Status
Not open for further replies.

NBB

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 19, 2013
3,548
1,537
44
Uruguay
✟445,475.00
Country
Uruguay
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If we also say that all of the gifts are in operation, then we must acknowledge that there are more prophetic future visions or prophetic future foretelling that needs to be added to the Bible. But Revelation 22:18 says,

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:" (Revelation 22:18).

But men have lost their voice from adding to the Bible (Which is a plague not within the pages of Revelation but another part of the Bible):

Bible Corrector Loses Voice on Ankerberg Show
Bible Correctors lose Voice

That is modyfing the bible, or adding words to it, i think no one is interested in adding to the bible, i'm sure there were a lot of prophecies in NT times that didn't not make it to the bible.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
But scripture (the Bible) had its origin in prophecy.
The Bible should not be used to discredit its source. (prophecy)

2 Peter 1:20-21
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

But the Bible leans strongly in the direction of teaching us that prophecies and the miraculous gifts to certain men have ceased. Even church history teaches this. We can actually trace the origin of the Charismatic movement in church history. Granted, it is possible that this could be some kind of cover up or something, and men could have re-written history to favor their own beliefs, but we have the Bible confirming this truth, as well. Paul was not able to operate by his gift of healing like he did in the beginning. Paul was able to send his garments to others so that they could be healed. But later in his life when he was writing to Timothy, he told him to drink a little wine with his water for the infirmities of his stomach instead of sending him a garment of healing.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That is modyfing the bible, or adding words to it, i think no one is interested in adding to the bible, i'm sure there were a lot of prophecies in NT times that didn't not make it to the bible.

There are Charismatic churches that believe they can add new holy words of God via a vision, or prophecy, dream, etc. In fact, a poster (Who has been posting a lot recently in this thread) rejects Sola Scriptura. I realize that not all Charismatics reject Sola Scriptura. But this is actually not consistent of them to do this. They believe the gift of prophecy of foretelling the future (like Paul was able to do with writing NT Scripture) has ceased. Yet, they believe other gifts remain in effect. So they believe in a form of Cessationism.

To make matters worse, most Charismatic churches push a non-existent (or unclearly defined) use of tongues in the Bible (i.e. the ecstatic utterances) and they do not commonly speak real foreign languages (Which is what the Bible says tongues is really about).

They also go against the use of these tongues as prescribed in Scripture. Women were supposed to keep silent in the church. Yet, many Charismatic churches have women speaking in tongues. They were supposed to speak in tongues at 2-3 at most and one at a time (and yet we see large groups of believers speaking in tongues). The Bible also teaches that there needs to be an interpreter. If there was no interpreter, they were to keep silent. Yet, that is not what we see in many Charismatic churches. Also, speaking in tongues was not something for everyone. 1 Corinthians 12 makes this fact abundantly clear. Yet, most Charismatic churches teach that everyone is to speak in tongues or that is something every believer can have if they just practice it (Which is not something taught in Scripture). Speaking in tongues was a gifting to only certain individuals and it was not something for all members of the body.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Interesting to note that the scripture you quoted separates the "signs and wonders" from "gifts of the Holy Ghost". But when you discuss it you combine them. ("miraculous gifts") Which is more biblical?

The point here is that the author of Hebrews is speaking of these things in the past tense. The author is not saying that these things are still being confirmed presently. He said these things were in the beginning and God bore witness (of these things in the beginning) via signs, wonders, and diverse miracles. The Jews sought after a sign. So God gave them signs so as to help them to believe. God also gave these signs and miracles as a way to authenticate God's Word.

"And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen." (Mark 16:20).
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The point here is that the author of Hebrews is speaking of these things in the past tense. The author is not saying that these things are still being confirmed presently. He said these things were in the beginning and God bore witness (of these things in the beginning) via signs, wonders, and diverse miracles. The Jews sought after a sign. So God gave them signs so as to help them to believe. God also gave these signs and miracles as a way to authenticate God's Word.

"And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen." (Mark 16:20).
Your final conclusion, as already noted, is an extrapolation of the text, which is fine, if there is some logical rigor, some sense of logical necessity that seems to demand the conclusion. You haven't shown anything of the kind here.

As analogy, suppose you took a DNA test to confirm a paternity. It is now confirmed for YOU, in the past tense. But what about others who haven't yet seen the DNA results? THEY still need confirmation.

So this is worse than just a lack of logical rigor - it seems to flatly contradict how things work in everyday life.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Wow. You throw out the first half of the verse and keep the second half.
How can you "try the spirits" to see whether they are from God (which means some/many are) if there is no prophecy today?

