Cessationism - Biblical Evidence

[TaylorSexton]

Greetings, everyone.

Before I begin this thread, I must give a little background on myself. I grew up in a Pentacostal church. Over the years, I began to question the things I saw in my church. After much research, I moved to Reformed theology. For a number of years now, I have embraced with love the Doctrines of Grace. I am Reformed. I am not a Charismatic in any sense of the word. I embrace the absolute sovereignty of God in all things and will defend it to my death.

However, there is one thing with which I have constantly struggled: cessationism. I just want to open this thread—for my sake only—so people that are more educated than myself might make a Biblical case for the cessationist position. Here are some guidelines I need to put down in order to get the information I desire.

1) I am interested only in Scripture, not church history, commentaries, or otherwise. Please, only Scripture and its interpretation.

2) When I mention the spiritual gifts of prophecy and tongues/interpretation, I am not talking about Benny Hinn-type material. I am talking about tongues as discussed in 1 Corinthians 14—orderly and controlled, truly benefitting the church. I am talking about prophecy in terms of speaking what The Lord has brought to mind, not "thus saith The Lord".

I hope these two guidelines make sense. If anyone desires further clarification, I will be happy to give it.

I must also ask one more thing. I ask that this concern be treated seriously but in love. I am not starting this thread to in any way threaten historical Reformed theology—a theology I embrace as the truth. I am merely a Christian desiring only to fully understand and apply God's word to my life. Please, no denigrating, insulting, or hateful comments towards me or anyone on this board.

Thank you all in advance.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessationism_versus_Continuationism

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Greetings, everyone.

Nice to meet you.

Before I begin this thread, I must give a little background on myself. I grew up in a Pentacostal church. Over the years, I began to question the things I saw in my church. After much research, I moved to Reformed theology. For a number of years now, I have embraced with love the Doctrines of Grace. I am Reformed. I am not a Charismatic in any sense of the word. I embrace the absolute sovereignty of God in all things and will defend it to my death.

Having come out of the teachings of the Assemblies of God (that I grew up with) around 11 years ago to embrace the lovely doctrines of grace, while continuing to grow in Christ ever since, we have much in common.

However, there is one thing with which I have constantly struggled: cessationism. I just want to open this thread—for my sake only—so people that are more educated than myself might make a Biblical case for the cessationist position.

Even after I became a Calvinist, I held on to continualism, for Biblicist sake, but not without struggles, and for quite some time, until recently after the "Strange Fire" brought the issue to the forefront of discussion and thinking. After further struggle, I decided to drop continualism for a number of reasons.
I must confess, I am not more educated than you, rather less educated.

Here are some guidelines I need to put down in order to get the information I desire.

1) I am interested only in Scripture, not church history, commentaries, or otherwise. Please, only Scripture and its interpretation.

2) When I mention the spiritual gifts of prophecy and tongues/interpretation, I am not talking about Benny Hinn-type material. I am talking about tongues as discussed in 1 Corinthians 14—orderly and controlled, truly benefitting the church. I am talking about prophecy in terms of speaking what The Lord has brought to mind, not "thus saith The Lord".

I hope these two guidelines make sense. If anyone desires further clarification, I will be happy to give it.

How does your view compare with D.A. Carson, John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Sam Storms, etc.?

I must also ask one more thing. I ask that this concern be treated seriously but in love. I am not starting this thread to in any way threaten historical Reformed theology—a theology I embrace as the truth. I am merely a Christian desiring only to fully understand and apply God's word to my life. Please, no denigrating, insulting, or hateful comments towards me or anyone on this board.

Thank you all in advance.

I love and respect all of my Calvinist brothers and sister in the Lord. I admire R.C. Sproul and John MaCarthur and the example they set in doing conferences publicly together and in the berean spirit. Welcome to CF brother, hope you can benefit!

 

[TaylorSexton]

How does your view compare with D.A. Carson, John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Sam Storms, etc.?

