Deliverance Gifts.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,644.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If someone has the supernatural ability to heal, they would not need to call upon God to perform the healing.

The gifts given operate under the control of the Holy Spirit not the individual. You can't turn them on at will.

He can choose to move in healing regardless of gifts.

Faith is not the ultimate factor in receiving healing otherwise the unsaved would never be healed.

Any way, for those who want to walk as He walked, sharing the gospel, caring for the homeless, Loving the lost, He will show up and confirm truth with all sorts of signs if your trust is fully in Him. It's pretty simple, not a matter of titles - who cares what you are - it is what He is that matters. My church saw what was happening and the Pastor rejoiced. Mostly we couldn't take the folks He saved to church - They responded to the reality of Him among us and didn't see it elsewhere. My Pastor said there was nothing in the church within a bulls roar of what we were witnessing. This was one of the fastest growing churches in NZ at the time.

Nothing has changed - what you read in Acts will show up if you step out into the edge of the Kingdom where there is a power encounter for souls - making friends with the street people just as Jesus did. These gifts are largely absent in the church because they are not needed when there is no going out to demand the release of the lost. It is a Holy indignation and fearlessness that the 'streetwise' recognise as genuine and they are not stupid, they see the truth in lives when confronted with it. I was privileged to see what I did having been totally broken and rebuilt so I have no reason to credit myself with anything.

The opportunity is there to walk where He walked. He loves the lost. We had two levels of a building funded through a box on the wall. The Prayer of children released this for us.

Please don't miss the opportunity.

Love you all.
 
Upvote 0

Francis Drake

Returning adventurer.
Apr 14, 2013
4,000
2,508
✟184,952.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Independence-Party
Hi there,

If John dies around AD100, the Canon of scripture is closed and the gifts ceased, how come the church fathers continued to testify concerning deliverance and healings after that time?
Deliverance, casting demons out, should be a normal part of every Christian's spiritual warfare.
Deliverance is for all, and was never meant to be a special ministry done by pastors bishops or some "special forces" spiritual elite.

Unless all the demons on earth magically disappeared (with the death of the apostles maybe), then they still remain around the earth today, still causing the same death and destruction they have always done.

That being the case, if Christians fail to drive them out, these demons will remain resident in their Christian host till that person dies, when it will seek another host.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,644.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Carl, in this forum, a few years ago, someone asked for prayer for healing. I wrote out my prayer to the person in response to the request. That person read my prayer. The next day she responded that she was healed when she read my prayer. Online ministry works because God is omnipresent and that person asked believing she could be healed if someone answered.

This is helpful thanks.
 
Upvote 0

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,644.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
swordsman1 said:

Faith to be healed is not a requirement of healing.

This wrong doctrine is why so few Christians experience healing. And why so few, when they pray, actually believe the person will be healed.

I don't want to major on this but I have seen a lot of healing and don't hold your view for two reasons.

Faith is often not biblically defined.

Without hearing Him there is no faith.
Without faith there is no belief.

So when He tells me to pray for folks the results are purely up to Him... unless He has shown me a healing in this specific case.

Secondly folks are encouraged to pray for others when they have not learned to Hear Him first.

This is the rub - we have two mandates
1. to pray for folks that are sick in general obedience.

2. to proclaim those healed that He has specifically revealed will recover.

So expecting healing before there is a specific word leads to 'hyper-faith' i.e. believing without hearing Him.

This brings His Name into disrepute and generally blames the recipient for 'lack of faith' which is frankly cruel.

I am very relaxed about outcomes because I know He can heal because He has ultimate authority over all realms including the physical.

I once asked why all are not healed... he answer was immediate - to save me from pride.

So I conclude it is all about Him and nothing about me.

I have had little to do with church doctrine rather I have learned from doing rather than hearing from those who often teach and haven't walked, but are strong in theory.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟250,347.00
Faith
Christian
Many people - at healing services and elsewhere; yet I wasn't healed when they prayed.
No, read what I said; I said that she would say that she didn't have faith. She was a faithful and regular church member and attender at Bible study.

