Speak in Tongues - essential :

[Alithis]

But I expect there are very few areas, if any, that only have one rare unique language. They would need to be totally untouched by civilization, otherwise I expect they would have English at least (or whatever their lingua franca).




You need the gospel to see people saved, the rest are useless to save. And where do we find that? Romans 10:17 "So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God"

If they are not given the bible shortly after arriving the missionaries are certainly not doing their job.

Can't find that scripture either... Go and give them a library of books.

Nope he said Go heal the sick preach the gospel drive out devils etc
So if the gifts ended..so did the Gospel.
The devilish falsehood of cessationism just continues to show itself to be preposterous .

 

[Biblicist]

Of course many won't have a bible in the mother tongue of their local ethnic group. But there would be very few populated areas of the world, if any, that are totally untouched by civilization and so not be within travelling distance of a bible in say English or Spanish. If you have proof otherwise please supply a link.

You only need to do what took me a couple of seconds to do via Google with the search parameter “how many people groups do not have a bible in their language”, where you would have come across the first link which also happened to be to Wycliffe which said:

You seem to be under the illusion that hundreds or even thousands of unreached and unregenerate people who do not have the Bible in their own language will have the foresight to travel to another region in their country to have some someone who speaks in another language to sit down and read the Bible to them, this sort of thinking seems to be a bit too far fetched even for a cessationist, who knows, maybe you simply enjoy taking a different approach to life in general.

 

[swordsman1]

You only need to do what took me a couple of seconds to do via Google with the search parameter “how many people groups do not have a bible in their language”, where you would have come across the first link which also happened to be to Wycliffe which said:

And they define 'heart language' as being their mother tongue (www.wycliffe.org.uk/blog/2015/02/breaking-down-walls). That doesn't mean 160 million don't have access to a bible in another language. As I said there would be few if any areas where people cannot travel to a nearby town where there will be a bible in another language they can understand, or which someone else can translate for them.

You seem to be under the illusion that hundreds or even thousands of unreached and unregenerate people who do not have the Bible in their own language will have the foresight to travel to another region in their country to have some someone who speaks in another language to sit down and read the Bible to them, this sort of thinking seems to be a bit too far fetched even for a cessationist, who knows, maybe you simply enjoy taking a different approach to life in general.

So you would define an unreached area as somewhere where there isn't a bible on every street corner or perhaps even in every home? The question we are seeking to answer is how many populated areas are there in the world where the bible has not been introduced (ie within reasonable travelling distance).

I see you still cannot resist adding one or two mocking/insulting remarks into your replies. This seems to be a pretty common trait among so called "Spirit filled" believers.

 

[swordsman1]

"Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely give."

You missed out the preceding verse "And as you go, preach...". But anyway they were specific instructions to the twelve apostles at that specific time, not a universal guide to evangelism for everyone else since then. How many dead have you raised recently? Did you avoid the Gentile areas?

Actually those are the first things charismatic/Pentecostal missionaries do when they enter areas that don't have the gospel.

What, put on a circus show with regular performances of the leg-lengthening trick? That will certainly draw a crowd I suppose. People love magic shows. But it won't save them.

Exactly.

Including the tongues and interpretation kind of prophecy.

You think tongues + interpretation = prophecy? Don't tell Biblicist that, he'll be up in arms.

That's silly. Where does it say that they will not also cease?

1 Cor 13:8 says only the gifts of tongues, prophecy and word of knowledge will cease when "completeness" comes. To say that all the other gifts will cease as well is adding to scripture.

By the way - there will be healing, giving, teaching and administration on the new earth. In addition - there will likely be evangelism during the millennial reign of Christ on this earth.

Make you mind up. Which gifts then do you think will cease when "completeness" comes?

 

[swordsman1]

So if the gifts ended..so did the Gospel.

Healing the sick and driving out devils is not the Gospel.

 

[Albion]

1 Corinthians 14:22-23 shows that tongues is a sign to the unbeliever. Why? Because they will speak against it. They will think you are mad.

