Of the following spiritual gifts, which ones are still available and which ones have ceased?

[TruthSeek3r]

Of course. We are on a Christian forum. You say that I made the "extraordinary claim" that the Bible is true and therefore I have a burden of proof to show that. It is not an extraordinary claim at all. That is the status quo among Christians, and one which everyone here already accepts (or nearly everyone it seems). Therefore I am under no burden of proof whatsoever.

You keep on using logical fallacies. This is a textbook example of the well known fallacy of appealing to the crowd, or argumentum ad populum (Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia). Just because a lot of people believe something it doesn't mean it is true. Lots of Mormons believe in the Book of Mormon, should I conclude that you believe in the Book of Mormon as well? Lots of Muslims believe in the Quran, so you believe in the Quran as well?

Furthermore, you very clearly have the burden of proof, because you are the one who is making a claim. I'm not making any claim.

Given the claim X = "Acts 2 was a historical fact", there are 3 possible options you could adopt:

1) I claim that X is true: here you have the burden of proof to show that X is true.

2) I claim that X is false: here you have the burden of proof to show that X is false.

3) I withhold judgement with respect to X: here you don't claim neither that X is true nor that X is false, you just withhold judgement and do not defend either position. For example, agnostics usually fall into this category with respect to the claim "God exists". More generally, if you lack enough information to give a verdict in favor of either option, you fall into this category by default. This should be the default position when you don't know if X is either true or false. This could also be labeled as the "I don't know" position.

With respect to the claim X = "Acts 2 was a historical fact", I'm withholding judgement (option 3), I've never claimed at any point in our discussion that X is either true or false. On the other hand, you sir, as a cessationist, are making the positive claim that X is true. That's a claim, so you have the burden of proof to show that that's the case. That's how the burden of proof works. If someone claims that X is true, they have to give evidence for why X is true. If someone claims that X is false, they have to give evidence for why X is false. If someone withholds judgement, they have no burden of proof.

If you say that X is true because lots of people are saying that X is true, sorry sir, but that's a terrible justification. That's literally the textbook definition of the fallacy of appealing to the crowd. If the crowd has very good reasons to believe that X is true, quote the reasons instead, and forget about the crowd.

So you believe the alien abduction stories, but instead of them being aliens from another planet they were actually demons?

It depends on the testimony. In these sorts of things you always have to make judgements on a case by case basis, but yeah, I would say there are testimonies where that appears to be the case.

A typical story would be a flying saucer came and hovered over someone's car, levitated the person into the craft, where they were placed on an operating table and surrounded by aliens with bug-like heads, who performed experiments on them, giving them injections, inserting probes into their mouth etc, before dumping them back on the ground.

So you believe all this happened in real life, just as they claimed, except it was demons performing the experiments and not aliens?

As I said before, you have to judge these things on a case by case basis. It wouldn't be fair to make blanket judgements based on a story you just made up when the proper thing to do should be to take into account all the details surrounding the person and their testimony.

Instead of having me analyze your just made-up story, how about you cite a concrete testimony you might be interested in and I share my thoughts on it?

 

[TruthSeek3r]

@swordsman1 The following quote from Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia might be of interest to you:

The fallacy is similar in structure to certain other fallacies that involve a confusion between the justification of a belief and its widespread acceptance by a given group of people. When an argument uses the appeal to the beliefs of a group of experts, it takes on the form of an appeal to authority; if the appeal is to the beliefs of a group of respected elders or the members of one's community over a long time, then it takes on the form of an appeal to tradition. It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect.​

 

[swordsman1]

You keep on using logical fallacies. This is a textbook example of the well known fallacy of appealing to the crowd, or argumentum ad populum (Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia). Just because a lot of people believe something it doesn't mean it is true. Lots of Mormons believe in the Book of Mormon, should I conclude that you believe in the Book of Mormon as well? Lots of Muslims believe in the Quran, so you believe in the Quran as well?

Furthermore, you very clearly have the burden of proof, because you are the one who is making a claim. I'm not making any claim.

Given the claim X = "Acts 2 was a historical fact", there are 3 possible options you could adopt:

1) I claim that X is true: here you have the burden of proof to show that X is true.

2) I claim that X is false: here you have the burden of proof to show that X is false.

