No more miracles because the apostles left?

IamRedeemed · #41 12th May 2008, 02:42 PM

Exactly.

I agree wholeheartedly with this post!

Originally Posted by Artificial Intelligence

Hmm? But still there are no clear passages that say the gifts are or will be removed other than when we see Jesus face to face as Paul said. I mean now we speak, teach and understand as a child but one day we shall be face to face with the Lord no longer looking dimly into the mirror but shall then put off childish things. At THAT point, gifts will cease. Are you face to face yet? I take it that this is referring to the millennial reign, not the church age. He was speaking of the future, and then still spoke of the future as the chapter context flows. They will cease, and we will be face to face then, and we will put off childish things then, but that hasn't happened yet.

But what I recall you bringing forward were commentary rather than scripture. Wasn’t that what got the Jews in trouble when Jesus first came? I mean they built up commentary upon commentary and law upon law that they were unable to make any sense out of the scripture any longer, that God Himself delivered to them.

I think some take old commentary too seriously, because there is often an attitude that those from the past knew more of spiritual matters and understanding the bible, as though today’s understanding is lacking compared to the old traditional commentators. But I see the opposite, that the church has become much more mature, being ever closer to being face to face, having now a greater understanding being more mature now. Not all, but some. Isn't that how maturity works? It progresses, not digresses.

Once we go outside the bible, we can get in a lot of trouble. I’ve mentioned this to you a few times, like with using psychology etc.. it’s not from the bible but manmade. The same problems can be found in using old commentary that really itself does not really address scripture directly but tries to unveil something that is never said, being in this case that the gifts have ceased. It’s just not in scripture, it has nothing to do with some emotional response, it’s just not there. And just because old commentary says one thing or another, that does not make it so, not unless it directly lines up with scripture.
Spoken like a true fundie, eh?

IamRedeemed · #42 12th May 2008, 02:44 PM

Amen. Good post.

Originally Posted by Starcrystal

Really? He never says anything kind about signs and wonders?
Matthew 10:8 - "Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give."
Healing, cleansing and casting out devils would be considered signs...

Mark 9:39 - "But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me."
(Note he doesn't say "just apostles here, does he?")

In Luke 10 Jesus sends out 70 people, not just apostles. He gives them power to perform miracles.
"And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name.
And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you."

And for a time yet to come,
"And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.
And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.
These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will. "
~ Revelation 11:3 - 6

Obviously Jesus did mentions signs and wonders in a possitive light. The only negative he spoke of was when the pharisees demanded a sign to prove Jesus was divine, or else when he warned us about satanic signs that people might believe come from God. If we seek signs specifically to prove the existance of God then we've missed the mark. If we trust in God by faith then God will do signs and wonders at His time and by His will, not because we seek signs but because God is God and does signs!

IamRedeemed · #43 12th May 2008, 02:46 PM

Amen brother Bill!

Originally Posted by bill16652

In other words every time God gives me a word of knowledge, a vision, prospers me, heals me, I am out of the will of God? That puzzles me as He has done all these things in my life and in the lives of many others so how van that be faulty for it wasnt my emotion that payed that bill or fixed my car nor was it emotion that healed me or told me a word that God slipped in something I had no way of jknowing to validate that word to that person. It isnt about winning or losing an argument, it is however about flowing with the Holy Spirit.

onthenarrow · #44 12th May 2008, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by IisJustMe

No, my friend, there was no need to repeat myself. There was no refutation. No one proved my exegesis of the passages to be faulty, and no one will, because, again, they are not.

You've actually contributed nothing to this thread, other than your very inaccurate, dogmatic and shallow opinions, and your false accusations. There has not been - and cannot be - any 'solid' exegetical argument for the cessation of the gifts, nor have you provided any. All you have shown is a very opinionated ignorance of the fathers, but you have not shown any humility in acknowledging what they actually said about these things, which I have partially quoted. I'm really surprised anyone here interacts with you. You're not as knowledgeable as you think, nor do you have the truth you think you have.

The same kind of posts that are seen here -- based on emotion and "experience" -- were used to "counter" solid exegetical argument, and they failed there as well as here.

There is nothing solid about anything you say. Your words are unstable, and based upon a shallow dogmatism. Tell me what in the following is based upon ignorance: Paul said 'despise not prophesyings'; he said 'seek the best gifts'. What is it about those commands you don't understand? He said in 1 Cor that we are to 'come behind in no gift, waiting for the coming of the Lord'. Jesus said that these signs will follow those who believe - they will heal, speak in new tongues etc. You are not in tune with yourself if you think that any honest soul who studies the Bible would come out with your cessationism - something based upon one questionable interpretation of one passage, and lots of strained reasoning. Such a person would have to jump alot of hoops and ignore a lot of scripture to come out with your view, wouldn't they? Like all those scriptures I just quoted. In light of that, if you were in tune with reality you would at least acknowledge that. But I've already learned all I need to know, unfortunately. You propensity to falsely accuse never goes away - now you accuse people of basing things solely on their experience.

