to not see the tremendous miraculous working of our God regularly today. I don't mean present-day miracles, though I am certainly not excluding them. I mean the miracle of the new birth, for one example.

I have been told that if I haven't spoken in tongues that I am missing out and need to experience a "2nd blessing." Now... if we want to discuss the baptism of the Holy Spirit I am definitely prepared to argue there, though not really interested. Romans 8:9 says that anyone who is not indwelt by the Spirit is not saved. And 1 Corinthians 12:13 makes it clear that the baptism of the Spirit is something that happens to all believers - placing them into the body of Christ.

The concept of the 2nd blessing of the Spirit has caused a lot of harm to young believers over the years, though not intended.

When people ask me, I just tell them that I do not have the gift of speaking in tongues, nor am I really all that interested because my present experience of the Lord is just too great a gift. Those who say that I am missing out cannot support that from scripture. :P

Are the charasmatic gifts still around? Well, I won't say "no" based on 1 Corinthians 13. But personally I am very doubtful. Though one text nearby has kept me from being stronger than that...

1 Corinthians 14:39, 40 Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in other languages. But everything must be done decently and in order.

Those of you who have attended afterglow services... have you ever seen it done decently and in order? So if I see a believer speaking in some human language which he does not know, I'm not going to call it a sham. But the Greek word translated "tongues" (GLWSSIA) does not refer to mysterious supernatural languages. If we look at what happened at Pentecost, it was clearly human languages there, and I don't see any evidence why it should be different since then.

But like I said, I don't really like to argue such things. So I'll discuss whether or not 1 Corinthians 13 refers to tongues ceasing, but I don't want to get into the rest. Ask Toolman... I think he has a few thoughts to share on this. :D I think that anyone who's seen the abuse of the "charasmatic gifts" probably does as well.

My focus is not "don't focus on the gifts." It is "do focus on the Word."

FWIW,

BD

Centurionoflight
Dec 12th 2005, 05:02 PM
BadDog


So the question remains, could this be referring to the return of Christ? Yes it could, and IMO that is probably the best fit here. You see, hO XRISTOS is masculine, but the return of Christ as an event would fit very nicely. As I said before, there are no neuter nouns in the context that could be the antecedent, so just as in Ephesians 2 we should look for some concept. The 2nd coming of Christ fits quite nicely, IMO.

It would fit like a square peg in a round hole, meaning one has to break off other points of doctrine to get that conclusion.

Christ is not even the topic in 1 cor 13, it is gifts that being the partial gift of knowledge that wasnt complete.
The knowledge we have today is MORE COMPLETE than what Paul had. He NEVER read the book of Revelations, and a few other of the books.

Again as I posted before.
And will probally have to repost 5 more times.



The coming of “that which is perfect” is IN a age of when faith and hope abides and that tongues, prophecies, and other gifts, were to be ‘done away.’

That such is in this age of the church, is when faith and hope abide.

Faith, in the next life, will end in sight, it is the ‘conviction of things not seen’ (Heb. 11:1);

Hope will end in realization when heaven and eternal life are finally possessed.

Paul Stated that one does not hope for that which he has (Rom. 8:24).

It is therefore, in this age, while faith and hope abide, that the gifts peculiar to the early church were to be abolished, and the time marked by the appearance of the perfect (complete) revelation that being the Completed scipture.”


Conclusion: To keep total context of the chapter, It in no way refers to Christs return.

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 05:27 PM
Banzy: Thank you for that testimony you gave as well. Sounds quite interesting. And indeed, I think I was thinking a different sort of "prophetic" than what you were speaking. What you experienced I'd almost liken to a sort of mind connection through the Spirit.

ProjectPeter: Well, to compare the two...let's just put them up, shall we? ;)

Here's the woman Paul enountered:

Acts 16:16-18 (ESV)
16 As we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners much gain by fortune-telling. 17 She followed Paul and us, crying out, “These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation.” 18 And this she kept doing for many days. Paul, having become greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.

Mark 5:6-7
6 And when he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and fell down before him. 7 And crying out with a loud voice, he said, “What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I adjure you by God, do not torment me.”

Notice the similarities?

Now then, where I get my suggestion that demons seemed to prefer children and ascetics...I glean from a few snippets of scripture.

Now, I don't need to list to the areas where children were involved...since we know that happened.

Now, for their interest in ascetics, rather than say, sensual people...here's some interesting stuff:

Matthew 11:18-19
18 For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon.’ 19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds.”

Notice how demon possession seemed to be associated with a lack of eating or drinking (this includes alcohol).

And here about Legion:

Mark 5:3-5
3 He lived among the tombs. And no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain, 4 for he had often been bound with shackles and chains, but he wrenched the chains apart, and he broke the shackles in pieces. No one had the strength to subdue him. 5 Night and day among the tombs and on the mountains he was always crying out and bruising himself with stones.

Notice how it says he was brusing himself with stones? (on a separate note, we can observe it's possible he was not sleeping at all.)

This lines up quite a lot with asceticism...abstaining from drink, fasting, and once possessed imitating self-flagellation. The demons didn't go after the gluttonous, or the drunkards, or the lechers. They seemed to really like anyone who was holding ascetic qualities. Even Paul later warned against ascetic practices.
This may also point as to why Mary Magdalene had been possessed...since she was not a prostitute, as the church later painted her as.

Demoniacs have no interests in eating, drinking, or sensual pleasures.Well I figure it had more to do than with just John's eating and drinking that they called him demon possessed. As to all that other stuff... one can make something into most anything if they want to I suppose. I am fairly certain that the intent of those passages wasn't to clue us that the demon possessed folk are either children or hardcore religious types.

As to the similarity between the demoniac and the slave girl... I really see no similarity at all. The fact that they both recognize the Lord and who He is... pretty much stands to reason I'd think. They recognize the authority that Jesus had as the Son and they recognize the authority that Paul had as a Servant of God... that hasn't changed to this day.

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 05:40 PM
So the question remains, could this be referring to the return of Christ? Yes it could, and IMO that is probably the best fit here. You see, hO XRISTOS is masculine, but the return of Christ as an event would fit very nicely. As I said before, there are no neuter nouns in the context that could be the antecedent, so just as in Ephesians 2 we should look for some concept. The 2nd coming of Christ fits quite nicely, IMO.


BadDog

It would fit like a square peg in a round hole, meaning one has to break off other points of doctrine to get that conclusion.

Christ is not even the topic in 1 cor 13, it is gifts that being the partial gift of knowledge that wasnt complete.
The knowledge we have today is MORE COMPLETE than what Paul had. He NEVER read the book of Revelations, and a few other of the books.

Again as I posted before.
And will probally have to repost 5 more times.


Centurionofflight,

Well let's consider part of that context...


1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I will know fully, as I am fully known.

I think we agree that some event is being referred to here as Paul refers to "now" and "then," and the "then" has clearly not occured yet.

Now since the canon is closed, your interpretation would require:

1 - That we see "face-to-face."
2 - That we know fully - implying that when we have the completed canon, we will no longer know only partially. :rolleyes:
3 - Understanding the "perfect" to be the completed NT canon implies that scripture is only sufficient when we have the completed canon. So was Paul's letter to the Romans not very effective until the canon was complete?!

Has that happened yet? Obviously not. Does God's Word give us a hint of what knowing fully will be like? Yes. But we're far from there.

And you're misinterpreting my argument. When did I say or imply that Christ was the topic of the chapter? The topic is gifts - the proper use of gifts - which is through love. A time aspect was alluded to, and we're trying to figure out what that time aspect could be. You are opting for the time of the completion of the NT canon, while I'm opting for the time of the return of the Christ to set up His kingdom. And there is some time in the context, we're just not sure what.

No the fact that Revelation had not been written, nor had likely any of John's letters, is great. But I don't think that I have more knowledge than Paul. :P He received his by revelation. He visited the 3rd heavens (whatever that is) and couldn't even talk about it. But I understand your point. The NT canon became more complete after Paul wrote the letter to the Corinthians we are discussing.

But you have yet to conclusively demonstrate that "that which is perfect comes" refers to the completion of the Bible. I have given a few reasons why it just doesn't make sense that this was what Paul was referencing. Saying that the return of Christ to set up His kingdom is a square peg in a round hole is just ridicule - not an argument.



The coming of “that which is perfect” is IN a age of when faith and hope abides and that tongues, prophecies, and other gifts, were to be ‘done away.’

That such is in this age of the church, is when faith and hope abide.

Faith, in the next life, will end in sight, it is the ‘conviction of things not seen’ (Heb. 11:1);

Hope will end in realization when heaven and eternal life are finally possessed.

Paul Stated that one does not hope for that which he has (Rom. 8:24).

It is therefore, in this age, while faith and hope abide, that the gifts peculiar to the early church were to be abolished, and the time marked by the appearance of the perfect (complete) revelation that being the Completed scipture.”


Conclusion: To keep total context of the chapter, It in no way refers to Christs return.
The coming of that which is perfect being being when tongues... were to be done away with... why should that not be during the kingdom?

This is not to say that those gifts have not been done away with. It simply points out that the time referenced was the return of Christ to set up His kingdom.

Paul said that faith, hope and love abide (remain), but the greatest is love. At the time of Paul writing this letter faith, hope and love remained. That's all that was said. Also, why need biblical "hope" cease? Biblical hope is a confidence that what God promised He will deliver. We will continue to have "hope" that this will continue to be so. And will we not trust Him throughout eternity?

watchinginawe
Dec 12th 2005, 05:53 PM
I also have an opinion that many gifts have ceased. The gift of prophecy, for one, has ceased. (Unless you do not believe in a closed canon or have a different definition of prophecy than I do, you'll agree with that.)I am not wanting to debate either, but there is a lot of confusion in this thread regarding prophecy and whether anything prophetic is by nature scripture. It would seem that your next post shows the obvious answer. Does Paul exhort the body at large to deliver scripture? How much lost Canon is there just among the Corinthian body? Or was there never any prophecy given at Corinth? Is Paul exhorting the Corinthians at large to desire the Spiritual Gift to write scirpture? I suggest that prophesying is the act of revelation (understanding) given an individual by the Spirit. We clearly put too much emphasis on "declaration of the future" in regards to prophecy as opposed to "declaration of principle" (I just made that up so I reserve the right to come to full enlightenment at a later time :lol: ). To give an example, study Nathan the Prophet in David's time. A prophet is: Called by God, instructed by God, obedient to God. I am sure that is an incomplete list but my point is that if God gives you or I a message to preach we are his prophet if we are obedient. However, that doesn't mean the Canon of Scripture is going to be opened up for the "Book of BadDog" or the "Book of Awe". :rofl:Has God quit calling? Has God quit instructing?

To suggest that prophecy is no longer needed because revelation of scripture is complete denies the nature of prophecy that Paul was talking about.

I Corinthians 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

Consider Paul's epistle to the Thessalonians. Is Paul exhorting them to accept the prophecies of the Old Testament? Or is he talking about prophesyings among the body at that time? How would these have been given? Are we to prove scripture? Can we quench the very Spirit that produces prophesyings by despising the operation of the Spirit?

I Thessalonians 5:
14 Now we exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly, comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men.

15 See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.

16 Rejoice evermore.

17 Pray without ceasing.

18 In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.

19 Quench not the Spirit.

20 Despise not prophesyings.

21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
I intend to focus on people and the Word of God, and I have absolutely no concern/fear of having "missed out" in some way. But the Word of God must be the standard we use in trying to deal with issues such as this one, and IMO it is not adamantly certain one way or another. Deffinbaugh resorted to the historical approach to draw his conclusion ultimately.Turning to the word of God regarding prophecy, do we see a standard exercised that does not make prophecy synonymous with scripture? I am going to give a "thread" of scripture regarding Paul going to Jerusalem and on to Rome to demonstrate how some prophesyings are given. One might argue that they are in scripture but there is a verse given that "everywhere" Paul goes the the Spirit speaks the same and we have the prophesyings of Phillip's daughters and so not all prophecy is recorded in scripture (just wanted to deal with that one right off).

Acts 19:
21 After these things were ended, Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been there, I must also see Rome.

22 So he sent into Macedonia two of them that ministered unto him, Timotheus and Erastus; but he himself stayed in Asia for a season.


Acts 20:
22 And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there:

23 Save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me.

24 But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.

25 And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more.
...
36 And when he had thus spoken, he kneeled down, and prayed with them all.

37 And they all wept sore, and fell on Paul's neck, and kissed him,

38 Sorrowing most of all for the words which he spake, that they should see his face no more. And they accompanied him unto the ship.


Acts 21:
3 Now when we had discovered Cyprus, we left it on the left hand, and sailed into Syria, and landed at Tyre: for there the ship was to unlade her burden.

4 And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.

5 And when we had accomplished those days, we departed and went our way; and they all brought us on our way, with wives and children, till we were out of the city: and we kneeled down on the shore, and prayed.

6 And when we had taken our leave one of another, we took ship; and they returned home again.


Acts 21:
8 And the next day we that were of Paul's company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him.

9 And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.

10 And as we tarried there many days, there came down from Judaea a certain prophet, named Agabus.

11 And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.

12 And when we heard these things, both we, and they of that place, besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.

