Destroying the Disastrous Doctrine of Cessationism

[Dave L]

these are more platitudes, peppered with an ad hominem attack. can you present something with depth and if it is as valuable as you claim we all can benefit from it

I originally replied with this, not refuted yet. With lots more.
Destroying the Disastrous Doctrine of Cessationism

 

[DamianWarS]

Yes, the issue is bigger, but I feel that it may take one step at a time to unravel the misconceptions.

For now, I have been mainly concerned with the basic issue of what causes continuationists to sneer at cessationists. The former have all sorts of reasons why they believe cessationists are wrong, wrong, wrong. One of them concerns what I was speaking to recently--their notion that cessationists think tongues have ceased and have never been experienced again, period.

The continuationists assume that they have a foolproof rejoined to that by pointing to the modern pentecostal movement as a resumption of tongues and the gifts generally, as though that disproves the cessationist position. In reality, it either fails to recognize it or else assumes that, with a recent resumption, the point is negated...which it is not.

I'm not really interested in what two polarized groups think we should or should not be doing, I'm interested in what Christ desires for his Church.

 

[Albion]

I'm not really interested in what two polarized groups think we should or should not be doing, I'm interested in what Christ desires for his Church.

OK, then that is what you should speak to. What I am addressing was part of the OP and so is very much on-topic.

 

[DamianWarS]

I originally replied with this, not refuted yet. With lots more.
Destroying the Disastrous Doctrine of Cessationism

I replied to it here your response was:

Tongues are not genuine today for many reasons beyond what I've already said.

this isn't even an attempt to comment on what I said, you just say you know more information but for some reason you're not telling anyone. Implicitly this accepts my argument, become red-faced, then take your ball home because you don't want to play anymore.

 

[Dave L]

"when Paul said" is the argument here so rather than force your perspective in some wordplay let's respect each other enough to allow a conversation to continue.

If these gifts in question have not been withdrawn then this would be the wrong question and the wrong focus. If "the perfect" is an eschatological event, which is the only meaning that can be responsibly reconciled with the rest of scripture, then the question should be why isn't this practiced church-wide?

there have been many questions that have challenge wide opinion in the past that has resulted in better theology today (for example should we translate the Bible into English) so we shouldn't be scared to open a can of worms just because it seems unpopular. This would be a poor reason to ignore something that the Bible values.

Really?

 

[Ken C.]

The issue is not that tongues "have ceased," but that tongues did cease--at some time.

Many continuationists argue that they may have ceased, but then follow that up with "but now they are back," as though that is what matters.

It is NOT "what matters" when denunciations of cessationists for having pointed out that tongues gradually disappeared in the years after Christianity became the dominant religion remains part of the continuationists' argument.

I believe the Bible is the inspired, God-breathed Word of God. I believe it from Genisis to maps. But if I have been wrong about some things, I need to know.

 

[topher694]

Here's a fun scripture, 2 Timothy 3:1-5

1 But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, 4 traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away!
​

• Verse 1 In the "last days"
• Verse 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power
  • power = greek word: Dunamis
    • inherent power, power residing in a thing by virtue of its nature, or which a person or thing exerts and puts forth
    • power for performing miracles
  • because the context is godliness the power residing in God by virtue of His nature... that a person exerts and puts forth (the anointing)
  • Throughout the book of Acts when God did miracles through the Apostles, the word used was Dunamis.
• So in the last days there will STILL BE DUNAMIS, but some will deny it... turn away from such people
• Additionally:
  • I have seen a fair amount of unloving (rude) behavior towards tongues, prophesy and miracles
  • I have seen slander justified, (even if you believe you are "right" love isn't rude and slanderous)
  • I have seen plenty of pride masquerading as "I'm right, you're wrong, show me the scripture, blah, blah, blah"
  • I have seen lack of self-control
  • I have seen despising of good. Testimonies of God doing really awesome stuff, any glory to God for that? Any amens? Any, we may disagree, but praise God for that testimony? Nope, only headstrong effort to discredit it.

 

[Albion]

I believe the Bible is the inspired, God-breathed Word of God. I believe it from Genisis to maps. But if I have been wrong about some things, I need to know.

I agree that you do. Where do we start?

 

[Ken C.]

The New Covenant replaced the Old. We are no longer under the law but use it for instruction and commentary.

Ok, what about the New Covenant. Anything in there besides Gifts that need to be addressed? I can think of one. In Mark after Jesus cursed the fig tree and He told His disciples about telling a mountain to be picked up and tossed into the ocean. He was talking to His disciples so that means it's not for us today? Ooh, Ooh, what about when Jesus told His disciples to go into all the world and preach the Gospel and that signs would follow. He was addressing His disciples so we get a pass on witnessing and preaching and signs following because after all, He was just speaking to His disciples. Say, I believe I'm beginning to get the hang of this. Thanks, Dave!