What makes you think prayers must be answered immediately? Or that someone else did not pray for you that day? That seems to be a more likely explanation than someone who says she isn't a Christian saying "I want to heal you". Strange that you should think this woman has the supernatural ability to heal but Jesus and the disciples didn't and had to resort to prayer!

He prayed before he raised Lazarus from the dead, as did Peter with Dorcas.
Jesus spent much time in prayer - all night, on one occasion - and the apostles met daily to pray and break bread.

It tells us exactly what Jesus prayed for before raising Lazarus. It wasn't for God to raise Lazarus. He prayed that people would believe the Father has sent him. He then commanded Lazarus to come forth.

John 11:41 And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this on account of the people standing around, that they may believe that you sent me. When he had said these things, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out.””

Same with Peter. It doesn't say that Peter prayed for Dorcas to be raised from the dead in Acts 9:40. It doesn't tell us what Peter prayed for. It may well have been the same as what Jesus prayed for. Not that these are examples of healings anyway, they were raising people from the dead. So you are comparing apples with oranges. There is certainly no mention of prayer when Jesus and the disciples healed people from sickness.

Just because Scripture doesn't say "they prayed before they went out and healed", it's almost certain that they did so. There is no evidence that Jesus did NOT pray before he healed.

You are arguing from silence. Because scripture is silent on whether Jesus and the disciples prayed for healing does not mean they did! Classic logical fallacy. In every example there is no indication they ever prayed for healing, it was always a command or a touch.
 
Upvote 0

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟250,347.00
Faith
Christian
Not according to early church writers. Many, apart from the 12, are called apostles. This doctrine of only those 12 were apostles came much later in church history.

A lot of the early church writers were mistaken. I will stick with inspired scripture which makes it clear the apostles were the Twelve plus 3 or 4 others eg Barnabas.

Yes, in areas where the Gospel is newly being preached. Those missionaries and evangelists who work together to establish local congregations are laying the foundation.

Paul refers to "the apostles" alongside Christ himself, being the foundation of the Church. "The apostles" is not how one would refer to future apostles.

"having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone"

Paul also used the past tense "having been built", not "being built" or "will be built" as you would expect if it was an ongoing activity.
 
Upvote 0

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟250,347.00
Faith
Christian
The following excerpt from Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology helps to explain who apostles are. (Grudem is a continuist theologian)

1. Apostle. Earlier in this book we saw that the New Testament apostles had a unique kind of authority in the early church: authority to speak and write words which were “words of God” in an absolute sense. To disbelieve or disobey them was to disbelieve or disobey God. The apostles, therefore, had the authority to write words which became words of Scripture.1 This fact in itself should suggest to us that there was something unique about the office of apostle, and that we would not expect it to continue today, for no one today can add words to the Bible and have them be counted as God’s very words or as part of Scripture.

In addition, the New Testament information on the qualifications of an apostle and the identity of the apostles also leads us to conclude that the office was unique and limited to the first century, and that we are to expect no more apostles today. We shall see this as we ask the following questions: What were the requirements for being an apostle? Who were the apostles? How many apostles were there? And are there apostles today? At the outset it must be made clear that the answers to these questions depend on what one means by the word apostle. Today some people use the word apostle in a very broad sense, to refer to an effective church planter, or to a significant missionary pioneer (“William Carey was an apostle to India,” for example). If we use the word apostle in this broad sense, everyone would agree that there are still apostles today— for there are certainly effective missionaries and church planters today.

The New Testament itself has three verses in which the word apostle (Gk. ἀπόστολος, G693) is used in a broad sense, not to refer to any specific church office, but simply to mean “messenger.” In Philippians 2:25, Paul calls Epaphroditus “your messenger (ἀπόστολος) and minister to my need”; in 2 Corinthians 8:23, Paul refers to those who accompanied the offering that he was taking to Jerusalem as “messengers [ἀπόστολοι from ἀπόστολος (G693)] of the churches”; and in John 13:16, Jesus says, “Nor is he who is sent [ἀπόστολος] greater than he who sent him.”

