Convince me of Continuationism.

[Albion]

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.

I think I have to disagree on part of that. If the HS genuinely grants you one of the sign gifts, it doesn't mean that Continuationism itself is true.

Cessationists ordinarly do not deny that God can, if and when he chooses, gift somebody--with healing powers, for example.

What is denied, however, is the Continuationist claim that because the gifts allegedly never ceased, they are there for almost anybody who believes.

 

[Radagast]

I think I have to disagree on part of that. If the HS genuinely grants you one of the sign gifts, it doesn't mean that Continuationism itself is true.

Well, OK, I see your point.

But if God granted me a genuine sign gift, I'd be more likely to accept Continuationism than the idea that I'm special.

As it happens, though, He has granted me none of the gifts that Cessationists say have ceased.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It is almost a wrong premise. It's not about whether they continue. It's more about which ground humans can stand on nowadays as a measurement of how close they can be to God.

In 30s last century, how much nudity humans can get in touch through the media? 99.99% humans (including Christians) don't stand a chance to touch any nudity. Take a look at today's world, 99.99% humans in a modern society are inevitably in touch with inappropriate contentography. That reflects how fast this world goes corrupt, mostly in a gentile world. God's great effort was once on the Jews. In a nutshell, Jesus is in on time before the whole world went corrupt.

When Jesus said to the Jews,
Matthew 17:20-21 (NIV2011)
He replied, “Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.”

When the Jews (they don't have Internet back then, I must say) having faith as a mustard seed, then how about gentiles in today's world?! We need a mirror much more than a miracle or healing or tongue.

Well, for me, it is about whether the sign gifts continued or not. If we are certain they continued with 100% certainty, then we should be all for them and seek them earnestly (Because it is an NT command). If they did not continue and we know this with 100% certainty, then we should preach strongly against those who oppose Scripture. But Scripture appears to put me somewhere in the middle ground on this issue. God's Word does not appear to outright condemn the Continuationist position or make it clear. So if I believed I reject the position as being entirely false, I could potentially condemn myself for speaking against God. Yet, the Bible gives me certain verses that appear to favor Cessationism (letting me know that I should not get mixed up in the practices of Continuationism just in case they are wrong). In other words, the safer play is to be in the middle on this issue. It seems like if I went one way too far in either direction, it could potentially endanger my own soul.

For me: It is not about a faith issue.
Most Christians today mock the idea that they can overcome grievous sin, and they do not believe those verses in the Bible that talks about such a thing (Galatians 5:24, 1 Peter 4:1-2, 2 Corinthians 7:1). I do. I have no problem believing them. I also believe the King James Bible is the pure Word of God, as well. Again, I base this as a faith issue that God preserved His Word for all generations according to Psalms 12:6-7 (among many other verses).

 

[Albion]

Well, OK, I see your point.

But if God granted me a genuine sign gift, I'd be more likely to accept Continuationism than the idea that I'm special.

I dunno. By that I mean that if I were to put myself in that situation, I am not at all sure I'd react that way.

Knowing that tongues did cease, etc. and that the Continuationists were clinging to a sort of mythology that's necessary to support the raison d'etre of the modern charismatic movement...

I think I would feel that I had been selected as others from time to time probably are as well. Not that this would mean I was the apple of God's eye or anything like that, but just that he had something in mind for me to do that would advance his purposes.

 

[JAL]

Cite where Robert Thomas says prophecy is immature. You are putting words in his mouth. He said no such thing. Is there any end to your dishonesty?

Extrapolation is not dishonesty. At post 533 I enumerated the operands and challenged YOU to do the math. What do his assertions amount to? WHAT specific things are coming to a cease/cessation? WHAT, in the opinion of Robert Thomas, are the immature "childish things" being "put away"? Is he NOT saying that prophecy is put away? And if the chapter is retaining these gifts instead of putting them away, isn't that Continuationism?

Yet instead of answering these questions head-on as to provide an ALTERNATIVE reading of Robert Thomas, you conveniently ignore and evade them. YOU were the one who introduced his name into this debate. Your reticence on these questions speaks volumes here.

