Is Continuationism or Cessationism a hard doctrine to prove?

[Saint Steven]

Scripture sets its own limits.

Scripture is a subset of God's word.
God's word was spoken before it was written down.
What prevents God's word from being spoken again?

 

[Saint Steven]

The word of God is complete not to be added to especially by those who hear imaginary voices.

Did Moses hear imaginary voices when he witnessed the burning bush?

 

[Dave L]

Did Moses hear imaginary voices when he witnessed the burning bush?

Moses was a prophet.

 

[Dave L]

Scripture is a subset of God's word.
God's word was spoken before it was written down.
What prevents God's word from being spoken again?

Scripture thoroughly furnishes us.

 

[JAL]

The main problem with your position is that the gifts came only through an apostle's hands after the two outpourings. Scripture does not support any other means of distribution. This means all claims to having the gifts today are false. And all claims for external revelation are false. Based on this, how can any of it not be of human origin or worse?

As expected, not a direct answer. Just the same random distinctions and false dichotomies.

Again, cessationists and continuationists both:
(1) Analyze the Scripture
(2) Pray for illumination
(3) Regard the investigation as complete when feelings of certainty are satisfying.

You've failed to identify any differences.

When you're ready to provide a direct answer to that post, let me know.

(Yeah, no, THAT will never happen).

 

[JAL]

So you think adding to God's word is a good thing?

Cessationism thrives on spreading the paranoia (propaganda) that contemporary prophecy will add to the Bible in ways that will destroy the church.

Funny because you were the one who, earlier, intimated the church to be invincible based on Christ's claim that the gates of hell won't prevail against it. Changing your tune, when it's convenient?

I attended charismatic churches for 12 years. I never met ANYONE or even HEARD of anyone in the charismatic movement who wanted to canonize contemporary prophecy. And even if such a person arose, so what? You don't trust your conscience to make the right decision at that time? The same conscience that made the decision to accept or reject the CURRENT canon?

Look, one of the main reasons that Scripture was canonized is to preserve the writings of Christ's CONTEMPORARIES. That's just not going to happen today. That's one point that all the churches agree upon, hence NONE OF THEM are interested in canonizing anything today. I feel the same way.

You have objections to the present charismatic movement? Fine, so do I. That doesn't call for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Refinement is needed. My main beef is that charismatics with less than 100% certainty should be reluctant to call it prophecy, or at least be FORTHCOMING about their uncertainty.

And leaders should be leery of continually allowing members to publicly 'prophesy' who have never once managed to inspire 100% certainty in the leader himself. A real 'prophet' needs to prove himself.

 

[Saint Steven]

Moses was a prophet.

Right. People who hear from God are prophets.
People that don't believe we can hear from God claim imaginary voices.
I'm not clear as to which camp you are in.

 

[Saint Steven]

Scripture thoroughly furnishes us.

Why would that prevent God's word from being spoken again?
Maybe we should give all the preachers a day off today.
Tell everyone the "Scripture thoroughly furnishes us."
So you won't be needing our furniture.

 

[Dave L]

Why would that prevent God's word from being spoken again?
Maybe we should give all the preachers a day off today.
Tell everyone the "Scripture thoroughly furnishes us."
So you won't be needing our furniture.

Scripture is complete meaning all other claims for God's word are false.

 

[Dave L]

Right. People who hear from God are prophets.
People that don't believe we can hear from God claim imaginary voices.
I'm not clear as to which camp you are in.

There are no prophets beyond the Apostles. Today's prophecy is false.

 

[Dave L]

Cessationism thrives on spreading the paranoia (propaganda) that contemporary prophecy will add to the Bible in ways that will destroy the church.

Funny because you were the one who, earlier, intimated the church to be invincible based on Christ's claim that the gates of hell won't prevail against it. Changing your tune, when it's convenient?

I attended charismatic churches for 12 years. I never met ANYONE or even HEARD of anyone in the charismatic movement who wanted to canonize contemporary prophecy. And even if such a person arose, so what? You don't trust your conscience to make the right decision at that time? The same conscience that made the decision to accept or reject the CURRENT canon?

Look, one of the main reasons that Scripture was canonized is to preserve the writings of Christ's CONTEMPORARIES. That's just not going to happen today. That's one point that all the churches agree upon, hence NONE OF THEM are interested in canonizing anything today. I feel the same way.