3) I withhold judgement with respect to X: here you don't claim neither that X is true nor that X is false, you just withhold judgement and do not defend either position. For example, agnostics usually fall into this category with respect to the claim "God exists". More generally, if you lack enough information to give a verdict in favor of either option, you fall into this category by default. This should be the default position when you don't know if X is either true or false. This could also be labeled as the "I don't know" position.

With respect to the claim X = "Acts 2 was a historical fact", I'm withholding judgement (option 3), I've never claimed at any point in our discussion that X is either true or false. On the other hand, you sir, as a cessationist, are making the positive claim that X is true. That's a claim, so you have the burden of proof to show that that's the case. That's how the burden of proof works. If someone claims that X is true, they have to give evidence for why X is true. If someone claims that X is false, they have to give evidence for why X is false. If someone withholds judgement, they have no burden of proof.

If you say that X is true because lots of people are saying that X is true, sorry sir, but that's a terrible justification. That's literally the textbook definition of the fallacy of appealing to the crowd. If the crowd has very good reasons to believe that X is true, quote the reasons instead, and forget about the crowd.

Wrong. I never once said the reason I believe the Bible is because everyone else does. You cannot even spot a logical fallacy properly.

This is getting a rather tiring. Instead of than having an honest debate about cessationism it seems you are simply playing games by trying to trip me up with false allegations of logical fallacies on an unrelated matter.

It says you are a Christian under your moniker, but you sound more like an atheist desperately trying to prove Christianity wrong by demanding I supply proof that the Bible is true.

You are not only wasting my time but everyone else who is still following this thread.

It depends on the testimony. In these sorts of things you always have to make judgements on a case by case basis, but yeah, I would say there are testimonies where that appears to be the case.

As I said before, you have to judge these things on a case by case basis. It wouldn't be fair to make blanket judgements based on a story you just made up when the proper thing to do should be to take into account all the details surrounding the person and their testimony.

Instead of having me analyze your just made-up story, how about you cite a concrete testimony you might be interested in and I share my thoughts on it?

Very well, have a look at these alien abduction testimonies and tell me if you believe they are true. This is just a small selection from this particular UFO website, there are dozens more I never even looked at. I am not asking you if you just think the witnesses are convinced themselves it was genuine. Nor am I asking you if you think they were just having a vivid dream or a vision. I am asking you if you believe these events occurred in real life exactly as the witnesses describe.

The Manhattan Abduction (Linda Cortile Napolitano)
https://www.ufocasebook.com/boastotalabduction.html
1989 - The Voronezh, Russia Aliens
1981-GERMANY: THE LINTEL LAKE INCIDENT-UFO Casebook Files
The 1973 Pascagoula, Mississippi Abduction (Hickson/Parker)
An Alien Detour - Two Russian Truck Drivers See Landed Spaceship, 1989
The Rendlesham Forest Landings (Bentwaters/Woodbridge) 1
Abduction on North Canol Road, Northern Canada, UFO Casebook Files
The 1973 UFO Encounter of Lyndia Morel, UFO Casebook Files
The Salter Encounter
The Kelly Cahill Encounter

 

[TruthSeek3r]

Wrong. I never once said the reason I believe the Bible is because everyone else does. You cannot even spot a logical fallacy properly.

Then why do you keep dodging the question !?! I asked you to provide the reasons why you believe Acts chapter 2 specifically is true, and instead of providing those reasons, you basically have said "the crowd believes it, the crowd believes it, the crowd believes it". My apologies if you have actual reasons to believe that Acts chapter 2 is true (and if so, please provide them!!!), but everything you have said shouts argumentum ad populum to me.

Looking forward to the actual reasons why you think Acts 2 (including xenoglossy) was a historical fact.

This is getting a rather tiring. Instead of than having an honest debate about cessationism it seems you are simply playing games by trying to trip me up with false allegations of logical fallacies on an unrelated matter.

It says you are a Christian under your moniker, but you sound more like an atheist desperately trying to prove Christianity wrong by demanding I supply proof that the Bible is true.

Sir, you are the one who keeps dodging the question and appealing to the crowd instead of providing the actual reasons/evidence to support your claim that Acts chapter 2 was a historical fact. This exchange of posts about Acts 2 would've ended long ago if you had simply provided those reasons right away.

