Speaking in Tongues a Cessationists’ View

[Saint Steven]

lol

It's just our dopaminergic genes and a reaction to stress and a seeking of pleasure, trying to 'get a high' out of the experience, and all the other Cessationist garbage -- it's not really the Holy Ghost, even though the experience matches exactly what happenned several times in Acts -- oh, yes, also it was said we invite demons in -- I wonder which it is - neurotransmitters or evil spirits?

If it is demons then we need deliverance ministry. Too bad the gifts aren't in operation. I guess Satan wins. How unfortunate.

Which reminds me... These folks like to bad mouth us like this, but when their child has a demon who do they turn to? They run to the Pentecostal church for help. How come?

 

[Hillsage]

That was a quick change of tack. In your previous post you were quite happy to accept 1 Cor 12:13 as referring to the Holy Spirit. Now that your theory was debunked, you've come up with another new hypothesis that is so bizarre it really doesn't warrant any comment.

For one thing the verse doesn't say "HOLY SPIRIT" as you assume. It says "spirit" period. But because of the capitalization you can waffle out. I never did, I said you were baptized by "the Spirit" which is still true. But, as you well know my theology deals with things I can't even get in to, when those I deal with are drowning in the shallows.

We haven't even begun to talk about my teachings of capitalization, or the teachings concerning decomai and lambano concerning the Greek word 'receiving' as being specific for the reception of the holy spirit of Christ for salvation versus the receiving of the supernatural holy spirit power FROM the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues. So no I have no problem saying that what I said before has not changed one bit. You're just not 'seeing' what is truly being said.
Go back to my post before the last post, you just responded to, and see if I am not STILL saying the very same thing I WAS saying which your GRUDEM theology also does not understand because he too is unable to reference biblical context outside of the "ungifted/unlearned" indoctrinated pretext.

That's what I said before, and you didn't catch it then and still don't. From my post before the post where 'you think' I've made a track change.....NOT!!!

Pay attention to my capitalizations. I'm simply said more than your theology has ever been able relate to.

"Being baptized BY the Spirit into the body of Christ with 'the spirit OF Christ', simply happens BEFORE being baptized IN holy spirit power from the Holy Spirit which is subsequent.

JOH 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."

So I made no track change, but you need to and won't. I think i t's called "kicking against the goads."

 

[swordsman1]

Focus on PROMISE, not how it comes, but WHO IT IS TO!

And Acts 2:39 gives that clearly -- with NO PROVISO of

Exactly, the promise of the Holy Spirit is to "all whom the Lord our God will call". Not to those who wait for a 2nd blessing.

Peter goes on

Acts 2:38 "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."
​

No waiting for a 2nd blessing there either.
Nor here:

Gal 3:2 "Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?"​

Nor here.

Eph 1:13 "In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit"​

Luk 24:49
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.
Act 1:4
And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

Who is it to? Not us. Or do we too have go and tarry in Jerusalem before we receive the Spirit?

 

[Anto9us]

rofl
we are in bad shape, Steve! We need deliverance but the power has ceased that could help us!

 

[Albion]

Suit yourself.
If you don't believe it, you don't believe it. I can't help you.

Not if you're unwilling to consider the facts I presented to you, no.

 

[swordsman1]

Generally, it is a Holy Spirit baptism SUBSEQUENT to conversion -- but the Cornelius household disrupts that 'pattern' -- so WHY SEEK A 'PATTERN'?

Exactly. The subsequence pattern is incompatible with this in many other scriptures.

I am not seeking the pattern, I am seeking to refute it!

I had blue flames hovering over me that came through the roof of the car that I was in -- my friends who laid hands on me did not see the blue flames, but I did, in a vision just for me.

If people are claiming Pentecost as a pattern for today then everyone must also have tongues of fire upon their heads and hear a mighty rushing wind before they receive the Spirit.

 

[Saint Steven]

... things I can't even get in to, when those I deal with are drowning in the shallows. …

That is so funny. Thanks, you made my day.

 

[swordsman1]

Well, if the early church fathers spoke in tongues then that was after the Apostles died. So much for the theory of Cessationism. POOF!

When did I say tongues etc ceased when the last Apostle died?