Keep in mind that no one is arguing that there were not tongues or what accounts for them or what they did. Or even that God might, from time to time, gift someone with any of these abilities. This disagreement started with the point about them having been continuously a feature of the church or not.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Keep in mind that no one is arguing that there were not tongues or what accounts for them or what they did. Or even that God might, from time to time, gift someone with any of these abilities. This disagreement started with the point about them having been continuously a feature of the church or not.

Between the first century and now, it was pretty dry on all accounts regarding the Spirit. Like a long hot dry summer. And dark. That's why they call it the dark ages IMO The first century and now is the early and latter rain.

 

[pescador]

And they define 'heart language' as being their mother tongue (www.wycliffe.org.uk/blog/2015/02/breaking-down-walls). That doesn't mean 160 million don't have access to a bible in another language. As I said there would be few if any areas where people cannot travel to a nearby town where there will be a bible in another language they can understand, or which someone else can translate for them.




So you would define an unreached area as somewhere where there isn't a bible on every street corner or perhaps even in every home? The question we are seeking to answer is how many populated areas are there in the world where the bible has not been introduced (ie within reasonable travelling distance).

I see you still cannot resist adding one or two mocking/insulting remarks into your replies. This seems to be a pretty common trait among so called "Spirit filled" believers.

You need to travel my friend. Shut off your TV or turn off your tablet or whatever device you get your news from and go out into the real world. It's not all cities and literate people.

There are millions of people who are illiterate or functionally illiterate who must walk considerable distances to find other villages, where people live the same as they do. Unfortunately people are often kept illiterate so that they cannot learn anything other than "the truth".

It's not the fantasy world you think it is.

 

[swordsman1]

There are millions of people who are illiterate or functionally illiterate who must walk considerable distances to find other villages, where people live the same as they do. Unfortunately people are often kept illiterate so that they cannot learn anything other than "the truth".

Those are not areas that the Bible hasn't reached though.

 

[Marvin Knox]

1 Cor 13:8 says only the gifts of tongues, prophecy and word of knowledge will cease when "completeness" comes. To say that all the other gifts will cease as well is adding to scripture. Make you mind up. Which gifts then do you think will cease when "completeness" comes?

That's silly. Where does it say that they will not also cease?

By the way - there will be healing, giving, teaching and administration on the new earth. In addition - there will likely be evangelism during the millennial reign of Christ on this earth.

Note my highlighted question above. The scriptures say nowhere that they will not also cease. That's just a simple fact.

You read more into it than I intended.

My later use of the "by the way" phrase indicates another thought concerning what you said earlier namely:

....... it wouldn't just be tongues and prophecy that cease, all the spiritual gifts would cease. There won't be any further need for healing, giving, teaching, evangelism, pastors, mercy, administration etc.

Now you say:

1 Cor 13:8 says only the gifts of tongues, prophecy and word of knowledge will cease when "completeness" comes. To say that all the other gifts will cease as well is adding to scripture.

Which is it? Will all gifts cease when the Lord comes or is saying that they will (as you clearly did) "adding to scripture"?

You were the one who said that they will cease when the Lord comes (which is my position concerning the timing indicated by the passage, as opposed to yours about the "widely distributed" scriptures).

I was correcting you on your error.

These tit for tats get a bit convoluted.

I'll just say that IMO your position goes beyond what the scriptures teach. I know that cessationists often cite the idea that it is the completed canon which will bring about cessation (or in your case, saying that it is the wide distribution of the scriptures which makes things perfect). But it is, as I see it, simply stretching the plain meaning of the passage to fit into a preconceived position which you have. That's not good theology.

 

[swordsman1]

Note my highlighted question above. The scriptures say nowhere that they will not also cease. That's just a simple fact.

You are shifting the burden of proof. If you are making the assertion that gifts other than the 3 mentioned would also cease, then the onus is upon you to prove it, not on me to prove it cannot be more than 3.

Which is it? Will all gifts cease when the Lord comes or is saying that they will (as you clearly did) "adding to scripture"?

Along with most people I believe that all spiritual gifts will cease at the eschaton. As they are for the benefit of the church in the world, they will not be needed in eternal glory because the mission of the church will be complete. Yet only 3 gifts cease when "completeness" comes, not the others. Another reason it cannot be the eschaton.

