Convince me of Continuationism.

[Carl Emerson]

The writings of church fathers is not Scripture. While I am sure there are truths we can glean from them, we cannot base our faith exclusively on them as the basis for our faith. Men can be fallible in their beliefs in views even back then.

I think mention in early church writings carries more weight than Non mention in scripture...

 

[Carl Emerson]

I myself am a soft Cessationist. I'd be very, very happy to accept evidence of "sign gifts."

However, when people in this thread have given their best examples, they're still not very good.

I also have a specific Biblical concern with the idea of infallible prophecy continuing, because I believe in a closed canon.

I have a second specific Biblical concern with the idea of fallible prophecy. I see no evidence of such a thing in the NT, and Deuteronomy 18:20-22 tells us that the "prophet" who makes even one "mistake" must be immediately killed.

I have a third Biblical concern with the idea of tongues as an "ecstatic prayer language." That's not what Acts of the Apostles 2:6-11 is talking about.

I cant imagine anyone would claim it was.

The one who's tongue was not interpreted was asked not to operate that gift in public - they were not told it was false...

 

[Radagast]

I cant imagine anyone would claim it was.

"'I know what "it" means well enough, when I find a thing,' said the Duck: 'it’s generally a frog or a worm.'"

But what does "it" mean in your sentence?

The one who's tongue was not interpreted was asked not to operate that gift in public - they were not told it was false...

Huh?

That made no sense to me, but I do note that Acts of the Apostles 2:6-11 was in public.

I would also point out that William Samarin, in his classic book "Tongues of men and angels: The religious language of Pentecostalism," has pretty much proved that modern "speaking in tongues" is not the speaking of actual human languages. That agrees with the fact that no "speaking in tongues" recorded on tape is in actual human languages.

In the aftermath of Azusa Street, there was an optimistic belief that "speaking in tongues" would be useful for missionaries. It wasn't. The wonderful, godly Pentecostal people that go out as missionaries today learn languages the old-fashioned way.

 

[topher694]

What do you think of the Azusa Street Revival?

I think a lot of things about Azusa, some good some not so good. You'll have to be more specific.

 

[Tra Phull]

1 Cor 14:28 May be what Carl referred to, and may also be a basis for a private prayer language.

 

[Tra Phull]

But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
1 Cor 14:28

There are diverse kinds of Tongues, not everything is the same as Acts 2, as the cesspool of cessationism would have us believe.

In the above verse, Paul points out that without interpretation, the guy should "speak to himself, and to God"

IOW, he is quiet in the service, but not false or wrong. People using a prayer language are not boldly proclaiming something the congregation needs to hear. People giving an interpretation are also NOT doing what was done in Acts 2 - where the disciples talked in, and the hearers heard in - their own language, Parthian or whatever. Acts 2:4-6 makes it clear that both speaking and hearing occurred in the other languages, it was not a case of "hearing in tongues only" as some have tried to propose, that the miracle was all in the hearing.

 

[Radagast]

as the cesspool of cessationism would have us believe

One of the points made in this thread has been "what is the fruit?"

Abuse like that is not a good fruit.

But getting back to the debate, some of the Continuationists in this thread claim that what they are doing is exactly as in Acts of the Apostles 2:6-11 (A).

Others, who I am calling "soft Continuationists" (for lack of a better name), do not claim this, but claim that they are speaking in an "ecstatic prayer language" or "heavenly language" (B).

A third group seems to flip-flop back and forth between the two claims.

Personally, I find claim (A) dubious empirically, and I find claim (B) not well supported by the Bible.

 

[Tra Phull]

The Acts 2 phenomenon is very involved - perhaps some disciples spoke to one group in Cretan, another disciple spoke to Parthians in that tongue - many languages spoken and heard, in what may be the area of Solomon's Porch, til some think the disciples are drunk, until Peter addresses them on his own. Whether Peter spoke in Hebrew, which probably all these God-fearers knew, or whether something else transpired, we don't know, but it seems to me like we went from multiple disciples addressing multiple nationalities to Peter preaching by himself.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I think this whole thread is rather inane...

Straining the gnat and swallowing the camel comes to mind.

If I pray for someone who is miraculously healed - who cares if a 'gift' was operating or not???

The aim is that He is glorified...

How He is effecting the sudden change in a persons health is His business.