But there is another sense for the word apostle. Much more frequently in the New Testament the word refers to a special office, “apostle of Jesus Christ.” In this narrow sense of the term, there are no more apostles today, and we are to expect no more. This is because of what the New Testament says about the qualifications for being an apostle and about who the apostles were.

a. Qualifications of an Apostle: The two qualifications for being an apostle were (1) having seen Jesus after his resurrection with one’s own eyes (thus, being an “eyewitness of the resurrection”), and (2) having been specifically commissioned by Christ as his apostle.4

The fact that an apostle had to have seen the risen Lord with his own eyes is indicated by Acts 1:22, where Peter said that person to replace Judas “must become with us a witness to his resurrection.” Moreover, it was “to the apostles whom he had chosen” that “he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days” (Acts 1:2–3; cf. 4:33).

Paul makes much of the fact that he did meet this qualification even though it was in an unusual way (Christ appeared to him in a vision on the road to Damascus and appointed him as an apostle: Acts 9:5–6; 26:15–18). When he is defending his apostleship he says, “Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” (1 Cor. 9:1). And when recounting the people to whom Christ appeared after his resurrection, Paul says, “Then he appeared to James then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle” (1 Cor. 15:7–9).

These verses combine to indicate that unless someone had seen Jesus after the resurrection with his own eyes, he could not be an apostle.

The second qualification, specific appointment by Christ as an apostle, is also evident from several verses. First, though the term apostle is not common in the gospels, the twelve disciples are called “apostles” specifically in a context where Jesus is commissioning them, “sending them out” to preach in his name: And he called to him his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every infirmity. The names of the twelve apostles are these....These twelve Jesus sent out charging them, “...preach as you go, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is at hand.”’ (Matt. 10:1–7)

Similarly, Jesus commissions his apostles in a special sense to be his “witnesses...to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). And in choosing another apostle to replace Judas, the eleven apostles did not take the responsibility on themselves, but prayed and asked the ascended Christ to make the appointment:

“Lord, who knows the hearts of all men, show which one of these two you have chosen to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside....” And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias; and he was enrolled with the eleven apostles. (Acts 1:24–26)


Paul himself insists that Christ personally appointed him as an apostle. He tells how, on the Damascus Road, Jesus told him that he was appointing him as an apostle to the Gentiles: “I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you to serve and to bear witness...delivering you from the people and from the Gentiles—to whom I send you” (Acts 26:16–17). He later affirms that he was specifically appointed by Christ as an apostle (see Rom. 1:1; Gal. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:12; 2:7; 2 Tim. 1:11).

b. Who Were Apostles? The initial group of apostles numbered twelve—the eleven original disciples who remained after Judas died, plus Matthias, who replaced Judas: “And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias; and he was enrolled with the eleven apostles” (Acts 1:26). So important was this original group of twelve apostles, the “charter members” of the office of apostle, that we read that their names are inscribed on the foundations of the heavenly city, the New Jerusalem: “And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb” (Rev. 21:14).

We might at first think that such a group could never be expanded, that no one could be added to it. But then Paul clearly claims that he, also, is an apostle. And Acts 14:14 calls both Barnabas and Paul apostles: “when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it....” So with Paul and Barnabas there are fourteen “apostles of Jesus Christ.”

Then James the brother of Jesus (who was not one of the twelve original disciples) seems to be called an apostle in Galatians 1:19: Paul tells how, when he went to Jerusalem, “I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother.”6 Then in Galatians 2:9 James is classified with Peter and John as “pillars” of the Jerusalem church. And in Acts 15:13–21, James, along with Peter, exercises a significant leadership function in the Jerusalem Council, a function which would be appropriate to the office of apostle. Furthermore, when Paul is listing the resurrection appearances of Jesus he once again readily classifies James with the apostles: Then he appeared to James then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. (1 Cor. 15:7–9)

Finally, the fact that James could write the New Testament epistle which bears his name would also be entirely consistent with his having the authority which belonged to the office of apostle, the authority to write words which were the words of God. All these considerations combine to indicate that James the Lord’s brother was also commissioned by Christ as an apostle. That would bring the number to fifteen “apostles of Jesus Christ” (the twelve plus Paul, Barnabas, and James).

