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.
Given that your Anglican church has drifted so deeply into unbelief and deception, its not surprising there has been no witness of the gifts.
Wayne, I would accept that IF we did not know the testimony, the record, of actual history.I agree and the fact that the Bible does not explicitly say that they will end is good reason to suppose that they shouldn't end.
It's a common expression. Is your position made secure if I were instead to say two or three or several or a few men said....?And arguing that it is 'one' man's perception when you have already mentioned others who have had similar experiences seems a bit odd.
Ask yourself, during the span of the Old Covenant, the ministry of death, from Mt. Sinai to the Day of Pentecost (same anniversary) when the New Covenant started, what changed during the old covenant?
Matthew 5:18
For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.
The same is true of the New Covenant, the ministry of the Spirit. Nothing of the Spirit will change until we see God face to face. 1 Corinthians 13:12. That includes the gifts of the Spirit.
Jesus, the I AM, started the Old Covenant, and only He could end it, and start the new one. And only His second coming will end the New Covenant. And the covenant will stay in tact from beginning to end with nothing ceasing.
Cessationism is wishful thinking of those without the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Just like everything spiritual, the gifts are given according to your faith. Those with unbelief or disdain, will never receive anything from the Lord to their shame. I remember one Cessationist preacher write in a book against tongues, that if the gifts of the Spirit were available today, then he would most certainly have been given them. Such humility.
Regarding the laws of each covenant. They are similar as they are both based on the eternal laws of God, (love God with all your heart, mind and body, and love your neighbor as yourself), but the signs of a covenant cease when the covenant ceases. The Sabbath was the sign of the Old Covenant, and it ceased as Jesus is its substance, our Rest. And the sign of the New Covenant is the Cup, representing the blood of the covenant. 1 Corinthians 11:25.
Well let's drop the 'raised from the dead' issue and I've heard loads of people speaking in French, particularly when I was in France on holiday, but I never thought it was the gift of tongues and I doubt they did either.Proof is irrefutable evidence. To say that the speaker saw (or heard of) someone who raised the dead to life or was speaking French is not proof of anything.
Well, 'it's there' isn't saying much. If it is there, you should be able to present it to us who don't know what it is you are referring to.Well the evidence is there. All it needs is evaluation.
And experienced as well. Having spoken in tongues, prophesied, spoken words of wisdom, interpreted tongues and had words of knowledge (in addition to the other 1 Co 12 gifts), I have all the evidence I need.
In some churches, yes. Not in most.Having read the scriptures, I'm quite happy that this is normal activity in the church.
So what do you really mean by 'irrefutable evidence'. I have it. I have prophesied and it was God speaking; I have spoken words of Wisdom and it was divinely given; I have spoken in tongues (and it certainly wasn't French); I have interpreted tongues without understanding the language spoken (English is my first and only language).
Wayne, I would accept that IF we did not know the testimony, the record, of actual history.
So because the gifts did cease (except perhaps for a suggestion every now and then that one of them was associated with some saint or other, which is not even to claim any continuity), we MUST take account of that when making a decision about the matter.
It's a common expression. Is your position made secure if I were instead to say two or three or several or a few men said....?
I have medical proof that my daughter was healed of 75% hearing loss. I have a test results from one doctor then a week later from a specialist. One states the 75% hearing loss, the other states perfectly normal hearing. In between there we specifically laid hands on her ears for healing. This was the result. I have presented that evidence before (not here). Obviously I hide personal information. So guest what happens? I get accused of being dishonest. That could be from 2 different people. The information could be "doctored". The first doctor probably made a mistake and so on. I'm not putting my daughter's personal information on the internet. Even if I did it I'd still be accused of "doctoring" the information. THAT is why I don't play the "proof" game anymore. THAT is why I say that cessationism is founded in deception and accusation, because it is their default position. I don't need to provide proof of anything to know that such attitudes do not line up with the character and nature of Jesus.Let's say it a more accurate way. I was drawing from several different comments that have already been posted and, presumably, read by the readers here.
But you wrote that you are dismayed or perplexed or just plain surprised that that they are not convinced of your POV after allegedly being given proof.
And yet, you're not about to present any of that proof to us?
Didn't people do that there on that thread? Why bring it up again? Was there insufficient argument given?