I'll just say that IMO your position goes beyond what the scriptures teach. I know that cessationists often cite the idea that it is the completed canon which will bring about cessation (or in your case, saying that it is the wide distribution of the scriptures which makes things perfect). But it is, as I see it, simply stretching the plain meaning of the passage to fit into a preconceived position which you have. That's not good theology.

If you think the canon view is stretching it then the eschaton theory is even more implausible seeing that neither Christ nor anything eschatological is ever mentioned in the passage, and "completeness" is the more likely meaning of teleion than "the perfect". The fact of the matter is Paul does not spell it out for us. So we have to employ a fair bit of exegetical analysis. At first glance the eschaton view seems to fit when people see words "perfect" and "face to face", but look a little deeper and it becomes obvious that the canon view makes more exegetical sense.

 

[pescador]

Those are not areas that the Bible hasn't reached though.

What is your basis for saying this?

 

[pescador]

If there is a purpose for God revoking the gifts that he has given to believers, what is it? God, being good, does not revoke that which he has given.

 

[Phantasman]

I don't care if 'THAT WHICH IS PERFECT", "COMPLETENESS", or "final maturity" is used for an English rendition of TO TELEION; makes no difference to me.

TO TELEION is a time when we shall no longer SEE THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY -- as Paul, even in his own personal maturity -- said was still the case with him, even in adulthood/maturity.

It is a time/state of things WHICH HAS NOT COME YET, TO THIS DAY.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with the "completion of the New Testament writings".

THE ANALOGIES OF 'MILK VS. MEAT', "child to man", are illustrative of the human life of a Christian as he or she progresses in spiritual development -- they do not relate in any way to a FINAL KINGDOM COME when we will no longer see through a glass darkly -- it aint over til it's over.

And it aint over yet.

Agree in the most part.

Asking for the Kingdom come, and Jesus saying that the Kingdom is here, within us and all around us, is the mystery. I prefer the non Canon explanations, since the detail increases, and as 2 Peter says, Pauls words can be confusing to the spiritually unlearned. 2 Peter 3:15-16

To know ones self is to know that there are physical ears and spiritual ears. Physical eyes, spiritual eyes. But truth is given to us, not in words (that can be arranged and rearranged) but in "types and images" the mind accepts through spiritual intervention (Holy Spirit [teacher, comforter, truth]).

The NT Canon provides enough to ask (many) questions. It is a spiritual "101". It's lack of (fuller) spiritual information makes us ask questions that "different church leaders" will answer for us. But how can there be so many different answers to one question?

Truth did not come into the world naked, but it came in types and images. The world will not receive truth in any other way. There is a rebirth and an image of rebirth. It is certainly necessary to be born again through the image. Which one? Resurrection. The image must rise again through the image. The bridal chamber and the image must enter through the image into the truth: this is the restoration. Not only must those who produce the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, do so, but have produced them for you. If one does not acquire them, the name ("Christian") will also be taken from him.- Gospel of Philip

In my 47 years of study, the first "inside the box" the latter "outside the box", the box has become clear. Where you are led to experience "continuing spiritual knowledge" is a choice. One that I can say (for me) gave me the spiritual ears and eyes I was denied by the (few Gospel) Canon integrations by the OT theology.

 

[Marvin Knox]

You are shifting the burden of proof. If you are making the assertion that gifts other than the 3 mentioned would also cease, then the onus is upon you to prove it, not on me to prove it cannot be more than 3.

I'm pleased that you said "if you are making the assertion", because I have made no such assertion.

However you absolutely have made a assertion addressed in the next section which is absolutely incorrect.

Along with most people I believe that all spiritual gifts will cease at the eschaton. As they are for the benefit of the church in the world, they will not be needed in eternal glory because the mission of the church will be complete. Yet only 3 gifts cease when "completeness" comes, not the others. Another reason it cannot be the eschaton.

You are wrong in this. If indeed "most people" say the same thing, they are wrong as well.