I have Grudem's Systematic Theology. His work is what caused me to revisit my Cessationist position. He seems to me to make a great case for Continuationism. Rather than saying the gifts are not for today, he Biblically and strictly defines the gifts in regards to the church. However, if his interpretation of the use of the gifts were to be followed, most of what I see happening in Charismatic circles today would vanish. Though his interpretation is very compelling, I have no real world example to observe for myself. I have only seen extreme Charismatics or extreme Cessationists. I have never witnessed "middle ground".

The reason why I am so concerned about this is that I have seen so many horrible things happen in Pentecostal circles "in the name of God" that I know are unbiblical. That is what caused me to become a Cessationist. However, upon attending a Reformed church (at said church I grew enormously in my faith), I began to fear that my position might be denying the power of God in my life. Because I can find no clear case for either position, I seriously began to fret. I am still fretting, if you can't tell!

Thank you for your reply.

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

Greetings, everyone.

Before I begin this thread, I must give a little background on myself. I grew up in a Pentacostal church. Over the years, I began to question the things I saw in my church. After much research, I moved to Reformed theology. For a number of years now, I have embraced with love the Doctrines of Grace. I am Reformed. I am not a Charismatic in any sense of the word. I embrace the absolute sovereignty of God in all things and will defend it to my death.

However, there is one thing with which I have constantly struggled: cessationism. I just want to open this thread—for my sake only—so people that are more educated than myself might make a Biblical case for the cessationist position. Here are some guidelines I need to put down in order to get the information I desire.

1) I am interested only in Scripture, not church history, commentaries, or otherwise. Please, only Scripture and its interpretation.

2) When I mention the spiritual gifts of prophecy and tongues/interpretation, I am not talking about Benny Hinn-type material. I am talking about tongues as discussed in 1 Corinthians 14—orderly and controlled, truly benefitting the church. I am talking about prophecy in terms of speaking what The Lord has brought to mind, not "thus saith The Lord".

I hope these two guidelines make sense. If anyone desires further clarification, I will be happy to give it.

I must also ask one more thing. I ask that this concern be treated seriously but in love. I am not starting this thread to in any way threaten historical Reformed theology—a theology I embrace as the truth. I am merely a Christian desiring only to fully understand and apply God's word to my life. Please, no denigrating, insulting, or hateful comments towards me or anyone on this board.

Thank you all in advance.

Much like your experience, i also cannot accept a cessationalist position as biblical. One simply does not presume to tell an Almighty God what He can and cannot do in a given circumstance. It is God who tells us what He will or will not do.

HOWEVER: This matter often depends on the definition of cessationalism.

If one is to take the position that miraculous gifts are rare i would strongly agree and state that they were probably rare during the ministry of Paul.

If you look at the New Testament Epistles and realise the time frame involved, that isn't a whole lot of miracles.

If also one is to claim that universal (as in applicable to the entire invisible church) special revelation comes about by revelation utterances such as tongues and interpretation, and prophecy, i would strongly disagree. Such a doctrine is a direct challenge to the sufficiency of scripture. Since the close of the Canon this kind of revelation has ended.

All of this said, this former Charismatic long ago rejected the modern Charismatic movement as largely heretical. This has no bearing on the continuation of the charisma.

 

[stenerson]

I tend towards a cessationist view, but not zealously. This subject along with eschatology I find tricky.

 

[cubanito]

Due to personal experiences, I have no recourse but to believe in the conotinuance of charismata. However, I am NOT nor ever been a charismatic.

The link by Osage Bluestem above is an excellent and I think mostly unbiased outline of the debate. I am a huge fan of John MacArthur and like RC Sproul's work, having gone through several of his video series and online classes. I am glad the Strange Fire conference occured. Someone needs to point out the fakery of Charismatics: they upset me greatly.

On the other hand, when Isaiah was a prophets there were 600 false prophets of Baal and also of many other false gods. The Biblical ratio of true to false prophets was always very small, except in the time of Moses when immediate death cleared the decks periodically. Thus Biblically speaking, it seems that Moses being an exeption, whenever God raised up a true prophet or two, Satan would raise hundreds of false ones to counter. It is thus to be expected that as the true Charisma began to appear, the counterfeit charismatic movement was allowed by God to muddy the waters.

Someone mentioned that they have never met a "moderate" continualist. I believe I fit the description, Were it not for personal occurences, witnessed by many people, I would prefer to be a cessacionist. An honest reading of Scripture, IMO, is more in line (though not conclusively) with a cessacionist interpretation.

