Number One Flaw in Cessationism

[CharismaticLady]

@CharismaticLady
You must feel like you threw an apple at the hornet's next with this topic. So much venom. Oh well, by their works...

What is amazing is no one cares that nothing inside a covenant ceases while the covenant exists. But maybe someday it will hit them in the head like a V8!

 

[CharismaticLady]

The only person not getting it is you. I see other posters trying to get you to see the same thing I am to no avail.

Look,
5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

Then look,
6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

Lastly it names the nations,
9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,

10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,

11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

And even says ONE MORE TIME "We do hear them speak in OUR tongues (aka language of those countries)



No, not correct.

The disciples, yes, they had the gift of tongues.

The "devout Jews" NO. They had no gift bestowed upon them. I challenge you to prove it as well that they received a miraculous gift.

What was it? The miraculous gift of hearing? Preposterous. No such thing in scripture. It was the disciples that had the gift and spoke in those peoples language from those different countries.

It also doesn't help your ridiculous belittling. I dont see how you can try to belittle me when I am almost having to spell things out in macaroni and crayons with you.

The Jews had no miraculous gifts. The disciples did.

The disciples with their gift of tongues spoke in the language the Jews from those different countries could understand.

So its more like this:

Three disciples come and speak to all the countries that are in their presence.

One spoke German
One spoke French
One spoke English

All the countries that were present were French, German and English

One spoke English
One spoke German
One spoke French

And therefore they heard the disciples, who were Galilean born, speak their language from their native tongue.

Its really that simple.

6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,

10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,

11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

What does 1 Corinthians 14:2 mean to you? I'd love to see how you are going to twist it to fit Acts 2, instead of seeing how Acts 2 conforms to the rule.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

CFAN prayed for a blood washed Africa, and used the spiritual gifts as a catalyst. They go together to bring Christ's return. To move people to repent to Jesus. So long as they are needed we have them. And we will always need Christ's blood. And the gifts until we have Christ here .

 

[Saint Steven]

What is amazing is no one cares that nothing inside a covenant ceases while the covenant exists. But maybe someday it will hit them in the head like a V8!

Right. That would be bait and switch if something was taken away from a covenant. And when it hits them it will come with the regret of what they could have had. Oftentimes we get the question: "Why would you want to speak in tongues?" (with noted disgust) For their sake, I'm glad it's not a salvation issue. But I'm not sure why they are so in love with their B+W world when the bliss of colorful vistas await. To each their own, I suppose. (sigh) SMH

Acts 2:39
The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

 

[Acts2:38]

What does 1 Corinthians 14:2 mean to you? I'd love to see how you are going to twist it to fit Acts 2, instead of seeing how Acts 2 conforms to the rule.

Funny how you think this is your answer.

I have applied the Greek language multiple times for you and you refuse to accept them. Nowhere in the Greek language does this ever mean gibberish utterances.

γλῶσσα glōssa, gloce-sah'
the tongue, a member of the body, an organ of speech; a tongue; the language or dialect used by a particular people distinct from that of other nations.

of uncertain affinity; the tongue; by implication, a language (specially, one naturally unacquired):—tongue.


"In order for the first question to be understood, the Bible student must get a picture of the overall context of 1 Corinthians 14, and the circumstances that prevailed in the assemblies of those Christians.

Information that is provided by several passages within the chapter reveals that some of the Corinthian saints, who possessed the divine gift of being able to speak in foreign languages [ordinary human tongues] in a supernatural manner, were abusing that gift. If, therefore, a person had the divinely bestowed gift of speaking in a “tongue,” he was to exercise that gift only in an assembly where the same language was known — unless there was an interpreter present.

Let us illustrate the matter more concretely. Suppose a brother had been granted the ability to speak the Punic language, as the people of Melita did (where Paul was shipwrecked — Acts 28:1). He could exercise that gift only in a setting where the people who spoke that tongue were present — unless there was another brother nearby who possessed the gift of interpretation. In such a case, the message could be conveyed intelligibly through the interpreter.

With this background in mind, consider now the fact that Paul, in 1 Corinthians 14:2, addresses an abuse of this procedure. If we may be permitted to expand and paraphrase the apostle’s admonition, this would be the sense of it.

For the one who speaks in a tongue [to an audience unfamiliar with his language], is not speaking to men [in any meaningful way], but to God [since only God would be able to know what was being said]; for no one [in this audience] would understand, but in his spirit he [the speaker] would be speaking mysteries [that which could not be understood due to the language barrier] to his alien audience.

In the circumstance just described, the group would hear a sound, but since they could not comprehend the message, nothing would be revealed; the message would remain a mystery (obscured).

