Is Continuationism or Cessationism a hard doctrine to prove?

[JAL]

The gifts ceased when he said they would. Bogus gifts today support this.

See my recent post #98.

 

[Butch5]

As already noted, I don't base doctrine on purely conjectural speculations about history. I look to the didactic statements of men like Christ, Paul, Peter, and James, to name a few.

Right, because it shows you're wrong.

You mean you base doctrine on your "interpretation" of the didactic statements of men like Christ, Paul, Peter, and James,

Huh? Could you form some complete sentences please? I don't understand you.

There's no need for the attitude.

I don't find that statement particularly 'plain'. I'm certainly not going to build a whole theology on it.

Of course not. It doesn't fit the narrative.

 

[JAL]

Right, because it shows you're wrong.

You mean you base doctrine on your "interpretation" of the didactic statements of men like Christ, Paul, Peter, and James,

I thought that was implied (see my signature). The point is that I don't try to make broad sweeping generalizations about history that don't seem to hold water, like cessationists do. Why should I, given the comparatively lucid didactic teachings of the NT?

There's no need for the attitude.

It's not an attitude.I honestly have no idea what you said.

Of course not. It doesn't fit the narrative.

For me it doesn't fit ANY narrative. I honestly can't make heads or tails of what Paul meant when he called tongues a sign for unbelievers. I could speculate, I suppose.

 

[Saint Steven]

blame?

Yes, blame.
You said: "The first century miraculous gifts have ceased."
Who's fault is it?

Did we somehow find ourselves complete without them?

 

[Saint Steven]

Revival CAN be an act of divine mercy and, as such, can even fall upon an ungodly society. Nonetheless godly societies are more likely to get it.

Revival ALWAYS falls on the ungodly.
It means to wake up or rise from the dead.

 

[Butch5]

I thought that was implied (see my signature). The point is that I don't try to make broad sweeping generalizations about history that don't seem to hold water, like cessationists do. Why should I, given the comparatively lucid didactic teachings of the NT?

If they are just your opinions then why are you trying to prove me wrong?

On the one hand we have your "interpretation" of the text. On the other hand we have the writings of men who were there.

It's not an attitude.I honestly have no idea what you said.

Sorry, I thought you were being sarcastic.

You said,
"Love never ceases. As for prophecies, they will cease; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will cease. For we [apostles and prophets] know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the mature comes, what was in part will cease. When I was a babe, I spoke like a babe, I thought like a babe, I reasoned like a babe. When I became a [mature] man, I ceased from baby things (13:8-11, my translation)."

Is it your contention that when the Corinthians became mature that knowledge and prophecy among the apostles and prophets would cease?

For me it doesn't fit ANY narrative. I honestly can't make heads or tails of what Paul meant when he called tongues a sign for unbelievers. I could speculate, I suppose.

He's alluding to Isaiah 28. Tongues was sign to Israel. Isaiah 28 is a judgment against Israel in the day of Christ. Isaiah said that God would speak to this people Israel with another tongue, yet they would not hear. That's what happened. That's why Paul said it was a sign to unbelievers. It was unbelieving Israel. In Corinthians 13 Paul uses a different word for tongues ceasing than he uses for the other two and it's in the middle voice which means tongues will cease of their own accord. Since tongues was a sign of the coming judgment, the destruction of Jerusalem, there would be no need for tongues after the judgment came about.

Woe to the crown of pride, to the drunkards of Ephraim, whose glorious beauty is a fading flower, which are on the head of the fat valleys of them that are overcome with wine!
2 Behold, the Lord hath a mighty and strong one, which as a tempest of hail and a destroying storm, as a flood of mighty waters overflowing, shall cast down to the earth with the hand.
3 The crown of pride, the drunkards of Ephraim, shall be trodden under feet:
4 And the glorious beauty, which is on the head of the fat valley, shall be a fading flower, and as the hasty fruit before the summer; which when he that looketh upon it seeth, while it is yet in his hand he eateth it up.
5 In that day shall the LORD of hosts be for a crown of glory, and for a diadem of beauty, unto the residue of his people,
6 And for a spirit of judgment to him that sitteth in judgment, and for strength to them that turn the battle to the gate.
7 But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.
8 For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean.
9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.
10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.
12 To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.
13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.
14 Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem.
15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
17 Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.
18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
19 From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you: for morning by morning shall it pass over, by day and by night: and it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.
20 For the bed is shorter than that a man can stretch himself on it: and the covering narrower than that he can wrap himself in it.
21 For the LORD shall rise up as in mount Perazim, he shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that he may do his work, his strange work; and bring to pass his act, his strange act.
22 Now therefore be ye not mockers, lest your bands be made strong: for I have heard from the Lord GOD of hosts a consumption, even determined upon the whole earth.
23 Give ye ear, and hear my voice; hearken, and hear my speech.
24 Doth the plowman plow all day to sow? doth he open and break the clods of his ground?
25 When he hath made plain the face thereof, doth he not cast abroad the fitches, and scatter the cummin, and cast in the principal wheat and the appointed barley and the rie in their place?
26 For his God doth instruct him to discretion, and doth teach him.
27 For the fitches are not threshed with a threshing instrument, neither is a cart wheel turned about upon the cummin; but the fitches are beaten out with a staff, and the cummin with a rod.
28 Bread corn is bruised; because he will not ever be threshing it, nor break it with the wheel of his cart, nor bruise it with his horsemen.
29 This also cometh forth from the LORD of hosts, which is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working.