A believer can be a prophet today or speak prophetically without resorting to foretelling the future. They can expound upon the already existing Scripture that is prophetic in nature. These are not new words, but they are merely a clarification to what the Bible already says (Which many times uses other cross references). A believer can also see the fulfillment of certain events in the real world and say that this is a prophetic fulfillment of Scripture, too. This is not foretelling, but current prophetic telling of things in Scripture.

The test in 1 John 4:3 can apply to humans today. If a person is not confessing Jesus is come in the flesh (like those who deny the deity of Jesus Christ), they are antichrist. For in order for Jesus to come INTO the flesh, He would have to pre-exist as GOD. This makes sense because the Word is God and the Word was made flesh (See John 1:1, and John 1:14).
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
But scripture (the Bible) had its origin in prophecy.
The Bible should not be used to discredit its source. (prophecy)

2 Peter 1:20-21
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

But the canon is closed (Revelation 22:18).
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I am glad that I am ignorant to things that cannot be verified (Which is unlike the Bible).



I believe the Cambridge Edition King James (circa 1900) (The KJV listed at Biblehub.com courtesy of Bible Protector) is the perfect Word of God for our day. Before that time, the Bible perfectly existed in the Latin language. Before that time, the New Testament existed in the Greek, and the Old Testament existed in the Hebrew and Aramaic (Note: The book of Daniel was partially provided to us in Aramaic). The King James today is available in 7 other languages (Spanish, French, Dutch, Norwegian, Thai, Korean, and Brazilian Portuguese).

As for Modern Translations: I believe that there are many problems with Modern Translations (and that the devil's name is placed within them sometimes); However, despite these problems, I myself use and encourage others to use Modern Translations so as to help update the 1600's English within the KJV. For 1600's English can sometimes be difficult to understand.

But a person needs to have ONE final Word of authority. Otherwise, they can either make up their own Word of God, or be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine by the deceptions of other men. We need ONE nailed down Word of God that cannot be altered either by us or another. If not, then we are simply seeing what we want to see or making God and His ways what we desire and not what God desires. So I compare Modern Translations with the KJV. The KJV is my final Word of authority. The original languages can be helpful when we run into a challenging verse or word, but they should not be used as our final Word of authority. The English should not conflict with what the original languages say. For we have our English bibles based on what the original languages say. We did not grow up speaking biblical Hebrew, and biblical Greek to truly have any kind of authority in what these languages say. Even the scholars are interpreting these language hindsight and they did not live during Bible times. There are also two sets of manuscripts. The Textus Receptus (i.e. the line of manuscripts used for the KJV), and the Majority Text (NT Critical Text - which is the line of manuscripts used for the Modern Translations). So there are two vines. From my study on this topic, I have seen how some men (not all) can tend to drift away from God's Word who did not believe that we have a perfect Word of God for our day in our own language.
I am glad that I am ignorant to things that cannot be verified (Which is unlike the Bible).



I believe the Cambridge Edition King James (circa 1900) (The KJV listed at Biblehub.com courtesy of Bible Protector) is the perfect Word of God for our day. Before that time, the Bible perfectly existed in the Latin language. Before that time, the New Testament existed in the Greek, and the Old Testament existed in the Hebrew and Aramaic (Note: The book of Daniel was partially provided to us in Aramaic). The King James today is available in 7 other languages (Spanish, French, Dutch, Norwegian, Thai, Korean, and Brazilian Portuguese).

As for Modern Translations: I believe that there are many problems with Modern Translations (and that the devil's name is placed within them sometimes); However, despite these problems, I myself use and encourage others to use Modern Translations so as to help update the 1600's English within the KJV. For 1600's English can sometimes be difficult to understand.

But a person needs to have ONE final Word of authority. Otherwise, they can either make up their own Word of God, or be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine by the deceptions of other men. We need ONE nailed down Word of God that cannot be altered either by us or another. If not, then we are simply seeing what we want to see or making God and His ways what we desire and not what God desires. So I compare Modern Translations with the KJV. The KJV is my final Word of authority. The original languages can be helpful when we run into a challenging verse or word, but they should not be used as our final Word of authority. The English should not conflict with what the original languages say. For we have our English bibles based on what the original languages say. We did not grow up speaking biblical Hebrew, and biblical Greek to truly have any kind of authority in what these languages say. Even the scholars are interpreting these language hindsight and they did not live during Bible times. There are also two sets of manuscripts. The Textus Receptus (i.e. the line of manuscripts used for the KJV), and the Majority Text (NT Critical Text - which is the line of manuscripts used for the Modern Translations). So there are two vines. From my study on this topic, I have seen how some men (not all) can tend to drift away from God's Word who did not believe that we have a perfect Word of God for our day in our own language.
All this talk about fallible translations and fallible exegesis only serves to confirm that we need infallible revelation (prophecy).
 