BUT....

Every once in a while, God takes His pleasure in playing pinball, and I am usually the ball. I used to be terrified of these episodic occurences. After 30 years I have grown to enjoy losing the illusion of being in control of my life and having God hit me up against some bumpers. Because of the OP request I will not describe any of these "events"

I do not agree AT ALL with men like Piper who have sought after speaking in toungues, going so far as to mumble in the hopes of setting it off. Like John McArthur, I am distressed by respectable and godly pastors who make excuses for absurdities like "the Kansa city prophets" or the shenanigans of Drscoll.

I have experienced things that have happened through me, without my bidding, and often with me fearful and opposed to them. It is a frightful thing to be visited by God, even for the elect. I know, of some occurences it took me more than ten years to speak of it to anyone, even my wife. I only did so when they began to happen again after 10 years of the "ordinary" Christian life (if the Christian life were ever ordinary!)

God is God, in preserving the orderly peacefulness of His Church (and rightly so) let us be careful not to think we have made a box that He totally fits nicely inside.

JR

 

[TaylorSexton]

I am glad to find that there are some here that are asking questions as well. Some of our fellow Reformed folks elsewhere on the web consider excommunication at the mention of the concerns I have presented here.

 

[JM]

Grudem is convincing BUT...I've never seen tongues practiced biblically, ever. Not in the way the NT describes the gift...even guys like Piper who defend tongues have never spoke in tongues.

 

[GQ Chris]

I'm with JM; every time I have witnessed so called tongues, its been nothing but a theatrics show and prideful puffed up flesh wanting to pass for something divine.

 

[nobdysfool]

All I can say is that I have witnessed and experienced enough manifestations of the Spiritual Gifts to hold to a Continualist position. I do speak in tongues, but only in private prayer to God, which Paul indicated he did. I have been healed, and witnessed healing. I have even seen the dead come back to life. Are these everyday occurrences? No.

One thing I firmly believe is that these Gifts are, and always have been in God's control, His to manifest when, where, and how He chooses. Many who claim to have these Gifts speak and act as though the Gift(s) were under their control. I can find no Scriptural warrant for such a position and belief. They are Gifts of the Spirit, not the Gifts of Bob, or George, or John, etc. , and as such are under God's control.

One thing I have learned in my walk with Christ, (halting and stuttering though it may be) is that God does as He Wills, and He IS in control, always. I have learned to avoid limiting Him in my own mind and heart, and to be open to How He has chosen to do things. I think that may be the essence of "Be still and know that I am God".

 

[Digout]

Greetings, everyone.

Before I begin this thread, I must give a little background on myself. I grew up in a Pentacostal church. Over the years, I began to question the things I saw in my church. After much research, I moved to Reformed theology. For a number of years now, I have embraced with love the Doctrines of Grace. I am Reformed. I am not a Charismatic in any sense of the word. I embrace the absolute sovereignty of God in all things and will defend it to my death.

However, there is one thing with which I have constantly struggled: cessationism. I just want to open this thread—for my sake only—so people that are more educated than myself might make a Biblical case for the cessationist position. Here are some guidelines I need to put down in order to get the information I desire.

1) I am interested only in Scripture, not church history, commentaries, or otherwise. Please, only Scripture and its interpretation.

2) When I mention the spiritual gifts of prophecy and tongues/interpretation, I am not talking about Benny Hinn-type material. I am talking about tongues as discussed in 1 Corinthians 14—orderly and controlled, truly benefitting the church. I am talking about prophecy in terms of speaking what The Lord has brought to mind, not "thus saith The Lord".

I hope these two guidelines make sense. If anyone desires further clarification, I will be happy to give it.

I must also ask one more thing. I ask that this concern be treated seriously but in love. I am not starting this thread to in any way threaten historical Reformed theology—a theology I embrace as the truth. I am merely a Christian desiring only to fully understand and apply God's word to my life. Please, no denigrating, insulting, or hateful comments towards me or anyone on this board.

Thank you all in advance.