The tongue thus contemplated was not some mysterious, ecstatic utterance by which the speaker personally communicated with God (as modern Pentecostals claim); instead, it was a language inaccessible to the audience by virtue of the circumstances, but one which the speaker might exercise in personally speaking to God in prayer.

Finally, verse 28 reiterates the same point. If the person who possesses the tongue gift is within an audience that is unacquainted with the language he is able to speak, and there is no interpreter available, he must keep silent. He may commune with God silently [i.e., mentally], but his speaking would be of no use to the congregation in such a situation as that contemplated above, and thus was prohibited.

These texts, then, properly understood, provide no support for the use of so-called ecstatic tongues." - Wayne Jackson
What Are the So-called "Mystery" Tongues of 1 Corinthians 14?

Oh, and dont think I didnt notice your avoidance of the main point, that miracles have ceased, post #3 I believe. Not to mention your deflection of Acts 2 and its clear and precise context and grammar usage. That's why you had to attempt to pull what you thought was your "Ace in the hole", but really did more damage to your stance than good. It also still has no proof that the audience of the disciples in Acts 2 had any powers whatsoever. Because they didnt. I know it, and deep down you know it (seem to be suffering "denial in psychology").

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

Funny how you think this is your answer.

I have applied the Greek language multiple times for you and you refuse to accept them. Nowhere in the Greek language does this ever mean gibberish utterances.

γλῶσσα glōssa, gloce-sah'
the tongue, a member of the body, an organ of speech; a tongue; the language or dialect used by a particular people distinct from that of other nations.

of uncertain affinity; the tongue; by implication, a language (specially, one naturally unacquired):—tongue.


"In order for the first question to be understood, the Bible student must get a picture of the overall context of 1 Corinthians 14, and the circumstances that prevailed in the assemblies of those Christians.

Information that is provided by several passages within the chapter reveals that some of the Corinthian saints, who possessed the divine gift of being able to speak in foreign languages [ordinary human tongues] in a supernatural manner, were abusing that gift. If, therefore, a person had the divinely bestowed gift of speaking in a “tongue,” he was to exercise that gift only in an assembly where the same language was known — unless there was an interpreter present.

Let us illustrate the matter more concretely. Suppose a brother had been granted the ability to speak the Punic language, as the people of Melita did (where Paul was shipwrecked — Acts 28:1). He could exercise that gift only in a setting where the people who spoke that tongue were present — unless there was another brother nearby who possessed the gift of interpretation. In such a case, the message could be conveyed intelligibly through the interpreter.

With this background in mind, consider now the fact that Paul, in 1 Corinthians 14:2, addresses an abuse of this procedure. If we may be permitted to expand and paraphrase the apostle’s admonition, this would be the sense of it.

For the one who speaks in a tongue [to an audience unfamiliar with his language], is not speaking to men [in any meaningful way], but to God [since only God would be able to know what was being said]; for no one [in this audience] would understand, but in his spirit he [the speaker] would be speaking mysteries [that which could not be understood due to the language barrier] to his alien audience.

In the circumstance just described, the group would hear a sound, but since they could not comprehend the message, nothing would be revealed; the message would remain a mystery (obscured).

The tongue thus contemplated was not some mysterious, ecstatic utterance by which the speaker personally communicated with God (as modern Pentecostals claim); instead, it was a language inaccessible to the audience by virtue of the circumstances, but one which the speaker might exercise in personally speaking to God in prayer.

Finally, verse 28 reiterates the same point. If the person who possesses the tongue gift is within an audience that is unacquainted with the language he is able to speak, and there is no interpreter available, he must keep silent. He may commune with God silently [i.e., mentally], but his speaking would be of no use to the congregation in such a situation as that contemplated above, and thus was prohibited.

These texts, then, properly understood, provide no support for the use of so-called ecstatic tongues." - Wayne Jackson
What Are the So-called "Mystery" Tongues of 1 Corinthians 14?

Oh, and dont think I didnt notice your avoidance of the main point, that miracles have ceased, post #3 I believe. Not to mention your deflection of Acts 2 and its clear and precise context and grammar usage. That's why you had to attempt to pull what you thought was your "Ace in the hole", but really did more damage to your stance than good. It also still has no proof that the audience of the disciples in Acts 2 had any powers whatsoever. Because they didnt. I know it, and deep down you know it (seem to be suffering "denial in psychology").

Here are the relevant verses about tongues being useful without anyone understanding them except God.
1Co 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.
1Co 14:3 On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation.
1Co 14:4 The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church.
1Co 14:5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up. ESV

 

[CharismaticLady]

Nowhere in the Greek language does this ever mean gibberish utterances.