13 Then Paul answered, What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.

14 And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done.


Acts 23:
11 And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome.


I find the scripture (prophesying) given in Acts 21:4 particularly interesting. For what purpose would the Spirit give such an utterance? Note how it is worded. That Paul should not go up to Jerusalem. Was it false prophecy? Was Paul disobedient to the Spirit? Or was the message given for instruction to illustrate Paul's obedience in the face of certain persecution?

Gifts of the Spirit: That which the Holy Ghost gives. Gift: Grace of God, Jesus Christ, Holy Ghost. Have the Gifts of God ceased? Has Grace subsided? As I posted originally in this thread, I believe most get caught up with the idea that affirming the Gifts of the Spirit means affirming "tongues". Therefore, their acknowledgment gets caught up in doctrine instead of the Spirit, the Spirit is quenched. Perhaps God meant it this way. Otherwise, why would Paul have to exhort to "quench not the Spirit" and to "despise not prophesyings". The Gifts of the Spirit must operate where the Spirit is not quenched. Despite Paul's declaration that he would not have us be ignorant concerning the operation of the Spirit within the body, we nevertheless develop doctrine to both acknowledge Paul's teaching but remain ignorant of it's application.

I started to post something similar to this several times in this thread but backed off because of length and time. Now I did it and look at the length. Ughh. As usual, the Lord showed me a thing or two so if for no other purpose it was worth it to me.

God Bless!

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 05:56 PM
[I]Conclusion: To keep total context of the chapter, It in no way refers to Christs return.
BTW, where did you come up with your username? Cool.

You have not demonstrated that the context will not allow an event such as the return of Christ. I have given a few reasons why your suggestion that the time referenced is the completion of the canon has its problems.. It would be good if you addressed some of those.

BTW, as I said earlier, I don't really like to argue this stuff. I've made my comments. You guys know that IMO the gifts have ceased, though I refuse to be adament about it. I posted these last few posts on request of someone in this forum. I'm through with this discussion now.

There are many solid theologians who hold to COF's position guys. It just doesn't seem very likely to me.

You guys have fun. :P Me - I just don't think it's worth it. If I thought that it was clearly taught in scripture, I'd hang in there. I don't, so I won't. I do hope I have clarified the grammatical stuff though. If someone tries to debunk what I posted on that, could someone let me know?

Thx,

BD

watchinginawe
Dec 12th 2005, 06:08 PM
Well I figure it had more to do than with just John's eating and drinking that they called him demon possessed.We don't have to read much into it, if John the Baptist came today he would certainly be accused of the same:

Matthew 3:
4 And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.


I think it was the leather girdle that brought the accusation myself. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

God Bless!

Centurionoflight
Dec 12th 2005, 06:12 PM
BadDog




1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I will know fully, as I am fully known.

I think we agree that some event is being referred to here as Paul refers to "now" and "then," and the "then" has clearly not occured yet.

Had not occured at the point paul wrote it, it has occured since he wrote it.





1 - That we see "face-to-face."

When you look into Gods word, you see Christ face to face.

Paul didnt have that complete glass

Hence "“But now we see by means of a mirror, an obscure form.” "

The obscure form, as it were, is Christ.
The mirror is the Word of God and the only way you can see Christ in this world at all is through the Word of God.
And the more you know about the Word the more you know about Christ.
The less you know about the Word the less you know about Christ.
The whole point is that we can only see Christ through the Word.



2 - That we know fully - implying that when we have the completed canon, we will no longer know only partially.

We have the COMPLETE cannon.

2 tim 3
16 every Writing [is] God-breathed, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for setting aright, for instruction that [is] in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be fitted -- for every good work having been completed.

With the bible we are completely fitted.
It is complete.
There is nothing more in doctrine we need that is not in the bible.




3 - 3 - Understanding the "perfect" to be the completed NT canon implies that scripture is only sufficient when we have the completed canon. So was Paul's letter to the Romans not very effective until the canon was complete?!

Hence why they had the temporory gifts to fill in until the cannon was complete.



His kingdom is a square peg in a round hole is just ridicule - not an argument.

It is valid, cause you have to knock off a few doctrines to get it to fit.






The coming of that which is perfect being being when tongues... were to be done away with... why should that not be during the kingdom?[1]

This is not to say that those gifts have not been done away with. It simply points out that the time referenced was the return of Christ to set up His kingdom.[2]

[1] Because tongues was a SIGN to the jews of disipline, that which occured in 70 ad. THus when the event of a sign occured the need for the sign ended.

1 Corinthians 14:22
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

[2] Nothing about the kingdom or Christ is there at all. gender doesnt support it nor does the context.


Conclusion
1) the gender is neutral thus not about Christs return.
2) When Christ returns, we no longer need to continue in faith and hope.
13 But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.

This abiding passes the ending of the fore mentioned gifts.

3) with the bible that which is in part,is complete.

Centurionoflight
Dec 12th 2005, 06:15 PM
BadDog



BTW, where did you come up with your username? Cool.


matt 8

8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.
9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.
10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

Centurion Of Light

To have faith that needs no signs, emotions, or tricks .
To believe things will be, because God stated they would be.

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 06:22 PM
We don't have to read much into it, if John the Baptist came today he would certainly be accused of the same:

Matthew 3:
4 And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.


I think it was the leather girdle that brought the accusation myself. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

God Bless!
Of that there is no doubt! :D

DarkMajin
Dec 12th 2005, 07:06 PM
Well, the text doesn't say anything about his appearance in relation to being though he had a demon. It at least connects a lack of drinking and eating to have being possessed, thereby as I said, demoniacs have no interest in eating, drinking, or sensual pleasures.
I see no reason to interject idle speculation about his appearance...it's irrelevant.

And ProjectPeter, what I was illustrating really was that I'd like to see a modern account that bears a similarity to those two. You say they continue to this day, but apparently only a chosen few seem to have knowledge of it, according to you.

watchinginawe
Dec 12th 2005, 07:16 PM
Well, the text doesn't say anything about his appearance in relation to being though he had a demon. It at least connects a lack of drinking and eating to have being possessed, thereby as I said, demoniacs have no interest in eating, drinking, or sensual pleasures.
I see no reason to interject idle speculation about his appearance...it's irrelevant.

And ProjectPeter, what I was illustrating really was that I'd like to see a modern account that bears a similarity to those two. You say they continue to this day, but apparently only a chosen few seem to have knowledge of it, according to you.DM, perhaps the verse says that they accused John the Baptist of having a devil without cause? For instance, "even though John the Baptist lived as a Holy man, you still accused him of having a devil". Not, "even though John the Baptist acted like a person with a devil, he was a Holy man".

God Bless!

DarkMajin
Dec 12th 2005, 07:25 PM
Well, here's the full thing:

Matthew 11:18-19 (ESV)
18 For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon.’ 19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’

Luke 7:33-34
33 For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ 34 The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’

It seems pretty plain. If you came eating and drinking...you wouldn't be considered possessed. But then people may think you're a glutton and drunkard. ;)

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 07:30 PM
BadDog

matt 8

8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.
9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.
10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

Centurion Of Light

To have faith that needs no signs, emotions, or tricks .
To believe things will be, because God stated they would be.COL,

Uh, sorry. Just saw that it was Centurion of Light... not FLight! :rolleyes: Sorry about that.

I do want to be clear that I respect the person who asked me to comment on the Greek here. I felt that I couldn't do so without making my position overall clear, though. I don't really like to debate this issue too much, as IMO it is not clear from scripture. I did not mean for this to come across as if I was put-out to post what I did, FWIW. I wasn't. I just do not want to spend a lot of time on it.

I respect your reasons for viewing this as the Word of God having been completed, though I do not think that was what Paul was saying here. It would be nice if it was, because it bothers me when people say that they can have a modern-day prophecy which has value on a level with the Bible. No way. IMO all NT scripture was based on Apostolic origin - not that an apostle actually wrote all of the NT. But since all of the Apostles are with the Lord, and the early church chose their canon that way, I just do not see how any gift of prophecy can come today.

But I'll let you guys discuss it.

Thx,

BD

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 07:34 PM
Well, the text doesn't say anything about his appearance in relation to being though he had a demon. It at least connects a lack of drinking and eating to have being possessed, thereby as I said, demoniacs have no interest in eating, drinking, or sensual pleasures.
I see no reason to interject idle speculation about his appearance...it's irrelevant.

And ProjectPeter, what I was illustrating really was that I'd like to see a modern account that bears a similarity to those two. You say they continue to this day, but apparently only a chosen few seem to have knowledge of it, according to you.I've never said anything about only a chosen few having knowledge of it so why would you say that?[/QUOTE]I think it safe to say that in todays language we might call them nuts, insane, crazy, etc.

Now... I never said that only a few chosen have that knowledge. I never even implied such as that so I've no clue why you felt the desire to say something like that. In fact I said if you do a Google on the subject you'd likely come up with tons of stuff... more than you could read in a lifetime. I cautioned you that you'd need to exercise discernment when reading the stuff though. And since you don't believe the gifts are today I don't suppose it would do to tell you that you should pray for the gift of discernment so not sure what you'll see when you see.

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 07:36 PM
Well, here's the full thing:

Matthew 11:18-19 (ESV)
18 For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon.’ 19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’

Luke 7:33-34
33 For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ 34 The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’

It seems pretty plain. If you came eating and drinking...you wouldn't be considered possessed. But then people may think you're a glutton and drunkard. ;)Oh come now! You've read the Bible I figure. Even Jesus was considered to have received his power from the devil. So I am having a problem following your line of reasoning here.

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 07:38 PM
It would be nice if it was, because it bothers me when people say that they can have a modern-day prophecy which has value on a level with the Bible.Just for the record... I would have a huge problem were I to hear someone say such as that as well.

DarkMajin
Dec 12th 2005, 07:43 PM
ProjectPeter: Well, I say that because while some here have graciously shared testimony concerning certain things, and I have received it graciously, you seem opposed to sharing anything you say you know of. Instead you tell me I should go wade through a bunch of fake accounts for however long so I may hopefully find one or two that seem true, or perhaps I won't find anything at all.
If you believe nothing you say will change my opinion, then you must feel the same way for anyone else reading through this thread, as sharing such things would not only be for my benefit, but them as well.
You're still free to share anything you'd like to, of course.

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 07:49 PM
ProjectPeter: Well, I say that because while some here have graciously shared testimony concerning certain things, and I have received it graciously, you seem opposed to sharing anything you say you know of. Instead you tell me I should go wade through a bunch of fake accounts for however long so I may hopefully find one or two that seem true, or perhaps I won't find anything at all.
If you believe nothing you say will change my opinion, then you must feel the same way for anyone else reading through this thread, as sharing such things would not only be for my benefit, but them as well.
You're still free to share anything you'd like to, of course.Have any of those accounts shared and graciously received changed your mind about anything? Do you count them as authentic accounts now therefore demons are still active?

DarkMajin
Dec 12th 2005, 07:53 PM
ProjectPeter: Well, aside from one, none of the accounts given here were about demons. The one that was given...I'd say is inconclusive (I've had a couple weird experiences in my life...but I have no idea what they were, so I see them as inconclusive as well).
However, the other accounts given I cannot dismiss in my mind, as the things described sound quite interesting, and I do have a feeling they are true in spirit. I cannot with certainty say if they are the same gifts that I listed, but I feel there is something to them.

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 08:10 PM
ProjectPeter: Well, aside from one, none of the accounts given here were about demons. The one that was given...I'd say is inconclusive (I've had a couple weird experiences in my life...but I have no idea what they were, so I see them as inconclusive as well).
However, the other accounts given I cannot dismiss in my mind, as the things described sound quite interesting, and I do have a feeling they are true in spirit. I cannot with certainty say if they are the same gifts that I listed, but I feel there is something to them.What do you need to see to be convinced?

Centurionoflight
Dec 12th 2005, 08:39 PM
BadDog


I respect your reasons for viewing this as the Word of God having been completed, though I do not think that was what Paul was saying here.

I fail to see any OTHER conclusion on this passage, unless one is viewing it thru a prisim of trying to put something here that is not here.
To me its quite plain.

What is not perfect, not complete, in part.

Answer: The spiritual Gifts of the church of Corenth

1 cor 13

8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.

The subject = "gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away."


9For we know in part and we prophesy in part;

Attribue of subject = "in part"



10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.

Complete = The perfect
Action caused by the complete = subject is rendered NULL


11When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.


Subject = Child
Complete = Man

Lession: When you grow up you end childish ways and thinking.
When the Subject is complete the childish ways end.

What are the Childish ways? gifts of prophecy and knowledge

The complete is complete knowledge in prophecy and knowledge, ie the maturing of the gifts of prophecy and knowledge. The complete is not some perfect male, if it was then the gender would state so., It is complete doctrine.


12 But now we see by means of a mirror, an obscure form, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.



At THAT time they gazed upon Christ thru their gifts, the gift was obscure when compared to the clear doctrine that is in the new testament. Therefore thru the COMPLETE "prophecy and knowledge" (that being the scripture) we can gaze on Christ face to face.


I dont see christs return, and a bunch of other stuff here.

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 09:08 PM
I respect your reasons for viewing this as the Word of God having been completed, though I do not think that was what Paul was saying here.