Were there more than these fifteen? There may possibly have been a few more, though we know little if anything about them, and it is not certain that there were any more. Others, of course, had seen Jesus after his resurrection (“Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time,” 1 Cor. 15:6). From this large group it is possible that Christ appointed some others as apostles—but it is also very possible that he did not. The evidence is not sufficient to decide the issue.

Romans 16:7 says, “Greet Andronicus and Junias my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners; they are men of note among the apostles and they were in Christ before me.” Because there are several translation problems in the verse, no clear conclusions can be reached. “Men of note” may be also translated “men noted by” (the apostles). “Junias” (a man’s name) may also be translated “Junia” (a woman’s name).7 “Apostles” here may not mean the office “apostles of Jesus Christ,” but may simply mean “messengers” (the broader sense which the word takes in Phil. 2:25; 2 Cor. 8:23; John 13:16). The verse has too little clear information to allow us to draw a conclusion.

Others have been suggested as apostles. Silas (Silvanus) and sometimes Timothy are mentioned because of 1 Thessalonians 2:6: “though we might have made demands as apostles of Christ.” Does Paul include Silas and Timothy here, since the letter begins, “Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy” (1 Thess. 1:1)?

It is not likely that Paul is including Timothy in this statement, for two reasons. (1) He says just four verses earlier, “we had already suffered and been shamefully treated at Philippi, as you know” (1 Thess. 2:2), but this refers to the beating and imprisonment which happened just to Paul and Silas, not to Timothy (Acts 16:19). So the “we” in verse 6 does not seem to include all of the people (Paul, Silvanus, Timothy) mentioned in the first verse. The letter in general is from Paul, Silas and Timothy, but Paul knows that the readers will naturally understand the appropriate members of the “we” statements when he does not mean to include all three of them in certain sections of the letter. He does not specify “—that is, Silas and I—had already suffered and been shamefully treated at Philippi, as you know,” because the Thessalonians will know who the “we” are that he is talking about.

(2) This is also seen in 1 Thessalonians 3:1–2, where the “we” certainly cannot include Timothy:

Therefore when we could bear it no longer, we were willing to be left behind at Athens alone, and we sent Timothy our brother and God’s servant in the gospel of Christ, to establish you in your faith and to exhort you. (1 Thess. 3:1–2)

In this case, the “we” refers either to Paul and Silas, or else just to Paul alone (see Acts 17:14–15; 18:5). Apparently Silas and Timothy had come to Paul in Athens “as soon as possible” (Acts 17:15)—though Luke does not mention their arrival in Athens—and Paul had sent them back to Thessalonica again to help the church there. Then he himself went to Corinth, and they later joined him there (Acts 18:5).

It is most likely that “We were willing to be left behind at Athens alone” (1 Thess. 3:1), refers to Paul alone, both because he picks up the argument again in verse 5 with the singular “I” (“When I could bear it no longer, I sent that I might know your faith,” 1 Thess. 3:5), and because the point concerning extreme loneliness in Athens would not be made if Silas had stayed with him.8 In fact, in the previous paragraph, Paul means “I,” for he says, “We wanted to come to you—I, Paul, again and again—but Satan hindered us” (1 Thess. 2:18). Apparently he is using “we” more frequently in this epistle as a courteous way of including Silas and Timothy, who had spent so much time in the Thessalonian church, in the letter to that church. But the Thessalonians would have had little doubt who was really in charge of this great mission to the Gentiles, and on whose apostolic authority the letter primarily (or exclusively) depended.

So it is just possible that Silas was himself an apostle, and that 1 Thessalonians 2:6 hints at that. He was a leading member of the Jerusalem church (Acts 15:22), and could well have seen Jesus after his resurrection, and then been appointed as an apostle. But we cannot be very certain.