Speaking in an unknown tongue was a phenomenon reported to Paul after he left Corinth. He came up with a temporary solution in depending on an interpreter! This was totally different from what happened on Pentecostal day! This type was never mentioned in his other letters to Romans and Ephesians in which he spoke of spiritual gifts. He advised not to desire this gift that was mentioned last. Subsequently, people heeded to his advice and it ceased.

The revival of this in 20th century is misguided! Who wants to revive the worst conditions of the notorious Corinthian church?

 

[cubanito]

Grudem is convincing BUT...I've never seen tongues practiced biblically, ever. Not in the way the NT describes the gift...even guys like Piper who defend tongues have never spoke in tongues.

I have always stayed away from "charismatic/pentecostal" churches and what little I have seen of them mostly disgusts me (though not totally, Calvary Chapel seems to have a good balance of this).

I have "spoken in toungues" twice in 30 years. I put that in "" because it may have been nothing but emotional events, and not at all a Gift. The first time I was by myself and just ran out of words with which to praise God. The second time there was one very close friend there only, and I felt as ashamed as if my pants had fallen to the floor. Given my EMOTIONAL response to what my have been nothing but a psychological manifestation. Nonetheless, IF what I experienced was truly speaking in toungues, I can not imagine why anyone would willingly do it publicly. They were intensely private moments; I can almost "read between the lines" at Paul's astonishment at the cavalier attitude of the Corinthians.

Thus other than myself, I have also never seen toungues spoken in anywhere near a Biblical manner. What passes for such phenomena in charismatic churches is crowd manipulation and crass psychological techniques. It is so disgusting that today's more profitable ear-tickling hereyical shysters like Osteem downplay it.

In any case, if all that happened to me were speaking in toungues I would be a mild cessacionist. What has happened through and around me were public objective events where "extraordinary Providence" is not enough of an explanation.

Again, when Isaiah stood to prophesy, there were hundreds of false prophets imitating him, That there is a huge tub of dirty bathwater need not negate a small baby we ought not toss out. It would be more comfortable for me to be a cessacionist, much neater package; God has not allowed that option to me.

 

[drjean]

Anyone who has done missionary work has seen the gifts in action...truly. I would point you to Arthur Blessit in fact, who experienced countless miracles as he walked around the globe with the cross... amazing how God worked!

Perhaps some of the confusion is in the definitions of the gifts and the reason God gave them?

For the healers, well I'll say this: IF you are a true healer then go to the children's hospitals and heal them, as God said they are most precious! IF you do that, then I might keep track of you. For me, now, God is Healer.

 

[Digout]

I have always stayed away from "charismatic/pentecostal" churches and what little I have seen of them mostly disgusts me (though not totally, Calvary Chapel seems to have a good balance of this).

I have "spoken in toungues" twice in 30 years. I put that in "" because it may have been nothing but emotional events, and not at all a Gift. The first time I was by myself and just ran out of words with which to praise God. The second time there was one very close friend there only, and I felt as ashamed as if my pants had fallen to the floor. Given my EMOTIONAL response to what my have been nothing but a psychological manifestation. Nonetheless, IF what I experienced was truly speaking in toungues, I can not imagine why anyone would willingly do it publicly. They were intensely private moments; I can almost "read between the lines" at Paul's astonishment at the cavalier attitude of the Corinthians.

Thus other than myself, I have also never seen toungues spoken in anywhere near a Biblical manner. What passes for such phenomena in charismatic churches is crowd manipulation and crass psychological techniques. It is so disgusting that today's more profitable ear-tickling hereyical shysters like Osteem downplay it.

In any case, if all that happened to me were speaking in toungues I would be a mild cessacionist. What has happened through and around me were public objective events where "extraordinary Providence" is not enough of an explanation.

Again, when Isaiah stood to prophesy, there were hundreds of false prophets imitating him, That there is a huge tub of dirty bathwater need not negate a small baby we ought not toss out. It would be more comfortable for me to be a cessacionist, much neater package; God has not allowed that option to me.

 

[hedrick]

Since I’m mainline Reformed, it probably won’t surprise anyone that my opinion on this isn’t the same as either classic position being discussed here. I see no reason to think that there was any hard and fast cessasion of gifts, but I also don’t think I agree with some charismatics about what those gifts are.