Where have I ever said it was a "gibberish utterance"? That type of mockery of a gift of God is Cessationist talk, not mine.

γλῶσσα glōssa, gloce-sah'
the tongue, a member of the body, an organ of speech; a tongue; the language or dialect used by a particular people distinct from that of other nations.

of uncertain affinity; the tongue; by implication, a language (specially, one naturally unacquired):—tongue.


"In order for the first question to be understood, the Bible student must get a picture of the overall context of 1 Corinthians 14, and the circumstances that prevailed in the assemblies of those Christians.

Information that is provided by several passages within the chapter reveals that some of the Corinthian saints, who possessed the divine gift of being able to speak in foreign languages [ordinary human tongues] in a supernatural manner, were abusing that gift. If, therefore, a person had the divinely bestowed gift of speaking in a “tongue,” he was to exercise that gift only in an assembly where the same language was known — unless there was an interpreter present.

Let us illustrate the matter more concretely. Suppose a brother had been granted the ability to speak the Punic language, as the people of Melita did (where Paul was shipwrecked — Acts 28:1). He could exercise that gift only in a setting where the people who spoke that tongue were present — unless there was another brother nearby who possessed the gift of interpretation. In such a case, the message could be conveyed intelligibly through the interpreter.

With this background in mind, consider now the fact that Paul, in 1 Corinthians 14:2, addresses an abuse of this procedure. If we may be permitted to expand and paraphrase the apostle’s admonition, this would be the sense of it.

For the one who speaks in a tongue [to an audience unfamiliar with his language], is not speaking to men [in any meaningful way], but to God [since only God would be able to know what was being said]; for no one [in this audience] would understand, but in his spirit he [the speaker] would be speaking mysteries [that which could not be understood due to the language barrier] to his alien audience.

In the circumstance just described, the group would hear a sound, but since they could not comprehend the message, nothing would be revealed; the message would remain a mystery (obscured).

The tongue thus contemplated was not some mysterious, ecstatic utterance by which the speaker personally communicated with God (as modern Pentecostals claim); instead, it was a language inaccessible to the audience by virtue of the circumstances, but one which the speaker might exercise in personally speaking to God in prayer.

Finally, verse 28 reiterates the same point. If the person who possesses the tongue gift is within an audience that is unacquainted with the language he is able to speak, and there is no interpreter available, he must keep silent. He may commune with God silently [i.e., mentally], but his speaking would be of no use to the congregation in such a situation as that contemplated above, and thus was prohibited.

These texts, then, properly understood, provide no support for the use of so-called ecstatic tongues." - Wayne Jackson
What Are the So-called "Mystery" Tongues of 1 Corinthians 14?

@Saint Steven

Did I nail it on the head, or what? The above is the response to this:

What does 1 Corinthians 14:2 mean to you? I'd love to see how you are going to twist it to fit Acts 2, instead of seeing how Acts 2 conforms to the rule.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Tongues in private are not a sign only, but for edification.

Rhyming noises, are rhyming noises, in private or in public...Hagin in that video is a disgrace. Everyone should have walked out.
That anyone could support such lying false teachers is shameful.
Some deny this video, but I could find hundreds of such foolish videos.
The harm is it produces deluded persons creating a fantasy world in which they imagine they are doing more than Jesus and the apostles, by using a misunderstanding of the greater works verse.
These same people remain ignorant of God given theological truth.
They substitute carnal ideas of biblical teaching for God given instruction.
Those who boast about being "gifted" do so in the flesh....very ironic.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

What is amazing is no one cares that nothing inside a covenant ceases while the covenant exists. But maybe someday it will hit them in the head like a V8!

It has been shown you do not understand the term Covenant theology.
You set that aside and continue on the path of error.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

Rhyming noises, are rhyming noises, in private or in public...Hagin in that video is a disgrace. Everyone should have walked out.
That anyone could support such lying false teachers is shameful.
Some deny this video, but I could find hundreds of such foolish videos.
The harm is it produces deluded persons creating a fantasy world in which they imagine they are doing more than Jesus and the apostles, by using a misunderstanding of the greater works verse.
These same people remain ignorant of God given theological truth.
They substitute carnal ideas of biblical teaching for God given instruction.
Those who boast about being "gifted" do so in the flesh....very ironic.

Hagin? And a video?
CFAN did some greater works, in numbers of responders to repentance and the new birth.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Hagin? And a video?
CFAN did some greater works, in numbers of responders to repentance and the new birth.