The situation with Timothy is different, however. Just as he is excluded from the “we” of 1 Thessalonians 2:2 (and 3:1–2), so he seems to be excluded from the “we” of 1 Thessalonians 2:6. Moreover, as a native of Lystra (Acts 16:1–3) who had learned of Christ from his grandmother and mother (2 Tim. 1:5), it seems impossible that he would have been in Jerusalem before Pentecost and would there have seen the risen Lord and come to believe in him, and then suddenly have been appointed as an apostle. In addition, Paul’s pattern of address in his letters always jealously guards the title “apostle” for himself never allowing it to be applied to Timothy or others of his traveling companions (note 2 Cor. 1:1; Col. 1:1: “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus...and Timothy our brother”; and then Phil. 1:1: “Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus”). So Timothy, as important a role as he had, should not rightly be considered one of the apostles.

This gives us a limited but somewhat imprecisely numbered group who had the office “apostles of Jesus Christ.” There seem to have been at least fifteen, and perhaps sixteen or even a few more who are not recorded in the New Testament.

Yet it seems quite certain that there were none appointed after Paul. When Paul lists the resurrection appearances of Christ, he emphasizes the unusual way in which Christ appeared to him, and connects that with the statement that this was the “last” appearance of all, and that he himself is indeed “the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle.”

He appeared to Cephas (Peter), then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle.” (1 Cor. 15:5–9)

c. Summary: The word apostle can be used in a broad or narrow sense. In a broad sense, it just means “messenger” or “pioneer missionary.” But in a narrow sense, the most common sense in the New Testament, it refers to a specific office, “apostle of Jesus Christ.” These apostles had unique authority to found and govern the early church, and they could speak and write words of God. Many of their written words became the New Testament Scriptures.

In order to qualify as an apostle, someone (1) had to have seen Christ with his own eyes after he rose from the dead, and (2) had to have been specifically appointed by Christ as an apostle. There was a limited number of apostles, perhaps fifteen or sixteen or a few more—the New Testament is not explicit on the number. The twelve original apostles (the eleven plus Matthias) were joined by Barnabas and Paul, very probably James, perhaps Silas, and maybe even Andronicus and Junias or a few unnamed others. It seems that no apostles were appointed after Paul, and certainly, since no one today can meet the qualification of having seen the risen Christ with his own eyes, there are no apostles today.9 In place of living apostles present in the church to teach and govern it, we have instead the writings of the apostles in the books of the New Testament. Those New Testament Scriptures fulfill for the church today the absolutely authoritative teaching and governing functions which were fulfilled by the apostles themselves during the early years of the church.

Though some may use the word apostle in English today to refer to very effective church planters or evangelists, it seems inappropriate and unhelpful to do so, for it simply confuses people who read the New Testament and see the high authority that is attributed to the office of “apostle” there. It is noteworthy that no major leader in the history of the church—not Athanasius or Augustine, not Luther or Calvin, not Wesley or Whitefield—has taken to himself the title of “apostle” or let himself be called an apostle. If any in modern times want to take the title “apostle” to themselves, they immediately raise the suspicion that they may be motivated by inappropriate pride and desires for self-exaltation, along with excessive ambition and a desire for much more authority in the church than any one person should rightfully have.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Woke

Active Member
Supporter
Oct 8, 2019
239
82
71
California
✟38,620.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well I have done just that with immediate results. Case in point - Sick brother in Christchurch NZ. difficulty breathing. Pain in chest.
Several prayed 'good prayers' without result. I was asked to pray - I then felt a burden for the man but as I did a dog under the bed started to moan... I asked that the dog be put out.
Then before I could pray I saw in a vision God removing the sickness.
Having seen what the Father was doing I proceeded to declare that the man be healed in Jesus name.
No prayer... just a proclamation based on what I had seen.
Immediate result, the brother got up out of bed healed.
Well I have done just that with immediate results. Case in point - Sick brother in Christchurch NZ. difficulty breathing. Pain in chest.
Several prayed 'good prayers' without result. I was asked to pray - I then felt a burden for the man but as I did a dog under the bed started to moan... I asked that the dog be put out.
Then before I could pray I saw in a vision God removing the sickness.
Having seen what the Father was doing I proceeded to declare that the man be healed in Jesus name.
No prayer... just a proclamation based on what I had seen.
Immediate result, the brother got up out of bed healed.
Hi there,

If John dies around AD100, the Canon of scripture is closed and the gifts ceased, how come the church fathers continued to testify concerning deliverance and healings after that time?