Furthermore, this has everything to do with the continuationism vs. cessationism debate. I already provided you with tons of testimonial evidence in support of the claim that miracles and sign gifts have continued, but you dismissed it entirely by demanding undeniable scientific evidence published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. You accuse me of being an atheist, but your reaction to the overwhelming testimonial evidence for the continuation of the spiritual gifts doesn't sound very different from how atheists would react. In fact, your level of skepticism is comparable and pretty much equal to that of atheists when it comes to continuationism. I'm just applying the same standard to your extraordinary claim that Acts 2 and xenoglossy were historical facts.

I'm sorry to say this, but even atheists are more consistent. An atheist would be epistemologically consistent and deny both Acts 2 and contemporary miracles. Instead, you claim that Acts 2 was true but deny contemporary miracles. Continuationists instead see contemporary miracles and sign gifts and Acts 2 as two pieces of testimonial evidence that support each other.

You are not only wasting my time but everyone else who is still following this thread.

You are the one who keeps dodging the question!!

This is very simple: why do you believe Acts chapter 2 (including all its supernatural claims about Xenoglossy) truly happened? Can you share the actual reasons, instead of appealing to the crowd? Just answer that properly, and this discussion about Acts 2 will end and we will be able to proceed with the other points (there are tons of them by the way, this debate can potentially take up months).

Very well, have a look at these alien abduction testimonies and tell me if you believe they are true. This is just a small selection from this particular UFO website, there are dozens more I never even looked at. I am not asking you if you just think the witnesses are convinced themselves it was genuine. Nor am I asking you if you think they were just having a vivid dream or a vision. I am asking you if you believe these events occurred in real life exactly as the witnesses describe.

The Manhattan Abduction (Linda Cortile Napolitano)
https://www.ufocasebook.com/boastotalabduction.html
1989 - The Voronezh, Russia Aliens
1981-GERMANY: THE LINTEL LAKE INCIDENT-UFO Casebook Files
The 1973 Pascagoula, Mississippi Abduction (Hickson/Parker)
An Alien Detour - Two Russian Truck Drivers See Landed Spaceship, 1989
The Rendlesham Forest Landings (Bentwaters/Woodbridge) 1
Abduction on North Canol Road, Northern Canada, UFO Casebook Files
The 1973 UFO Encounter of Lyndia Morel, UFO Casebook Files
The Salter Encounter
The Kelly Cahill Encounter

I don't have the time to go through each of those stories, so I'll focus on the first one (The Manhattan Abduction (Linda Cortile Napolitano)) which I presume you placed at the top because it is the most worthwhile (??).

To be fair, I'm not really sure. The first thing I try to figure out when I look at a particular case or testimony is if there are good reasons to think the witness is being sincere. I look for evidence of sincerity. I'm not sure if that's possible in this case. I would like to see an interview of Linda Cortile Napolitano, recorded on video, where we can see her facial expressions and body language as she recounts her story and is interviewed.

There are websites such as this one The Bizarre True Story Of The Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abduction that mention reasons by skeptics to doubt her story. For example:

Though Hopkins was wowed that Napolitano "'spontaneously' recall[ed]" her experiences under hypnosis, according to Skeptics UFO Newsletter, the most straightforward answer is that she had some part in crafting them.

Napolitano, confronted that she erroneously said she would be getting half the proceeds for Witnessed, admitted that she intentionally spread disinformation, according to "A Critique of Budd Hopkins' Case..." Seven years after her abduction in 1989, "Priests of High Strangeness" recounted that Napolitano came to Hopkins's home, telling a harrowing tale of having just escaped another kidnapping attempt with her cousin Connie. Hopkins insisted that he speak to Connie to verify. Napolitano left, and Connie called shortly after. Once it concluded, Hopkins said, "That was Linda, pretending to be her cousin Connie."
​

If you want an example of a testimony where the aliens turned out to be demons, check out this one:

 

[swordsman1]

Then why do you keep dodging the question !?! I asked you to provide the reasons why you believe Acts chapter 2 specifically is true, and instead of providing those reasons, you basically have said "the crowd believes it, the crowd believes it, the crowd believes it". My apologies if you have actual reasons to believe that Acts chapter 2 is true (and if so, please provide them!!!), but everything you have said shouts argumentum ad populum to me.

Show me where I said my reason for believing the Bible is because everyone else believes it. For the 2nd time, I never said such a thing. Please stop misrepresenting me and falsely accusing me of fallacies.