BadDog

I fail to see any OTHER conclusion on this passage, unless one is viewing it thru a prisim of trying to put something here that is not here.
To me its quite plain.

COL,

You have some valid reasons for thinking this way, though IMO that was not what Paul was talking about. What I do not like is your assumption here that no one would come to a different conclusion than your own "unless one is viewing it thru a prism of trying to put something here that is not here." I see this text between chapters 12 and 14, which are speaking about the gifts of the Spirit and their proper use. Paul does speak about certain gifts ceasing, going away, etc.. I am not arguing that Paul does not conclude that some gifts will cease. And I am not arguing even that the time when this will happen is His return. What I am arguing is that in "when that which is perfect comes" the "perfect" is not referring to the Word of God. I used to argue that... I do not anymore.

You know that my position is similar to your own. Obviously to support your position would be to my advantage, were I trying to force things to fit my theology. The fact that I am not should argue that I am doing just the opposite of what you have deduced. You should be careful about assuming people's motives - you could offend some people.

My reason for concluding that the "perfect" is referring to the return of Christ to set up His kingdom is simply that I see the problems with the other view that I mentioned earlier, and I refuse to any longer take a stance about which there is much doubt. Is it possible that your position was Paul's intent? yes, it's not that far-fetched. But it also is not the most likely meaning, IMO. Reasoning the context as you have is a sound approach. It does have that in its favor. But the argument is not about whether or not some gifts were temporary (for the time of the Apostles - my position) but if the perfect coming referred to the Word of God being completed.

Incidentally, I think the "childish ways" there did not include the gift of prophecy, but speaking in tongues. The context of the next chapter in which Paul compares the advantages of prophecy and speaking in tongues to build up argues against that. What Paul is encouraging in this chapter is to use the gifts in love. The demonstrative gifts, whatever they may be, may seem impressive, but what really matters is building up one another in love. That's the point of the chapter, and any gift could be used in a childish, self-centered way.

But vs. 8 is pretty clear IMO that eventually the gifts would disappear:

vs. 8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will pass away; if there is knowledge, it will be done away

When Christ returns perhaps all of the gifts, not just the charasmatic ones, will finally end. I'm, not sure. If God had intended to be really clear He could have been. Since we do not read anywhere else about this, I'm not going to be adament about anything here. That can end up with a person's theology leading his interpretation rather than the other way around.

BD

Centurionoflight
Dec 12th 2005, 09:16 PM
You have some valid reasons for thinking this way, though IMO that was not what Paul was talking about. What I do not like is your assumption here that no one would come to a different conclusion than your own "unless one is viewing it thru a prism of trying to put something here that is not here."

You know that my position is similar to your own. Obviously to support your position would be to my advantage, were I trying to force things to fit my theology. The fact that I am not should argue that I am doing just the opposite of what you have deduced. You should be careful about assuming people's motives - you could offend some people.
[1] For me the bible is not some happy sack that one can kick in and use as they please., It is exact in what it states. IF some guys views does not align with that exactness then I must ask why do they have that view. I have layed out my case as to what is stated there. I have seen no other logical case.

[2] Truth is not a slave to who it may offend, truth is eternally truth.

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 09:45 PM
You have some valid reasons for thinking this way, though IMO that was not what Paul was talking about. What I do not like is your assumption here that no one would come to a different conclusion than your own "unless one is viewing it thru a prism of trying to put something here that is not here."

You know that my position is similar to your own. Obviously to support your position would be to my advantage, were I trying to force things to fit my theology. The fact that I am not should argue that I am doing just the opposite of what you have deduced. You should be careful about assuming people's motives - you could offend some people.


[1] For me the bible is not some happy sack that one can kick in and use as they please., It is exact in what it states. IF some guys views does not align with that exactness then I must ask why do they have that view. I have layed out my case as to what is stated there. I have seen no other logical case.

[2] Truth is not a slave to who it may offend, truth is eternally truth. COL,

First-of-all, you need to know that I edited and added to that post you qouted... there's more there now.

Sometimes the Bible is not so clear as well. God didn't always put the cookies on the bottom shelf. There are many men of God who have concluded that your position doesn't work. Because they disagree with you does that make them wrong? That does sound like a rather arrogant approach, doesn't it?

You see, you set up yourself as the one who determines when the Bible says what. Why should someone not reason that you are perhaps the one who is using the Bible as he pleases? It would be to my advantage to have that text mean what you say it means. Yet I have taken a position of saying that it does not likely mean that - to my own hurt.

Where did you first hear about or read about that view? Perhaps they have made a mistake.

Centurionoflight, when you assume that others are not only wrong, but being deceptive, or twisting scripture, you are on dangerous ground. Our enemy would prefer to have you assume that and thereby injure those for whom our Lord died. What is so wrong in admitting not that scripture could be wrong, but that you may have misunderstood it? I do that a lot... make mistakes in trying to understand scripture. One approach I take: if IMO scripture is not clear, then I refuse to say that it is clear about something. Does that mean I am wrong or being wishy-washy?

Paul's point in 1 Corinthians 13 is that we need to not seek the demonstrative gifts, but seek to serve one another. But Paul's point was not that some of the speaking gifts were going to cease once the canon was complete. If we could find any other scripture which hinted at that, perhaps we could entertain it as a more likely possibility.

Don't you think that we should allow scripture to help us interpret scripture? That's what I'm advocating.

Take care, Centurion. I'm not going to continue here - others may take my place. (Unless you want to discuss the Greek argument there.)

Take care,

BD

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 09:48 PM
COL,

First-of-all, you need to know that I edited and added to that post you qouted... there's more there now.

Sometimes the Bible is not so clear as well. God didn't always put the cookies on the bottom shelf. There are many men of God who have concluded that your position doesn't work. Because they disagree with you does that make them wrong? That does sound like a rather arrogant approach, doesn't it?

You see, you set up yourself as the one who determines when the Bible says what. Why should someone not reason that you are perhaps the one who is using the Bible as he pleases? It would be to my advantage to have that text mean what you say it means. Yet I have taken a position of saying that it does not likely mean that - to my own hurt.

Where did you first hear about or read about that view? Perhaps they have made a mistake.

Centurionoflight, when you assume that others are not only wrong, but being deceptive, or twisting scripture, you are on dangerous ground. Our enemy would prefer to have you assume that and thereby injure those for whom our Lord died. What is so wrong in admitting not that scripture could be wrong, but that you may have misunderstood it? I do that a lot... make mistakes in trying to understand scripture. One approach i take: if IMo scripture is not clear, then I refuse to say that it is clear about something.

Paul's point in 1 Corinthians 13 is that we need to not seek the demonstrative gifts, but seek to serve one another. I think too much is being done is trying to figure out your spiritual gifts. We were commanded to do certain things... let's just do our job. He'll give us what we need to do it. But Paul's point was not that some of the speaking gifts were going to cease once the canon was complete. If we could find any other scripture which hinted at that, perhaps we could entertain it as a more likely possibility.

Don't you think that we should allow scripture to help us interpret scripture? That's what I'm advocating.

Take care, Centurion. I'm not going to continue here - others may take my place. (Unless you want to discuss the Greek argument there.)

Take care,

BDI give you a gold star... didn't think you'd go around with Centurion as long as you did. :rofl:

DarkMajin
Dec 12th 2005, 09:58 PM
ProjectPeter: What would it take to convince me? Time, evidence, and the grace of God.

You don't really expect to tell someone something and they'll be convinced instantaneously, do you? Truth must always be tested.

Centurionoflight
Dec 12th 2005, 10:07 PM
BadDog


Sometimes the Bible is not so clear as well. God didn't always put the cookies on the bottom shelf. There are many men of God who have concluded that your position doesn't work. Because they disagree with you does that make them wrong? That does sound like a rather arrogant approach, doesn't it?

Yes they could be very wrong, especally when their recourse is to just say I am arrogant, rather than address the logic I posted.




You see, you set up yourself as the one who determines when the Bible says what. Why should someone not reason that you are perhaps the one who is using the Bible as he pleases? It would be to my advantage to have that text mean what you say it means. Yet I have taken a position of saying that it does not likely mean that - to my own hurt.

Where did you first hear about or read about that view? Perhaps they have made a mistake.

Again I posted the logic, the logic of the doctrine is solid.
Test it.




Centurionoflight, when you assume that others are not only wrong, but being deceptive, or twisting scripture, you are on dangerous ground. Our enemy would prefer to have you assume that and thereby injure those for whom our Lord died. What is so wrong in admitting not that scripture could be wrong, but that you may have misunderstood it? I do that a lot... make mistakes in trying to understand scripture. One approach I take: if IMO scripture is not clear, then I refuse to say that it is clear about something. Does that mean I am wrong or being wishy-washy?


2 tim 2
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

I have no shame or uncertainity in dealing with solid doctrine, on this point.
Solid doctrine is not wrong.
Again I made the points to the conclusion.

Part 2

16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

If the doctrine is not tested by doctrine then what occurs is just babbling.

Test the points with doctrine.





Paul's point in 1 Corinthians 13 is that we need to not seek the demonstrative gifts, but seek to serve one another. I think too much is being done is trying to figure out your spiritual gifts. We were commanded to do certain things... let's just do our job. He'll give us what we need to do it. But Paul's point was not that some of the speaking gifts were going to cease once the canon was complete. If we could find any other scripture which hinted at that, perhaps we could entertain it as a more likely possibility.
As I posted before the SAME NEUTER TENSE of perfect occurs in James


James 1

22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

In James;

1) We have the word (doctrine) being used as a mirror, like also what occurs in 1 cor 13
2) we have the PERFECT (gender neutral) pointing to the word, like also what occurs in 1 cor 13

ProjectPeter
Dec 12th 2005, 10:15 PM
ProjectPeter: What would it take to convince me? Time, evidence, and the grace of God.

You don't really expect to tell someone something and they'll be convinced instantaneously, do you? Truth must always be tested.Actually I was just wondering. Perhaps in time by the grace of God... He'll show you the evidence.

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 10:19 PM
BadDog

As I posted before the SAME NEUTER TENSE of perfect occurs in James

James 1

22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

In James;

1) We have the word (doctrine) being used as a mirror, like also what occurs in 1 cor 13
2) we have the PERFECT (gender neutral) pointing to the word, like also what occurs in 1 cor 13Centurion,

It is neuter as it is ALWAYS neuter. That's how nouns behave. They are always one gender or another. (well, there are a handful of nouns that do appear in more than one gender - but that's the very rare exception.) The word "Law" there is masculine. And "perfect" there does not mean "complete," does it. James was probably the very first book written in the NT.

It just doesn't apply. Now, I refuse to interact with people who take your approach - Centurion. I've tried to be friendly and considerate. I do not want to be your enemy. However, I do not wish to discuss anything with you anymore... unless you do want to discuss the Greek involved... I may find that too difficult to resist. :cool:

BD

DarkMajin
Dec 12th 2005, 10:19 PM
ProjectPeter: Well, if he does, it seems it shall be through someone else.

Centurionoflight
Dec 12th 2005, 10:50 PM
BadDog


It is neuter as it is ALWAYS neuter. That's how nouns behave. They are always one gender or another. (well, there are a handful of nouns that do appear in more than one gender - but that's the very rare exception.) The word "Law" there is masculine. And "perfect" there does not mean "complete," does it. James was probably the very first book written in the NT.



Complete would be one of the attributes of perfect, and christians of that day knew the doctrine was not complete yet, and that it would be complete one day.



It just doesn't apply. Now, I refuse to interact with people who take your approach - Centurion. I've tried to be friendly and considerate. I do not want to be your enemy. However, I do not wish to discuss anything with you anymore... unless you do want to discuss the Greek involved... I may find that too difficult to resist.


For a discussion to occur both sides have to offer data, you have offered no real supporting data to the other position, beyond stating there is another view and that I am arrogant, cause I find it really lacking in scope of the other doctrines, and support.

For the other view to have merit, it must with stand stress testing.
It has not been offered for testing yet.


I am a programmer by trade, for my code to be good it must have stress and operational testing, every angle, every variable, every input allowed must be tested. Before I will pass it.

For me the same goes for doctrine, every angle variable and stress must test the doctrine. If it is found lacking then I know that is false doctrine. It is not a issue of do I understand it, it is the issue of does it pass the test.

When I start trying to test the doctrine then one to state "I refuse to interact with people who take your approach". Again my approach is to test the doctrine presented. If it cant be tested it is nothing.

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 11:07 PM
Let me make something clear from the Greek here. I don't think I was very clear before:

A neuter pronoun or adjective is often used to reference an antecedent (what it's pointing to.) For instance, "that" could refer to something earlier, which might be unclear in English, but the gender in Greek would help us to know what it was intended to be pointing to. I didn't find any articles where anyone said much about that, in general, for this text. Now TELIOS is an adjective and as such is masculine in James 1 and it modifies (as an adjective, not a noun) "law" (NOMON) which is a masculine noun.