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,943
11,698
Neath
✟1,002,191.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
For me, tongues ended with the Apostles. They spoke 'real' tongues. 'Languages'. Not gobbledegook. Their words were understood. These days, 'tongues' are not interpreted / understood.

Why would God have someone uttering sounds that they themselves cannot understand? Why would He need to do that? It makes no sense.

As for Sola Scripture, in the early church, and for hundreds of years after, people relied on oral teaching. Even before the 'Bible' was put together! The Apostles went out teaching by word. With Apostolic succession this was carried on. It was only when the printing press was invented that people had a bible readily available. And even then, most couldnt read or write!
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There are Charismatic churches that believe they can add new holy words of God via a vision, or prophecy, dream, etc. In fact, a poster (Who has been posting a lot recently in this thread) rejects Sola Scriptura. I realize that not all Charismatics reject Sola Scriptura. But this is actually not consistent of them to do this.
Um...you reject Sola Scriptura too, because it's impossible to carry out in actual practice, as I have shown. You just don't ADMIT that you've rejected Sola Scriptura.

(Sigh) Here it is again. On what basis do you accept Scripture as inspired? Whatever the basis (let's call it Basis-X), you therefore have two authorities:
(1)You draw some religious conclusions predicated on Basis-X.
(2)You draw some religious conclusions predicated on Scripture.
Which contradicts the Sola in Sola Scriptura.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The Bible also teaches that there needs to be an interpreter. If there was no interpreter, they were to keep silent.
That's an odd reading of the text. Here's what Paul said:

"If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God." (14:28).

Personally I don't take that to necessarily mean 'absolute silence' - surely it means that he can speak the tongue quietly to God? Most churches allow for periods of quiet prayer (interspersed with periods where everyone is silent except for the appointed speaker). During these periods of quiet prayer, why not pray in tongues?
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
To all:

Looking to evidences that proves the Bible is divine is not in contradiction to Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura is saying that the Bible alone is our sole guide on spiritual matters of the faith. Biblical evidences merely point that God's Word is true. They do not offer extra biblical revelation or words from God. Yes, even the creation speaks of the existence of GOD, but this again is not a way we build our faith about where we learn about Jesus Christ and salvation in Him and His good ways. When we are talking about salvation, doctrine, and living for the Lord, this is derived from the Bible alone and not in any vision, man made doctrine, prophecy, biblical evidence, etc.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
For me, tongues ended with the Apostles. They spoke 'real' tongues. 'Languages'. Not gobbledegook. Their words were understood. These days, 'tongues' are not interpreted / understood.
It makes no sense for Paul to speak of the gift of interpretation, in that case. Yet he did.
Why would God have someone uttering sounds that they themselves cannot understand? Why would He need to do that? It makes no sense.
It's a form of communication with God and therefore a form of intimacy. Suppose the joy of the Lord has just filled your heart with an overflowing desire to praise Him but you sense a deficiency in finding appropriate words to say. The Holy Spirit can give you assurance that the stream of words given to you in a foreign tongue was apropos.

Why not your native language? See Num 12:8. Clear revelation (prophecy) is a high privilege. God doesn't grant it willy nilly to every immature believer. Even mature believers don't necessarily get clear prophecy EVERY SINGLE SECOND OF THE DAY. Therefore tongues is a middle ground, an intimate form of communication beneficial, albeit a compromise.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
To all:

I would encourage anyone who is in doubt about Sola Scriptura to read 2 Timothy 3:16-17 for 40 days repeatedly in deep prayer. Let God speak to you with these words and do not fight them. Believe every single word that is within this passage.

For it says all Scripture (not traditions, and not biblical evidences, and not visions or prophecies) is profitable for doctrine, correction, instruction in righteousness and is profitable so that the man of God may be PERFECT unto EVERY GOOD WORK. Every good work. That the man of GOD may be PERFECT unto EVERY good work. Not some good works as if to say that we need something else to be added so as to be guided unto being perfect unto every good work.

In other words, it is saying Scripture is sufficient for the man of God to be perfect unto every good work (Which means that we do not need anything else to be perfect unto every good work).
 
  • Winner
Reactions: David Kent
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
If you know your Bible, you know that if men did not obey God according to HIS WORD, then they were destroyed. The sons of Aaron is one example. They did their own thing. They put forth strange fire, and they were destroyed by God. They did not obey the words of the LORD. They did their own thing. Many today, want to venture outside of God's Word. They want to go outside the safety of God's Word and do other things that God does not specifically prescribe. Therein lies the danger. Many of the world's religions are based on things that are not in the Bible. They are doing their own thing.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,943
11,698
Neath
✟1,002,191.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
It makes no sense for Paul to speak of the gift of interpretation, in that case. Yet he did.
It's a form of communication with God and therefore a form of intimacy. Suppose the joy of the Lord has just filled your heart with an overflowing desire to praise Him but you sense a deficiency in finding appropriate words to say. The Holy Spirit can give you assurance that the stream of words given to you in a foreign tongue was apropos.