Examples:

110 A.D. Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, Didache
150 A.D.-180 A.D. Justin Martyr, Tatian, Theophilus
190 A.D.-210 A.D. Irenaeus, Melito of Sardis, Tertullian, Minucius Felix
230 A.D.-300 A.D. Origen, Lactantius
325 A.D. Eusebius
375 A.D. Cyril of Jerusalem
 
Upvote 0

Ricky M

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 19, 2017
1,905
1,319
66
Los Angeles
✟130,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.” 2 Corinthians 12:12 (KJV 1900)

Nothing today comes close.
The only thing that ever ceased was belief.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

Ricky M

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 19, 2017
1,905
1,319
66
Los Angeles
✟130,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
In scripture, whenever apostolos is translated "apostles" it refers only to the small band of divinely appointed, miracle working, eye-witness apostles of Christ. ie the Twelve and perhaps 2 or 3 others. Not to any other group of people.

Apostles were the foundation of the church. Eph 2:20 "...built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone"

Is the foundation of the church still being laid today?
Yes, in many diverse places
 
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

Ricky M

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 19, 2017
1,905
1,319
66
Los Angeles
✟130,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
John 14:12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.

Interesting thing, I apparently never looked real close at this verse. When I did, I finally saw the asterisk, and the footnote saying "limited time offer".
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,962.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Why didn't Jesus go to all the grave yards and resurrect everyone?
Why didn't Jesus spend more time gathering all the sick in all the towns and healing them?
Why didn't Jesus go to all the neighbouring nations and heal there?

John the Baptist did not have God physically heal anyone through him.

Did any miracles going back to the Jew walking through the Red Sea cause people to believe to the point of following God in obedience to God?

I would point to Lazarus in the rich man and Lazarus story and what Jesus said in John 7:1-9. Lazarus was providing the rich man whom God also Loved with the very best opportunity to experience Godly type Love through befriending Lazarus.

There is an excellent reason why today, we do not have scientific “proof” of the miracles that do happen. Documented verifiable videos, pictures, recordings and independent supporters are not there.
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,962.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Healing was never intended as a health care plan.

When did Jesus ever empty a hospital?

John the Baptist did not have God physically heal anyone through him.

Did any miracles going back to the Jew walking through the Red Sea cause people to believe to the point of following God in obedience to God?

I would point to Lazarus in the rich man and Lazarus story and what Jesus said in John 7:1-9. Lazarus was providing the rich man whom God also Loved with the very best opportunity to experience Godly type Love through befriending Lazarus.

There is an excellent reason why today, we do not have scientific “proof” of the miracles that do happen. Documented verifiable videos, pictures, recordings and independent supporters are not there.
 
Upvote 0

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,644.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
John the Baptist did not have God physically heal anyone through him.

Did any miracles going back to the Jew walking through the Red Sea cause people to believe to the point of following God in obedience to God?

I would point to Lazarus in the rich man and Lazarus story and what Jesus said in John 7:1-9. Lazarus was providing the rich man whom God also Loved with the very best opportunity to experience Godly type Love through befriending Lazarus.

There is an excellent reason why today, we do not have scientific “proof” of the miracles that do happen. Documented verifiable videos, pictures, recordings and independent supporters are not there.

How about the Hospital Registrar who dealt with the Xrays in the hospital, standing up in Church in response to a Polish man testifying healing of broken bones in the foot, and confirming the unexplainable healing. I can supply names but as I said before, theology runs deep and no evidence is ever enough.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Woke

Active Member
Supporter
Oct 8, 2019
239
82
71
California
✟38,620.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hello Carl,
Thanks for posting this interesting topic.