In 1 Corinthians 13, it is neuter - which should indicate, as an adjective, that it is modifying something which is neuter. That was COL's point... that hO XRISTOS (Christ) was not neuter but masculine. But we were not saying that the perfect was Christ, but His return - a concept. It is also true that the two nouns which refer to the Word in the NT (LOGOS and RHMA) are both masculine, so the same logic would apply to them as well. But, though I did not mention this, Paul could have been referring to a concept there as well... the concept of speaking gifts - not just say prophesy or the Word. But one thing we know: "the perfect" cannot be referring to "the Word."

Now since TELEION is neuter and an adjective in 1 Corinthians 13, and we cannot find any neuter nouns around which could be the antecedent, the most likely thing is that it is referring to some concept. COL is correct in that context could help us, should help us, to determine what that concept might be. He's also right that we do see specific reference to some speaking gifts disappearing, and also the context does reference speaking in general, but dfoesn't reference the Lord's return.

Of course it can be easily argued that when Paul was referring to some future event in which something perfect comes the most likely assumption would be the Lord's return, so it is not illogical either.

The question is just when that will happen. What does "When the perfect comes" refer to? What is the concept it is referencing? It is clearly some time. Is it the time when the canon is complete or the time when Christ returns to set up His kingdom... or perhaps some other concept we're missing here?

Just wanted to clarify some of the Greek. Nouns do not change their gender; adjectives and pronouns do. TELIOS is a noun which can act as an adjective, and does in 1 Corinthians 13 and also James 1. It means two different things though. The idea of "completion" as well as "perfection" works in 1 Cor. 13, but not in James 1 - only "perfection" works there.

I don't want to even unintentionally appear to be saying more than is accurate from the Greek. It's not fair to those without the Greek training.

Thx,

BD

Christinme
Dec 12th 2005, 11:24 PM
COL,

What do you think the following refers to, to the completion of the New Testament scripture?

Ephesians 4:11-13 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ

I think logically you would have to have that opinion, otherwise how could one have prophets without prophecy?

And about being a programmer, I was a programmer also, there are lot's of programmers here on the board. I was a programmer before I went into production management. I went to Massachusetts Institute of Technology. I've studied logic. You think you are the only one who has built a case for what you believe, but you are not.

Christinme
Dec 12th 2005, 11:26 PM
ProjectPeter: Well, if he does, it seems it shall be through someone else.And you must not be really too open to exploring otherwise I would think you would have some conversation with me.

BadDog
Dec 12th 2005, 11:26 PM
COL,


Complete would be one of the attributes of perfect, and christians of that day knew the doctrine was not complete yet, and that it would be complete one day.

Where's the evidence of this? Those who I've read have said just the opposite... that even Paul did not expect such a thing. But IMO they were all likely expecting Christ to return very soon.


For a discussion to occur both sides have to offer data, you have offered no real supporting data to the other position, beyond stating there is another view and that I am arrogant, cause I find it really lacking in scope of the other doctrines, and support.

Uh, why don't you ask others here if they think that I've "offered no real supporting data to the other position." You still haven't dealt with those 3 points why it was not very likely to be pointing to the completion of the canon. Perhaps you should go back and read my first 2 posts. Lots of data there.

I think if you read my more recent posts that you will conclude that I have endeavored to be fair to your position. Why else post that last post on the grammar. I read back through things and realized that I was perhaps giving the wrong impression by not giving enough details on it. That last post actually supports your position a bit.

Right now... I'm a "dog" trying to sleep...

BD

Centurionoflight
Dec 13th 2005, 12:04 AM
What do you think the following refers to, to the completion of the New Testament scripture?

Ephesians 4:11-13 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ

I think logically you would have to have that opinion, otherwise how could one have prophets without prophecy?


Missing your point.


And about being a programmer, I was a programmer also, there are lot's of programmers here on the board. I was a programmer before I went into production management. I went to Massachusetts Institute of Technology. I've studied logic. You think you are the only one who has built a case for what you believe, but you are not.

Ok because I built a case, and others have in the past built a case, does that some how null the case I presented?

Christinme
Dec 13th 2005, 12:11 AM
Missing your point.You say Ephesians 4 and 1 Cor 13 have nothing to do with each other. Ephesians 4 talks about having prophets UNTIL a certain time, 1 Cor 13 talks about prophecy ending at a certain time ... So it seems these would be talking about the same time BECAUSE how are you going to have prophets if you don't have prophecy and vice-versa. I think this is the third or fourth time I've tried to get you to address this issue.


Ok because I built a case, and others have in the past built a case, does that some how null the case I presented?No, but the case you presented does not null the case I presented either and I have been presenting a case.

Banzy
Dec 13th 2005, 12:59 AM
Was Paul trying to confuse the Corinthian church?

The very teaching of 1Cor. 12 totally refutes the position of the completion of the bible being the perfect.

"But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills." 1Cor. 12:11

Has the gift of helps ceased? How about adminstration? How about the gift of a teacher? These as well as all the others stated in 1Cor. 12 are "gifts" of the Holy Spirit. The body is not one member and this is what it will be when the "perfect" has come.

"...then I shall know just as I also am known." 1Cor. 13:12 What did Paul write after Corinthians? What about Peter? Or what about the Revelations that John saw? Did any of these writings make that passage of Paul come true?

The completion of the Scriptures did not bring in what is perfect. Because if you really look and see the "gifts" are outside the bible and in us. And all of this is because it is the work of the Holy Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit working through the church(us) in bringing in the perfect. Are all apostles, prophets, healers, prophesiers, teachers, administrators, workers of miracles, evangelists, pastors, helpers, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. The answer is no. But individually all of us have gifts from the Holy Spirit that make us different from each other so that each of us does his/her part.

That is the teaching of 1Cor. 12. The Holy Spirit distributes these gifts to everyone in the body of Christ so that the body of Christ comes together and depends on each other. And this exactly ties in with Paul's teaching in Ephesians.

Centurionoflight
Dec 13th 2005, 05:06 PM
Banzy


The completion of the Scriptures did not bring in what is perfect. Because if you really look and see the "gifts" are outside the bible and in us. And all of this is because it is the work of the Holy Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit working through the church(us) in bringing in the perfect. Are all apostles, prophets, healers, prophesiers, teachers, administrators, workers of miracles, evangelists, pastors, helpers, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. The answer is no. But individually all of us have gifts from the Holy Spirit that make us different from each other so that each of us does his/her part.


The gifts in discussion chapter 13 was tongues, prophesy, and knowledge.
Not many of the other gifts needed to run the church.,

Centurionoflight
Dec 13th 2005, 05:14 PM
Banzy


Ephesians 4:11-13 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ

--
You say Ephesians 4 and 1 Cor 13 have nothing to do with each other. Ephesians 4 talks about having prophets UNTIL a certain time, 1 Cor 13 talks about prophecy ending at a certain time ... So it seems these would be talking about the same time BECAUSE how are you going to have prophets if you don't have prophecy and vice-versa. I think this is the third or fourth time I've tried to get you to address this issue.





Eph 4


11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,

12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;

13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.

14 As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;

15 but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ,

From my first glance..
This is about building up the believer to spritual maturity, and the use of certain gifts of that day aided in that (v11)

It is not related to how some gifts will cease when the doctrine is complete.
I am missing how you link this with that in 1 cor 13?

Christinme
Dec 13th 2005, 07:46 PM
From my first glance..
This is about building up the believer to spritual maturity, and the use of certain gifts of that day aided in that (v11)

It is not related to how some gifts will cease when the doctrine is complete.
I am missing how you link this with that in 1 cor 13?COL,

You are missing how having prophecy is linked with having prophets and having prophets is linked with having prophecy?

Centurionoflight
Dec 13th 2005, 09:30 PM
You are missing how having prophecy is linked with having prophets and having prophets is linked with having prophecy?

In that time they had that, for they didnt have the complete doctrine like we have today. They couldnt just turn to revelations like we can, so they had prophets.

Now for us that gift has faded, there is no more prophets teaching mystery doctrine of the future. We can open our bibles and read the doctrine. What we read will be more clear than listening to some prophet give partial information..

Christinme
Dec 13th 2005, 09:50 PM
In that time they had that, for they didnt have the complete doctrine like we have today. They couldnt just turn to revelations like we can, so they had prophets.

Now for us that gift has faded, there is no more prophets teaching mystery doctrine of the future. We can open our bibles and read the doctrine. What we read will be more clear than listening to some prophet give partial information..COL,

So we are back to this:


COL,

What do you think the following refers to, to the completion of the New Testament scripture?

Ephesians 4:11-13 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ

I think logically you would have to have that opinion, otherwise how could one have prophets without prophecy?

Centurionoflight
Dec 13th 2005, 10:30 PM
COL,

So we are back to this:

Back to the fact there is no prophets today?

I never left that position.

Christinme
Dec 13th 2005, 10:45 PM
Back to the fact there is no prophets today?

I never left that position.So Ephesians 4:11-13 according to you has been fulfilled?

BadDog
Dec 13th 2005, 11:21 PM
OK, I said I'd stay out, but let me put in my 2-cents worth:

In Ephesians 2 it speaks of the Church being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the chief cornerstone. There does not need to be another foundation, once it has been built, right? Jesus is that cornerstone. The apostles and prophets supply the foundation.

So, no, there are no more prophets. This does not specifically address the gifts of tongues, knowledge, etc.. But it is important to acknowledge IMO that the gifts of apostleship and prophecy are no longer around. They both were necessary while the canon was being developed through the inspiration of the Spirit.

Incidentally, some teach that the purpose of the gift of tongues was in validating that certain groups (as in Acts) were part of the body of Christ. In Acts 2 it introduced the new church at Pentecost. It also demonstrated to the existing church that Samaritans and later Gentiles were part of the kingdom of God (or part of the church). There came a time after which they were no longer necessary for that purpose. As we read later in Acts we stop seeing incidents of speaking in tongues. I imagine it gradually went away.

As I said before, I refuse to take a strong stand on the gift of tongues, though IMO it is no longer necessary. But I do take a very strong stand regarding the gift of prophecy... it can lead to some dangerous things.

Ephesians 4:11-13 And He personally gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, for the training of the saints in the work of ministry, to build up the body of Christ, until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of God's Son, growing into a mature man with a stature measured by Christ's fullness.

Notice the order. The gifts of apostles 1st, then that of prophets. Apostles are not around anymore. (They had to see Jesus resurrected.) Similarly, the gift of prophecy is not around either, based on Ephesians 2. There are other places where the gifts of the Spirit are spoken of, so we know that many gifts abound for upbuilding the body of Christ. The gift of evangelism and teaching is still needed, similar to the role of the priests in the OT who explained the Word of God when read.

FWIW, Earl Radmacher teaches that there is not a gift of evangelism. (I don't agree with him.) So there are different views on the gifts. But since in Paul's letter to the church at Ephesus he spoke of the church being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets ONLY, he would not speak of something else 2 chapters later, as I see it.

There are probably people who have a gift similar to the gift of prophecy today... but not one that foretells the future and gives us new scripture. They would be used by God to exhort the brothers (and sisters). Similarly, IMO some have a gift related to missionary work. An apostle was someone who was "sent out." that's what it meant. All of the apostles traveled around the world in those days, proclaiming Christ. IMO missionaries may have a similar gift... but it is not, cannot be, the same gift. (This latter is just speculation on my part.)

The point is that God gives gifts to His people to accomplish His work. Since we have a complete canon, there is no longer a need for a gift of prophecy.

Anyway... my 2-cents.

BD

Christinme
Dec 13th 2005, 11:39 PM
BD,

Concerning prophecy here is something I posted in another thread discussing 1 Corinthians 14, which by the way does come after 1 Corinthians 13 ;) :


NKJV 3) But he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and comfort to men.

NAS 3) But one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation.

This verse seems to define some what it means to prophesy, to speak to men to edify them with exhortation and/or comfort.I think this is what Paul is referring to when he speaks of prophecy and prophets.

Also I think the reference in Ephesians 2 to prophets is a direct reference to OT prophets.

Banzy
Dec 14th 2005, 12:12 AM
It seems some of you guys are misinformed about what prophesying is.

And it also seems that some pick and choose which gifts the Holy Spirit is still distributing. Look at verse 31 of 1Cor. 12. It says: But earnestly desire the best gifts." Paul did not specify that you couldn't have the gift of a healer or a prophet or even an apostle. Show me where he differentiates that.

S10CHEVY
Dec 14th 2005, 02:39 AM
Why isn't tongues needed anymore? That just does not make sence. Based on what findings? Consider this;

Jesus has not yet come back to earth.

There is a meeting from every nationality, with 100 people from each. Jesus comes back to earth, right in the middle of it. He speaks, and no one can communicate with him. Because there is no one with the gift of tongues, there is also no one with the gift of interpretation. You are one of those there. Then what? Tell me the ending of what happens.

watchinginawe
Dec 14th 2005, 05:23 AM
Incidentally, some teach that the purpose of the gift of tongues was in validating that certain groups (as in Acts) were part of the body of Christ. In Acts 2 it introduced the new church at Pentecost. It also demonstrated to the existing church that Samaritans and later Gentiles were part of the kingdom of God (or part of the church). There came a time after which they were no longer necessary for that purpose. As we read later in Acts we stop seeing incidents of speaking in tongues. I imagine it gradually went away. BD, using the above logic, we can also assume that water baptism was no longer necessary either. If we believe the above for tongues then I believe you will find that water baptisms must have ceased just previous to tongues in Acts. However, as in my last post to you in this thread, one would find prophecy active after both water baptism and tongues.

