Is Continuationism or Cessationism a hard doctrine to prove?

[Dave L]

You've got it backwards. Prophecy was before scripture. It has ALWAYS been the more sure word. Peter says, "completely reliable". (and you would do well to pay attention to it)

2 Peter 1:19-21
We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

“And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” (2 Peter 1:18–21) (KJV 1900)

 

[Dave L]

The Bible says nothing of the sort. You just made that up.

This is the only record we have telling about how the gifts were distributed. You are adding to scripture if you say any other way exists.

 

[Dave L]

That's rich.
The guy who claims the gifts are dead thinks I don't have spiritual discernment. lol
Isn't that a thing. Wow.

If you can raise the dead and command healing, you might have other gifts too. But only the "gifts" that can stay under the radar seem to be popular today.

 

[Saint Steven]

“And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” (2 Peter 1:18–21) (KJV 1900)

It is your bias that is reversing what it actually says.
Your understanding is forced by what you think cannot be.
No worries. Happens to the best of us. (you would do well to take heed)

 

[Saint Steven]

This is the only record we have telling about how the gifts were distributed. You are adding to scripture if you say any other way exists.

You have it backwards AGAIN!
You still have no scripture to back up your claim.
What does this say?

1 Corinthians 12:1, 4, 7, 8-11
1 Now about the gifts of the Spirit, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed.
4 There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them.
7 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.
8 To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10 to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.
11 All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines.

 

[Saint Steven]

If you can raise the dead and command healing, you might have other gifts too. But only the "gifts" that can stay under the radar seem to be popular today.

I didn't see that "qualification" in 1Cor.12-14. (raise the dead and command healing)
Why do you add it to scripture now?

 

[Dave L]

I didn't see that "qualification" in 1Cor.12-14. (raise the dead and command healing)
Why do you add it to scripture now?

If you have the gifts, you would also have these gifts.

 

[Dave L]

You have it backwards AGAIN!
You still have no scripture to back up your claim.
What does this say?

1 Corinthians 12:1, 4, 7, 8-11
1 Now about the gifts of the Spirit, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed.
4 There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them.
7 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.
8 To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10 to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.
11 All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines.

I have scripture that limits the distribution of the gifts to the two outpourings or through an apostle's hands. You need to expand this with scripture saying the gifts came in any other way.

 

[Dave L]

It is your bias that is reversing what it actually says.
Your understanding is forced by what you think cannot be.
No worries. Happens to the best of us. (you would do well to take heed)

No, Peter said scripture is better.

 

[Saint Steven]

If you have the gifts, you would also have these gifts.

Chapter and verse please. Thanks.

 

[Dave L]

Chapter and verse please. Thanks.

Are you saying some gifts, visibly provable but totally missing today, are not among the others that stay under the radar and are easy to bluff others with?

 

[Saint Steven]

I have scripture that limits the distribution of the gifts to the two outpourings or through an apostle's hands. You need to expand this with scripture saying the gifts came in any other way.

Oh, I get it.

It would be a lot of work to build your doctrinal house of cards for us.
So you hope to put the burden of proof on us for the claims you can't substantiate.

Besides I already provided the scripture for my view.
We are waiting for you to arrive with the goods.

 

[Saint Steven]

No, Peter said scripture is better.

Where's the news?
Why would he need to inform that audience "you would do well to take heed"?
Who doesn't know that already. It only makes sense in reference to prophecy.
It just doesn't fit your paradigm.

And these days a paradigm isn't even worth twenty cents. lol

 

[Dave L]

Oh, I get it.

It would be a lot of work to build your doctrinal house of cards for us.
So you hope to put the burden of proof on us for the claims you can't substantiate.

Besides I already provided the scripture for my view.
We are waiting for you to arrive with the goods.

Your scripture doesn't amount to anything unless you can prove I'm wrong. With scripture saying the gifts came in other ways besides the two outpourings and an apostle's hands. Why couldn't Philip impart the Holy Spirit to the Samaritans? Or where does it say everyone spoke in tongues apart from the Two Outpourings or through the hands of an apostle?

If you love the truth, you should know these things.

 

[Dave L]

Where's the news?
Why would he need to inform that audience "you would do well to take heed"?
Who doesn't know that already. It only makes sense in reference to prophecy.
It just doesn't fit your paradigm.

And these days a paradigm isn't even worth twenty cents. lol

Peter said scripture is a more sure word of prophecy.

 

[Saint Steven]

Are you saying some gifts, visibly provable but totally missing today, are not among the others that stay under the radar and are easy to bluff others with?

No.
I am saying you are adding to scripture.
Where are the gifts of "raising the dead" and "healing on command"?
I don't see those on the list.

 

[JAL]

There is no scripture supporting the gifts for today.

Sure, if you've already decided beforehand that most of the NT became obsolete a few years after it was written, because God was too incompetent to create a reference work of preponderantly enduring value.

With those blinders on, naturally you won't accept Paul's definition of a church:

"And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues."

You abide by your own definition of a church because you reject Paul's definition:

"Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ."

Nor will you accept Paul's explicit commands: "Follow the way of love, and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy" (1Cor 14:1).

Funny hermeneutic that cherry-picks the first half of that verse only to reject the other half.

You're right. If we all put on the same blinders as you, if we each concoct our own definitions of ecclesiology and spirituality, Scripture nowhere depicts the church as a charismatic institution.

 

[Saint Steven]

Your scripture doesn't amount to anything unless you can prove I'm wrong. With scripture saying the gifts came in other ways besides the two outpourings and an apostle's hands. Why couldn't Philip impart the Holy Spirit to the Samaritans? Or where does it say everyone spoke in tongues apart from the Two Outpourings or through the hands of an apostle?

If you love the truth, you should know these things.

"... apostle's" (small a) Name them.

The scriptures say the Holy Spirit distributes the gifts and you say otherwise.
Thus adding to scripture.

 

[Saint Steven]

Your scripture doesn't amount to anything unless you can prove I'm wrong.

Scripture amounts to nothing?
I need to disprove your opinion?

 

[JAL]

This is the only record we have telling about how the gifts were distributed. You are adding to scripture if you say any other way exists.

The record flatly contradicted by two outpourings of gifts devoid of any need for an apostle to lay hands (and nevermind the dozens of OT recordings on this matter) - THAT record?

Just want to confirm we're on the same page.