You are saying that, in the opinion of Robert Thomas, prophecy is not childish. It is thoroughly adult. Then why put it away in maturity? So Paul is saying:

"When I became an adult, I put away adult things" ?????

Clearly, I've raised some pertinent points of objection to a cessationist reading of the passage. For you to sit here and continue spraying empty rhetoric without addressing the actual exegetical issues is totally inappropriate.

Conclusion: Any attempt to adduce 1Cor 13 for a cessation (putting away) of the gifts - as Robert Thomas so adduced it - is too problematic (and seemingly heretical) to take seriously. If the cessationists want to make a case, they will need to look elsewhere.

 

[Hawkins]

Well, for me, it is about whether the sign gifts continued or not.

I don't mean to say that i am a person of faith. I am however the one ever witnessed what tongue (i.e. how I heard into my native tongue, more or less as a translator in a sense) is, what resurrection is. Gifted mean it needs to be performed through a human. It's all about faith in that case as far as I can tell. To me, miracles, healing, tongue etc. they all exist or else I won't be able to see, I have yet to see how they are performed by a human though.

I seldom talk about because I am not gifted as commonly understood what it is. I can barely say that I am experienced though.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If Pentecostal churches did that (or even something milder, like excommunication), there would be a lot fewer "prophets."

Agreed.

To the best of my knowledge, all Continuationists teach fallible prophecy. That's how they justify the fact that "prophecies" are so often wrong. One of my dashed hopes for this thread was clarity on whether it was really all Continuationists.

Our understanding on what always goes on is limited. There could be some group of believers in a remote jungle somewhere operating by the sign gifts or those who have such a gift could be like 1 person per every billionth person and they do not advertise about it. We simply do not know.

But I think that if you personally had been given a genuine sign gift, you would know.

But Continuationists have told me that they speak in tongues and they believe it is genuine to them. I think Scripture has to be in line with that experience. Some believe in a private prayer language that is not in any real language. I do not believe this is Scriptural. But if they did speak in a real foreign language and there was an interpreter present, and they believed this was genuine, then that is their experience. For me: I am not interested by such an experience because there are verses in support for Cessationism. For if the gifts had truly ceased, I would be condemning myself. Remember, the heart is deceitful and desperately wicked. We cannot trust ourselves alone, but we have to trust what God's Word says.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I don't mean to say that i am a person of faith. I am however the one ever witnessed what tongue (i.e. how I heard into my native tongue, more or less as a translator in a sense) is, what resurrection is. Gifted mean it needs to be performed through a human. It's all about faith in that case as far as I can tell. To me, miracles, healing, tongue etc. they all exist or else I won't be able to see, I have yet to see how they are performed by a human though.

I seldom talk about because I am not gifted as commonly understood what it is. I can barely say that I am experienced though.

I believe miracles by God in general exist today (i.e. God can heal by miracles, etc.), but I leave room for mystery in that the sign gifts given to the apostles or the early church are still operational. There is a difference between miracles in general and the miraculous gifting of the Spirit given to believers. Do you know of anyone today who can always heal 100% of the time? Do you know of anyone today who can speak in a foreign language and yet there is no way they learned that language on their own? Again, I am not doubting that such individuals may exist, I simply believe Scripture puts me in the middle on this issue (With me leaning more towards Cessationism).

 

[Radagast]

But Continuationists have told me that they speak in tongues and they believe it is genuine to them.

And, on evidence available to me, I don't trust what they say. But I think that I would trust myself.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I think I have to disagree on part of that. If the HS genuinely grants you one of the sign gifts, it doesn't mean that Continuationism itself is true.

Cessationists ordinarly do not deny that God can, if and when he chooses, gift somebody--with healing powers, for example.

What is denied, however, is the Continuationist claim that because the gifts allegedly never ceased, they are there for almost anybody who believes.

If just one person were to have the sign gift, then Continuationism would be true. God is not a respecter of persons. Paul encouraged the early church to seek after the gifts earnestly, and not just one person. In fact, it was an NT command. But does this command apply today? Therein lies the mystery (with me leaning more towards Cessationism).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

And, on evidence available to me, I don't trust what they say. But I think that I would trust myself.

“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9).