And yes I have seen Him 'in the Spirit' lift sickness off a person and then having 'seen' it lifted off - simply declared "be healed" with immediate effect.

I have come here to share the good things He is wanting to do, I don't care if you believe it or not because it happens simply as a result of reading scripture, simply believing what it says and going out and doing it.

No big deal - I was nothing and He healed me.

What more can I do than walk in His purpose as He leads.

The inuendo that I have a false spirit because He does stuff with me - well I am in very good company with my Jesus in that and you might get on rather well with those who judged Him the same way as well.

Sorry if I am a bit harsh - I am ironically rather unwell at the moment.

The world so much needs Him and obedient servants who walk as He walked.

I am nothing - less than nothing and I came to share what He has been doing to encourage others. He took me to Israel and China with $150 for 14 weeks everything was miraculously paid for. I had no plan. Just went in obedience. Folks were healed, folks heard the gospel, I was healed of a worn out hip.

What happened to rejoice with those who rejoice?

All I am hearing is "Yes but..."

As a result the treasure is being missed.

This is a seriously sad day.

I love you all.

 

[Tra Phull]

Oh, lighten up, Radagast, I refrained from saying "tongues-forbidders" or "Holy Spirit blasphemers"

 

[Tra Phull]

Get well, Carl.

 

[Radagast]

If I pray for someone who is miraculously healed - who cares if a 'gift' was operating or not???

Because truth and correct theology are important things.

And because this thread, if you look at the O.P. has a very specific purpose.

I am ironically rather unwell at the moment.

I pray that you will be healed, through the power of "Him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine."

 

[Tra Phull]

So we had disciples talking in, and visitors hearing in, the various tongues; then Peter preaching alone and all the visitors understanding him.

 

[Carl Emerson]

The things we have seen and done are because we were 'out on the edge'

We had Black Power in our lounge asking about Jesus.

It seemed to us that the gifts kicked in when we were vulnerable facing impossible power encounters - if He didnt show up we were toast. One important gift I noticed was to know when trouble makers were about to arrive.

He was truely sufficient in every encounter.

So my message is that the harvest is ripe and His enabling is all sufficient - He will gift you as necessary.

Our Pastor said we were in territory the Church didn't commonly venture into.

Just maybe you haven't seen the gifts released because they haven't been necessary in the realm in which you have walked.

This makes this thread rather academic.

By the way, thanks for praying, I took dog for a walk and am feeling much better.

 

[Radagast]

Just maybe you haven't seen the gifts released because they haven't been necessary in the realm in which you have walked.

That may well be true. Soft Cessationists are open to "sign gifts" in unusual situations, like the mission field.

By the way, thanks for praying, I took dog for a walk and am feeling much better.

Glad to hear it.

 

[Guojing]

Jesus told a man in Matthew 5 to offer a gift after he reconciled with his brother first. Obviously we do not offer animal sacrifices anymore. But before the cross: Animal sacrifice was still done and even endorsed by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. In other words, things can change and evolve beyond what Jesus initially taught. The thing is that we need to see the Biblical evidence of such a change. I believe we do see an explanation as to why Paul could no longer heal like he used to. The sign gifts were to confirm the Word (Mark 16:20).

In addition, the word “perfect,” and the word “mirror” is tied with another place in Scripture in 1 Corinthians 13.

“But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.” (James 1:25).

The perfect (the perfect Law of liberty - James 1:25) has come with the completion of the Bible.

“For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:” (James 1:23).

Glass here is in reference to a mirror.

10 “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” (1 Corinthians 13:10-13).

Both chapters are in reference to our behavior and it is not concerned about the afterlife. Seeing the chapters are focused on our behavior we must realize that our good behavior in the Lord can only be guided by God's Holy Word. All Scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

I do not see Jesus as being referenced as the perfect here or the the perfect being referenced to the Kingdom here within the context. The whole context is one based on behavior and we can only get that via the Word of God. Granted, I am open to seeing otherwise. But the Continuationist has to really explain this one to convince me to see their point of view.

Good point. Exodus 4 is the clearest example of what signs were meant for. God used signs to authenticate to others that he has sent a messenger to them.

Whether was it Moses, Elijah, or Jesus, signs were for Israel.

 

[Carl Emerson]

That may well be true. Soft Cessationists are open to "sign gifts" in unusual situations, like the mission field.