Actually, I think it is just a bad arguement to suggest that Acts demonstrates that tongues were waning in the first century Church when you extend the logic fairly.

God Bless!

Centurionoflight
Dec 14th 2005, 05:04 PM
S10CHEVY


Why isn't tongues needed anymore? That just does not make sence. Based on what findings? Consider this;

Jesus has not yet come back to earth.

There is a meeting from every nationality, with 100 people from each. Jesus comes back to earth, right in the middle of it. He speaks, and no one can communicate with him. Because there is no one with the gift of tongues, there is also no one with the gift of interpretation. You are one of those there. Then what? Tell me the ending of what happens.

Tongues was used to spread the gospel to the UNBELIEVERS!.

It was A SIGN to non-believing Isreal
1 cor 14
21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.


When "this people" (Israel) was disiplined in 70 Ad tongues CEASED.





1. Tongues were for a sign. (v.22)

2. Tongues were for a sign to unbelievers. (v. 22)

3. Tongues are directed toward Jews. (v. 21)

First Conclusion: Tongues were a sign to unbelieving Israel.

Second Conclusion: Tongues were a sign to unbelieving Israel of the discipline.



Tongues Will Cease: 1 Corinthians 13:8

1 Corinthians 13:8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.


The verb used with tongues is in the "middle voice".
which means..
The middle voice, used with tongues, indicates that the gift of tongues would work against itself to bring about its own termination.

Application: Since tongues were a sign, when the sign had served its full purpose, the sign would no longer be needed, therefore, tongues had a limited use from the beginning, and when their usefulness had run its course, tongues ceased in and of themselves.

The spiritual gift of tongues ceased in 70 A.D. and everything that is being called tongues, today, is no more than “gibberish,” and is a counterfeit of the original spiritual gift.

Gibberish defined: Webster’s dictionary defines “gibberish” as rapid and incoherent talk; unintelligible chatter. (“gibberish,” Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language)
Tongues today are..

1) the engastrimuthos demon
2) emotion
3) self-induced

Centurionoflight
Dec 14th 2005, 05:09 PM
watchinginawe


BD, using the above logic, we can also assume that water baptism was no longer necessary either. If we believe the above for tongues then I believe you will find that water baptisms must have ceased just previous to tongues in Acts. However, as in my last post to you in this thread, one would find prophecy active after both water baptism and tongues.

Actually, I think it is just a bad arguement to suggest that Acts demonstrates that tongues were waning in the first century Church when you extend the logic fairly.



Baptism isnt needed either, it was a teaching tool to the early Church.

To teach the baptism of the spirit.

1 cor 1
17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

Paul veased baptism, when he found it to be a divider.

watchinginawe
Dec 14th 2005, 06:58 PM
watchinginawe


Baptism isnt needed either, it was a teaching tool to the early Church.

To teach the baptism of the spirit.

1 cor 1
17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

Paul ceased baptism, when he found it to be a divider.The doctrine: Paul ceased the practice of water baptism.

The doctrine: Water Baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost is divisive in the Body of Christ and should not continue.

Logical test: Do the scriptures say that Paul ceased baptizing?

Logical test: Do the scriptures say that Water Baptism as ordained by Jesus Christ is divisive?

Conclusion: !True (not true) It is a false doctrine to say that Paul ceased baptizing since the scripture does not say that nor is it implied. It is also a false doctrine to teach that Water Baptism as ordained by Jesus Christ is divisive and should cease.

God Bless!

ProjectPeter
Dec 14th 2005, 07:01 PM
The doctrine: Paul ceased the practice of water baptism.

The doctrine: Water Baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost is divisive in the Body of Christ and should not continue.

Logical test: Do the scriptures say that Paul ceased baptizing?

Logical test: Do the scriptures say that Water Baptism as ordained by Jesus Christ is divisive?

Conclusion: !True It is a false doctrine to say that Paul ceased baptizing since the scripture does not say that nor is it implied. It is also a false doctrine to teach that Water Baptism as ordained by Jesus Christ is divisive and should cease.

God Bless!I would count your conclusion as an accurate one.

Kahtar
Dec 14th 2005, 07:05 PM
Tongues was used to spread the gospel to the UNBELIEVERS!.
You missed a few reasons there COL.
1Co 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual [gifts], but rather that ye may prophesy.
1Co 14:2 For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. (God is not included in your 'unbelievers' requirement)
1Co 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men [to] edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. (himself is not included in your 'unbelievers' requirement)
1Co 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater [is] he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. (the church does not consist of unbelievers)
1Co 14:6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?
1Co 14:7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?
1Co 14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
1Co 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.
1Co 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them [is] without signification.
1Co 14:11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh [shall be] a barbarian unto me.
1Co 14:12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual [gifts], seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
1Co 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret.
1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
1Co 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
1Co 14:16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
1Co 14:17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
1Co 14:18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
1Co 14:19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that [by my voice] I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an [unknown] tongue.
1Co 14:20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
1Co 14:21 In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
1Co 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
1Co 14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in [those that are] unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
1Co 14:24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or [one] unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
1Co 14:25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on [his] face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
1Co 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. (Is it the unbelievers that are being edified here, or the believers in the church?)
1Co 14:27 If any man speak in an [unknown] tongue, [let it be] by two, or at the most [by] three, and [that] by course; and let one interpret.
1Co 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
1Co 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
1Co 14:30 If [any thing] be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
1Co 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
1Co 14:32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
1Co 14:33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
1Co 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
1Co 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
1Co 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
1Co 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
1Co 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
1Co 14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
1Co 14:40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

I also might point out that the Corinthians were not Jews, or Israel, but rather gentiles.

Kahtar
Dec 14th 2005, 07:11 PM
I would count your conclusion as an accurate one.PP, you don't think water baptism is a valid thing for us to do today?

ProjectPeter
Dec 14th 2005, 07:15 PM
PP, you don't think water baptism is a valid thing for us to do today?Sure I do... That would have been what Watching concluded in his conclusion therefore I concur with his conclusion! :lol:

BadDog
Dec 14th 2005, 07:17 PM
BD, using the above logic, we can also assume that water baptism was no longer necessary either. If we believe the above for tongues then I believe you will find that water baptisms must have ceased just previous to tongues in Acts. However, as in my last post to you in this thread, one would find prophecy active after both water baptism and tongues.

Actually, I think it is just a bad arguement to suggest that Acts demonstrates that tongues were waning in the first century Church when you extend the logic fairly.

God Bless!Jesus commanded baptism... He didn't command tongues.

BD

watchinginawe
Dec 14th 2005, 07:19 PM
PP, you don't think water baptism is a valid thing for us to do today?Sorry, I revised my conclusion a little. !True in programming would be interpreted as NOT TRUE or TRUE NOT.

God Bless!

Kahtar
Dec 14th 2005, 07:19 PM
Sure I do... That would have been what Watching concluded in his conclusion therefore I concur with his conclusion! :lol:Ahem. My bad. Guess I need another cup of coffee. I thought you said 'inaccurate', but see now you said 'accurate'. My most humblest of appologies.:D

watchinginawe
Dec 14th 2005, 07:28 PM
Jesus commanded baptism... He didn't command tongues.

BDI think we disagree here about tongues ceasing and that is OK. However, it wasn't our disagreement that I was addressing. It was this:
As we read later in Acts we stop seeing incidents of speaking in tongues. I imagine it gradually went away.That is simply not a valid arguement when one considers that the last water baptism recorded in Acts happened just previous to the last incident of speaking in tongues. (Not to mention they also prophesied yet we don't have their prophesyings recorded in the Canon of scripture. :rolleyes: )

Just for the record:
Acts 19:
1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

7 And all the men were about twelve.

God Bless!

BadDog
Dec 14th 2005, 07:32 PM
BD,

Concerning prophecy here is something I posted in another thread discussing 1 Corinthians 14, which by the way does come after 1 Corinthians 13 ;) :

I think this is what Paul is referring to when he speaks of prophecy and prophets.

Also I think the reference in Ephesians 2 to prophets is a direct reference to OT prophets.CIM,

I don't disagree with what you say here regarding prophesy... except that a prophet did those things, but he foremost spoke from God. That's why in the OT he had to be 100% accurate. And that's the issue. The prophet was needed in the early church until God had provided the NT canon. We also have to ask ourselves when these things were written... was the canon still being formed? Were apostles still around?

2 Peter 1:19-21 So we have the prophetic word strongly confirmed. You will do well to pay attention to it, as to a lamp shining in a dismal place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. First of all, you should know this: no prophecy of Scripture comes from one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the will of man; instead, moved by the Holy Spirit, men spoke from God.

Just as IMO some have a gift for missionary work, which has certain aspects of apostleship (being sent out), yet they are not apostles, so the same is likely true about prophesy. What you are speaking of is the gift of exhortation spoken of in Romans 12. It is good to recognize that the prophet did more than just foretell the future... but the essence of prophesy is speaking the Word of God.

You might be right about the prophets there being OT prophets, many take that stance. But Peter in 2 Peter does not seem to agree.

Good points,

BD

ProjectPeter
Dec 14th 2005, 07:35 PM
Ahem. My bad. Guess I need another cup of coffee. I thought you said 'inaccurate', but see now you said 'accurate'. My most humblest of appologies.:D
What you need to do is come to Minnesota and shovel snow! Yeah.... start with my driveway! It'll sure enough wake you up! :D

Centurionoflight
Dec 14th 2005, 07:36 PM
Kahtar

You missed a few reasons there COL.
Tongues int hat time, was allowed and needed to be done, as part of the sign.

Today they are not, for the reasonf or that sign hads occured.

Once again

1Co 14:21 In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
1Co 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

ProjectPeter
Dec 14th 2005, 07:39 PM
CIM,

I don't disagree with what you say here regarding prophesy... except that a prophet did those things, but he foremost spoke from God. That's why in the OT he had to be 100% accurate. And that's the issue. The prophet was needed in the early church until God had provided the NT canon. We also have to ask ourselves when these things were written... was the canon still being formed? Were apostles still around?

2 Peter 1:19-21 So we have the prophetic word strongly confirmed. You will do well to pay attention to it, as to a lamp shining in a dismal place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. First of all, you should know this: no prophecy of Scripture comes from one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the will of man; instead, moved by the Holy Spirit, men spoke from God.

Just as IMO some have a gift for missionary work, which has certain aspects of apostleship (being sent out), yet they are not apostles, so the same is likely true about prophesy. What you are speaking of is the gift of exhortation spoken of in Romans 12. It is good to recognize that the prophet did more than just foretell the future... but the essence of prophesy is speaking the Word of God.

You might be right about the prophets there being OT prophets, many take that stance. But Peter in 2 Peter does not seem to agree.

Good points,

BD
I don't think I have ever asked you this nor do I recall ever seeing you comment on it. But do you believe that a minister or teacher today is still gifted and called into that ministry by Christ?

ProjectPeter
Dec 14th 2005, 07:41 PM
Kahtar

Tongues int hat time, was allowed and needed to be done, as part of the sign.

Today they are not, for the reasonf or that sign hads occured.

Once again

1Co 14:21 In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
1Co 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
And what do you think that passage is proving? Certainly you are aware that there are still unbelievers so why do you think it still couldn't be a sign for unbelievers?

Kahtar
Dec 14th 2005, 07:49 PM
Kahtar

Tongues int hat time, was allowed and needed to be done, as part of the sign.

Today they are not, for the reasonf or that sign hads occured.

Once again

1Co 14:21 In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
1Co 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. Does that somehow address all those other reasons Paul mentioned that tongues was used for? Clearly from I Cor 14 we can see several reasons for the gift of tongues.

BadDog
Dec 14th 2005, 07:52 PM
It seems some of you guys are misinformed about what prophesying is.

And it also seems that some pick and choose which gifts the Holy Spirit is still distributing. Look at verse 31 of 1Cor. 12. It says: But earnestly desire the best gifts." Paul did not specify that you couldn't have the gift of a healer or a prophet or even an apostle. Show me where he differentiates that.
Banzy,

Well, according to Acts 1 an apostle had to be present with Christ throughout His earthly ministry from the time of His baptism to the death on the cross. He also had to be a witness to the resurrection. This latter was absolutely essential. That was in essence what the apostles witnessed to - the resurrection of Christ. So I can confidently say that there are no modern day apostles.

The church was built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets. The foundation has been built. There is not more than one foundation. The apostles (and prophets) were especially gifted individuals given by the Spirit to help the church get grounded. There is no biblical reason for them to be around today. If you say that the gift of prophecy is around today, then you are saying that God's Word can be added to... that someone can speak a word from God now which is directly from God, inerrant and to be obeyed.

If you say "yes" to all of those things, then I am very concerned for what standard you use. The battle cry of the protestant reformation was SOLA SCRIPTURA!

It is extremely dangerous to allow for others to make themselves authorities on a par with the Word of God... when you allow for biblical prophets today, that is precisely what is permitted. Look at all of the terrible harm that was come through Popes speaking as the representatives of Jesus Christ.