Without the Bible as our roadmap, we would be off course.

 

[Albion]

If just one person were to have the sign gift, then Continuationism would be true..

?? Why so?

There is absolutely no reason that he would have to have kept up, non-stop, throughout all of church history, with that which was done in the early church for a reason pertaining only to the early church.

Continuationism doesn't mean something is still possible. Almost anything is possible with God at any time.

Continuationism argues that there has in fact been no letup, therefore we should believe that what are said to be experiences of receiving the gifts today are nothing new or different, but just something that is a natural part of the church at all times.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

?? Why so?

There is absolutely no reason that he would have to have kept up, non-stop, throughout all of church history, with that which was done in the early church for a reason pertaining only to the early church.

Continuationism doesn't mean something is still possible. Almost anything is possible with God at any time.

Continuationism argues that there has in fact been no letup, therefore we should believe that what are said to be experiences of receiving the gifts today are nothing new or different, but just something that is a natural part of the church at all times.

If one man received the sign gifts, then “Partial Continuationism” or “Limited Continuationism” or “Temporary Continuationism” etc. would be the new coined terms if such a case was true.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

?? Why so?

There is absolutely no reason that he would have to have kept up, non-stop, throughout all of church history, with that which was done in the early church for a reason pertaining only to the early church.

Continuationism doesn't mean something is still possible. Almost anything is possible with God at any time.

Continuationism argues that there has in fact been no letup, therefore we should believe that what are said to be experiences of receiving the gifts today are nothing new or different, but just something that is a natural part of the church at all times.

I am just saying that back in the early church, the sign gifts were for all. To say that if the sign gifts resumed for only one person does not seem consistent with Scripture.

 

[Albion]

If one man received the sign gifts, then “Partial Continuationism” or “Limited Continuationism” or “Temporary Continuationism” etc. would be the new coined terms if such a case was true.

I wouldn't be sure of that. It's a claim that builds a case on a technicality while not really showing that there was any continuity.

So even if one person here or there received a gift now and then, this doesn't show that there was actual continuity throughout church history, yet believing that is essential to the Continuationist argument.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

And, on evidence available to me, I don't trust what they say. But I think that I would trust myself.

For example: If you died and came back from the dead, and you had a similar dream or vision like that of Colton Burpo, it does not mean that the dream or vision is true; Especially when we know that such a vision or dream contradicts inspired Scripture. So in this instance, you could not trust your own experience. For this type of dream would be a deception from the enemy. For Colton Burpo said that the angels had to calm him down because he was afraid of Jesus among other odd things mentioned.

 

[JAL]

Most Continuationists claim instead to have fallible prophecy from God. To me, that has a different problem: it makes no sense.

In our immaturity, the divine Voice typically isn't perfectly loud and clear. The result is fallible communication. I agree with you that Scripture probably reserves the term "prophecy" for infallible communication.

When we speak our daily Christianese, however, perhaps it's okay to use the term "prophecy" in fallible contexts. MY frustration is when people claim, "Thus saith the Lord" without admitting they are less than 100% certain of the message/accuracy.

In my understanding, the biblical prophets prophesied at 100% certainty consistently.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I wouldn't be sure of that. It's a claim that builds a case on a technicality while not really showing that there was any continuity.

So even if one person here or there received a gift now and then, this doesn't show that there was actual continuity throughout church history, yet believing that is essential to the Continuationist argument.

A sequel to a movie is a continuation from the first movie. It does not mean that the first movie is an unending movie being aired 24/7 for all time. The New Testament is a continuation of the Old Testament, but there is obviously a gap of time between the testaments that we have in our Bibles.

 

[Albion]

One thing I've learned from this discussion is that the Continuationist claim has been compromised or qualified every which way in order to meet reasonable objections from the other side.

Meanwhile, the Cessationist argument has remained the same and hasn't needed to be repeatedly tinkered with.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

One thing I've learned from this discussion is that the Continuationist claim has been compromised or qualified every which way in order to meet reasonable objections from the other side.

Meanwhile, the Cessationist argument has remained the same and hasn't needed to be repeatedly tinkered with.

Based on the limitations of this thread, and other discussions, I would agree with that.