 

[Dave L]

Ok, what about the New Covenant. Anything in there besides Gifts that need to be addressed? I can think of one. In Mark after Jesus cursed the fig tree and He told His disciples about telling a mountain to be picked up and tossed into the ocean. He was talking to His disciples so that means it's not for us today? Ooh, Ooh, what about when Jesus told His disciples to go into all the world and preach the Gospel and that signs would follow. He was addressing His disciples so we get a pass on witnessing and preaching and signs following because after all, He was just speaking to His disciples. Say, I believe I'm beginning to get the hang of this. Thanks, Dave!

He told them to teach us to observe all that he taught them.

 

[JLB777]

What I am saying is that you cannot form doctrine on the narratives of scripture. We base doctrines on the didactic material, the doctrinal materials like what is found in the epistles, the teachings of Jesus, the Psalms, etc. We do not take an experience someone had in the Bible and try to normalize that for the Christian experience.

Doctrine is formed from scripture.


The doctrine of Christ.



JLB

 

[HatGuy]

I originally replied with this, not refuted yet. With lots more.
Destroying the Disastrous Doctrine of Cessationism

I'll bite.

If tongues were to cease at the end of the world, why would Paul need to say tongues would cease? If they were to cease anyway? With everything else?

Because he is building the point that neither tongues, prophecy, or knowledge is as important as love.

That's the point of the scripture - that love trumps these things, and each of them eventually needs to be silent before love.

It's a poetic way of saying that everything else is good but yet not as good as love - and that, in the face of love, they eventually are stilled.

In fact, I really think the "perfection" mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13:10 is, in fact, a reference to love, not to the eschatological end. It is only in reference to the end because ultimately love continues into the coming age.

Paul said; “so that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye be unreproveable in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, through whom ye were called into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.” (1 Corinthians 1:7–9)

Notice the Revelation would also confirm them to the end. So they would not seek the gifts until the end. But only until the Revelation of Christ.

“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;” (Revelation 1:1)

So he was saying the gifts would expire with the Revelation of Jesus Christ that we now know was written by John in either 60 or 90 AD.

All of the gifts expired, and history confirms this, as John published Revelation.

Firstly, you're not showing how 'the perfect' in 1 Corinthians 13:10 (τέλειον) is a reference to ἀποκάλυψις. That's complete conjecture, or perhaps a bad case of eisegesis.

Secondly, given that the Revelation of Jesus Christ is a written record of what is coming in the future, your point really does not prove cessationism anyway, even if there is a link between 'the perfect' and 'the Revelation'. It could actually prove the continuationist viewpoint: that when the Revelation physically happens - when all in the book is completed - then tongues cease.

It's a weak argument.

Lastly, in terms of 'history', it might not confirm it either way. It boils down to definition. If, as I've argued earlier, 'prophecy' and 'preaching' are linked, then this gift has continued on and on. If, as I mentioned earlier, tongues is not a 'heavenly language' but the actual language of actual people in the world, then it would make sense to say that it seems it appears here and there when necessary. History does seem to show that.

This is sufficiently refuted as an unconvincing argument unless you can build on this argument or prove it in some stronger way.

 

[JLB777]

Scripture says the apostleship ended with Paul.

“And that he [Jesus] was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.” (1 Corinthians 15:5–8)

This would not be true if there were more apostles.

There is nothing here that says there are no more Apostles.


For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.1 Corinthians 15:3-8


Paul is teaching them that there were witnesses who saw the risen Lord Jesus Christ as a testimony.

• After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep.

This is not about there being no more Apostles.



LOL...



JLB

 

[Dave L]

I'll bite.


Because he is building the point that neither tongues, prophecy, or knowledge is as important as love.

That's the point of the scripture - that love trumps these things, and each of them eventually needs to be silent before love.

It's a poetic way of saying that everything else is good but yet not as good as love - and that, in the face of love, they eventually are stilled.

In fact, I really think the "perfection" mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13:10 is, in fact, a reference to love, not to the eschatological end. It is only in reference to the end because ultimately love continues into the coming age.


Firstly, you're not showing how 'the perfect' in 1 Corinthians 13:10 (τέλειον) is a reference to ἀποκάλυψις. That's complete conjecture, or perhaps a bad case of eisegesis.