I'm sorry you don't accept that your "experience" is not valid in the face of Scripture. So, you can be as condescending as you choose to be in placing "experience" above Scripture, but that is no more valid than claiming the Catholic "tradition" is equal to Scripture.

Unfortunately there has been condescending attitudes - though it hasn't been from just one side.

I couldn't let this comment stand without casting it in the light of truth.

Taking one scripture and ignoring lots of others is not being truthful at all. All you are doing is showing just how shallow your views are. Your misuse of that Scripture would have condemned everyone at Corinth who sought to follow Paul's instructions to seek the gifts. And you can't even see it. You need to take a step back and stop trusting in your own sense of infallibility.

So reply if you will, it won't make any difference. It is not my knowledge or education that makes me right. It is the fact of God's will and desire. Those engaging in the "signs and wonders" gifts today are out of the will of God, period. Not that they are not believers. But they are not obedient. Now I'm done.

You're like a hit and run driver, throwing the accusations and sweeping statements, and then running away before being challenged.

Psalms34 · #45 12th May 2008, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by IisJustMe

So Jesus said to him, "Unless you people see signs and wonders, you simply will not believe." (John 4:48)

I think, in part, why Jesus gave a rebuke, and btw who was that rebuke to but to the Jews, is that they already had the scriptures and the promises and all the fulfilled prophecy, but that was still not enough for them at that time to believe that the Messiah had come in their time. They were instructed to keep an eye open for the Messiah, to believe on that for what they had already received, and in that to maturely keep vigilant. But for some, that was not the case, they needed even more miracles just to accept the Messiah which many did not even with the miracles.

I’ll say it again, as I have said it many times before, the Church is not Israel. We must always keep this in mind when studying what is said in scripture, to keep the perspective in check. We as the church need not receive miracles to believe, we use the miracles to help other believe, just as Jesus did use them for. We use them as a tool, or should use them as such. Only the Prophets of Israel used miracles, they were not delivered by the average Jew. But in the case of the church, we are all considered to be of the Priestly order, thus have access to the same miracles if we choose to utilize them, or let God work them through us. After all it is not of our power, but of the purpose and use of the Holy Spirit God that dwells within us.

It’s the same power used by the Prophets of old, used by Jesus during His earthly ministry, used in the first century church, and is still used today. I won’t attribute every “miracle” I see to it, I know that there are lying wonders, just as there were in the time of the old Prophets, but still today there are such things practiced as have been practiced even back to the days of the Prophets of Israel. Like I said, Paul never stated that they were to be removed, not until face to face.

IisJustMe · #46 12th May 2008, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by onthenarrow

You've actually contributed nothing to this thread, other than your very inaccurate, dogmatic and shallow opinions, and your false accusations. There has not been - and cannot be - any 'solid' exegetical argument for the cessation of the gifts, nor have you provided any.

Yes I have. What has not been provided is any Scriptural refutation of the points I made in that debate forum thread. And no one can. In case you did not know, saying, "You didn't provide any solid exegetical evidence" when it is quite obvious that I at the very least made the effort -- and, by the way, successfully so -- and all the replies have constituted is, essentially, "No. you didn't," without any attempt whatsoever to disprove my conclusions with the same texts that I used, is no proof of anything other than that you disagree. As is the entire remainder of your latest post. So there's no point in dealing with it. And I won't.

I have one other question I would appreciate an answer to, while we're on topic here. Why, when you who are overtly and obviously Pentecostal/Charismatic and who have a forum dedicated to that form of worship forum, do you want to turn the N/D forum into a carbon copy? The vast majority of N/D's are not Pentecostal/Charismatic.

Psalms34 · #47 12th May 2008, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by IisJustMe

I have one other question I would appreciate an answer to, while we're on topic here. Why, when you all have your Pentecostal forum, do you want to turn the N/D forum into a carbon copy? The vast majority of N/D's are not pentecostal/charismatic.

The majority of non-denom churches are not SBC. Quite a lot of non-denom churches have some level of charismatic beliefs. I see more balance here than in Pentecostal vs. Baptist forums. Why you always tryin to run everyone off all the time? hehehe
This isn't the Baptist forum either you know

*never expects an answer of course*

IisJustMe · #48 12th May 2008, 05:58 PM

Originally Posted by Artificial Intelligence

I think, in part, why Jesus gave a rebuke, and btw who was that rebuke to but to the Jews, is that they already had the scriptures and the promises and all the fulfilled prophecy, but that was still not enough for them at that time to believe that the Messiah had come in their time.