You have objections to the present charismatic movement? Fine, so do I. That doesn't call for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Refinement is needed. My main beef is that charismatics with less than 100% certainty should be reluctant to call it prophecy, or at least be FORTHCOMING about their uncertainty.

And leaders should be leery of continually allowing members to publicly 'prophesy' who have never once managed to inspire 100% certainty in the leader himself. A real 'prophet' needs to prove himself.

The only thing that rings my alarm bells are false prophets, which is all that exists today.

 

[Dave L]

As expected, not a direct answer. Just the same random distinctions and false dichotomies.

Again, cessationists and continuationists both:
(1) Analyze the Scripture
(2) Pray for illumination
(3) Regard the investigation as complete when feelings of certainty are satisfying.

You've failed to identify any differences.

When you're ready to provide a direct answer to that post, let me know.

(Yeah, no, THAT will never happen).

We are not the same. Not even close.

 

[Saint Steven]

Scripture is complete meaning all other claims for God's word are false.

The new covenant is of the Spirit, not of the letter.
The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

2 Corinthians 3:6
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

 

[JAL]

Scripture thoroughly furnishes us.

2Tim 3:16-17 won't bear the weight usually placed upon it.
(1) It's referring to OT Scripture. If the OT is sufficient, the NT is superfluous. Right?
(2) It wasn't written to an entire congregation, just to an individual, because it is not in fact a message applicable to the whole church. See point #4.

(3) In fact, there was not a printing press till around 1500 A.D, which is one of the major thorns in Sola Scriptura.

(4) Who is it applicable to? It pertains to a 'man of God' (an OT designation for a PROPHET). OBVIOUSLY, only a prophet can RELIABLY divide rightly the Word of Truth. The rest of us are largely stabbing in the dark by comparison, as fallible exegetes.

(5) The passage is MERELY anticipatory ('hopeful'), because no one in this life will ACTUALLY be 'fully equipped' (perfect). However, prophethood vis a vis the written Word is certainly a step in the right direction.

(6) The Greek root word in that passage for teaching is DIDACTIC. Note well that ALL Scripture is didactic, according to that very passage. This presents a considerable challenge, hermeneutically, for the cessationist, in his attempt to disparage the book of Acts - and all charismatic passages - as non-normative. Cessationists, in a nutshell, cherrypick the Bible, in preference for what they WANT to believe, 'having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof'.

Conclusion. 2Tim 3:16 lends no support to the cessationist thesis. On the contrary, it soundly refutes it. The need for a 'man of God' (prophets) is just as relevant today as it was back then.

 

[Saint Steven]

There are no prophets beyond the Apostles. Today's prophecy is false.

That's not correct.
It wasn't even true in NT days. Who are these prophets? (different than apostles - small "a")

Ephesians 2:19-21
Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord.

 

[JAL]

We are not the same. Not even close.

As expected, not a direct answer. You've failed to deny differences in terms of ACTUAL PRACTICE.

You've only identified disagreements in terminology, but we already knew that. You say poteighto, I say potato. So what?

We call it prophecy, you call it illumination. So what? If you can't identify relevant distinctions in actual practice, the cessationist movement appears to be needlessly divisive, misleading, and fraudulent - straying the sheep away from the need to seek direct illumination from the Holy Spirit.

 

[JAL]

The only thing that rings my alarm bells are false prophets, which is all that exists today.

Sola Scriptura means to base doctrine on SCRIPTURE, not on your perspective on contemporary events, and other post-apostolic events. Stop contradicting yourself.

 

[Dave L]

As expected, not a direct answer. You've failed to deny differences in terms of ACTUAL PRACTICE.

You've only identified disagreements in terminology, but we already knew that. You say poteighto, I say potato. So what?

We call it prophecy, you call it illumination. So what? If you can't identify relevant distinctions in actual practice, the cessationist movement appears to be needlessly divisive, misleading, and fraudulent - straying the sheep away from the need to seek direct illumination from the Holy Spirit.

All prophecy is false today.

 

[Dave L]

Sola Scriptura means to base doctrine on SCRIPTURE, not on your perspective on contemporary events, and other post-apostolic events. Stop contradicting yourself.

But your doctrine has no scriptural support.

 

[Dave L]

That's not correct.
It wasn't even true in NT days. Who are these prophets? (different than apostles - small "a")

Ephesians 2:19-21
Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord.

They had prophets up until the Apostles died off.