As far as I can tell, modern tongue-speaking isn’t prophecy. It’s an expression of the believer’s reaction to the Holy Spirit’s presence. The account in Acts 2 seems to lead people to think that tongues is an actual revelation. But Acts 2 is unique. The text says that the people were speaking actual, intelligible messages in a variety of languages. People around them understood what they were saying.

But Paul’s descriptions of tongues isn’t that way. He implies that they are not a human language. They need an interpreter, but either this is simply someone to explained to visitors what’s going on, or it is someone who is inspired to get an intelligible message from them. His description does not make it sound like a translator dealing with an intelligible message delivered in a different language. Indeed Paul says (1 Cor 14:2) that tongues are not a message for other people, but a way to express in prayer (speaking to God) things of the Spirit which can’t be put into words. I see no reason why this phenomenon would have ceased. People still feel the need to express things that can’t be put into words, and I don’t see why tongues wouldn’t be a valid way to do that.

Thus I understand Acts 2 as a specific miracle, and not a model that was repeated, even in NT times.

Paul also speaks of prophets. But even in his NT times I don’t see any reason to think that they are equivalent to the OT prophets. The OT prophecies are “public revelation.” They are revelations from God intended for the whole Church. Yes, they are directed at specific situations, but still, after understanding what that context is, and making appropriate allowances, we can use them to establish doctrine. Paul shows no sign of having treated the prophecies in his congregation this way. If he truly believed there was someone in his congregation that was equivalent to Isaiah, it seems really odd that he never tells us what that person said. This suggests that he regarded the prophets as inspired people who had messages for his congregation, but that this was not public revelation in the same sense as the OT prophets.

(One way in which I probably differ from other participants here is that I don't see the Apostles as prophets in the OT sense either. Rather, I see them as witnesses to Christ, but not as conveying independent revelation.)

What’s the modern situation? I don't see any reason to say that there's a clear difference. I don’t see any reason to rule out the possibility of miracles and even of messages from God. But there are lots of reasons for caution with both. All the “prophets” I know of have messages that don’t seem to pan out. But there are credible accounts of miracles, even if there are even more non-credible accounts. Even in my very liberal church, my Sunday School co-teacher personally experienced a very low-probability event that one might well consider a miracle. I don’t see any reason to dogmatically reject the possibility that God might inspire people. Indeed one hopes that the Holy Spirit is speaking through many of us. However I admit to very great skepticism about the publicized “prophets.”

Similarly, I think modern tongues are a legitimate way for people to express the presence of the Holy Spirit. What I doubt is that they represent prophecy, or that they did even in the NT church. While I think Acts 2 is a unique event, even there, Luke doesn’t bother telling us what they actually said. He says simply that they spoke “about God’s deeds of power,” suggesting that their message was similar to Peter’s. I conclude that they weren’t revealing anything that wasn’t otherwise known, but rather that it was a miraculous sign, and possibly an aid to people who didn’t understand Greek. While I think tongues are legitimate, I am concerned with churches that push people into using tongues, at considering people who use tongues as superior as Christians, and at making what I think are unjustified claims for what they are. Paul, after all, certainly doesn’t see them as mandatory, or even as one of the more useful gifts.

 

[twin1954]

I once again offer this as the reason that I am a cessationist. I do not expect you or anyone else to be convinced by it but only to give you the reason that I am.




Why I am a cessasionist.
________________________________________

Why I am a cessationist. I admit that much of this comes from “ Signs of the Apostles” by Walter Chantry. He is not my only source but he did help shape my views. I also read many Pentecostal pages on the subject and found almost all of them saying pretty much the same thing. Only that the gifts had not ceased but not giving any real reason why. I also studied some Pentecostal history and was convinced that the modern day gifts were absent until about the 1800’s. Most of those who hold to modern day gifts trace their history to the so-called Azusa Street Revival which took place between 1906 to 1913. I must question why those gifts were absent, especially in the manner in which they are practiced today, until that time. Was not the Spirit working before that time?

