Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Let's set aside Eph 2:20 for just one milisecond. What about cessationism on the whole? What are scholars saying about it today? Most biblical scholars of today, according to this pastor (who holds a Doctorate of Ministry from Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary), stand opposed to cessationism - this appears to be a recent shift in opinion:
That's a laugh. A while back you claimed that if scholars do not function with scholarly integrity, they'd lose their jobs. Isn't it ironic how quickly you change the narrative? First of all, Gordon Fee wasn't commenting on a passage - he wasn't expressing his opinion on the doctrine of cessationism in that quote. He was telling us the STATUS of other scholars. Is he qualified to do this? Look at the Wikipedia article. He is one of the most esteemed theologians of the past century. Here's ONE example of his credentials:A quote from Gordon Fee, a Pentecostal theologian! Would you expect anything less from him. Give me a break. Of course with the explosion in the Pentecostal and charismatic movement in the last 100 years there are more people advocating continuationism. That doesn't make their theology correct. There are even more Muslims in the world - does that make them correct?
Stop telling lies. Your fundamental assertion here has been a point of dissent for me for over 15 years! How is it backpedaling for me to stay consistent for 15 years? Here's your assertion:You never made that clear in your original statement to which I responded, which was....
"The prophets tended to be the most mature - and therefore the most likely to exhibit miracles. God is too wise to put that kind of power in the hands of the spiritually immature. "
And I proved it wrong. God gave prophecy in abundance to a spiritually immature church.
Now you're backpedalling and moving the goalposts after the goal was scored.
Yet more blatant dishonesty.
A quote from Gordon Fee, a Pentecostal theologian! Would you expect anything less from him. Give me a break. Of course with the explosion in the Pentecostal and charismatic movement in the last 100 years there are more people advocating continuationism. That doesn't make their theology correct. There are even more Muslims in the world - does that make them correct?
Link? Any specific post of yours on that thread?I've already refuted your bizarre interpretation of 1 Cor 13:8-13 back in this thread.
Um...And I stand by those words. Do you NOT understand that the cornerstone is PART of the larger foundation?You're lying again. You plainly said....
Can you also make a good case for Continuationism?
Stop telling lies. My understanding of Eph 2:20 hasn't changed. I'll admit that I adduced ADDITIONAL SUPPORT for my reading of it when I realized that TWO modes of the Greek genitive noun (not just one) were harmonious with my view. Two out of three ain't bad. It's a majority position. Shame on me for corroborating my own position.So you're sitting on the fence again. Last time you did that and I refuted your argument you shifted the goalposts (after the goal was scored ) by saying oh that was only "one facet" of your thinking and instead had the gall to accuse me of misrepresenting you! That was when I left the thread in disgust at your blatant dishonesty.
Let me know when you've stopped moving the target and made up your mind on your interpretation of Eph 2:20. Then we can continue discussing it. Otherwise you're wasting my time.
After 28 pages of more heat than light, the answer is a very clear no.
It's your decision, of course. But what you say seems wise.I am inclined to agree (although I still label it as a mystery so as not to condemn myself). The safer play in my book is to not get mixed up in the Continuationist movement.
It's your decision, of course. But what you say seems wise.
After all, even if the Continuationists were correct, the gifts may be given to anyone of the Holy Spirit's choosing. It's not as though only members in good standing of one of the avowedly Pentecostal denominations are eligible.
If new prophecy is still happening, then we should be adding these prophecies in an official written form to the back of our Bibles. But not even many Continuationists would not dare do something like that. Yet, they are still saying their prophecy is from God. This to me sounds contradictory. If the prophecy is from God, then it should be added to the Bible.
Well, if it's infallible prophecy, then that applies.
Most Continuationists claim instead to have fallible prophecy from God. To me, that has a different problem: it makes no sense.
But I simply do not agree that it is safe spiritually to practice Continuationism (Just in case they are wrong).
I am on the fence between Cessationism and Continuationism.
I'm not quite sure what you mean. If God genuinely grants you one of the "sign gifts," then (a) Continuationism is true, and (b) you should exercise your gift.
What you should actively resist is anybody who instructs you on how to "fake" a sign gift.
At best, such fakery would be a form of lie; at worst it would be blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
Right, the Bible does not teach fallible prophecy. If men did not get a prophecy correct in the OT, they would be killed.
If a Continuationist teaches fallible prophecy, then they would be instantly disqualified in my view as being a genuine Continuationist.
But see, there's the rub. How do I know the sign gifts have truly continued? I don't.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?