KJV Isaiah 29:1 Woe to Ariel, to Ariel, the city where David dwelt! add ye year to year; let them kill sacrifices.
2 Yet I will distress Ariel, and there shall be heaviness and sorrow: and it shall be unto me as Ariel.
3 And I will camp against thee round about, and will lay siege against thee with a mount, and I will raise forts against thee.
4 And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.
5 Moreover the multitude of thy strangers shall be like small dust, and the multitude of the terrible ones shall be as chaff that passeth away: yea, it shall be at an instant suddenly.
6 Thou shalt be visited of the LORD of hosts with thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and tempest, and the flame of devouring fire.
(Isa. 28:1-29:6 KJV)

 

[Butch5]

Yes, blame.
You said: "The first century miraculous gifts have ceased."
Who's fault is it?

Did we somehow find ourselves complete without them?

I still don't understand what you mean by blame. It was planned that way. Paul didn't say when we become complete. He spoke of when the maturity or completion came.

 

[JAL]

You said,
"Love never ceases. As for prophecies, they will cease; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will cease. For we [apostles and prophets] know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the mature comes, what was in part will cease. When I was a babe, I spoke like a babe, I thought like a babe, I reasoned like a babe. When I became a [mature] man, I ceased from baby things (13:8-11, my translation)."

Is it your contention that when the Corinthians became mature that knowledge and prophecy among the apostles and prophets would cease?

No. Please re-read the post. It's an endless cycle. It NEVER ENDS. It need not even end in heaven (perhaps we'll always be learning, even in heaven?)
And even if there were an endpoint, the passage doesn't mention it. It's only concern is relative maturity as a (presently)unending cycle. The purview in that passage is not eschatological. It's about spiritual maturity. In a nutshell, Paul's language is ingeniously coinciding spiritual maturity with prophetic maturity. He's DEFINING spiritual maturity as mature prophetood. And some noted cessationists scholars concede that point.

Cessationists love to talk about history. How about the following historical datum? Historically, who is by and large the most spiritually mature class of believers in salvation history? The prophets!

 

[Butch5]

No. Please re-read the post. It's an endless cycle. It NEVER ENDS. It need not even end in heaven (perhaps we'll always be learning, even in heaven?)
And even if there were an endpoint, the passage doesn't mention it. It's only concern is relative maturity as a (presently)unending cycle. The purview in that passage is not eschatological. It's about spiritual maturity. In a nutshell, Paul's language is ingeniously coinciding spiritual maturity with prophetic maturity. He's DEFINING spiritual maturity as mature prophetood. And some noted cessationists scholars concede that point.

Cessationists love to talk about history. How about the following historical datum? Historically, who is by and large the most spiritually mature class of believers in salvation history? The prophets!

I don't really see how this argument makes sense. Paul explains how this prophesying in part will end, yet you say it's a never ending cycle?

You speculate that we will be learning in Heaven. We won't even be in Heaven. The gift of knowledge isn't just learning things. It's supernatural knowledge, ie prophecy.

Also, can you define what "spiritual maturity" is. I find that people use this word spiritual in all kinds of different ways to mean all kinds of different things. It would be helpful if you could tell me what you mean by it.

 

[JAL]

He's alluding to Isaiah 28. Tongues was sign to Israel. Isaiah 28 is a judgment against Israel in the day of Christ. Isaiah said that God would speak to this people Israel with another tongue, yet they would not hear. That's what happened. That's why Paul said it was a sign to unbelievers. It was unbelieving Israel. In Corinthians 13 Paul uses a different word for tongues ceasing than he uses for the other two and it's in the middle voice which means tongues will cease of their own accord. Since tongues was a sign of the coming judgment, the destruction of Jerusalem, there would be no need for tongues after the judgment came about.