I would say that the dozen examples you provided actually prove that the gifts did not cease with the death of the Apostles. The idea that the gifts ended is the opinion of Cessationists, not Continuationists, who say the gifts continued, as they should. Much to say on this topic. But I will wait until the proper time.

I would also like to address the idea of the canon of scripture being "closed". The canon of NT scripture was not a singular writing that stopped with the book of Revelation in 95 AD. The New Testament canon was a collection of books in an approved form (27 books) that was not finalized until the Council of Carthage AD 397. Late in the fourth century.

Therefore, the NT canon could not have closed in 95 AD, as it did not exist in any form until 170 AD. Which at that time did not include Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, and 3 John.

Additionally, just to clarify, Deliverance (casting out demons) is not referred to as a gift in the Bible. Though it is dependent on a number of the listed gifts. Deliverance, I would say is a ministry. In the same category as administering water baptism, intercessory prayer, and preaching the gospel.

Deliverance may involve one or more of these spiritual gifts from the list in 1 Cor.12. A message of wisdom, a message of knowledge, faith, miraculous power, prophecy, distinguishing between spirits, speaking in tongues, the interpretation of tongues.

Brother I'll continue to build on your remark that the spiritual gifts referred to in scripture are not listed in scripture as ceasing as of the date I write this comment. I do so because you didn't expound on that idea. The only scripture I am aware of that people use to assert the "gifts of the spirit" already ceased is 1Corinthians 13:10 and scriptures surrounding it. So let's look at that in context.

" 8Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. 11When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. 12For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. 13But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love."

Verse eight speaks of them ceasing, but the time period when that happens is disputed not that they cease someday. Even though Paul identifies that time period in these scriptures it is nevertheless in dispute. At vs 10 Paul wrote when the perfect (or complete ) comes the partial will be done away with. The partial is the partial knowledge and partial gifts of the spirit he and other Christians had at that time. The identity of the time period when Paul said the perfect comes is contained in these surrounding scriptures. And vs 10 claims when the perfect comes those gifts of the spirit will cease.

Paul states that he personally will be affected during the time period the perfect comes. He claims he will personally be affected by having a much more complete picture, meaning fuller knowledge about something. He claims that in vs 12. Now Paul wrote these words just a few years before he died. So what could he have meant by this perfect thing coming that would give him a far greater picture of something he didn't clearly see at that time. That complete thing coming couldn't be the completion of the Bible, like WT teaches it is, the religion I used to believe in. Why? Because Paul died well before the Bible as we know it today was complete. So, we can throw that idea out the window. It doesn't make any sense in light of Paul's scriptures.

So ask, could something have happened during the few years between the time Paul wrote these scriptures and the time Paul died that gave Paul a much more complete knowledge about what he named the perfect thing that was coming to give all Christians this superior knowledge? We have to guess, but there is no scriptural evidence that happened. Plus if it did happen some other elder like John who wrote his books way after Paul's death would have told us about it. But in John's scriptures he doesn't tell us about anything that came while Paul was alive to enlighten Christians with a much deeper knowledge. The only new information that might have done that was Revelation. But wait! Paul was dead way before John wrote Revelation, so that could not have enlightened Paul.

And remember Paul made personal application to himself. Since Paul did and it is very likely nothing enlightened him so much further while he was alive that he would cloak some human experience of his this way it's obvious he was referring to a time after he died. That idea is locked in stone considering he said all Christians would receive this greater knowledge, not just Paul. And since the Bible shows the gifts of the spirit continued after Paul's death, then we can believe with all certainty Paul was definitely referring to a time period the gifts of the spirit would cease after his death, while also teaching their ceasing would drastically increase his knowledge. Since it occurs after Paul's death the increased knowledge is obviously increased knowledge about God, the Father , Son, and heavenly things centered around God's purpose for Paul. The perfect or complete thing that was coming has to be Paul's realization of what God is when Paul has access to God's presence in heaven. But the time period could not be just when Paul died. Why? Because that perfect or complete things bringing a deeper knowledge has to come to all Christians. Because Paul applied this time period to a time that affects all Christians. See vs9 "For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away." And Paul's death didn't affect all Christians receiving this complete knowledge of God. It has to be when they ALL experience that themselves. So why must that be? It has to be when they all experience God like Paul claimed he would, because only then could they have the same knowledge Paul claimed he would. Paul never applied these scriptures to himself only. He applied them to us, and those who remain on Earth after us. And that knowledge we have not attained yet.