If you give me a "word of prophecy" that someone has recently proclaimed in writing, I am fairly confident that we could probably find where it contradicts scripture somewhere... then what do you say? (Try me on this one, if you do not believe it.)

BD

Kahtar
Dec 14th 2005, 07:54 PM
As far as the gift of prophecy goes, I would point out that Paul instructed the Corinthians to seek after the gift of prophecy, suggesting that many of them could have that gift, and notice that he did not say the gift was strictly for the purpose of writing the New Testament, but rather for the edification of the church.
I would humbly submit that the church even to this day needs edification.

BadDog
Dec 14th 2005, 07:55 PM
I don't think I have ever asked you this nor do I recall ever seeing you comment on it. But do you believe that a minister or teacher today is still gifted and called into that ministry by Christ?Well first of all we do need to distinguish, IMO, between an office and gifts. But to keep things simple: yes - definitely.

It is my opinion, though, that too often Christians waste time fretting over their gifts rather than just getting off their dufts and doing something! :P The best ability is availability... as a pastor, I imagine you often appreciate those who do that.

BD

Centurionoflight
Dec 14th 2005, 07:56 PM
watchinginawe


The doctrine: Paul ceased the practice of water baptism.

The doctrine: Water Baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost is divisive in the Body of Christ and should not continue.

Logical test: Do the scriptures say that Paul ceased baptizing?

Logical test: Do the scriptures say that Water Baptism as ordained by Jesus Christ is divisive?

Conclusion: !True (not true) It is a false doctrine to say that Paul ceased baptizing since the scripture does not say that nor is it implied. It is also a false doctrine to teach that Water Baptism as ordained by Jesus Christ is divisive and should cease.

1 Corinthians 12:12-14 -

12: For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13: For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14: For the body is not one member, but many.

Notice the lack of water in the baptism of the spirit?

Paul states baptism of the water divides
Baptism of the spirit unifies.
Baptism of the spirit only occurs at salvation.
So while people are dunking each other in water, they do nothing more than clean them self, for they was all ready baptised by the spirit at salvation.



Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

The one baptism is not of water, it is of the spirit, Since the water baptism only adds another baptism to the one baptism by the Spirit into one body, there is little wonder why such arrogance and ritual surrounds that dividing bath.

BadDog
Dec 14th 2005, 07:59 PM
BD... (BD - covered)

Actually, I think it is just a bad arguement to suggest that Acts demonstrates that tongues were waning in the first century Church when you extend the logic fairly.

God Bless!
You are correct that from Acts alone the argument that tongues has ceased is not nearly as strong. But where else do we see it spoken of in the NT? Not much. That should be a clue.

But my issue is not with tongues, as I said, but prophecy and apostleship. It is my opinion that tongues has ceased... it is my strong conviction that prophecy as ceased. :P I'm not going to get drawn into an argument regarding tongues.

Just FYI.

BD

Centurionoflight
Dec 14th 2005, 08:00 PM
Kahtar


Does that somehow address all those other reasons Paul mentioned that tongues was used for? Clearly from I Cor 14 we can see several reasons for the gift of tongues.


And some those was valid reasons in THAT time.
They are not valid reasons for today since tongues are for a sign to the jews of Isreal in THAT TIME. And THAT TIME has passed.

BadDog
Dec 14th 2005, 08:12 PM
Kahtar


And some those was valid reasons in THAT time.
They are not valid reasons for today since tongues are for a sign to the jews of Isreal in THAT TIME. And THAT TIME has passed.Just FWIW, I agree with COL here - tongues was a sign to the Jews.

Now, that said, I do not agree that H2O baptism has ceased.

1 Peter 3:21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the pledge of a good conscience toward God) through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Most agree that Peter probably wrote 1 Peter about 64 AD... (The persecution in Rome is referenced there, so it couldn't have been much earlier.) But here we see this late, one of the later letters written, that water baptism is still ongoing.

When Paul spoke of not baptizing many it was not because he did not see the continued value - it was a command of the Lord - but that he personally baptized hardly anyone because of the jealousy and pride that brought about.

Baptism has been used from the early days as a public testimony of joining a local body of believers. True, there is a lot of confusion and infighting over it, but it was commanded by our Lord.

BD

watchinginawe
Dec 14th 2005, 08:15 PM
watchinginawe

1 Corinthians 12:12-14 -

12: For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13: For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14: For the body is not one member, but many.

Notice the lack of water in the baptism of the spirit?

Paul states baptism of the water divides
Baptism of the spirit unifies.
Baptism of the spirit only occurs at salvation.
So while people are dunking each other in water, they do nothing more than clean them self, for they was all ready baptised by the spirit at salvation.



Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

The one baptism is not of water, it is of the spirit, Since the water baptism only adds another baptism to the one baptism by the Spirit into one body, there is little wonder why such arrogance and ritual surrounds that dividing bath.The doctrine: Water baptism, as commanded by Jesus Christ, is dividing and is surrounded by arrogance and ritual and therefore Paul, in his better judgment, changed the command of Jesus Christ since only one was needed anyway.

Logical test: Doctrine rejected out of hand since it straightly contradicts Jesus' command. One could easily apply the same arguements to the Lord's Supper to imply it also is such a ritual (which I feel is at least a 50/50 chance of COL doing so).

God Bless!

Centurionoflight
Dec 14th 2005, 08:34 PM
watchinginawe

The doctrine: Water baptism, as commanded by Jesus Christ, is dividing and is surrounded by arrogance and ritual and therefore Paul, in his better judgment, changed the command of Jesus Christ since only one was needed anyway.

Logical test: Doctrine rejected out of hand since it straightly contradicts Jesus' command. One could easily apply the same arguements to the Lord's Supper to imply it also is such a ritual (which I feel is at least a 50/50 chance of COL doing so).


Paul stated it was a divider.

1 cor 1
11For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe's people, that there are quarrels among you.
12Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," and "I of Christ."
13Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,
15so that no one would say you were baptized in my name.

He is thanking God, he DID not baptize them.
If it was so needed, then why thank God you didnt do it?

Paul stated it was not why Christ sent him.

1 cor 1

17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.

Centurionoflight
Dec 14th 2005, 08:50 PM
Just some thoughts on the Church and baptism.



In all of Paul's epistles does he give instructions concerning who is to be water-baptized or how they are to be water-baptized or who is qualified to be the baptizer? No.

Jesus Himself , "John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost" (Acts 1:5).

Is there two baptisms, water and Spirit? No. "There is...one baptism" (Eph. 4:5).


I think water baptism replaced circumcision, thus a empty ritual.

BadDog
Dec 14th 2005, 08:54 PM
Hebrews 1:1, 2 Long ago God spoke to the fathers by the prophets at different times and in different ways. In these last days, He has spoken to us by [His] Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things and through whom He made the universe.

Many say that the underlined portion above indicates that with the coming of Christ there is no longer a need for prophets. Yet the gift of prophecy was essential in the 1st century (as is clear from the rest of the NT) for the communication of New Testament truth through the apostles in the early church because there was no completed canon of Scripture at that time.

2 Peter 3:15, 16 Also, regard the patience of our Lord as [an opportunity for] salvation, just as our dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you. He speaks about these things in all his letters, in which there are some matters that are hard to understand. The untaught and unstable twist them to their own destruction, as they also do with the rest of the Scriptures.

Paul's writings were recognized immediately as 'scripture."

Later in Hebrews we see the prophetic ministry spoken of as every bit as crucial and authorized as the OT prophets' works...

Hebrews 2:1-4 We must therefore pay even more attention to what we have heard, so that we will not drift away. For if the message spoken through angels was legally binding, and every transgression and disobedience received a just punishment, how will we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was first spoken by the Lord and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him. At the same time, God also testified by signs and wonders, various miracles, and distributions [of gifts] from the Holy Spirit according to His will.

This also shows, as COL has said, the purpose of those "signs and wonders and distribution of gifts of the Spirit"... to testify to this great salvation we have gained. "At the same time" seems to indicate a time aspect for the need for such.

But when we tie Hebrews 1 with Hebrews 2 we see that the final revelation of God to the world came at the 1st coming of our Lord, but it was "confirmed." Such confirmation would only be needed during that 1st century shortly after the Messiah had come and resurrected.

And because the canon was not yet completed in many churches, such as Corinth, the gift of prophecy was active still. To try to pin down precisely when it ceased would just be guess-work on my part... so I won't even try.

But the claim that prophecy still is active has led to many cults, such as Mormonism... The general argument that many make is that if the gifts were needed then, than they are still needed now. Sounds reasonable at first.

Now some say, as CIM has suggested, that the gift of prophecy is exercised when a believer shares a message with his local body which he believes the Lord has brought to mind. Such "prophecy" ("forth-telling" vs. "fore-telling") does not have to be obeyed as it would if it came from an Apostle, but rather should be carefully considered in the light of other scripture. I do not doubt that God does work this way, and He has done so through me. I am just not sure it should be called "prophecy." As I said before, that sounds like the gift of exhortation. Some say it is the gift of knowledge, which applies to people, not necessarily the Bible.

What is at stake here is the authority of scripture. During the time that the Apostles were around, God performed powerful signs and wonders (real miracles) through them which authenticated their office and authority.

2 Corinthians 12:12 The signs of an apostle were performed among you in all endurance -- not only signs but also wonders and miracles.

Could God do miracles today through specific individuals? Sure, if He wanted to do so. But prophets in the 1st century regularly prophesied. Edited-added: It sure seems to me that this dual-type of prophecy is somewhat convenient for explaining why prophecy as it is exercised today is so fallible. IMO prophecy is one of the signs and wonders kind of gifts... miraculous.

Anyway, makes sense to me.

BD

watchinginawe
Dec 14th 2005, 09:28 PM
watchinginawe


Paul stated it was a divider.

1 cor 1
11For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe's people, that there are quarrels among you.
12Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," and "I of Christ."
13Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,
15so that no one would say you were baptized in my name.

He is thanking God, he DID not baptize them.
If it was so needed, then why thank God you didnt do it?

Paul stated it was not why Christ sent him.

1 cor 1

17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.The doctrine: Things that Jesus commanded that cause division should be done away with.

Logical Test:
I Corinthians 11:
17 Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse.

18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.

19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.

22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.

We see above that even the Lord's supper was likewise a problem among the Corinthians as was Water Baptism. So is the Lord's supper another one of those arrogant and contentious rituals that the Apostle Paul did away with?

23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

Paul does not do away with the Lord's supper but rather intructs and teaches the command of Jesus.

But what about Water Baptism? Were the Corinthians divided over Baptism as commanded by Jesus?

I Corinthians 1:
11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

It is evident from the text that the Corinthians were not Baptizing according to Jesus' command. Paul, as he did with the Lord's supper, set them straight.

Furthermore, we see in Acts 19 where Paul commands those in Ephesus to be Baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. This occurred after those that Paul baptized in Corinth which occurred in Chapter 18:

Acts 18:1 After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth;
...
7 And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue.

8 And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.

We learn from Paul's epistle to the Corinthians that it was he himself that baptized Crispus. We are told by COL that at it was at this time that Paul left off baptizing. However, in just the next chapter we have this:

Acts 19:
1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

7 And all the men were about twelve.

It is understood that Paul wrote I Corinthians from Ephesus during this visit that began in Acts 19.

Conclusion: It is evident that Paul did not cease the practice of Water Baptism. Furthermore, even the doctrine of the Lord's supper was "divisive" in the Corinthian Church but the practice was not ceased. Therefore, COL's doctrine is false.

God Bless!

Banzy
Dec 14th 2005, 09:40 PM
Once again it seems some of you use a pick and choose hermaneutic.

BadDog: Timothy, Silvanus, and Barnabas were apostles. Give me one scripture where it says they seen Christ's ministry and his death and resurrection. But you can't. Therefore, in order to keep your theory, you guys come up with this, "Oh they were apostles, but they weren't REALLY Apostles.":rofl: You guys just pick and choose.

Same way with the gifts. Tongues for the Jews? Are you serious? Tongues are a gift from the Holy Spirit for Christians. Tongues are a language that the Holy Spirit and God can understand. "For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him, however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries." 1Cor.14:2

And you still misunderstand the gift of prophecy. The gift of prophecy is not so that I can write IPennsylvania, an epistle to the church of Pennsylvania. The gift of prophecy is another gift from the Holy Spirit for the church. I have seen this gift numerous times. I have definitely seen: "But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an uninformed(another word for cessationists) comes in, he is convinced by all, he is judged by all. And thus the secrets of his heart are revealed..." 1Cor. 14:24-25

If you or centurionoflight or anyone else that is uninformed walks into a church where the prophetic is happening they could easily reveal the secrets of your heart. Why? Because God loves you and knows where you are at and whats in your heart.

Centurionoflight
Dec 14th 2005, 11:10 PM
watchinginawe


We see above that even the Lord's supper was likewise a problem among the Corinthians as was Water Baptism. So is the Lord's supper another one of those arrogant and contentious rituals that the Apostle Paul did away with?


Paul does not do away with the Lord's supper but rather intructs and teaches the command of Jesus.



Ok, he did instuct them for the LORD supper is a VALID observance.
I never stated the Lords suppoer was not valid.