Why not your native language? See Num 12:8. Clear revelation (prophecy) is a high privilege. God doesn't grant it willy nilly to every immature believer. Even mature believers don't necessarily get clear prophecy EVERY SINGLE SECOND OF THE DAY. Therefore tongues is a middle ground, an intimate form of communication beneficial, albeit a compromise.

No, i think that scripture is misinterpreted greatly when it comes to tongues.

God gave us speech. Our own languages. There is no reason for anything else. Even before we utter a word, God knows whats in our hearts.

Uttering foreign 'sounds' is useless. Meaningless.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
To all:

I would encourage anyone who is in doubt about Sola Scriptura to read 2 Timothy 3:16-17 for 40 days repeatedly in deep prayer. Let God speak to you with these words and do not fight them. Believe every single word that is within this passage.

For it says all Scripture (not traditions, and not biblical evidences, and not visions or prophecies) is profitable for doctrine, correction, instruction in righteousness and is profitable so that the man of God may be PERFECT unto EVERY GOOD WORK. Every good work. That the man of GOD may be PERFECT unto EVERY good work. Not some good works as if to say that we need something else to be added so as to be guided unto being perfect unto every good work.

In other words, it is saying Scripture is sufficient for the man of God to be perfect unto every good work (Which means that we do not need anything else to be perfect unto every good work).
2Tim 3:16-17 won't bear the weight usually placed upon it.
(1) It's referring to OT Scripture. If the OT is sufficient, the NT is superfluous. Right?
(2) It wasn't written to an entire congregation, just to an individual, because it is not in fact a message applicable to the whole church. See point #4.

(3) In fact, there was not a printing press till around 1500 A.D, which is one of the major thorns in Sola Scriptura. Practicing Sola Scriptura wasn't even a realistic option until then.

(4) Who is it applicable to? It pertains to a 'man of God' (an OT designation for a PROPHET). OBVIOUSLY, only a prophet can RELIABLY divide rightly the Word of Truth. The rest of us are largely stabbing in the dark by comparison, as fallible exegetes.

(5) The passage is MERELY anticipatory ('hopeful'), because no one in this life will ACTUALLY be 'fully equipped' (perfect). However, prophethood vis a vis the written Word is certainly a step in the right direction.

(6) The Greek root word in that passage for teaching is DIDACTIC. Note well that ALL Scripture is didactic, according to that very passage. This presents a considerable challenge, hermeneutically, for the cessationist, in his attempt to disparage the book of Acts - and all charismatic passages - as non-normative. Cessationists, in a nutshell, cherrypick the Bible, in preference for what they WANT to believe, 'having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof'.

Conclusion. 2Tim 3:16 lends no support to the cessationist thesis. On the contrary, it soundly refutes it. The need for a 'man of God' (prophets) is just as relevant today as it was back then (see 1Cor 14:1).
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
No, i think that scripture is misinterpreted greatly when it comes to tongues.

God gave us speech. Our own languages. There is no reason for anything else. Even before we utter a word, God knows whats in our hearts.

Uttering foreign 'sounds' is useless. Meaningless.
So what is the gift of interpretation mentioned by Paul?
 
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,943
11,698
Neath
✟1,002,191.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
So what is the gift of interpretation mentioned by Paul?

I am no Biblical scholar. Interpretation means interpreting a foreign language into your own tounge.

These days, all i see is masses of people screaming odd sounds, falling over and writhing on the floor!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
To all:

Charismatic churches and non-Charismatic churches can come in all sizes, shapes, and colors. Meaning, there are Calvinistic Charismatic churches, OSAS (or Belief Alone) Charismatic churches, Holiness Charismatic churches, Trinitarian Charismatic churches, Non-Trinitarian Charismatic churches.

There are even Catholic Charismatic churches.

We see tongue speaking (Which is a big part of the Charismatic churches) is being done in many other religions that are not Christian. Yet, many Charismatic Churches suggests that if a believer has the Spirit, they need to speak in tongues (or ecstatic utterances - which is not what we see in the Bible). The Bible teaches that tongues were always foreign languages. The defense for a secret prayer language or private prayer language cannot be made with the Bible.

Then again, if the Bible is not somebody's sole authority, then it is no big deal that they venture outside His Word to do their own thing.

In fact, if you believe that you receive special revelation, visions, dreams, prophecies, etc. then you have to prove to the rest of us that they are just as divine as the Holy Scriptures themselves. But I know you cannot do that. Many church traditions, prophecies, visions, dreams have all failed the test in being even biblical let alone divine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lost4words
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.