Is Continuationism or Cessationism a hard doctrine to prove?

[BobRyan]

knowledgable Pentecostals and Charismatics/ other denominations would point out that there are many counterfeits out there masking the real gift.

usually, the Cessationist will use the worst examples out there to rest their case, while the Constitutionalist will point out that the evidence they showed, only showed the counterfeit version of the gift and not the genuine real gift of the Holy Spirit.

For example from what I heard from a Pentecostal, "Speaking in tongues is not weird babblings, but like speaking a fluent language that no one knows" They do not speak the language through their own power.

They would say there are real tongues, and then there is the counterfeit one.

I haven't studied scripture enough to side with either one, so my position is (I don't know which doctrine is true yet).

But for those who have studied it, is this an easy doctrine to figure out?

I don't want to be missing out on the 9 gifts of the Holy Spirit, but at the same time, I want to be cautious.

Cessationism is wrong according to Ephesians 4 and 1 Cor 12

Ephesians 4 says the gifts are valid all the way to the 2nd coming.

Eph 4
11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting,

So then -- "easy to prove".


you start off with this "... denominations would point out that there are many counterfeits out there masking the real gift"

Very true, in fact every modern-day example of speaking in tongues that I have seen in person, on TV, on internet - is fake according to Acts 2 and 1Cor 14.

 

[Saint Steven]

I suspect that you also might deny the continuation of certain gifts.

Like what?

 

[Tree of Life]

Like what?

Like the things I mentioned in the same post. Are there any more apostles in the sense that the twelve were apostles? Are there any who might arise and write new Scriptures?

 

[Saint Steven]

Like the things I mentioned in the same post. Are there any more apostles in the sense that the twelve were apostles? Are there any who might arise and write new Scriptures?

What does that have to do with the continuation of certain gifts?

 

[Dave L]

knowledgable Pentecostals and Charismatics/ other denominations would point out that there are many counterfeits out there masking the real gift.

usually, the Cessationist will use the worst examples out there to rest their case, while the Constitutionalist will point out that the evidence they showed, only showed the counterfeit version of the gift and not the genuine real gift of the Holy Spirit.

For example from what I heard from a Pentecostal, "Speaking in tongues is not weird babblings, but like speaking a fluent language that no one knows" They do not speak the language through their own power.

They would say there are real tongues, and then there is the counterfeit one.


I haven't studied scripture enough to side with either one, so my position is (I don't know which doctrine is true yet).

But for those who have studied it, is this an easy doctrine to figure out?

I don't want to be missing out on the 9 gifts of the Holy Spirit, but at the same time, I want to be cautious.

Those in the early church knew what they were saying when speaking in tongues. Today's tongue speakers haven't a clue about what they are saying. Paul said "understanding what is said" is the basis for edification. And he said those who spoke in tongues edified themselves = they understood. But they should interpret the message so all could understand and be edified.

 

[His student]

.................I haven't studied scripture enough to side with either one, so my position is (I don't know which doctrine is true yet). But for those who have studied it, is this an easy doctrine to figure out? I don't want to be missing out on the 9 gifts of the Holy Spirit, but at the same time, I want to be cautious.

Although there are many examples of the gifts in play in the Book of Acts - we are not instructed to step out and emulate most of them.

Whether you consider praying in the Spirit a gift of the Spirit or something that Christians should just do - this "kind" of speaking in tongues is the only kind we are told to do out of our own wills.

(Many will, no doubt, jump in and tells us why the passages on that are not as I see them and that's OK with me. To me they are clear.)

One thing that all should agree on is that God will neither give us or allow us to experience a counterfeit from Satan just because we step out in faith and do what we see in the scriptures. That includes asking for the Holy Spirit in whatever way God wants to give Him to us.

Forgetting about the gift of tongues for now - it is important to realize that the various givings of the Holy Spirit in the Book of Acts were "post salvation" (in the most basic sense). I.e. - they were not the "baptism" that all believers experience when they are sealed with the Holy Spirit forever upon exercising true saving faith (or before faith as many would have it).

If those applications of the Holy Spirit are shrugged off salvation in the most basic sense - then salvation becomes a matter of tarrying for the Spirit, getting baptized in water, or having a special group of anointed high echelon disciples come and lay hands on you to get saved.