There is significant material from Jackie Pullinger who has ministered in the Walled City in Hong Kong among the addicts for over 40 years. She would doubtless say that without the gifts operating she would be in deep water. It really is worth having a look at some of her material on Youtube.

 

[Radagast]

There is significant material from Jackie Pullinger who has ministered in the Walled City in Hong Kong among the addicts for over 40 years. She would doubtless say that without the gifts operating she would be in deep water. It really is worth having a look at some of her material on Youtube.

Well, to be honest, I will only draw definite conclusions about work in the mission field by going there myself.

 

[Carl Emerson]

She tends to dissuade short term stays as the new converts from addiction need long term commitment.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

The sign gifts, tongues, prophecy, the gift of healing, etc. were operating all through the Book of Acts, and these gifts are mentioned in the letters that Paul wrote during the Acts period. But when we turn to the letters written after the Book of Acts—the 4 Prison Epistles, and the 3 Pastoral Epistles, we find that the sign gifts either aren’t mentioned at all or we see—as with the gift of healing—that they were no longer operating in Paul’s life. What he could do in Acts 28, he could no longer do in Philippians, or in 1 and 2 Timothy. He could heal all the sick on the island in Acts 28:9, but he couldn’t heal any of his closest co-workers—Timothy, Epaphroditus, Trophimus—after the close of the Book of Acts.

The letters were written to groups and individuals to teach on various subjects the recipient needed teaching on. If this were not so, each letter would be very long and very repetitive. 1 Corinthians was written during the period covered by Acts, but then so was Galatians (no mention of tongues), Colossians (no mention of tongues), James (no mention of tongues) and 1 Peter (no mention of tongues) for example. Most important is the fact that 2 Corinthians does not mention tongues, so by your reasoning tongues had ceased completely in the period between 1 and 2 Corinthians, despite Paul teaching on how to use tongues correctly.

Further, Acts was written AFTER the Pastoral letters (unless you hold to the position that the Pastorals are pseudonymous and early 2nd century) and Luke does not downplay tongues, but actually makes it an important part of the story, but makes no mention of the gift ceasing or going to cease, despite being in a position to know that by then.

You are reading a cessation of the gifts where there is no such indication. The Letter to Philemon makes no mention of the Death and Resurrection of Jesus, are we then to suppose that it had ceased to be relevant in the church at that time?

For something to be Biblical it needs to be taught in the Bible. There is not explicit teaching on the gifts ceasing and there is explicit teaching that the gifts were expected to continue (Acts; 1 Co 12 & 14).

There is an old saying: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I think you need to do a lot better than saying that there is no reference to tongues in the later New Testament, particularly when historically there is reference to the gift continuing well into the 3rd century.

Generally Cessationists believe that the miraculous gifting of the Spirit (not miracles in general done by God) had ended with the close of the creation of the book of Revelation in 96AD. The sign gifts would have been in operation to warn the Jew of the coming judgment upon their temple in 70AD.

The sign gifts WERE in operation to warn the Jew of the coming judgement on their temple as recorded in the gospels... but that is not actually the purpose of the gift of tongues and so is irrelevant to the argument that they ceased.

Whatever Cessationists believe needs to be backed up scripturally (which it is not) and historically (which it is not).

The use of gifts seem to have waxed and waned throughout the ages. For cessationists to be right, there should be no such use of the gifts after AD96, but tongues is mentioned in the Mark 16 longer ending which is generally dated to the early 2nd century, suggesting that tongues were still common and expected then.

Bringing this up to date, with historically verifiable cases (as opposed to vague references that may or may not indicate the usage of tongues). There is Edward Irving's church in the 1800's and the Azuza Street revival of 1906 which was followed by the Pentecostal revival where the gift of tongues (as well as other gifts) spread rapidly throughout the world. Following that there is the Charismatic Renewal of the 1950's and 60's and then the Catholic Charismatic Renewal of the 1970's. From Pentecostalism onwards the gifts of the spirit, including tongues, have continued in operation in a large number of churches, whether they are using them correctly or not (and a lot are probably not).

Cessationists need to explain how and why such groups operated in the Spiritual gifts and have continued to grow churches (in defiance of the general trend of decline) and how that fits with their theory that the gifts ceased after the first century.