Actually, "royal official" suggests Rome, not Jerusalem. In Jerusalem was Pilate. In Galilee, Herod. They were both Romans, not Jews. In fact, in the first century, there was no "royalty" among the Jews. The last king of Israel died in captivity in 706 BC, and of Judea in 587 BC.

The name "Herod" is the name of a royal family that flourished among the Jews in the times of Christ and the Apostles. Herod the Great was the son of Antipater of Idumaea. Appointed king of Judaea B.C. 40 by the Roman Senate at the suggestion of Antony and with the consent of Octavian, he at length overcame the great opposition which the country made to him and took possession of the kingdom 37 BC. After the battle of Actium, he was confirmed by Octavian, whose favor he enjoyed. He was brave and skilled in war, well-educated and well-spoken but also extremely suspicious and cruel. He destroyed the entire royal family of Hasmonaeans, put to death many of the Jews that opposed his government, and proceeded to kill even his dearly beloved wife Mariamne of the Hasmonaean line and his two sons she had borne him.

By these acts of bloodshed, and especially by his love and imitation of Roman customs and institutions and by the burdensome taxes imposed upon his subjects, he so alienated the Jews that he was unable to regain their favor by his splendid restoration of the temple and other acts of munificence. He died in the 70th year of his age, the 37th year of his reign, the 4th before the Dionysian era. In his closing years John the Baptist and Christ were born. Matthew states that he commanded all the male children under two years old in Bethlehem to be slain.

He was followed by Herod surnamed "Antipas", the son of Herod the Great and Malthace, a Samaritan woman. After the death of his father he was appointed by the Romans tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea. His first wife was the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia. He subsequently repudiated her and took to himself Herodias, the wife of his brother Herod Philip. The consequence was that Aretas, his father-in-law, made war against him and conquered him. He cast John the Baptist into prison because John had rebuked him for this unlawful connection, and afterwards, at the instigation of Herodias, he ordered him to be beheaded. Induced by her, too, he went to Rome to obtain from the emperor the title of king. But in consequence of the accusations brought against him by Herod Agrippa I, Caligula banished him (A.D. 42) to Lugdunum in Gaul, where he seems to have died. He was light minded, sensual and vicious, and was the one who oversaw the fifth trial of Christ by asking Him to "do a miracle."

It was to an official of this Herod's court, sent to Capernaum probably as punishment since it was a backwater fishing village that had a poor economy and even poorer prospects for an ambitious man, that Jesus said "Unless you people see signs and wonders, you will not believer."

psalms 91 · #49 12th May 2008, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by IisJustMe

Yes I have. What has not been provided is any Scriptural refutation of the points I made in that debate forum thread. And no one can. In case you did not know, saying, "You didn't provide any solid exegetical evidence" when it is quite obvious that I at the very least made the effort -- and, by the way, successfully so -- and all the replies have constituted is, essentially, "No. you didn't," without any attempt whatsoever to disprove my conclusions with the same texts that I used, is no proof of anything other than that you disagree. As is the entire remainder of your latest post. So there's no point in dealing with it. And I won't.

I have one other question I would appreciate an answer to, while we're on topic here. Why, when you all have your Pentecostal forum, do you want to turn the N/D forum into a carbon copy? The vast majority of N/D's are not pentecostal/charismatic.

Actually I dont, I saw this thread and once I read the OP decided I should respond. I did not start this subject nor would I as I am well aware that there are other beliefs here.

IisJustMe · #50 12th May 2008, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by Artificial Intelligence

The majority of non-denom churches are not SBC. Quite a lot of non-denom churches have some level of charismatic beliefs. I see more balance here than in Pentecostal vs. Baptist forums. Why you always tryin to run everyone off all the time? hehehe
This isn't the Baptist forum either you know
*never expects an answer of course*

I agree, there are many N/D churches who are Pentecostal/Charismatic (and I've edited my question to address the more adamantly such participants here on this forum) and who have respect for the more conservative non-tongues-speaking, prophecy-offering members herein. I count you among them. I count many overly pentecostal/charismatic members here among my friends, though obviously we've disagreed on that point but continued to fellowship. Again, because of the respect.

Perhaps some think I'm not giving them the respect they deserve, and if that's the case, then I apologize and I truly do ask for your forgiveness.

Given that many N/D churches and forum members are "signs and wonders" style of worshipers, they still are not in the majority of N/D's, either in membership on the N/D forum nor among styles of worship among N/D churches as a whole. Lately it seems, there have been participants here who insist on the validity of that style of worship, knowing it is controversial and yet continuing to demand that it be accepted by everyone. Again, I might be misunderstanding that as their attitude, and if I am, the I need to apologize and ask forgiveness for that as well.

Having said all that, can we all perhaps agree that the subject should be avoided for the sake of fellowship? You who hold those beliefs dear have a forum on which they can be openly discussed. And if we can't agree on this, perhaps it's time I go back to the Baptist forum.