No way. You're making way too big a huge stretch here. You are trying to read back into 1Cor 13 a verse that occurs one whole chapter later, regarding 'signs', a verse apparently steeped in the history of judgments upon Israel. NONE OF WHICH IS MENTIONED IN 1COR 13. And this becomes your basis for a ceasing of the gifts?

If we're going to make THAT BIG a stretch, there's probably dozens of other loosely-related passages that could also weigh in here, adding to the range of possible readings and interpretations. THAT can of worms should be opened only if we can find NO OTHER CLEAR EXPLANATION IN THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT as to why Paul speaks of the gifts 'ceasing'. But as I showed, Paul could hardly have been more clear as to what sense the gifts are supposed to 'cease' - they are supposed to mature. I also showed this thesis consistent with the general tenor of the epistle articulated in chapters 2 and 3 regarding the need of the Corinthians to mature.

And if that weren't enough, some noted cessationists concede MY reading (up to the point of back-pedaling, at least).

 

[JAL]

I don't really see how this argument makes sense. Paul explains how this prophesying in part will end, yet you say it's a never ending cycle?

Thought it was clear. At least more clear than this commentary put it, "The emancipation from childish things took place as a matter of course and it continues(Robertson & Plummer, I Corinthians in I. C. C., (1963), p. 298).

Yes the cycle continues. The contrast is between the 'babe' who prophesies in part, versus the 'man' who prophesies in full. Which was Paul? Was he a Corinthian babe? No. THEREFORE Paul is a MAN who prophesies in full (at least relative to them). Yet this same Paul says OF HIMSELF, 'We [apostles and prophets] prophesy in part'. He's still a babe! Relative to WHAT? To the immature Corinthian babes? No. Ok, then, relative to what? Christ. (The logic is irresistible).

The clear implication is that, at least in this life, maturation does NOT take you beyond infancy RELATIVE TO CHRIST. Mature as Paul was, nonethless, compared to CHRIST, he could still prophesy only 'in part'.

Clear?

 

[Saint Steven]

I still don't understand what you mean by blame. It was planned that way. Paul didn't say when we become complete. He spoke of when the maturity or completion came.

So you claim that 1Cor.13 negates 1Cor.12 and 14?
Maybe I should blame you. lol

 

[Butch5]

No way. You're making way too big a huge stretch here. You are trying to read back into 1Cor 13 a verse that occurs one whole chapter later, regarding 'signs', a verse apparently steeped in the history of judgments upon Israel. NONE OF WHICH IS MENTIONED IN 1COR 13. And this becomes your basis for a ceasing of the gifts?

If we're going to make THAT BIG a stretch, there's probably dozens of other loosely-related passages that could also weigh in here, adding to the range of possible readings and interpretations. THAT can of worms should be opened only if we can find NO OTHER CLEAR EXPLANATION IN THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT as to why Paul speaks of the gifts 'ceasing'. But as I showed, Paul could hardly have been more clear as to what sense the gifts are supposed to 'cease' - they are supposed to mature. I also showed this thesis consistent with the general tenor of the epistle articulated in chapters 2 and 3 regarding the need of the Corinthians to mature.

And if that weren't enough, some noted cessationists concede MY reading (up to the point of back-pedaling, at least).

It's not a stretch at all. Paul himself notes that it is written.

21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. (1 Cor. 14:21-22 KJV)

Paul himself "said it is written" and he quoted the passage from Isaiah. There's no stretch here, it's just the historical context.

 

[Butch5]

So you claim that 1Cor.13 negates 1Cor.12 and 14?
Maybe I should blame you. lol

I don't recall claiming that. If you could make an argument then I might know what you're talking about.

 

[JAL]

You speculate that we will be learning in Heaven. We won't even be in Heaven. The gift of knowledge isn't just learning things. It's supernatural knowledge, ie prophecy.

Correct. Christ Himself learned on earth by prophetic revelations from the Father. And so must we, and it might well continue in heaven, just as I stated.

Also, can you define what "spiritual maturity" is. I find that people use this word spiritual in all kinds of different ways to mean all kinds of different things. It would be helpful if you could tell me what you mean by it.

In 1Corinthians, both in chap 2 and 13, it's defined in terms of giftedness.

Elsewhere Paul defines it in terms of Spirit-fullness (viz fruits of the Spirit)

The two definitions go hand in hand. People who are mature in the fruits of the Spirit are of sufficiently noble character to be entrusted with charismatic power. They won't likely abuse it.

 

[Saint Steven]

I don't recall claiming that. If you could make an argument then I might know what you're talking about.

Is healing one of the "first century miraculous gifts" you claim have ceased?
God doesn't heal the sick we pray for anymore?