Secondly, given that the Revelation of Jesus Christ is a written record of what is coming in the future, your point really does not prove cessationism anyway, even if there is a link between 'the perfect' and 'the Revelation'. It could actually prove the continuationist viewpoint: that when the Revelation physically happens - when all in the book is completed - then tongues cease.

It's a weak argument.

Lastly, in terms of 'history', it might not confirm it either way. It boils down to definition. If, as I've argued earlier, 'prophecy' and 'preaching' are linked, then this gift has continued on and on. If, as I mentioned earlier, tongues is not a 'heavenly language' but the actual language of actual people in the world, then it would make sense to say that it seems it appears here and there when necessary. History does seem to show that.

This is sufficiently refuted as an unconvincing argument unless you can build on this argument or prove it in some stronger way.

We have scripture that directly proves the book of Revelation is what Paul said would be the cut off for seeking the gifts.

 

[Dave L]

There is nothing here that says there are no more Apostles.


For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.1 Corinthians 15:3-8


Paul is teaching them that there were witnesses who saw the risen Lord Jesus Christ as a testimony.

• After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep.

This is not about there being no more Apostles.



LOL...



JLB

All the apostles = no more to follow.

 

[HatGuy]

We have scripture that directly proves the book of Revelation is what Paul said would be the cut off for seeking the gifts.

No we don't. The scripture you posted wasn't saying that.

Do you know what eisegesis means?

 

[Ken C.]

He told them to teach us to observe all that he taught them.

But the disciples became Apostles and they're all dead now.

 

[topher694]

There is nothing here that says there are no more Apostles.


For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.1 Corinthians 15:3-8


Paul is teaching them that there were witnesses who saw the risen Lord Jesus Christ as a testimony.

• After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep.

This is not about there being no more Apostles.



LOL...



JLB

This is one of the goofiest arguments to me (not yours, the one you are addressing)

Seen by "all the apostles" means there are no more? That is not how the word "all" is ever used or interpreted, it's just wacky.

Its like me saying, I've seen all of the MCU movies. Does that mean that there will never be another MCU movie? Is that ever even a consideration when using the word "all" like this?

All the churches in town pitched in to help. Uh oh, I guess that town will never have a new church.

Player X broke all of the passing records, I guess we will never have a record broken again.

If my wife says, "did you take out all the garbage?" Does that mean there will never be more garbage? (Actually, in this case I wish they were right)

Let's do some scripture ones:

Matthew 4:24 - They brought to Him all sick people... and He healed them.
By this logic sickness should have ceased too.

Luke 3:21 - "when all the people were baptized"
So baptisms are all done now... what's worse, it said "all the people" I guess people should have ceased after this scripture too.

Wacky interpretation

 

[Ken C.]

I agree that you do. Where do we start?

I'm asking you and Dave. Please give me some direction. All this talk makes me wonder if when I spoke to my depression and told it to go and it left; was it God or the devil behind my healing, because there are some who say that couldn't happen today because the Apostles are dead now.

 

[DamianWarS]

The completion of the canon is a perfectly valid interpretation of 1 Cor 13:8-13. Many bible scholars have written commentaries exegesing that interpretation. There are also many commentaries that espouse the eschatological interpretation of course. But those commentaries tend be quite shallow. An in-depth study of the passage reveals the eschatological interpretation to be faulty. Eg, seeing "face to face" is unwarrantedly assumed to refer to seeing Christ; v13 says that faith and hope would continue after the gifts have ceased (but neither are needed when we are in the presence of the Lord); all the gifts would cease at the return of Christ, not just the 3 mentioned in this passage; teleios more likely refers to completeness rather than perfection; etc.

the completion of the canon is not a biblical theme and scripture itself cannot support this interpretation where an eschatological interpretation not only is the historical interpretation but has wide bible support such as in the opening and closing of 1 Corinthians. It is the only responsible biblical interpretation.

the context is of alll the spiritual gifts and the 3 are used representative for all the gifts. this is completely consistent with the way Paul previously handles the immediate context of spiritual gifts with the images of the body and showing how love is above all, not to mention the poetic style he uses that also is suggestive of this. If Paul wants to be clear he has no trouble doing this, but if he is meaning the completion of the canon and only the 3 gifts mention he does not highly cryptically and irresponsibly I might add, this is not consistent with Paul's style.

And no, 1 Cor 13:8-13 is not the only passage in scripture that supports cessationism:

The gift of apostle ceased - apostles being first century, miracle-working, scripture writing, eye-witness apostles of Christ. Paul specifically says he was the last apostle (1 Cor. 15:8). And nobody today can fulfill the apostolic requirement of being an eye witness to Christ's resurrection (Acts 1:21-22). Most continuists acknowledge that there are no longer apostles of the biblical kind today. So they already concede to cessationism to a certain degree.