It is evident from the text that the Corinthians were not Baptizing according to Jesus' command. Paul, as he did with the Lord's supper, set them straight.


He sure did, by thanking God he didnt baptize very many of them, and set them straight it was about the gospel not some ritual.



We learn from Paul's epistle to the Corinthians that it was he himself that baptized Crispus. We are told by COL that at it was at this time that Paul left off baptizing. [1]However, in just the next chapter we have this:


However there is no more mentioning of Paul baptizing any one after that event in Acts 19.
So about the time he wrote 1 cor , he stopped that "teaching" ritual of water baptism..

[1] Which is not what I stated, why the mis- applicaion? Is your doctrine so unsound that you must twist what I state?.



Furthermore, we see in Acts 19 where Paul commands those in Ephesus to be Baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. This occurred after those that Paul baptized in Corinth which occurred in Chapter 18:

Where did Paul command them?


acts 19

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


Also AFTER those men was baptized,


8 And he[Paul] entered the synagogue and continued speaking out boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading them about the kingdom of God.

9But when some were becoming hardened and disobedient, speaking evil of the Way before the people, he withdrew from them and took away the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus.

10This took place for two years, so that all who lived in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks.

So you have a space of 2 years 3 months during which Paul would have wrote 1 cor, that being AFTER the baptism of those men.

During that time Paul ceased baptism.





It is evident that Paul did not cease the practice of Water Baptism. Furthermore, even the doctrine of the Lord's supper was "divisive" in the Corinthian Church but the practice was not ceased. Therefore, COL's doctrine is false.


Yet there is no more mention of Paul baptizing any one after he wrote 1 Corinthians

watchinginawe
Dec 14th 2005, 11:28 PM
So you have a space of 2 years 3 months during which Paul would have wrote 1 cor, that being AFTER the baptism of those men.

During that time Paul ceased baptism.
...
Yet there is no more mention of Paul baptizing any one after he wrote 1 CorinthiansThe doctrine: Since Paul made no more mention of baptizing after that he wrote in I Corinthians, baptizing ceased.

Logical test: Are there other ordinances that Paul wrote of in I Corinthians but makes no more mention of? There certainly is: The Lord's supper. Applying this doctrine of COL to the Lord's supper, we can also assume that giving of the Lord's supper also ceased. But COL has already stated that the Lord's supper continued and was commanded.

Conclusion: When tested, there is a logical flaw in the doctrine offered by COL in the above. Therefore, it must be false doctrine.
Where did Paul command them?


acts 19

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.So Paul told them not to be baptized? Did they disobey? What in verse 4 convinced them to be baptized in verse 5? Did he excuse himself between the baptizing and the laying on of hands in verse 6? Who was the minister here? Actually, I suspect Paul himself baptized them like he did Crispus. In Crispus' account, it also does not mention that Paul did the baptizing but later we learn that Paul did indeed baptize him.

This will be my last post on this line. I beleive carrying on much more on my part will involve the wrong spirit that I offer this exchange in.

Thanks for your replies.

God Bless!

ProjectPeter
Dec 14th 2005, 11:34 PM
Yet there is no more mention of Paul baptizing any one after he wrote 1 CorinthiansJust for the record here.... After Acts 19 Paul began his journey to Jerusalem where he then was arrested and taken to Rome as a prisoner. Not a lot of pools to baptize folks in once you are locked up in the jail house and riding on ships and all that stuff for a number of years. So the fact that there is no record of Paul baptizing others after Acts 19 is not a big surprise nor is it some super secret baptism ending mystery message in the Bible! Actually it would fall more into the catagory of a no-brainer with an ounce or so of God given prudence.

Centurionoflight
Dec 15th 2005, 12:08 AM
Are there other ordinances that Paul wrote of in I Corinthians but makes no more mention of? There certainly is: The Lord's supper. Applying this doctrine of COL to the Lord's supper, we can also assume that giving of the Lord's supper also ceased. But COL has already stated that the Lord's supper continued and was commanded.
And again not a comparison, Paul never praises God for not serving the Lords supper.

Baptize

1 Cor 1

14I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

17For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.


He is stating he is not here to baptize. AND DROPS THE TOPIC on that, instead he goes into What he is here for.

Lords Supper

1 Cor 11
23For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.



He goes into a indepth reasoning for the lords supper, and how to go about it. He does not DROP IT like he did baptism

Comparing out dated rituals to legit rituals in no way makes the outdated legit.

Kahtar
Dec 15th 2005, 03:01 AM
They are not valid reasons for today since tongues are for a sign to the jews of Isreal in THAT TIME. And THAT TIME has passed.I am wondering, if the gift of tongues was ONLY used for a sign to the Jews, what in the world was Paul teaching the people of Corinth to speak in tongues for? Did the Corinthians need to witness to the Jews? Were the Corinthians Jews?
See, I'm pretty sure that Corinth was located in Greece, not Israel, and that the church there was made up mostly of Greeks. I have no doubt that there were a few Jews there as well, but Paul was the Apostle to the gentiles, and they were his main focus.
So why was he teaching them to speak in tongues? Just so they could witness to the handful of Jews that happened to live there?

Christinme
Dec 15th 2005, 04:10 AM
Personally I in general agree with COL concerning water baptism, however I don't think this is the thread to deal with that.

Christinme
Dec 15th 2005, 04:11 AM
I keep coming back to Ephesians 4:

Ephesians 4:11-16 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head Christ from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

This time has not come. No where here does it say they were given to "complete the writing of scripture" or until the "completion of the writing of scripture", it says what they are given for and it says that they are given UNTIL something happens, "till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ".

I don't think the way to deal with this is to say, well some of these He doesn't give us anymore. I think the way to deal with it is to look through scripture and see if maybe we don't have a full understanding as what is meant by apostles or what is meant by prophets. I think if one does that they will come to a fuller understanding of what an apostle is and what a prophet is and why the above scripture says what it says.

Tab
Dec 15th 2005, 02:39 PM
The requirements for being an apostle were simply 2 things:

1) You had to physically see the resurrected Christ after his crucifixion
Act 1:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Act&chapter=1&verse=3&version=kjv)To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: 2) You had to be commissioned to spread the gospel directly by Jesus himself

And when day came, He called His disciples to Him and chose twelve of them, whom He also named as apostles: Simon, whom He also named Peter, and Andrew his brother; and James and John; and Philip and Bartholomew; and Matthew and Thomas; James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot; Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor. (Lk. 6:13-16; cf. Mat. 10:1-7; Mk. 3:14)

Now the last one who became an apostle after this group was Paul who replaced Judas after the betrayal.

BadDog
Dec 15th 2005, 02:39 PM
Once again it seems some of you use a pick and choose hermaneutic.

BadDog: Timothy, Silvanus, and Barnabas were apostles. Give me one scripture where it says they seen Christ's ministry and his death and resurrection. But you can't. Therefore, in order to keep your theory, you guys come up with this, "Oh they were apostles, but they weren't REALLY Apostles.":rofl: You guys just pick and choose.
Banzy,

You do not need to put people down IOT make your point. Please try to be considerate in the manner in which you post.

Barnabas was an apostle - we don't know much about his past history. We do know that there were dozens of apostles who were with Christ (around Him often) from the time of his baptism until His resurrection who were not of the 12 disciples. (He sent out 70 disciples in pairs, for example.) Jesus chose His 12 disciples from among many available as well.

But where in scripture does it specifically call either Silvanus or Timothy an apostle? They are always referred to as Paul's co-workers. 2 Corinthians 1 says...

Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, To the church of God which is at Corinth with all the saints who are throughout Achaia...

It says that Paul is an apostle, but not Timothy. Timothy is "our brother." If Timothy was an apostle, as Barnabas, for example, why not say "Paul and Timothy, apostles..."? But Paul never introduces any of his letters like that.

The only basis for calling Timothy or Silvanus apostles is based on 1 Thessalonians 2 where Paul refers to "apostles," though never specifically calling either Timothy or Silvanus apostles. The point is that there is strong disagreement about them being apostles. Could they have been among the dozens of men who had been with Jesus since His baptism and saw Him resurrected? Sure. Paul wasn't, obviously, but God prepared a special experience for him on the Damascus road.

The basis for those requirements comes from the 1st chapter of Acts and the disciples actions while "waiting for power from on high:"

Acts 1:15-26 During these days Peter stood up among the brothers--the number of people who were together was about 120--and said: "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled that the Holy Spirit through the mouth of David spoke in advance about Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was one of our number and was allotted a share in this ministry. Now this man acquired a field with his unrighteous wages; and falling headfirst, he burst open in the middle, and all his insides spilled out. This became known to all the residents of Jerusalem, so that in their own language that field is called Hakeldama , that is, Field of Blood. For it is written in the Book of Psalms: Let his dwelling become desolate; let no one live in it; and Let someone else take his position. Therefore, from among the men who have accompanied us during the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us-- beginning from the baptism of John until the day He was taken up from us--from among these, it is necessary that one become a witness with us of His resurrection."

So they proposed two: Joseph, called Barsabbas, who was also known as Justus, and Matthias. Then they prayed, "You, Lord, know the hearts of all; show which of these two You have chosen to take the place in this apostolic service that Judas left to go to his own place."

Then they cast lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias. So he was numbered with the 11 apostles.

Are there apostles who were not among the original 12? Of course. The requirement for the 12th added apostle to have been with Christ since His baptism may have been a special added condition - to be among the 12. But, as is clear from the Damascus road experience of Paul, all apostles saw the risen Christ - so that they could be eye-witnesses to the resurrection. God enabled them to perform miraculous sings as further confirmation. So I'd back off of the requirement of having seen Christ since His baptism since clearly Paul himself doesn't meet that condition. But having seen the risen Christ was a condition, which limits the period of time for apostleship.


Same way with the gifts. Tongues for the Jews? Are you serious? Tongues are a gift from the Holy Spirit for Christians. Tongues are a language that the Holy Spirit and God can understand. "For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him, however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries." 1Cor.14:2

I did not say that tongues was a gift reserved for the Jews only. I said that the purpose of the gift was (mainly) as confirmation to the Jews - as a testimony to them that their Messiah had arrived. I say "mainly" because God could use it for other purposes if He so chose. Did it serve other purposes - of course. But according to 1 Corinthians 14 tongues does not edify the body (unless there is an interpretation). Hence why would it persist once it had served its purpose?

Now ask yourselves, those of you who have attended afterglow services - "How often is the tongues gift you saw interpreted?" According to Paul, it must always have an interpretation in the body of Christ, or else not exercised. Why is this clear policy of scripture almost always violated?

It did not need to be interpreted when used for its main function - a testimony to the Jews that their Messiah had arrived on the scene (and been crucified and rejected by them) - at Pentecost. But it does when exercised in the body of believers.

It continued during the time of the Apostles as further confirmation, but let's face it, it didn't serve much as an edifying gift, did it? Why else would Paul say that he would rather speak one edifying word than 10,000 words in a tongue?

The mysteries of 1 Corinthians 14:2 is due to the lack of an interpreter. The reference in chapter 13 of speaking in the tongues of men and of angels is hyperbole - perhaps there is some different language that angels can speak - I doubt that, but it's possible. But speaking in tongues is not such a thing. It's purpose was to have someone speak in a human language which he obviously did not know - testifying that God was speaking through him. It was mainly to the jews, as Joel 2 tells us. The only please in which we see it clearly exercised is at Pentecost, and that was how it was clearly used. How do people try to get around that one? By claiming that there are different types of tongues gifts.

Sound familiar? That's what is said about the gift of prophecy IOT have it continuing into the present time. There's no biblical basis for this though, IMO.

Joel 2:27, 28 You will know that I am present in Israel and that I am the Lord your God, and there is no other. My people will never again be put to shame. After this I will pour out My Spirit on all men; then your sons and your daughters will prophesy, your old men will have dreams, and your young men will see visions.

"My people" refers to the Jews. This prophecy is in the midst of a Messianic prophecy concerning Christ in His kingdom. But tongues indicated the outpouring of the Spirit. That was evidence to the Jews of that day that their Messiah had indeed arrived, had been "present in Israel," and that they had Him crucified!


And you still misunderstand the gift of prophecy. The gift of prophecy is not so that I can write IPennsylvania, an epistle to the church of Pennsylvania. The gift of prophecy is another gift from the Holy Spirit for the church. I have seen this gift numerous times. I have definitely seen: "But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an uninformed(another word for cessationists) comes in, he is convinced by all, he is judged by all. And thus the secrets of his heart are revealed..." 1Cor. 14:24-25
Another word for "cessasionalists?!" Where do we even have a hint that Paul anticipated that some people would claim that the gifts had ceased and that this was not true?! In 1 Corinthians 13 Paul says that tongues and prophecy will cease, so why would he warn people of those who would say this? The Greek does not mean that and cannot mean that in 1 Corinthians 14:24, 25. "Uninformed" simply is referring to someone who may be a believer but may not know about tongues or prophecy. Tongues can be used to convince someone that Jesus the Christ has truly come.

Prophecy can also convince an unbeliever who is open to the working of God. Why would this same unbeliever say that we were insane if he saw speaking in tongues (vs. 23)? Because it would sound like what happened at Pentecost, I suppose, where they were accused of being drunk.