That is hearsay or an allegation. Proof is independent evidence. Even in Scripture we have Jesus raising a man, Lazarus, from the dead and that person had been dead for four days and was laid in a tomb. That's hard to refute! But if someone says that they raised somebody from the dead, and the fact is that he had merely been unconscious before another man prayed over him, then mistakenly thinking that he had brought him back from the dead...that wouldn't be a verification, proof, that anyone was raised from the dead or that a gift of the Holy Spirit was involved.
I have medical proof that my daughter was healed of 75% hearing loss. I have a test results from one doctor then a week later from a specialist. One states the 75% hearing loss, the other states perfectly normal hearing. In between there we specifically laid hands on her ears for healing. This was the result. I have presented that evidence before (not here). Obviously I hide personal information. So guest what happens? I get accused of being dishonest. That could be from 2 different people. The information could be "doctored". The first doctor probably made a mistake and so on. I'm not putting my daughter's personal information on the internet. Even if I did it I'd still be accused of "doctoring" the information. THAT is why I don't play the "proof" game anymore. THAT is why I say that cessationism is founded in deception and accusation, because it is their default position. I don't need to provide proof of anything to know that such attitudes do not line up with the character and nature of Jesus.
How does that show that the gifts never ceased or could not cease? And does your mention of this conflict with anything I've written? I don't think so.And if one investigates, copious evidence of various gifts can be found well into the third century... long after the apostolic age had ended.
I don't know what you mean by this. Are you saying that the gifts were less often in evidence but that there was always a continuity of them? I don't think that's verified by history.That they began to dwindle after that is more likely to be an indication of the state of the church than the fact that there was an actual cessation.
Moreover the continuationists don't maintain that the gifts continued to be used unbroken, but that they continue to be available to be used...
...in line with the book of Acts which clearly doesn't indicate that everyone spoke in tongues all of the time).
That's a solid argument, yes, although it's not argued that the death of the last Apostle is somehow special to this issue. And there is an answer.If cessationists say that the gifts ceased after the apostles died... then ANY evidence that the gifts were used after that time (even if by only one person) is evidence that the gifts did not cease.
How is this purported revival evidence that the gifts did not cease at some time during, say, the Dark Ages?And here is multiple pieces of evidence: over a hundred years of Pentecostalism and over 50 years of the Charismatic Movement. And that is only the recent evidence. There is Edward Irving and before that the Primitive Methodists and Hildegarde of Bingham and numerous other names and groups that I have long since forgotten about.
But not over ALL the years since the time when the gifts were a major feature of the Church.No but then I am not saying two or three or several, I am saying that these gifts are and have been used regularly by hundreds of thousands of people over the years.
How many people do you consider 'proof'.
In that case, we believe not only because of the account but because we believe Holy Scripture to be God's own word.Would the same burden apply to other things... such as the resurrection of Jesus, which has far less witnesses and yet we can both agree it happened.
In that case, we believe no only because of the account but because we believe Holy Scripture to be God's own word.
I understand, but I'm dealing with the whole issue here, and the whole thread, not with just what a single poster says is his own experience. The topic is, after all, about Cessationism as a concept vs. Continuationism as a concept.I'm quite happy to agree on the subject of Lazarus... but I didn't say I'd witnessed someone being raised from the dead, nor am I making a case for it.
I'm not sure the Anglican Church has had no witness of the gifts... particularly when the current Archbishop has made a point of saying he speaks in tongues. I also know of dozens of Anglican churches where the gifts are in evidence (as well as a lot more where they aren't).Given that your Anglican church has drifted so deeply into unbelief and deception, its not surprising there has been no witness of the gifts.
Anointing of the sick sometimes heals people and sometimes it prepares them for death. We pray for sick people AND we build hospitals and medical schools, so you could say we are continuationalist AND cessationist. I would say we are open to God working through medicine AND prayer without getting all dogmatic about it.I must say that I don't fully understand the Catholic position.
The Catholic Catechism #1508 states "The Holy Spirit gives to some a special charism of healing," which seems Continuationist.
However, the preferred Catholic mode of healing seems to the sacrament of Anointing of the Sick, which seems Cessationist.
No. It's way older than that. There is no particular adaptation needed for charismatic Catholics.It might mean that; or it might be a theological compromise to satisfy Charismatic Catholics.
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?