That results in a disastrous view of salvation by grace through faith.

Oh - I know what some will tell us. They will say that these situation are special because they were the "first gentiles" or the "first something else. They may even say that Acts 2 was the "first instance of the Holy Spirit being given to the church" or some such thing.

Don't believe it. No one can even say "Jesus is Lord" in the first place unless it is by the Holy Spirit within them.

Look the scripture situation over for yourself and don't listen to those here who have an agenda. God will not let you experience something counterfeit or dangerous just because you ask Him for all the Spirit has for you - or because you step out in faith and pray to Him in another tongue.

God is the one who gave us this information in a way where we had to dig a bit to understand it. It's not the job of secessionists on the internet to guard your soul. God is the one who will guard your soul as you investigate it in scripture for yourself under the guidance of the Holy Spirit you received upon believing in Him.

 

[Tree of Life]

What does that have to do with the continuation of certain gifts?

You say that those who deny certain gifts are like those who throw away body parts. I'm saying that you also deny that certain gifts continued after the apostolic age. Unless you want to say that Apostles (like the 12) still exist and that there are those who can still write Scripture. Do you want to say this?

 

[Jonaitis]

usually, the Cessationist will use the worst examples out there to rest their case

What are those examples?

 

[Albion]

The operation of spiritual gifts (manifestations of the Holy Spirit) is a partnership.

You can say that, but the issue still remains the same: did the tongues (and the gifts in general) cease at any time in Christian church history? If yes, then the cessationists are correct.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

knowledgable Pentecostals and Charismatics/ other denominations would point out that there are many counterfeits out there masking the real gift.

usually, the Cessationist will use the worst examples out there to rest their case, while the Constitutionalist will point out that the evidence they showed, only showed the counterfeit version of the gift and not the genuine real gift of the Holy Spirit.

For example from what I heard from a Pentecostal, "Speaking in tongues is not weird babblings, but like speaking a fluent language that no one knows" They do not speak the language through their own power.

They would say there are real tongues, and then there is the counterfeit one.


I haven't studied scripture enough to side with either one, so my position is (I don't know which doctrine is true yet).

But for those who have studied it, is this an easy doctrine to figure out?

I don't want to be missing out on the 9 gifts of the Holy Spirit, but at the same time, I want to be cautious.

It is unfortunate that glossolalia is the one gift most focused on both in practice and in conversation today. Interestingly, Paul says this is the least of the nine gifts. So right from the start, there is an imbalance. I suspect this is due to its ease of counterfeit application and an almost impossible task of discerning it. Only God can discern the ecstatic language according to Paul and so he maintains this type of manifestation should remain private and not shared in public. On the other hand, he encourages tongues in a corporate venue when interpretation accompanies it. This is where the genuineness of the gift begins to break down and questioned when a mass of people join in ecstatic
speech with no restraint. Basically Corinth at its worse.
Back to your OP...the gifts have not ceased IMO rather they have been quenched by those who exploit to their benefit. When you read the list it would seem unlikely that God would allow Paul to teach them to the church and then take some of them away.

1. Word of wisdom
2. Word of knowledge
3. Faith
4. Gifts of healing
5. Miracles
6. Prophecy
7. Distinguishing between spirits
8. Tongues
9. Interpretation of tongues

 

[Albion]

If you are an evangelical student of Church history you would realize that it may well have been the quenching of the Spirit that accompanied Christianity being enthroned as an official religion of the empire that was a reason for what we've witnessed as a long period of only intermittent manifestations of the gifts of the Spirit until these later days in the Church age.

The reason why is beside the point. Was it that they continued on as always...or not?

You are suggesting here that there is a particular reason why they did not...but also that they did not.

OK. Then if what you say is true, you are also saying that the cessationists are correct.

 

[Foxfyre]

knowledgable Pentecostals and Charismatics/ other denominations would point out that there are many counterfeits out there masking the real gift.

usually, the Cessationist will use the worst examples out there to rest their case, while the Constitutionalist will point out that the evidence they showed, only showed the counterfeit version of the gift and not the genuine real gift of the Holy Spirit.

For example from what I heard from a Pentecostal, "Speaking in tongues is not weird babblings, but like speaking a fluent language that no one knows" They do not speak the language through their own power.