But what does that have to do with the ceasing of the gift of prophecy?


If you or centurionoflight or anyone else that is uninformed walks into a church where the prophetic is happening they could easily reveal the secrets of your heart. Why? Because God loves you and knows where you are at and whats in your heart.
Yes, if the legitimate gifts were in action, it would be convincing. I'm still waiting to see someone speak in some human language that he hasn't been trained in, and then for someone else, also not trained in that language, to interpret it into English. :P

Consider the following:

2 Corinthians 3:4, 5 By reading this you are able to understand my insight about the mystery of the Messiah. This was not made known to people in other generations as it is now revealed to His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit:

Here we see that the Apostles and prophets of the early church were given knowledge into deep mysteries... this is a supernatural gift - not just an ability to exhort and edify the church.

My concern is with the gift of prophecy. I've never argued about the validity or lack of validity of tongues on this or any other Bible forum... and I do not wish to get involved in that now either. But regarding prophecy... either SOLA SCRITURA or there are others, such as the Pope, who have as much authority as scripture in what they say. Don't you see the danger there? Call it a gift of exhortation if you must... even call it a gift of knowledge, but prophecy... "Let God be true and all others be liars."

BD

BadDog
Dec 15th 2005, 03:19 PM
I keep coming back to Ephesians 4:

Ephesians 4:11-16 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head Christ from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

This time has not come. No where here does it say they were given to "complete the writing of scripture" or until the "completion of the writing of scripture", it says what they are given for and it says that they are given UNTIL something happens, "till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ".

I don't think the way to deal with this is to say, well some of these He doesn't give us anymore. I think the way to deal with it is to look through scripture and see if maybe we don't have a full understanding as what is meant by apostles or what is meant by prophets. I think if one does that they will come to a fuller understanding of what an apostle is and what a prophet is and why the above scripture says what it says.
CIM,

I did not say, BTW, that the only purpose of prophecy was to complete the canon. Some prophecy never became canon, nor was it intended by the Spirit to be so. But while the canon had not yet been completed, God arranged for prophets to build up the body. They were not simply teachers - that's why we see that gift specifically listed separately here. The gift of prophecy was to edify by giving a word directly from God. But canonical writing was inspired by the Spirit and had apostolic authority behind it.

And no doubt I don't have full understanding on this! :D

We must read chapter 4 in the context of the letter, and hence interpret it in the light of chapter 2. Now at the time of Paul's writing prophests were still around. All gifts of the Spirit were for edifying.

Ephesians 4:1-3, 7, 8 I, therefore, the prisoner in the Lord, urge you to walk worthy of the calling you have received, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, accepting one another in love, diligently keeping the unity of the Spirit with the peace that binds us.

Now grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of the Messiah's gift. For it says: When He ascended on high, He took prisoners into captivity; He gave gifts to people.

The earlier context here for Ephesians 4:11ff is that of Paul's concern of there being unity in the local body there at Ephesus - that they keep the unity of the Spirit. The purpose of the gifts of the Spirit was to enable us to build up one another. That's why it concerns me so when people in this forum cannot disagree with another without getting hot. (This was by no means intended to apply to you, CIM! You're always gracious.)

See also vs. 16 - From Him the whole body, fitted and knit together by every supporting ligament, promotes the growth of the body for building up itself in love by the proper working of each individual part.

There were still apostles around as well as prophets. They were part of the edifiying process ongoing in the body. 4:11ff tells us that the purpose of all of those speaking gifts (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers [or perhaps pastor-teachers]) was to train the body to upbuild itself. Prophecy was one such speaking gift used for that purpose. But nothing in those verses says that this gift must persist in order for the church to be able to upbuild itself in love. But the apostles were in the foundation only, just as Chrisy is the cornerstone in the foundation only.

Does Christ still need to be physically around? No. Neither did the prophets or the apostles. And we know that Christ is not around physically - He sent His Spirit instead. We also know that apostles were required to be witnesses to the resurrection of Christ... and you can't be a witness to something you haven't seen. That last part of that foundation - prophets - is also not around today.

The gift of prophecy was needed while there was little NT scripture, and it hadn't been universally propogated either at the time. A prophet could speak directly from God, just as the Word does for us today. Hence when someone insists on the gift of prophecy existing today in a sense it is a lack of respect for the written Word of God and a lack of confidence that God orchestrated just which books would be in the NT canon. He was sovereign in that process I'm convinced, just as He sovereignly stopped giving the gift of prophecy once the New Testament was completed for the body of Christ.

Now, regarding "some of these He doesn't give us anymore," scripture is specific regarding which will cease...

"But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for languages (tongues), they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end..."

Paul never said that the gift of evangelism or teaching or pastoring or edifying or helps... woud come to an end.

1 Corinthians is spoken in very hyperbolic language, so we aren't sure about what Paul meant there, I'll grant that. That's why I do not insist that tongues is not arounf anymore, though I have not been convinced that it is. But prophecy - the danger there is regarding SOLA SCRIPTURA... perhaps someone can explain to me how SOLA SCRIPTURA is valid if the gift of prophecy is still around? (The biblical gift of prophecy)

edited-added: Following are the texts from Acts referring to the resurrection:

Acts 1:22 beginning from the baptism of John until the day He was taken up from us--from among these, it is necessary that one become a witness with us of His resurrection."

Acts 2:31 Seeing this in advance, he spoke concerning the resurrection of the Messiah: He was not left in Hades, and His flesh did not experience decay.

Acts 4:2 because they were provoked that they were teaching the people and proclaiming in the person of Jesus the resurrection from the dead.

Acts 4:33 And with great power the apostles were giving testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was on all of them.

Acts 17:18, 32 Then also, some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers argued with him. Some said, "What is this pseudo-intellectual trying to say?" Others replied, "He seems to be a preacher of foreign deities"--because he was telling the good news about Jesus and the resurrection. When they heard about resurrection of the dead, some began to ridicule him. But others said, "We will hear you about this again."

Acts 23:6, 8 When Paul realized that one part of them were Sadducees and the other part were Pharisees, he cried out in the Sanhedrin, "Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees! I am being judged because of the hope of the resurrection of the dead! For the Sadducees say there is no resurrection, and no angel or spirit, but the Pharisees affirm them all.

Acts 24:15 And I have a hope in God, which these men themselves also accept, that there is going to be a resurrection, both of the righteous and the unrighteous.

Acts 24:21 or about this one statement I cried out while standing among them, 'Today I am being judged before you concerning the resurrection of the dead.' "
An apostle was all about being a witness to the resurrection of the Messiah.

Thx,

BD

humbled
Dec 15th 2005, 03:24 PM
It did not need to be interpreted when used for its main function - a testimony to the Jews that their Messiah had arrived on the scene (and been crucified and rejected by them) - at Pentecost. But it does when exercised in the body of believers.
Brother, I agree with everything you said. The reason it did not need to be interpreted at Pentecost is because the Jews could understand! They were speaking languages that these devout Jews spoke.

Banzy...the same word glossa is used in every circumstance regarding tongues. Where does that word change from known languages to unintelligible babble?

Show me the verse or passage where it changes.

And the word "mysteries" in the NT (which you quoted from 1Cor 14:2) does not mean the same thing a mystery means today. Today it means something that needs to be solved...something that is not understood.

But in the NT era, it meant something that was once not understood but has now been revealed. They skip the whole "investigating the mystery" part and go straight to the conclusion with that word. So when someone speaks a tongue as a mystery in the Spirit, they are revealing some previously unknown truth about God. NOT speaking some hidden thing that only God knows about. Which is why it says "IN" the Spirit, and not "TO" the Spirit.

And on a personal side, when I was a new christian, I went to a church close to my house...it was an AG church, but I didn't know that was any denomination or anything...it was just a church. I made quick friends with those believers; they are dear friends of mine. But one of the first times I went to a prayer gathering, we were sitting in a circle praying and one of the people started babbling LOUDLY in "tongues." I opened my eyes WIDE, and looked around. Everyone was still in prayer, like nothign was happening. I WAS FREAKED OUT. This scared the pants off me. I later talked to my pastor about that and he said it was a normal part of prayer, although this person was a "little" overzealous. Said he'd talk to him, but that he wasn't going to stop him. That was when I started investigating this "gift." And from my studies, I've found that it was indeed misapplied.

The tongues that is portrayed as a "spiritual gift" today is merely a fleshly "show" for people. You do not need to speak in a tongue to speak intimacies with God. You merely need to bring a broken heart and a contrite spirit. THAT is a pleasing sacrifice to God. I'm saddened by the state of the church today where they choose the "showy" gifts and pass it off as "religiosity".

I've seen people "teaching" this technique to kids, too. Now why would you have to teach someone how to speak in tongues? Does it not say in the Scriptures that the SPIRIT gave them utterance? This is rediculous that someone would have to teach it to another, as if God wasn't able to actively distribute His own gifts if He chose to.

Anyway, sorry for the rant. I know I've probably rubbed a few people the wrong way. Please understand that I don't think these people are any less saved than I am. I just believe that this gift has been completely distorted from the biblical description of tongues. It denotes a "spiritual superiority" over others. If you don't speak in tongues, you haven't gotten a second blessing, etc...

Spiritual pride is a SIN.

God bless

BadDog
Dec 15th 2005, 03:39 PM
The requirements for being an apostle were simply 2 things:

1) You had to physically see the resurrected Christ after his crucifixion
Act 1:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Act&chapter=1&verse=3&version=kjv)To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: 2) You had to be commissioned to spread the gospel directly by Jesus himself

And when day came, He called His disciples to Him and chose twelve of them, whom He also named as apostles: Simon, whom He also named Peter, and Andrew his brother; and James and John; and Philip and Bartholomew; and Matthew and Thomas; James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot; Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor. (Lk. 6:13-16; cf. Mat. 10:1-7; Mk. 3:14)

Now the last one who became an apostle after this group was Paul who replaced Judas after the betrayal.

Tab,

Not sure that I agree with all of this, but this is excellent. (Some say that the church made a mistake in commissioning Matthias to replace Judas, and that Paul was actually intended there - that appears to be your position.)

Could be, except the apostles trusted that God would lead them in "drawing straws." Also, Barnabas is specifically listed as an apostle. But the commissioning part is very intrigueing. The Holy Spirit said "set apart for me Barnabas and Paul for the work..." just before that first missionary journey, so clearly Barnabas was commissioned by the Spirit to be "sent out," the root meaning of the Greek.

Acts 13:2-4 As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul for the work that I have called them to." Then, after they had fasted, prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them off. Being sent out by the Holy Spirit, they came down to Seleucia, and from there they sailed to Cyprus.

And note that we don't read about such a commissioning before the 2nd journey.

Thx, I'm looking forward to what else you've got to say on this.

BD

ProjectPeter
Dec 15th 2005, 03:49 PM
Well first of all we do need to distinguish, IMO, between an office and gifts. But to keep things simple: yes - definitely.

It is my opinion, though, that too often Christians waste time fretting over their gifts rather than just getting off their dufts and doing something! :P The best ability is availability... as a pastor, I imagine you often appreciate those who do that.

BDYeah no doubt that is appreciated.


And I agree that we could have done the office and gift thing but I didn't figure it necessary in regard to the question. I figured it pretty safe to assume you knew the difference and since my question was of more a personal nature... didn't figure it necessary. It just dawned on me that I don't think I've ever asked nor have I read anything you said on the matter... so took this as an opportunity to ask it.

ProjectPeter
Dec 15th 2005, 03:53 PM
Also, Barnabas is specifically listed as an apostle. But the commissioning part is very intrigueing. The Holy Spirit said "set apart for me Barnabas and Paul for the work..." just before that first missionary journey, so clearly Barnabas was commissioned by the Spirit to be "sent out," the root meaning of the Greek.

Okay cool... this is where I was going to lead with my post to you and my asking the question I did. Why do we think folks aren't "sent out" today thus fulfilling that qualification?

BadDog
Dec 15th 2005, 03:53 PM
humbled,

Just FYI, my position on tongues is precisely what humbled has posted above. But it becomes devisive, so I rarely, if ever, discuss it. My concern on this forum is the claim that the biblical gift of prophecy is still around. That's a very dangerous and unbiblical theology. I recognize that many say that there is a gift of prophecy which is not "thus says the Lord" around today... but then, how is that different from a gift of exhortation or teaching? The danger of referring to it as a gift of prophecy is that we open the door for other words to be added to scripture and we reduce the authority of scripture.


The tongues that is portrayed as a "spiritual gift" today is merely a fleshly "show" for people. You do not need to speak in a tongue to speak intimacies with God. You merely need to bring a broken heart and a contrite spirit. THAT is a pleasing sacrifice to God. I'm saddened by the state of the church today where they choose the "showy" gifts and pass it off as "religiosity".


Amen! Legit or not (and you know I don't think it is) the issue I have here is the spiritual pride. Instead of "choosing" the "showy" impressive-appearing gifts I would rather speak one word so that people can understand the Word than 10,000 in some other fashion. When people speak to me about the gift of speaking in tongues or other charasmatic gifts I say that I'm too busy exercising a gift that can genuinely build up the body of Christ.

Let's place God's Word in its rightful place in the body of Christ.

BD