Apostle is an untranslated word. it means "a messenger" or "sent out one" and it is not an abstract 1st century office of the church. The word actually is common greek and was more often used in a military context like an ambassador. Biblical speaking the word is used in different ways.

Jesus is called "the apostle and high priest" in Heb 3. Jesus himself quotes scripture saying "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because He has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners…" sent here is the verb form of apostle which would mean in that context Jesus would be an apostle "of the Lord". And all other scripture where Jesus speaks of being sent uses the same verb. Paul is not this kind of apostle.

The 12 disciples are all apostles. The 12 are "sent out" such as verse like "As you sent Me into the world, I have sent them into the world" the word "sent" is the verb for apostle. Acts 1 opens telling us of the chosen apostles and that Judas was replaced by Matthias "to take over this apostolic ministry". Paul is not this kind of apostles.

Paul was an apostle and he uniquely calls himself out as not just any apostle "sent from men nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead" so Paul identifies other apostles and separates himself in this mix as one called by God rather than man.

there were other apostles than just these 12 + Paul, for example, Barnabas was called an apostle in Acts 13. it's a fitting word to use because as Paul and Barnabas were literally "sent" out so can be called apostles simply by taking this task on but it affirms the sending out was by the church and the HS so this apostleship was ordained and made clear from others outside the 12. There are also others, in Romans 16 Pauls makes reference to a husband and wife and calls them "outstanding among the apostles". Others called apostles are Silvanas and Timothy and possibly more unmentioned. So apostles can be used more broadly in a missional aspect and these examples show us it's broad use. The word "missionary" is not in the bible but it is an anglicized version of the a Latin use of apostle. Missionaries are "sent out" and if they were identified in the bible they would be called apostles.

All Christians are also "sent out" and so all Christians are apostle of Christ, in that we carry the message of Christ and are sent out by Christ to do this, but this is different than the role of Paul as an apostle so being an "apostle" isn't such a cut and dry statement.

So did the gift of an apostle cease? depends what you mean by this. I can't speak for you but I am called as a messenger (apostle) of Christ to preach the gospel. if this was a gift would it not be the greatest of them all?

Ephesians 2:20 says the church was built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ being the cornerstone. Apostles and prophets were the foundation of the church. When a foundation of a building is completed, we no longer lay any further foundation stones. Prophets ceased along with apostles.

yet Christians are still sent out

The reason stated in scripture for people having the ability to perform healings and miracles was to authenticate them and their message (John 2:11, 20:30-31; Heb 2:3-4; Mat 11:2-5; Acts 2:22, 4:10, 16, 8:6-7, 14:3, John 4:48, Acts 2:22). Now that those men have been authenticated and their message recorded in scripture, the need for further authentication disappears.

we are sent to those who have yet to accept the Bible, apostolic gifts may be warranted as well so that Christ may establish his authority and by glorified.

Now it's your turn. Where in scripture does it state that all the gifts would continue until Christ returns? Unless you can provide some verses then there is more scriptural evidence for cessation than there is for continuation.

where does it state it will stop after we put together the bible? it doesn't. so why jump to this conclusion? The bible can only support an eschatological meaning to this verse in question so why try and force another meaning, especially one only confirmed outside of scripture?

An important distinction here is if the gifts are continually offered or if the gifts are continually received. the latter is dependant upon man, the former is dependant upon the HS. I'm not really interested in what man does or does not do, I'm interested in the will of the HS.

The huge elephant in the room for continuists of course is the fact that the gifts in question did indeed cease. Cessationists have given a valid biblical reason for them ceasing - Paul's prophecy was fulfilled. What is your theory, with scriptural evidence, as to why they stopped?

spiritual neglect or drift doesn't need to have biblical evidence (but there're lots if you want some like the letter to the Church in Sardis) Paul's prophecy can only be biblically supported with an eschatological event which no one seems to want to talk about. If we use scripture to interpret scripture then this is the only answer if we use history to interpret scripture then we are dependant upon the ups and downs of human reasoning to determine what is what.

The other big problem for continuists is the gifts which they claim have been reinstated in the last 100 years do not match the biblical description of those gifts. Where is the biblical evidence for tongues being a non-human language? Or for prophecy being a fallible message that comes through a fuzzy feeling? Or people with the gift of healing failing to instantly heal people?

misuse is not a reason to sweep this under a 1st-century rug, nor is it a reason to continue neglecting what the bible teaches. The Corinthians got it wrong and after Paul tells them off he leaves them with "...do not forbid speaking in tongues"