Sir, you are the one who keeps dodging the question and appealing to the crowd instead of providing the actual reasons/evidence to support your claim that Acts chapter 2 was a historical fact. This exchange of posts about Acts 2 would've ended long ago if you had simply provided those reasons right away.

You obviously think this question is a stumbling block that will catch me out, because you have been thrashing this off-topic horse for post after post after post. Explain how it is relevant.

I've already given you an answer which is God's word itself declares it to be true and inspired. For Christians that answer alone settles the matter, but that wasn't the answer you wanted was it, so you went into full atheist mode even though you claim to be a Christian. What was the answer you were looking for that you thought might trip me up? I could expand my answer further but I've played your game for long enough. You will have to come straight to the point.

I don't have the time to go through each of those stories, so I'll focus on the first one (The Manhattan Abduction (Linda Cortile Napolitano)) which I presume you placed at the top because it is the most worthwhile (??).

To be fair, I'm not really sure. The first thing I try to figure out when I look at a particular case or testimony is if there are good reasons to think the witness is being sincere. I look for evidence of sincerity. I'm not sure if that's possible in this case. I would like to see an interview of Linda Cortile Napolitano, recorded on video, where we can see her facial expressions and body language as she recounts her story and is interviewed.

I thought you might cop out of giving an answer. I expect you'll do the same for the others. Aliens from another galaxy running around the earth in flying saucers abducting people and performing experiments on them inside their spacecraft, indeed.

But your reason for copping out is very revealing. If you are not prepared to accept the written testimonies of alien abductions at face value without an additional video interview, then by your own standard you must neither accept the dozens of similar written testimonies of miracles in the books you listed. Just as no court would accept such hearsay evidence either.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

Show me where I said my reason for believing the Bible is because everyone else believes it. For the 2nd time, I never said such a thing. Please stop misrepresenting me and falsely accusing me of fallacies.

I already told you that the many times you have appealed to consensus/crowds give off an argumentum ad populum vibe, but if you say you don't need to appeal to crowds to justify your position, well, fine. Present your reasons then.

I've already given you an answer which is God's word itself declares it to be true and inspired.

Sure, you cited 2 Tim 3:16 in post #26, to which I responded in post #31 with the following follow-up questions:

• How do you know that 2 Timothy 3:16 was supernaturally inspired by God?
• How do you know that Acts chapter 2 is part of the canon of Scripture?
• If the author of 2 Timothy was Paul, it's very well possible that 2 Timothy was written before the book of Acts was written. How can you know then that 2 Timothy 3:16 applies to the book of Acts as well?

You completely dodged these questions in post #32.

For Christians that answer alone settles the matter, but that wasn't the answer you wanted was it, so you went into full atheist mode even though you claim to be a Christian.

I can say the same thing about the continuation of spiritual gifts. For continuationists, the overwhelming testimonial evidence for the continuation of spiritual gifts settles the matter, but that wasn't the answer you wanted was it, so you went into full atheist mode against those testimonies even though you claim to be a Christian who supposedly believes in an omnipotent, supernatural God.

What was the answer you were looking for that you thought might trip me up? I could expand my answer further but I've played your game for long enough. You will have to come straight to the point.

I'm not seeking to trip you up. I just want you to justify your beliefs by answering the questions I asked you in post #31, which you completely dodged in post #32, and which you have kept on dodging in subsequent posts, making this whole discussion unnecessary longer than it needed to be.

I thought you might cop out of giving an answer. I expect you'll do the same for the others. Aliens from another galaxy running around the earth in flying saucers abducting people and performing experiments on them inside their spacecraft, indeed.

But your reason for copping out is very revealing. If you are not prepared to accept the written testimonies of alien abductions at face value without an additional video interview, then by your own standard you must neither accept the dozens of similar written testimonies of miracles in the books you listed. Just as no court would accept such hearsay evidence either.

The thing with eyewitness testimonies is that you want to make sure that:

• The eyewitness are sincere (i.e. that they truly believe what they say)
• There is no major reasons to suspect of the eyewitness' ability to remember the events as they truly happened (to minimize the risk of misremembering things)
• If there are multiple eyewitnesses, ideally each one should fulfill the two above requirements, and also their testimonies should be consistent with each other.

If you can guarantee the things above, then I think we would have good reasons to believe that a person or group of people are reporting experiences that they genuinely believe happened to them (you would then need to disentangle the actual experiences, which might have been a mundane phenomenon, or perhaps an actual supernatural phenomenon, from the individual's unintended subjective interpretation of their own experiences).