Now to look at the way miracles and signs were used in the Scriptures.
Joseph was the first to receive extraordinary gifts from God. He didn’t work miracles but did do things that were not common. His gifts involved delivering divinely revealed truth. He was a Prophet of God.
Next we have Moses, the first to work miracles. His miracles were given as a sign that he came from God and spoke from God. This principle applies to all Old Testament miracles in that they were done as a sign that the one doing them was a Prophet from God and spoke for God. When they were done it was expected that the inspired word of God was to be spoken.

The miracles of Jesus are next in our study. His miracles were primarily to show His authority as the Prophet of God.

Joh 10:37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
Joh 10:38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
Joh 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
Joh 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

The miracles of the Apostles testified to their authority as God’s prophets, they who spoke the revelation of God.

Heb 2:3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
Heb 2:4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?
New Testament miracles are, in Scripture, viewed as God’s stamp of approval on the message of the Apostles.

Ordinary Christians and gifts. After Pentecost every recorded instance of men receiving these gifts were under the direct ministry of an Apostle.

This brings me to the conclusion that no true servent of Christ will be given power to work miracles unless he is directly associated with bring fresh revelation from God. They are given as signs of God to show He sent the ones performing miracles and we should expect to hear from God when they are done. There are no more Apostles as there are no more that saw and heard directly from Christ as did those who gave us the Scriptures. Also to believe that men today receive a fresh revelation from God is to say the Scriptures are not sufficient.

Baptism in the Spirit is clearly shown to have taken place on the day of Pentecost.
Act 1:4 And having met with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to await the promise of the Father which you heard from Me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days from now.
I do not find anywhere where there is a second work called a baptism in the Spirit. There are instances of fillings accompanied by the manifestations but only one baptism.

Speaking in tongues is only mentioned in Acts and 1Cor. If they were so important I believe they would have been spoken of in the other Epistles. The book of Romans was written after 1Cor. and the only gift repeated is prophesy, no mention of tongues.

The context of 1Cor. 12,13,14 is spiritual things not spiritual gifts. 1Cor. 12:1 does not have the word gift in it, it is another greek word altogether. Chapters 12&13 are concerned with divisions in the body, Some thinking they were higher in the body because of gifts. 14 merely teaches the proper use of tongues as opposed to prophesy in the Corinthian church not that they were to continue after the completed canon of Scripture.

These gifts were for a sign to unbelievers that they were speaking by God, that is , His word. I addressed this already.

As for 1Cor. 13:10 I do not believe that Paul is speaking of the completed canon of Scripture nor do I believe he was speaking of Christ, if he were he would have said Christ I believe. I am not sure what he is speaking of but I do think that it is possible that it is when we are glorified. Neither is he foretelling when the gifts will cease but only that they are temporary.

It seems clear to me that the book of Acts is a narration of the early Church and what happened to teach us how God established His Church in the world. It was not meant to teach doctrine nor should we learn doctrine from it exclusively. It should also be kept in mind that Paul wasn’t commending the Corinthians for their use of gifts but correcting them.

Now we have the complete inscripturated Word of God. The Apostles have all died and there are no more Apostles in the sense of those who were given special gifts and the ability to impart those gifts to men. I do believe it is clear from 1Cor. 13:11 that Paul is teaching that these things were for the establishing of the early Church. Modern day prophets claim to have new revelation from God and this denies that the Scripture are enough. I believe that Peter taught us that the Scriptures are mor to be believed than even our eyes or our experience.
2Pe 1:18 And we heard this voice being borne from Heaven, being with Him in the holy mountain.
2Pe 1:19 We also have a more sure Word of prophecy, to which you do well to take heed, as to a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the Daystar arises in your hearts,
2Pe 1:20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture came into being of its own private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For prophecy was not borne at any time by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke being borne along by the Holy Spirit.

Also God himself tells us that He has magnified His word even above His name.
Psa 138:2 I will worship toward Your holy temple, and praise Your name for Your loving-kindness and for Your truth's sake; for You have magnified Your Word above all Your name.
__________________
If you want someone to find Christ take them to where He has promised to be. Where two or three are gathered in His name.