Bonnie is another false teaching .79,000,000 million saved, right. Of these frauds make such claims. No one sees the results anywhere.

 

[CharismaticLady]

It has been shown you do not understand the term Covenant theology.
You set that aside and continue on the path of error.

I've got it in a document and will print it and plan to read it before I reply.

 

[Albion]

Tongues and the other gifts didn't cease. They were just less prevalent.

A search on "spiritual gifts through the ages" yields historic info on this.

Your quotes do not deal with "through the ages," however.

Aside from the dates given, the two references that are the most recent are clearly describing what happened earlier--during the Apostolic Age. Chrysostom and Augustine are not speaking of their own times, even though it would be relatively early in the history of the church if that had been their frame of reference. No cessationist, you should understand, places a specific date upon the cessationism, just that it did occur.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Your quotes do not deal with "through the ages," however.

Aside from the dates given, the two references that are the most recent are clearly describing what happened earlier--during the Apostolic Age. Chrysostom and Augustine are not speaking of their own times, even though it would be relatively early in the history of the church if that had been their frame of reference. No cessationist, you should understand, places a specific date upon the cessationism, just that it did occur.

However cessationists also claim once ceased, always ceased; that there is no such thing as the latter rain.

 

[Albion]

However cessationists also claim once ceased, always ceased; that there is no such thing as the latter rain.

The latter rain is a particular theological POV. I have not criticized it but neither is it something that is basic or essential with most Christian churches.

And I do not know where you got the idea that cessationists automatically or necessarily claim 'once ceased, always ceased.' What they claim is that a cessation negates the claim of the continuationists that there never was a cessation and that, therefore, their view must be correct.

 

[CharismaticLady]

The latter rain is a particular theological POV. I have not criticized it but neither is it something that is basic or essential with most Christian churches.

And I do not know where you got the idea that cessationists automatically or necessarily claim 'once ceased, always ceased.' What they claim is that a cessation negates the claim of the continuationists that there never was a cessation and that, therefore, their view must be correct.

I got that from John MacArthur's teaching. He said that once it ceased it could never come back again. In other words it doesn't "pause" as is the true meaning behind the word cease in 1 Corinthians 13.

 

[Albion]

I got that from John MacArthur's teaching. He said that once it ceased it could never come back again. In other words it doesn't "pause" as is the true meaning behind the word cease in 1 Corinthians 13.

I find none of the usual Bible commentaries saying what you did here, and the context makes "pause" almost impossible.

Here's a section from the Barnes commentary:

"They shall fail - The gift shall cease to be exercised; shall be abolished, come to nothing. There shall be no further use for this gift in the light and glory of the world above, and it shall cease."

Obviously, this doesn't come close to meaning "pause but start up again later."

 

[CharismaticLady]

I find none of the usual Bible commentaries saying what you did here, and the context makes "pause" almost impossible.

Here's a section from the Barnes commentary:

"They shall fail - The gift shall cease to be exercised; shall be abolished, come to nothing. There shall be no further use for this gift in the light and glory of the world above, and it shall cease."

Obviously, this doesn't come close to meaning "pause but start up again later."

Interesting that Barnes does put it at the second coming and not at the death of the apostles or the publishing of the canon as is theorized, and that is true for its end. But inside the covenant Joel 2 started, the early and latter rains does have a pause for the long dry summer.

 

[Acts2:38]

Did I nail it on the head, or what? The above is the response to this:

Okay.....

Trying to grab a crowd of people to point and laugh all while belittling those you discuss with is an all time low for you. I only hope one who does this kind of action isn't so miserable of a person in life that they have to demean others for satisfaction.

Look, I am not an English professor. I cannot school you in understanding grammar, or even help you in your reading comprehension. Something one might consider when they cannot comprehend the subject matter at hand. Especially when reading the bible since it has been agreed upon as material at the 6th grade reading level.

You have the nerve to tell me I do not understand, yet you have repeatedly avoided my main point (post #3 I believe). You fail to comprehend simple sentences and meaning of words. You deflect every sub point I have made. You have not once provided any evidence. And no, questioning what I think of a verse is not evidence.

You have nothing.

So grab your little friends, point and laugh, make your snide remarks, God knows I tried. I'm done spinning my wheels here.

I do sincerely bid you a great day, an awesome weekend, and a wonderful christmas season.

 

[Acts2:38]

Here are the relevant verses about tongues being useful without anyone understanding them except God.
1Co 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.
1Co 14:3 On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation.
1Co 14:4 The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church.
1Co 14:5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up. ESV

The post you are replying about already proved that stance wrong. Please read the post again.