In terms of assessing credibility, having a video interview where you can look someone in the face and analyze their body language and facial expressions can be very handy in that regard, but by no means it is the only way you could attempt to do so. For example, there is no way you could try to do that with eyewitness testimonies that were recorded prior to the invention of video cameras, so of course in those cases you would have to resort to other ways to judge their credibility, for example, with point 3 (multiple testimonies that are consistent with each other).

Back to the The Manhattan Abduction (Linda Cortile Napolitano) case, to what extent would you say that we can verify the 3 points I listed above?

 

[swordsman1]

Okay I think we're done. You are just going back over old ground:

I already told you that the many times you have appealed to consensus/crowds give off an argumentum ad populum vibe, but if you say you don't need to appeal to crowds to justify your position, well, fine. Present your reasons then.

....falsely accusing me of a fallacy I did not commit (for the 3rd time)

Sure, you cited 2 Tim 3:16 in post #26, to which I responded in post #31 with the following follow-up questions:

• How do you know that 2 Timothy 3:16 was supernaturally inspired by God?
• How do you know that Acts chapter 2 is part of the canon of Scripture?
• If the author of 2 Timothy was Paul, it's very well possible that 2 Timothy was written before the book of Acts was written. How can you know then that 2 Timothy 3:16 applies to the book of Acts as well?

You completely dodged these questions in post #32.

....and going back into full atheist mode

I can say the same thing about the continuation of spiritual gifts. For continuationists, the overwhelming testimonial evidence for the continuation of spiritual gifts settles the matter, but that wasn't the answer you wanted was it, so you went into full atheist mode against those testimonies even though you claim to be a Christian who supposedly believes in an omnipotent, supernatural God.

Unsubstantiated Hearsay might settle the matter for gullible fans of the Sid Roth Supernatural Show desperately craving miracles to satisfy their unhealthy desire for the supernatural, but not for anyone else.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

....and going back into full atheist mode

Come on! Those are 3 very simple, straightforward questions! You could've perfectly answered them back then when you wrote post #32! How can it be so hard to answer them ?!! Just answer those 3 questions and we can go back to discussing the other points! I'm copy-pasting them below for ease of reading:

• How do you know that 2 Timothy 3:16 was supernaturally inspired by God?
• How do you know that Acts chapter 2 is part of the canon of Scripture?
• If the author of 2 Timothy was Paul, it's very well possible that 2 Timothy was written before the book of Acts was written. How can you know then that 2 Timothy 3:16 applies to the book of Acts as well?

Unsubstantiated Hearsay might settle the matter for gullible fans of the Sid Roth Supernatural Show desperately craving miracles to satisfy their unhealthy desire for the supernatural, but not for anyone else.

Wait a second. You just accused me of "going back into full atheist mode", and here you are going back into full atheist mode yourself!! Have you ever heard of the concept of double standard?

By the way, take a look at these 3 examples, they took place way before Sid Roth's It's Supernatural was a thing.

Also, take a look at the latest answers to this question.

 

[Butch5]

In 1 Corinthians 12:4-11 we find the following gifts:

• utterance of wisdom
• utterance of knowledge
• faith
• gifts of healing
• working of miracles
• prophecy
• the ability to distinguish between spirits
• various kinds of tongues
• interpretation of tongues

Then, in verses 27-31 of the same chapter we find another list of gifts:

• apostles
• prophets
• teachers
• miracles
• gifts of healing
• helping
• administrating
• various kinds of tongues
• interpretation of tongues

Romans 12:3-8 also contains a list of spiritual gifts:

• prophecy
• service
• teaching
• exhortation
• contribution / generosity
• leadership
• acts of mercy

Ephesians 4:11-12 lists the following:

• apostles
• prophets
• evangelists
• shepherds
• teachers

Question: Which of the gifts listed above are still available to the body of Christ and which ones have ceased?

There were natural gifts and supernatural gifts. Gifts such a teaching and helping are natural gifts that are given to different people. These are basically abilities. The supernatural gifts such as tongues and prophecy were given for a specific purpose. That purpose was to validate the message of the apostles. Those gifts have ceased as the apostles are no longer around.