They would say there are real tongues, and then there is the counterfeit one.


I haven't studied scripture enough to side with either one, so my position is (I don't know which doctrine is true yet).

But for those who have studied it, is this an easy doctrine to figure out?

I don't want to be missing out on the 9 gifts of the Holy Spirit, but at the same time, I want to be cautious.

I do believe in the spiritual gift of tongues then and now. I also think everybody won't speak in tongues any more than everybody has any of the other spiritual gifts. And unlike ministries given to us, spiritual gifts are generally not 24/7 either but given when needed.

A gifted minister once explained to me that if speaking in tongues fills you with positive emotion and makes you conscious of and loving God more it is the real deal. Otherwise, caution is advised.

 

[Toney exlore]

I battled with this for years should I have spoken in tongues when I received the holy spirit or not.to me that is what the argument is about between the churches do we speak in tongues today or are they gone.you have to start in acts chapter 2 it reads divided tongues as of fire and they were all filled with the holy spirt and began to speak in other tongues as the spirit gave them utterance.there are clearly two different tongues spoken here. Divided tongues .two parts. Remember tongues is a sign to the unbelievers who were the unbelievers the jews and what did they not believe ? Was

 

[His student]

His student said: ↑

If you are an evangelical student of Church history you would realize that it may well have been the quenching of the Spirit that accompanied Christianity being enthroned as an official religion of the empire that was a reason for what we've witnessed as a long period of only intermittent manifestations of the gifts of the Spirit until these later days in the Church age.

The reason why is beside the point. Was it that they continued on as always...or not? You are suggesting here that there is a particular reason why they did not...but also that they did not. OK. Then if what you say is true, you are also saying that the cessationists are correct.

With all due respect - please read my post carefully including the part I highlighted above. It is very clear what I am suggesting.

I am indeed suggesting that the gifts did not "continue on as always" - due to a grieving of the Holy Spirit in many ways.

But I am not suggesting that they ceased or that the Holy Spirit did not desire that it be otherwise.

You couldn't possibly get that I hold the position that the gifts ceased from what I said - much less that it was God's desire that they cease.

The organized religion which has dominated the Church age for most of it's existence stifled the interaction of believers with the Holy Spirit through their rightful knowledge of the scriptures as well as through ecclesiastical abuses of various kinds.

That includes keeping the scriptures from the laity as well as out and out misrepresentation of the way of salvation and a personal relationship with God through His Spirit.

Although there has been a historical reformation in the worldwide church as you well know - the abusing parties still exist and, indeed, new ones have arisen within so-called Protestantism - not to even name the various cults.

 

[Albion]

It is very clear what I am suggesting.
I am indeed suggesting that the gifts did not "continue on as always" - due to a grieving of the Holy Spirit in many ways.

But I am not suggesting that they ceased or that the Holy Spirit did not desire that it be otherwise.

What's clear about that?

If you are suggesting that they ceased but only temporarily, it still rejects the main claim of continuationists that they could not cease and did not cease--ever.

 

[JAL]

There are several reasons why that passage cannot support the contentions of continuationists--typical Pentecostal Christians, that is.

For one, nothing in it says that the gifts must have continued on throughout all the ages and never let up. For that is the argument that the continuationist will give. In fact, the passage suggests that the signs described are something special for the end times.

That's a pretty tortured reading of the text. End times? Peter is attesting to the fullfillment of Joel's promise (in what you 'see and hear'), suggesting that Pentecost is the BEGINNING of those end times (the 'last days') which indeed WOULD suggest longevity of the gift of prophecy from Pentecost TO THE VERY END. And if that weren't enough, he reinforces the point with:

"The promise (of this Spirit of prophecy) is for you, AND FOR YOUR CHILDREN, and for ALL THOSE whom the Lord your God shall call."

I am not sure it's even POSSIBLE to express the perpetuity in stronger language than that.

This is promised Land. The fact that the church hasn't gone up to possess this Land doesn't extinguish the offer. The first generation of exodus-Israel didn't possess the land either, but a subsequent generation did.

For another, what is spoken of in this passage is not identical to, does not parallel, the list of gifts described in Corinthians, although there are some similarities.