Now could some of the gifts have been done away with by this time. I don't know, but I do know the scriptures above don't teach that. Also, please note the scriptures above say nothing about God ceasing to perform miracles outside Christian gifts of the spirit, or God ceasing to personally contact people. Those ideas are adding ideas that are not stated, and the only reason I brought it up is because that's what Watchtower teaches, and I know some other groups claim the gifts of the spirit were done away with when the Bible was completed like WT. So, I thought these other ideas might be taught by those other groups also.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Saint Steven
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

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,962.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
How about the Hospital Registrar who dealt with the Xrays in the hospital, standing up in Church in response to a Polish man testifying healing of broken bones in the foot, and confirming the unexplainable healing. I can supply names but as I said before, theology runs deep and no evidence is ever enough.
Do we have an independent secular group study?
When these make it to TV, they are dismissed by other alternative possibilities.
 
Upvote 0

Saint Steven

You can call me Steve
Supporter
Jul 2, 2018
18,580
11,385
Minneapolis, MN
✟930,116.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Brother I'll continue to build on your remark that the spiritual gifts referred to in scripture are not listed in scripture as ceasing as of the date I write this comment. I do so because you didn't expound on that idea. The only scripture I am aware of that people use to assert the "gifts of the spirit" already ceased is 1Corinthians 13:10 and scriptures surrounding it. So let's look at that in context.
Thanks for expanding on this. That was a long read. But very inspiring. (see below)

As I understand it...
It is not the gifts that cease, it is the partial aspect of them that ceases.
When we see Christ face-to-face (the perfection coming) then we will know in full and prophesy in full. No need for partial prophecy when we know the whole, as we are fully known.

1 Corinthians 13:8-12
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. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 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. 12 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.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: Ricky M
Upvote 0

Woke

Active Member
Supporter
Oct 8, 2019
239
82
71
California
✟38,620.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks for expanding on this. That was a long read. But very inspiring. (see below)

As I understand it...
It is not the gifts that cease, it is the partiality of them that ceases.
When we see Christ face-to-face (the perfection coming) then we will know in full and prophesy in full. No need for partial prophecy when we know the whole, as we are fully known.

1 Corinthians 13:8-12
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. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 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. 12 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.
Correct. Heavenly members of Christ's kingdom will not only receive much more knowledge they will also have far superior abilities. As Paul said, in ability we are now like babies in comparison to what we will be.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,644.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes I have always believed the fullness spoken of is after our resurrection when we are face to face with Him. However I have always believed that our appreciation of His Glory is an eternal gaining of knowledge of His wonders that never ceases (hence the 24 elders who bow day and night in eternity are seeing fresh wonders each time they look up.)
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Saint Steven
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

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Hi there,

If John dies around AD100, the Canon of scripture is closed and the gifts ceased, how come the church fathers continued to testify concerning deliverance and healings after that time?

Examples:

110 A.D. Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, Didache
150 A.D.-180 A.D. Justin Martyr, Tatian, Theophilus
190 A.D.-210 A.D. Irenaeus, Melito of Sardis, Tertullian, Minucius Felix
230 A.D.-300 A.D. Origen, Lactantius
325 A.D. Eusebius
375 A.D. Cyril of Jerusalem
It still happens today. Does that mean, eg if someone goes to the elders and they do the proscripted actions and pray for that someone, and so that someone is healed, does that mean the elders have the gift of healings or whatever?

(An aside, I'd like to know why people assume the lists given in the NT are complete and why others add their own, and define the gifts in either one of the lists, and somehow this is all accepted as Gospel.)

My point is that the fact there is healing and other miracles nowadays by no means implies the gifts have (or have not, for that matter) ceased. It says nothing about the gifts.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.