 

[RDKirk]

There were natural gifts and supernatural gifts. Gifts such a teaching and helping are natural gifts that are given to different people. These are basically abilities. The supernatural gifts such as tongues and prophecy were given for a specific purpose. That purpose was to validate the message of the apostles. Those gifts have ceased as the apostles are no longer around.

Even those you might be considering "natural" have their supernatural aspects through the Holy Spirit. Isaiah 40:31 works within those who have the spiritual gift:

They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles, they shall run and not be weary, and they shall walk and not faint.

One telling aspect of a spiritual gift is that its exercise is invigorating. For instance, someone with the spiritual gift of "helps" is energized by helping. Yes, their bodies may become physically tired, but after a nap and a snack they're ready to leap right back into the fray.

They will also be successful both in accomplishment in their gift and result of their spiritual gift--they will not labor in vain. A person with the gift of helps, for instance, will be able to learn the skills necessary to be of help, and they will find ways to be effective at helping.

 

[ViaCrucis]

All of these things, properly understood in their biblical and historically Christian context, have always been part of the experience of the Church.

Apostolicity is retained in the Church, not by the appointment of new apostles; but through the pastoral ministry of Word and Sacrament. The prophetic is retained in the Church, not because there are Old Testament style prophets walking around, but because the Church continues to be the word-bearing people of God, and the proclamation of God's word is prophecy.

Is there still glossolalia? I see no reason to say there isn't.
Do I believe that what is often called glossolalia is the real thing? No I don't.

Do I believe that there are prophets and prophecy? Yes.
Do I believe that those who call themselves prophets and those who speak of "prophecies" are the real thing? No I don't.

Martin Luther King, Jr is a better example of a prophet--not someone with a special "anointing" who goes around pretending to be a prophet; but someone who faithfully preaches the truth of God's word, and who speaks truth to power.

The error is that rather than understanding the ways in which God operates through His Church in ordinary ways, men crave signs and wonders and so set their eyes on sensationalism and religious showmanship. And so they chase after false prophets and false teachers who talk about "glory clouds", because man in his flesh loves glory but despises the weakness and lowliness of the cross.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[chad kincham]

All are still available and none have ceased. In the first faith is listed which is engrafted to every Christian, so the rest can not have ceased as it would be inconsistent. In the second teaching is listed which is done daily (and I mean teachers which are good and filled with knowledge of God not just the act), so the rest can not have ceased. In the third acts of mercy are listed and they most certainly have not ceased. It would be inconsistent for a few to remain off these lists but the rest be gone. In addition to that we know none of them have ceased from accounts of the lives of the Saints, even Saints in our era also.

Yes, all gifts are in effect until Jesus returns and they aren’t needed anymore.

 

[chad kincham]

I believe there are only the foundation Apostles chosen by God and given to Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Never ever has there been claim to this until the 20th century introduced by the NAR.

I don’t have the list in front of me, but the Bible lists apostles that were not part of the original dozen.

 

[chad kincham]

The following have ceased:

Apostles (Paul said he was the last of the apostles 1 Cor 15:8)
Prophets (were only for the foundation of the church Eph 2:20)
Tongues (only ever described as miraculously speaking foreign human languages Acts 2:4-11)
Miracles (used to authenticate the early church Heb 2:3-4)
Healing (ditto)

NB. Having the gift of healing or miracles is not the same as praying for healing or a miracle.

The type of prophecy talked about in 1 Corinthians, that even cessationists have to admit was still in effect when Paul wrote that epistle, (which is given during church services to a local congregation), is not the type of prophecy given to the whole church that ends up as scripture and doctrine.

No new scriptures or change in doctrine resulted from the prophecies given in the Corinthian church at the time Paul said this:

1Co 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

1Co 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

1Co 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

1Co 14:30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.

1Co 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.

That type of prophecy is a message of encouragement or exhortation to a local congregation about things pertaining to them, not a message to the entire church.

Peter said that what occurred at Pentecost was the fulfillment of what the prophet Joel wrote, that in the last days God pours out His spirit, and prophecy results.

Thus prophecy is for the last days, which we are still in.

And Peter also said that the Holy Spirit gift given that day, is for all who God will call, Acts 2:39.

If God’s still calling anyone, and if it’s still the last days, the HS gifts such as prophecy are still in effect.

 

[chad kincham]

If you think all the scholars are wrong concerning the cessation of apostles, then you should write your own exposition, have it peer-reviewed and published by a reputable theological journal.