 

[stenerson]

Seems to me that prophecies concerning a great apostasy in the last days is often associated with lying wonders and false miracles. The "Christian" world is ripe for the picking should any anti-Christ or false prophet come, deceiving if possible even the very elect. In other words it would look like the real thing,and be clothed in Christian language. An evil generation seeks a sign.

 

[Digout]

Since I’m mainline Reformed, it probably won’t surprise anyone that my opinion on this isn’t the same as either classic position being discussed here. I see no reason to think that there was any hard and fast cessasion of gifts, but I also don’t think I agree with some charismatics about what those gifts are.

As far as I can tell, modern tongue-speaking isn’t prophecy. It’s an expression of the believer’s reaction to the Holy Spirit’s presence. The account in Acts 2 seems to lead people to think that tongues is an actual revelation. But Acts 2 is unique. The text says that the people were speaking actual, intelligible messages in a variety of languages. People around them understood what they were saying.

But Paul’s descriptions of tongues isn’t that way. He implies that they are not a human language. They need an interpreter, but either this is simply someone to explained to visitors what’s going on, or it is someone who is inspired to get an intelligible message from them. His description does not make it sound like a translator dealing with an intelligible message delivered in a different language. Indeed Paul says (1 Cor 14:2) that tongues are not a message for other people, but a way to express in prayer (speaking to God) things of the Spirit which can’t be put into words. I see no reason why this phenomenon would have ceased. People still feel the need to express things that can’t be put into words, and I don’t see why tongues wouldn’t be a valid way to do that.

Thus I understand Acts 2 as a specific miracle, and not a model that was repeated, even in NT times.

Paul also speaks of prophets. But even in his NT times I don’t see any reason to think that they are equivalent to the OT prophets. The OT prophecies are “public revelation.” They are revelations from God intended for the whole Church. Yes, they are directed at specific situations, but still, after understanding what that context is, and making appropriate allowances, we can use them to establish doctrine. Paul shows no sign of having treated the prophecies in his congregation this way. If he truly believed there was someone in his congregation that was equivalent to Isaiah, it seems really odd that he never tells us what that person said. This suggests that he regarded the prophets as inspired people who had messages for his congregation, but that this was not public revelation in the same sense as the OT prophets.

(One way in which I probably differ from other participants here is that I don't see the Apostles as prophets in the OT sense either. Rather, I see them as witnesses to Christ, but not as conveying independent revelation.)

What’s the modern situation? I don't see any reason to say that there's a clear difference. I don’t see any reason to rule out the possibility of miracles and even of messages from God. But there are lots of reasons for caution with both. All the “prophets” I know of have messages that don’t seem to pan out. But there are credible accounts of miracles, even if there are even more non-credible accounts. Even in my very liberal church, my Sunday School co-teacher personally experienced a very low-probability event that one might well consider a miracle. I don’t see any reason to dogmatically reject the possibility that God might inspire people. Indeed one hopes that the Holy Spirit is speaking through many of us. However I admit to very great skepticism about the publicized “prophets.”

Similarly, I think modern tongues are a legitimate way for people to express the presence of the Holy Spirit. What I doubt is that they represent prophecy, or that they did even in the NT church. While I think Acts 2 is a unique event, even there, Luke doesn’t bother telling us what they actually said. He says simply that they spoke “about God’s deeds of power,” suggesting that their message was similar to Peter’s. I conclude that they weren’t revealing anything that wasn’t otherwise known, but rather that it was a miraculous sign, and possibly an aid to people who didn’t understand Greek. While I think tongues are legitimate, I am concerned with churches that push people into using tongues, at considering people who use tongues as superior as Christians, and at making what I think are unjustified claims for what they are. Paul, after all, certainly doesn’t see them as mandatory, or even as one of the more useful gifts.

I agree with much of things you have written excepting about modern unknown tongues. They don't relate to the Holy Spirit as many immature people claim! It is the emotionally spirited behavior of a person that is fruitless!

 

[Digout]

Seems to me that prophecies concerning a great apostasy in the last days is often associated with lying wonders and false miracles. The "Christian" world is ripe for the picking should any anti-Christ or false prophet come, deceiving if possible even the very elect. In other words it would look like the real thing,and be clothed in Christian language. An evil generation seeks a sign.