But the early church fathers didn't speak in tongues. Your own quote from Irenaeius tells us he had only heard 2nd hand reports of tongues. It was already getting rare. Your quote from Eusebius also looks dubious, he talks "of those that flourished in these times". What times? Presumably he is recollecting the past. I'll have to check.

 

[Anto9us]

We don't have to go tarry in Jerusalem -- we are the AFAR OFF!

Act 2:39
For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

 

[Saint Steven]

Not if you're unwilling to consider the facts I presented to you, no.

Facts? We are talking about supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit. How can such a thing be proven or disproven with "facts"?

 

[Saint Steven]

We don't have to go tarry in Jerusalem -- we are the AFAR OFF!

Act 2:39
For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

Maybe that's why they think we are so "far off". lol

 

[swordsman1]

I don't think ANY of the gifts or offices have 'ceased'.

We don't call people apostles yet some do the work of apostles - missionaries start churches and keep up with their progress - they are not famous people like the Apostle Paul that we know from scripture; yet they do great works.

I know a very humble man who smuggled Bibles into Russia at the height of the Soviet Union's power - he did amazing things ministering to Russian Christians.

Was John Wesley an apostle? He did the things apostles did - supervising other preachers in England and in America until Francis Asbury took over in this country - early Methodism is full of apostles on horseback...

Do Catholics consider their Popes an apostle? Orthodox their patriarchs?

Who says Prophets don't exist anymore?
They are probably RARE -- heck, they were RARE even in the New Testament -- I only know of Agabus and Phillip's four virgin daughters and a few unnamed prophets are mentioned in the New Testament; but face it, Prophets were rare as a two-dollar bill! They were not non-existent like a three-dollar bill, but they were rare.

I sit here safe at my computer in the USA, but elsewhere in the world Christians face great persecution, and they have LEADERS that may include Apostles and Prophets -- at least doing the FUNCTION; obviously it would be hard to find someone who has SEEN THE RISEN LORD -- but Jesus was able to appear to Paul and how do I know He did not appear to others? Apostles are those SENT WITH A COMMISSION, and may include Christians we will never hear of or know about in our online world where the worst that can happen to us is get banned from a message-board.

As Steve says -- you CANNOT PUT GOD IN A BOX -- you cannot cage the Holy Ghost and say "this is what He can and cannot do"; we are just humans - we have no idea what the Holy Ghost is capable of.

When the word 'apostles' appears in the New Testament it is always referring to the divinely appointed, eyewitness apostles of Christ: the twelve, Paul, etc. Nowhere does the word refer to anyone else. That is who it refers to in 1 Cor 12:28 and Eph 4:11. There are no such apostles today. That gift ceased.

 

[Anto9us]

If people are claiming Pentecost as a pattern for today then everyone must also have tongues of fire upon their heads and hear a mighty rushing wind before they receive the Spirit.

Bah. Some people do hear wind, I am the only one that saw blue flames that I know of - the tongues of fire at Pentecost were only then - not at Cornelius' house - where Peter described it as "the holy ghost fell on them as it did us at the beginning". So the same baptism of the Holy Spirit need not include every element at Pentecost every time it occurs.

 

[Saint Steven]

When did I say tongues etc ceased when the last Apostle died?

But the early church fathers didn't speak in tongues. Your own quote from Irenaeius tells us he had only heard 2nd hand reports of tongues. It was already getting rare. Your quote from Eusebius also looks dubious, he talks "of those that flourished in these times". What times? Presumably he is recollecting the past. I'll have to check.

You need to pick a side of the argument to be on.

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

This it true up to a point. But you need to show that God gave the charismatic gifts in other ways beyond the two outpourings and the Apostles' hands.

No, I don't. You're shifting the burden of proof to others, when it is up to you to show that scripture definitely makes 'distinction' between charismatic gifts and other gifts, or states specifically that gifts can 'only' be given by the laying on of hands.

But scripture does not make such a distinction, nor does it put restrictions on how the Spirit can give gifts. That scripture gives some examples of how various gifts were used and when, such as large public displays in the early church, doesn't mean that all 'other ways' not specifically mentioned are excluded.