Or, we can simply read scripture:

Jesus called twelve men to follow him, and these became apostles. After Judas fell, he was replaced by Matthias, our 14th person named apostle.

After this there were other apostles, which we call ascension apostles because they were called after the ascension of Christ. The other apostles were Paul, Barnabas and James (the Lord’s brother) and some Greek (non Jewish) apostles Apollos, Epaphroditus, Andonicus, Junias, Silas and Timothy. There were also 2 other unnamed apostles. This brings the total to 25 confirmed apostles in Scripture.

Apostle means a messenger.

And apostles are listed as an office given to the church.

Every preacher is a messenger, and can be called an apostle, as some sects call their preachers today.

 

[Guojing]

So the feeding of the 5000 was not for authentication purposes?

Nope. All of Jesus's miracles were for authentication purposes.

Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—

This should be preached more in churches.

Instead, we get the usual Bethel teaching of "Jesus doing all those signs as a man in the right relationship with God", thereby misleading the congregation into thinking they can do those signs too

 

[ViaCrucis]

Or, we can simply read scripture:

Jesus called twelve men to follow him, and these became apostles. After Judas fell, he was replaced by Matthias, our 14th person named apostle.

After this there were other apostles, which we call ascension apostles because they were called after the ascension of Christ. The other apostles were Paul, Barnabas and James (the Lord’s brother) and some Greek (non Jewish) apostles Apollos, Epaphroditus, Andonicus, Junias, Silas and Timothy. There were also 2 other unnamed apostles. This brings the total to 25 confirmed apostles in Scripture.

Apostle means a messenger.

And apostles are listed as an office given to the church.

Every preacher is a messenger, and can be called an apostle, as some sects call their preachers today.

You're right that there are a number of apostles mentioned in the New Testament outside of the Twelve.

However, since the death of those very apostles, there haven't been any more apostles. Because the Church never understood apostle as an office of the Church, but as those serving an essential purpose in the early years of the Church. Instead, the apostles laid their hands on and appointed pastors to serve in their stead. This is what the history we have shows.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[GreekOrthodox]

You're right that there are a number of apostles mentioned in the New Testament outside of the Twelve.

However, since the death of those very apostles, there haven't been any more apostles. Because the Church never understood apostle as an office of the Church, but as those serving an essential purpose in the early years of the Church. Instead, the apostles laid their hands on and appointed pastors to serve in their stead. This is what the history we have shows.

-CryptoLutheran

Eastern Orthodox does recognize a class of saints known as "Equal to the Apostles", isapostolos. Generally this is reserved for someone who was instrumental in the conversion of an entire region to Christianity such as St. Patrick, Sts. Constantine and Helen, and St. Vladimir.

 

[swordsman1]

Peter said that what occurred at Pentecost was the fulfillment of what the prophet Joel wrote, that in the last days God pours out His spirit, and prophecy results.

Thus prophecy is for the last days, which we are still in.

And Peter also said that the Holy Spirit gift given that day, is for all who God will call, Acts 2:39.

If God’s still calling anyone, and if it’s still the last days, the HS gifts such as prophecy are still in effect.

That aspect of Joel's prophecy was fulfilled in the first century. It doesn't say prophecy would continue throughout the entire 'last days' period. Joel's prophecy also talks about the sun turning to darkness and the moon to blood. That doesn't occur until the END of the 'last days'. So some of the things listed may only occur at the beginning of the last days - such as 'Your sons and daughters will prophesy'.

 

[swordsman1]

After this there were other apostles, which we call ascension apostles because they were called after the ascension of Christ. The other apostles were Paul, Barnabas and James (the Lord’s brother) and some Greek (non Jewish) apostles Apollos, Epaphroditus, Andonicus, Junias, Silas and Timothy. There were also 2 other unnamed apostles. This brings the total to 25 confirmed apostles in Scripture.

Most of those people are disputed as being apostles. The only confirmed ones are Paul, Barnabas & James.

Apostle means a messenger.

And apostles are listed as an office given to the church.

Every preacher is a messenger, and can be called an apostle, as some sects call their preachers today.

In the New Testament the word 'apostles' always means the foundational eye-witness apostles of Christ (the Twelve, Paul, etc). The Greek word can also mean 'messenger' but it is only used in this sense in Phil 2:25 and 2 Cor 8:23, but here our bible translators wisely use the word 'messengers' to avoid any confusion with 'the apostles'.