I have said, "There will be healing, giving, teaching and administration on the new earth. In addition - there will likely be evangelism during the millennial reign of Christ on this earth."

You have said that there will not be healing giving, teaching and administration after the Lord comes back. You are wrong as is clearly shown in the book of Revelation.

In your zeal to make this about the completion of scripture you are saying some things which simply are not true.

If you think the canon view is stretching it then the eschaton theory is even more implausible seeing that neither Christ nor anything eschatological is ever mentioned in the passage,

1 Cor. 13:12 says, "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."

Face to face means face to face not face to page. I think you are not only stretching things. You are simply ignoring the plain meaning of the scriptures.

The fact of the matter is Paul does not spell it out for us. So we have to employ a fair bit of exegetical analysis.

Exactly. It isn't spelled out.

That's why it's so ridiculous of you to take one simple sentence and stretch it so far out of line that it does away with the very reason for all of the instructions concerning the use of such gifts preceding and following that sentence.

The reason for those instructions is very simple. They are for anyone who is able to read the scriptures - namely the Christians of this day when the scriptures are so readily available to the church.

At first glance the eschaton view seems to fit when people see words "perfect" and "face to face"

One of the most basic rules of Bible interpretation is one learned in the very first year of every seminary which teaches the verbal plenary inspiration of the Bible.

"WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE OF SCRIPTURE MAKES COMMON SENSE, SEEK NO OTHER SENSE; THEREFORE, TAKE EVERY WORD AT ITS PRIMARY, ORDINARY, USUAL, LITERAL MEANING UNLESS THE FACTS OF THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT, STUDIED IN THE LIGHT OF RELATED PASSAGES AND AXIOMATIC AND FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS INDICATE CLEARLY OTHERWISE."

....... but look a little deeper and it becomes obvious that the canon view makes more exegetical sense.

Look no deeper than the plain sense of the scripture as every new seminary student is taught and you will quickly abandon your wild theory concerning the cessation of gifts when the scriptures were distributed.

The canon view makes no sense whatsoever.

Any new believer who reads the descriptions of the gifts and the instructions in 1 Corinthians for their use in the church and privately would believe (quite correctly) that they are meant for him or her.

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness." 2 Timothy 3:16

This discussion is going nowhere. You have obviously deserted simple Bible based logic in favor of a wild theory of your own. The fact that so many others espouse the same is all the more sad because it so clearly shows s lack of faith in the scriptures IMO.

 

[Alithis]

Healing the sick and driving out devils is not the Gospel.

Way to ignore what Jesus said to do...and your not even doing that part of it

 

[swordsman1]

I'm pleased that you said "if you are making the assertion", because I have made no such assertion.

But you were certainly suggesting it when you said:

Where does it say that they will not also cease?

Note my highlighted question above. The scriptures say nowhere that they will not also cease. That's just a simple fact.​

You are wrong in this. If indeed "most people" say the same thing, they are wrong as well.

Well it is standard continuationist theology:

Continuationism - Wikipedia
This and 1 Corinthians 13:10 mean that Jesus' return and the church's glorification (perfection) will fulfill the gifts of the Spirit (needed due to imperfection), just as Jesus' first coming (his sacrifice being perfect) fulfilled the law (the imperfect). Continuationists believe that Paul wrote lasting instructions about the use of gifts in the church for worship, teaching, and fellowship until the day the Lord comes (1Cor.1:7-8).​

You are obviously not a standard continuationist.

Cessationists and continuationists alike believe all the gifts will no longer be active in the eternal state.

I have said, "There will be healing, giving, teaching and administration on the new earth. In addition - there will likely be evangelism during the millennial reign of Christ on this earth."

You have said that there will not be healing giving, teaching and administration after the Lord comes back. You are wrong as is clearly shown in the book of Revelation.

That would only be true if you are premillennialist. I am an amillenialist. But even most premillennialists as far as I am aware don't interpret this passage as referring to the return of Christ, but rather the eternal state after the final judgement.

You certainly are unorthodox in your theology if you think otherwise.

One of the most basic rules of Bible interpretation is one learned in the very first year of every seminary which teaches the verbal plenary inspiration of the Bible.

"WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE OF SCRIPTURE MAKES COMMON SENSE, SEEK NO OTHER SENSE; THEREFORE, TAKE EVERY WORD AT ITS PRIMARY, ORDINARY, USUAL, LITERAL MEANING UNLESS THE FACTS OF THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT, STUDIED IN THE LIGHT OF RELATED PASSAGES AND AXIOMATIC AND FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS INDICATE CLEARLY OTHERWISE."

But your interpretation is not the plain reading of scripture. The plain reading of scripture makes no mention of Christ, his return or anything eschatological. You are seeing the words "perfect" and "face to face" and wrongly jumping to the conclusion that it is referring to the return of Christ. It is a classic example of the unwarranted associative fallacy whereby A WORD OR PHRASE TRIGGERS OFF AN ASSOCIATED IDEA, CONCEPT, OR EXPERIENCE THAT BEARS NO CLOSE RELATION TO THE TEXT AT HAND, YET IS USED TO INTERPRET THE TEXT.

 

[1stcenturylady]

But you were certainly suggesting it when you said:

Where does it say that they will not also cease?

Note my highlighted question above. The scriptures say nowhere that they will not also cease. That's just a simple fact.​

Well it is standard continuationist theology:

Continuationism - Wikipedia
This and 1 Corinthians 13:10 mean that Jesus' return and the church's glorification (perfection) will fulfill the gifts of the Spirit (needed due to imperfection), just as Jesus' first coming (his sacrifice being perfect) fulfilled the law (the imperfect). Continuationists believe that Paul wrote lasting instructions about the use of gifts in the church for worship, teaching, and fellowship until the day the Lord comes (1Cor.1:7-8).​

You are obviously not a standard continuationist.

Cessationists and continuationists alike believe all the gifts will no longer be active in the eternal state.




That would only be true if you are premillennialist. I am an amillenialist. But even most premillennialists as far as I am aware don't interpret this passage as referring to the return of Christ, but rather the eternal state after the final judgement.

You certainly are unorthodox in your theology if you think otherwise.




But your interpretation is not the plain reading of scripture. The plain reading of scripture makes no mention of Christ, his return or anything eschatological. You are seeing the words "perfect" and "face to face" and wrongly jumping to the conclusion that it is referring to the return of Christ. It is a classic example of the unwarranted associative fallacy whereby A WORD OR PHRASE TRIGGERS OFF AN ASSOCIATED IDEA, CONCEPT, OR EXPERIENCE THAT BEARS NO CLOSE RELATION TO THE TEXT AT HAND, YET IS USED TO INTERPRET THE TEXT.

I know this is off topic but could you just briefly tell me what you believe to be amillennialist?


As for tongues and the other gifts mentioned in 1 Cor. 13, they will cease when we see him face to face. Jesus will come and make all things perfect and they will not be needed any longer like they are needed today.

 

[Marvin Knox]

QUOTE="swordsman1, post: 71481621, member: 376452"]But you were certainly suggesting it when you said: Where does it say that they will not also cease?[/QUOTE]
Not at all. Like I said, "The scriptures say nowhere that they will not also cease. That's just a simple fact."

Well it is standard continuationist theology:

Continuationism - Wikipedia
This and 1 Corinthians 13:10 mean that Jesus' return and the church's glorification (perfection) will fulfill the gifts of the Spirit (needed due to imperfection), just as Jesus' first coming (his sacrifice being perfect) fulfilled the law (the imperfect). Continuationists believe that Paul wrote lasting instructions about the use of gifts in the church for worship, teaching, and fellowship until the day the Lord comes (1Cor.1:7-8).​

You are obviously not a standard continuationist.

Nor did I claim to be.

By the way - one should not get their theology from Wikipedia. Nor should they base their opinion concerning the theology of others on what Wikipedia says about them.

Most people - my self certainly included - are well able to tell you directly what they do and do not believe.

As for me in particular, I don't try to confine my thoughts to certain expectations of me be they from the likes of Wikipedia of some kind of TULIP crutch.