 

[JAL]

It's not a stretch at all. Paul himself notes that it is written.

21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. (1 Cor. 14:21-22 KJV)

Paul himself "said it is written" and he quoted the passage from Isaiah. There's no stretch here, it's just the historical context.

I'm not saying it's a stretch to claim that tongues in some (confusing) sense was a sign. It's a stretch to claim that 1Cor 13 is tying the cessation of gifts to eschatological judgments upon Jerusalem. That thesis isn't clearly articulated in 1Cor 13.

What IS clearly articulated, however, are these concepts:
1. Babes
2. Maturity
3. Maturity of prophecy
Why should I make a huge stretch given the crystal clarity of concepts in the immediate context? A stretch to what? To a conclusion that seems to FLATLY CONTRADICT the principles clearly articulated in the chapter?

 

[JAL]

It's not a stretch at all. Paul himself notes that it is written.

21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. (1 Cor. 14:21-22 KJV)

Paul himself "said it is written" and he quoted the passage from Isaiah. There's no stretch here, it's just the historical context.

Let me give an example of why I find 14:21-22 confusing. A 'sign' normally conveys something. If the intended audience doesn't grasp the import, it has failed in its mission (seems to me). In the passage, WHICH gift successfully conveys the message?
(1) Tongues? Nope. Nobody understands the tongues-gift of 1Cor 14.
(2) Prophecy? Yes
So...Isn't prophecy therefore the sign? As it DOES manage to convey a message? Look at verse 23:

So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who are uninstructed or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your minds? (14:23)

Was that an effective sign? They just think we're insane! Now look at verse 24 - it shows the potentially EFFICACIOUS role of prophecy as a sign:

"But if an unbeliever or uninstructed person comes in while everyone is prophesying, he will be convicted and called to account by all, 25and the secrets of his heart will be made clear. So he will fall facedown and worship God, proclaiming, “God is truly among you!”

Paul seems to be saying one thing, but his EXAMPLES seem to prove the opposite. It's very confusing. And you seriously want me to predicate a doctrine of cessationism on this foggy passsage?

 

[Butch5]

Thought it was clear. At least more clear than this commentary put it, "The emancipation from childish things took place as a matter of course and it continues(Robertson & Plummer, I Corinthians in I. C. C., (1963), p. 298).

Yes the cycle continues. The contrast is between the 'babe' who prophesies in part, versus the 'man' who prophesies in full. Which was Paul? Was he a Corinthian babe? No. THEREFORE Paul is a MAN who prophesies in full (at least relative to them). Yet this same Paul says OF HIMSELF, 'We [apostles and prophets] prophesy in part'. He's still a babe! Relative to WHAT? To the immature Corinthian babes? No. Ok, then, relative to what? Christ. (The logic is irresistible).

The clear implication is that, at least in this life, maturation does NOT take you beyond infancy RELATIVE TO CHRIST. Mature as Paul was, nonethless, compared to CHRIST, he could still prophesy only 'in part'.

Clear?

There it is, the inference. it's not that the passage says that, it's an inference. It's interesting that you import Christ into the passage when Paul makes not such reference.

Paul's use of the passive and middle voice verbs shows that tongues would cease of it's own accord and prophecy and knowledge would cease when something caused them to cease, ie, the maturity or completion. From this we see two different causes for the cessation of tongue and then Prophecy and knowledge. Paul uses passive verbs in regard to prophecy and knowledge indicating that something would cause these two to end as opposed to tongues which would end on it's own accord. Paul didn't say when we become mature or you become mature. When he writes of the completion or maturity coming he uses the definite article, the. One would think he would say you or we.

So what did they know in part and prophesy in part. It was the message that God was giving them. Jesus had told His disciples that He had much more to teach them but they couldn't handle it yet, but that the Holy Spirit would teach them. So they were learning as they went. Their knowledge was in part and their prophesying was in part. However, once that knowledge matured they would no long know and prophesy in part. The question is did that ever happen? Yes, it did.

And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more.
26 Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men.
27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God. (Acts 20:25-27 KJV)

 

[Butch5]

Correct. Christ Himself learned on earth by prophetic revelations from the Father. And so must we, and it might well continue in heaven, just as I stated.

This is speculation. Yes, Christ was given revelation. That doesn't mean we will be.

In 1Corinthians, both in chap 2 and 13, it's defined in terms of giftedness.

Elsewhere Paul defines it in terms of Spirit-fullness (viz fruits of the Spirit)

The two definitions go hand in hand. People who are mature in the fruits of the Spirit are of sufficiently noble character to be entrusted with charismatic power. They won't likely abuse it.

So, by spiritual maturity you mean giftedness. Is that correct?