Actually the primacy of Prophecy is the main thesis of 1Corinthians, so the parallel is quite strong.

 

[JAL]

Those in the early church knew what they were saying when speaking in tongues. Today's tongue speakers haven't a clue about what they are saying. Paul said "understanding what is said" is the basis for edification. And he said those who spoke in tongues edified themselves = they understood. But they should interpret the message so all could understand and be edified.

No translator was needed on Pentecost because, as you suggest, everything was immediately understood. When the language is immediately understood, what you have is the gift of PROPHECY, not the gift of TONGUES. Peter classified it as prophecy (fulfilment of Joel's promise of PROPHECY).

The gift of tongues doesn't exist in Acts. Acts is about prophecy.

Contrast this with the gifts described in 1Cor 14. There, a clear distinction is made between the gift of prophecy (a message which is understood immediately and thus has no need for a translator) versus the gift of tongues (which needs a translator). So I must perforce disagree with your categorical, "Those in the early church knew what they were saying when speaking in tongues."

That's dead wrong. It was precisely because they did NOT understand that they needed either:
(1) a companion endued with the gift of interpretationn
(2) OR to pray for that gift for themselves.

 

[JAL]

The reason why is beside the point. Was it that they continued on as always...or not?

You are suggesting here that there is a particular reason why they did not...but also that they did not.

OK. Then if what you say is true, you are also saying that the cessationists are correct.

Let's not mix apples with oranges. The cessationist claim is that the gifts CANNOT be fully revived today. The continuationist claim is that the gifts simply HAVE NOT been fully revived as of today.

 

[His student]

What's clear about that? If you are suggesting that they ceased but only temporarily, it still rejects the main claim of continuationists that they could not cease and did not cease--ever.

Saying that the gifts did not "continue on as always" says nothing about them ceasing.

If something continues on in a different way or less conspicuously than before - that does not say anything about them ceasing altogether.

If I chose to continue posting much less frequently and in a different way than I have in the past it does not mean that I have ceased to post. In fact it says just the opposite.

I do not believe that the gifts were withdrawn from God's people for much of the Church age. But I do believe that they were more inconspicuous than they are now for obvious reasons.

If a person under the thumb of the Catholic Church in the dark or middle ages (be he a priest or most certainly be he of the uneducated laity class) felt the moving of the Spirit and exercised a gift or tongues in some way - you are not likely to have heard of it 1000 years later.

Nor is he likely to fully have understood even remotely understood - not having access to the scriptures as we do.

But whether you really can't see that or if you perhaps misunderstood my meaning in the other post - there should be no doubt about what I mean now.

So please drop this silly line of reasoning.

The gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. They have never ceased.

The gifts may be more visible now than in the past. They may even be more abused now than in the past and probably are. But they have never ceased and will not until perhaps an age to come.

The evangelical calling of God may be more visible and even more frequent now than they were in some other period of Church history. But it has never ceased and will not until perhaps an age to come.

Capisce?

Cessationists simply do not have a solid scripture based argument for their position. It's all based on disagreeing with what they see around them now most particularly the abuses of the doctrine they see now.

We should never form a doctrine based on our feelings or our private opinions. We should form and preach only doctrine that is found in the scriptures.

The giving of gifts of the Holy Spirit by the Lord to His Church is clearly found in the scriptures. The ceasing of those gifts is not.

 

[JAL]

I believe that's it's a difficult case to prove biblically either way. That's one reason why there's been so much debate on this issue. The deity of Christ, the Trinity, salvation by faith through grace - these doctrines are much easier to establish from Scripture. I am a cessationist and believe that cessationism makes the most biblical sense. But it is not proven from Scripture like the Trinity is proven from Scripture.

An absolute, apodictic proof of ANYTHING is probably an unreachable goal. Hence, that shouldn't really be the fulcrum on which the debate pivots. A better question, 'Where does the bulk of evidence point?'

By all accounts, the NT is, through and through, a highly charismatic text. One therefore has to ask, WHY would someone, having read such a text, lean toward a non-charismatic theology?

The most likely reason isn't the text itself, but EXPERIENCE. Today we see little or no convincing manifestations of the gifts, and hence we feel the need to find an explanation. All too often, this effort to explain away the gifts leads to a very forced, seemingly torturous reading of the critical texts.