Cessationists and continuationists alike believe all the gifts will no longer be active in the eternal state.

I can't speak for others. But I see healing, administrations, and teaching among other things on the new earth. I also see evangelism in the millennium. But then I've already said that haven't I.

That would only be true if you are premillennialist. I am an amillenialist.

Why doesn't it surprise me that you are an amilennialist? You've already shown that you don't take the plain sense of scripture but try to make scriptures fit your preconceived notions.

But even most premillennialists as far as I am aware don't interpret this passage as referring to the return of Christ, but rather the eternal state after the final judgement. You certainly are unorthodox in your theology if you think otherwise.

If that be true, I'll take that as a compliment.

To me - face to face means face to face. Silly me.

.......your interpretation is not the plain reading of scripture.

Your interpretation which says that after the canon is compiled and after it is distributed to a certain degree the directions for the use of tongues will no longer be in effect -- is not the plain reading of the scripture. That's for sure.

Even those who don't believe that the tongues practiced today are in the Biblical sense can see that your interpretation is not the plain reading of the scripture.

The plain reading of scripture makes no mention of Christ, his return or anything eschatological.

Of course it does.

You are seeing the words "perfect" and "face to face" and wrongly jumping to the conclusion that it is referring to the return of Christ.

Of course I do. Scripture widely distributed or not does not have a face.

It is a classic example of the unwarranted associative fallacy whereby A WORD OR PHRASE TRIGGERS OFF AN ASSOCIATED IDEA, CONCEPT, OR EXPERIENCE THAT BEARS NO CLOSE RELATION TO THE TEXT AT HAND, YET IS USED TO INTERPRET THE TEXT.

Face to face does indeed "trigger off and associated idea".

That idea is that the living Word has a face and the written word does not.

You obviously will not admit when you are wrong even when everyone (regardless of their personal position on tongues as practiced today) can see that you are floundering to support your position.

For that reason, I'll break this off again. There comes a time when debate with a person is useless because they have a personal axe to grind and do not want the truth no matter how clear.

 

[1stcenturylady]

QUOTE="swordsman1, post: 71481621, member: 376452"]But you were certainly suggesting it when you said: Where does it say that they will not also cease?
Not at all. Like I said, "The scriptures say nowhere that they will not also cease. That's just a simple fact."

Nor did I claim to be.

By the way - one should not get their theology from Wikipedia. Nor should they base their opinion concerning the theology of others on what Wikipedia says about them.

Most people - my self certainly included - are well able to tell you directly what they do and do not believe.

As for me in particular, I don't try to confine my thoughts to certain expectations of me be they Wikipedia of some kind of TULIP crutch.

I can't speak for others. But I see healing, administrations, and teaching among other things on the new earth. I also see evangelism in the millennium. But then I've already said that haven't I.

Why doesn't it surprise me that you are an amilennialist? You've already shown that you don't take the plain sense of scripture but try to make scriptures fit your preconceived notions.

If that be true, I'll take that as a compliment.

To me - face to face means face to face. Silly me.

Your interpretation which says that after the canon is compiled and after it is distributed to a certain degree the directions for the use of tongues will no longer be in effect -- is not the plain reading of the scripture. That's for sure.

Even those who don't believe that the tongues practiced today are in the Biblical sense can see that your interpretation is not the plain reading of the scripture.

Of course it does.

Of course I do. Scripture widely distributed or not does not have a face.

Face to face does indeed "trigger off and associated idea".

That idea is that the living Word has a face and the written word does not.

You obviously will not admit when you are wrong even when everyone (regardless of their personal position on tongues as practiced today) can see that you are floundering to support your position.

For that reason, I'll break this off again. There comes a time when debate with a person is useless because they have a personal axe to grind and do not want the truth no matter how clear.

It's in our covenant. When will our covenant end? Did anything cease in the old covenant until Christ died? Not a jot or a tittle ended til all was fulfilled. Then He said, "It is finished." He started the old covenant with His finger on tablets of stone, and ended it with his death. Then He started the new covenant and not a dotting of an I or a crossing of a t will end until He ushers in eternity.