Imagine Sally has a fruit basket and gives fruit to her friends as she pleases. Tim tells Jim, "Yesterday I saw Sally give some raspberries to Toby to pass on to his mother, and I saw her give blueberries to Toby to pass on to Jasmine. John has some bananas Sally gave him, and Letisha has some apples. Do you think she'll give me some raspberries if I ask?"
Jim replies: "Oh no. Obviously she only passes on berries through Toby, and Toby is out of town right now."

Such logic would be nonsensical. There is no reason for Jim to assume that Sally fundamentally treats berries differently than other fruit, or that because she used an intermediary a couple times she must always use an intermediary or that same intermediary.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

However...

Being able to make sounds and convince oneself that it is a supernatural gift is not, after all, proof of anything.

Of course it isn't! But if a person takes steps of faith involving asking and receiving and then releases faith to speak in tongues, God will honour that person's faith and inspire the language. It is the faith of the person approaching God that makes the difference.

In my reading of Acts and early Church history up to the fourth century, tongues, along with healing were a normal part of church activity. The number of Church fathers who mentioned tongues and healing treated them as being a normal for every person who received Christ. But there was a significant change after the fourth century. I wonder why that change happened? The clues are in what the Church fathers around the fourth and fifth centuries said about the general state of the church during those times. From what I read, these Church fathers certainly said that tongues and healing had died out and ceased, but they never said that it was meant to happen. So what was different about the Church of the fifth century AD from the early church before then?

 

[Hillsage]

If it is demons then we need deliverance ministry. Too bad the gifts aren't in operation. I guess Satan wins. How unfortunate.

Which reminds me... These folks like to bad mouth us like this, but when their child has a demon who do they turn to? They run to the Pentecostal church for help. How come?

I started and ran the deliverance ministry, for 2 years, in our church 10 years ago. We saw things the 'nominal' church would say were 'the devil' deceiving us into 'thinking' we actually tapped in to "if by the finger of God I cast out devils".

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

We have zero scripture to support your claims for tongues outlasting the Apostles who administered them.

The whole of scripture was completed before the last Apostle (John) died. So demanding that there be scriptures talking about the use of tongues post-Apostle is rather silly. And scripture never states that tongues "must" be passed via one of the original Apostles or by any apostle at all.

However, there is scriptural proof that tongues still continues as a gift the Holy Spirit may give:

"Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known." I Cor 13:8-12

It's very clear that tongues and prophecy continue as gifts the Holy Spirit may give until we "see face to face" and "know fully" - i.e. until we come face to face with Christ at His second coming.

"They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads." Rev 22:4

 

[Hillsage]

It still remains no Apostles - no charismatic gifts.

Whereas I'm going to say still WAFFLING and I will now leave off dealing with you like you threatened to do with me, because I don't believe in bibliolotry. Hopefullly if you've learned nothing else of me, you know that I know scripture well enough and love 'the bible' more than any other book.

 

[Albion]

Of course it isn't!

You see...agreement is possible.

But if a person takes steps of faith involving asking and receiving and then releases faith to speak in tongues, God will honour that person's faith and inspire the language. It is the faith of the person approaching God that makes the difference.

Possibly, although you are assuming that the result that is claimed as a result of that praying etc is genuine. You do not know that it is; and there have been many cases of mistaken assumptions about these things as well as actual phonies. So while I do not take issue with the point in general terms, neither is there any reason to talk as though what you observe is always real or, for that matter, the result of specific praying, etc.

In my reading of Acts and early Church history up to the fourth century, tongues, along with healing were a normal part of church activity.

I agree that they gradually disappeared. I have not sided with the claim that they ceased upon the passing of the last Apostle or that it happened for that reason.

I wonder why that change happened? The clues are in what the Church fathers around the fourth and fifth centuries said about the general state of the church during those times. From what I read, these Church fathers certainly said that tongues and healing had died out and ceased, but they never said that it was meant to happen. So what was different about the Church of the fifth century AD from the early church before then?

It was at about that time that the church finalized and consolidated its beliefs, became the established church of the Roman Empire, and disposed of the greatest heresy or rival Christian movement of the ancient period, Arianism.

The gifts are generally seen as having a purpose, which was to facilitate the spread of the church into a hostile world, and this appears to be the time when that was accomplished.