Speaking in Tongues a Cessationists’ View

Saint Steven · Aug 2, 2018

Jennifer Rothnie said:
In addition to Steve's great points:

1) Scripture never claims gifts come only by the Apostles or that the original Apostles are necessary to be present. Conversely, it says the *Spirit* chooses how to distribute gifts, including the gifts of apostleship, teaching, etc.

"There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them." I Cor 12:4

"Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues,a and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines." I Cor 12:7-11

2) Scripture never makes distinction between 'charismatic' gifts and 'other' gifts. It's special pleading to claim special categories and then claim that one category is now 'gone.'

3) The given purpose of prophecy (and tongues with interpretation) is to edify the church. (I Cor 14:4) Has the need to edify the church ceased?

4) There were other Apostles besides the original 11 (not counting Judas here) and Paul.

Explicitly mentioned are the 70/72 (Luke 10:1-17) - Mark the evangelist was probably among these; James the brother of the Lord (Gal 1:19); Barnabas (Acts 13:2, Acts 14:4); Jesus (Heb 3:1); Andronicus and Junia (Rom 16:7,) and Matthias (Acts 1:20-26.)

Now, certainly, there are no more of the foundational Apostles nor anyone still living who walked with Christ on Earth. But the gift of apostleship is still active. An apostle is 'one who is sent' - such as for mission work, to share the gospel, plant churches, encourage believers, etc. We see husband/wife teams, and even teams of women, going out and doing this work to this day! It is a primary, necessary gift by the Spirit for the spread of the church and it's edification.

5) Claiming certain gifts do not exist does damage to the church, as it dismisses or even vilifies Christians who have been given those gifts by the Spirit. How are they to edify the church when many church groups ban them from practicing their gifts or try to convince them that the gifts the Spirit has given them are fake?

Thanks for the encouraging word. and a terrific post.

I would like to add to this that ALL of the gifts are manifestations of the Holy Spirit. As Jennifer said, "Scripture never makes distinction between..." the gifts. EVERY gift is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, distributed as the Spirit wills.

I am open to ANY manifestation that Spirit wants to lay on me. I have had single experiences that were for a specific time and place that were never repeated. This whole notion of discovering YOUR gift through inventory of natural abilities is way off base to me. Unless God has gifted someone with an extraordinary ability earlier in life.

Dave L · Aug 2, 2018

Saint Steven said:
Thanks for the encouraging word. and a terrific post.

I would like to add to this that ALL of the gifts are manifestations of the Holy Spirit. As Jennifer said, "Scripture never makes distinction between..." the gifts. EVERY gift is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, distributed as the Spirit wills.

I am open to ANY manifestation that Spirit wants to lay on me. I have had single experiences that were for a specific time and place that were never repeated. This whole notion of discovering YOUR gift through inventory of natural abilities is way off base to me. Unless God has gifted someone with an extraordinary ability earlier in life.

We have zero scripture to support your claims for tongues outlasting the Apostles who administered them.

Presbyterian Continuist · Aug 2, 2018

swordsman1 said:
You didn't answer my question. You claimed that 'the church' in 1 Cor 12:28 was referring to local church meetings and not the universal church, because Paul had no concept of a universal church.

So I asked if 'the church' in these verses by Paul was also a local church:

Eph 5:23 "For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church"
Col 1:18 "And he is the head of the body, the church"
Col 1:24 "for the sake of his body, which is the church."
etc

Quite clearly Paul is referring to the universal church in those verses. Notice also that he identifies the universal church as being the body of Christ. Seeing as the immediate context of 1 Cor 12:28 is the 'body of Christ' (v27 and previous), there can be no doubt 'the church' in v28 is referring to the universal church, not local church meetings. Paul states in v28 that not everyone in the universal church could speak in tongues.

And of course 1 Cor 12:28 is not the only verse that states that not every believer has the same gift.

Romans 12:4-6 "For just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we, though many, form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us."

1 Cor 12:8-10 "For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues. "

So people who didn't speak in tongues were not 'goofy' or errant in any way. They just hadn't been given that particular gift.

I don't think he did at the time he was going around the known world planting churches. I also don't think that he was aware of the churches that the other Apostles founded, for example, in Egypt, which became the Coptic Christian Church, and in South India where the Apostle Thomas went. There is no record of where the other Apostles went and what churches they planted. I suppose that information can be found in subsequent Church history. I don't think that the concept of the universal Church was fully realised until the first Conference of Bishops. Nicea was a very prominent conference, but I think there was one before that where all the scattered Bishops got together. I believe that was after the First Century, for that reason I believe that Paul saw the Church of his time as a group of scattered local churches in the different regions.

Near the end of the First Century, while John was on Patmos where he wrote the book of Revelation, Jesus spoke to him about the seven churches. So it appears that Jesus saw each church as a separate unit. If He spoke to them as the united Church He would have said so. He would have said something like, "The Laodicean Church,which is a part of the universal Church". But He never said that.

When Paul mentioned multiple churches he said, "All the churches" not the universal Church. So I believe he saw each church as the local church in each city.

Presbyterian Continuist · Aug 2, 2018

Saint Steven said:
I don't doubt the authenticity of the Book of Acts. I doubt your interpretation of the facts concerning the theory of supernatural hearing at Pentecost. And now you admit that you have no supporting text from the early church. Therefore I appear to be correct in my assessment of the situation. You got nuthin'.

What do you mean by "the theory of supernatural hearing"? I've never heard of that one.

swordsman1 · Aug 2, 2018

Oscarr said:
I don't think he did at the time he was going around the known world planting churches. I also don't think that he was aware of the churches that the other Apostles founded, for example, in Egypt, which became the Coptic Christian Church, and in South India where the Apostle Thomas went. There is no record of where the other Apostles went and what churches they planted. I suppose that information can be found in subsequent Church history. I don't think that the concept of the universal Church was fully realised until the first Conference of Bishops. Nicea was a very prominent conference, but I think there was one before that where all the scattered Bishops got together. I believe that was after the First Century, for that reason I believe that Paul saw the Church of his time as a group of scattered local churches in the different regions.

Near the end of the First Century, while John was on Patmos where he wrote the book of Revelation, Jesus spoke to him about the seven churches. So it appears that Jesus saw each church as a separate unit. If He spoke to them as the united Church He would have said so. He would have said something like, "The Laodicean Church,which is a part of the universal Church". But He never said that.

When Paul mentioned multiple churches he said, "All the churches" not the universal Church. So I believe he saw each church as the local church in each city.

So what was Paul referring to as 'the church' in these verses? A particular local congregation?

Eph 5:23 "For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church"

Eph 2:25 "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her"

Col 1:18 "And he is the head of the body, the church"

Col 1:24 "for the sake of his body, which is the church."

1 Cor 15:9 "because I persecuted the church of God."

Gal 1:13 "how intensely I persecuted the church of God"

Eph 1:22 "And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church,"

Eph 3:10 "His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms"

Phil 3:6 "as for zeal, persecuting the church"

Presbyterian Continuist · Aug 2, 2018

Saint Steven said:
No, that's not what this scripture is saying. Being baptized in the Spirit is not essential for salvation. It is a second blessing. One I would prefer to not be without.

Here is the near context.

1 Corinthians 12:12-14
Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ.
13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.
14 Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many.

My view is that every person who receives Christ receives the Spirit. The problem with many is that although they have the Spirit resident in them, they don't know how to allow the Spirit to flow out of them again, so He just stays dormant within them. So, what some may call the baptism of the Spirit may be just the Spirit who is already in them is now flowing out of them with, as Jesus said, rivers of living water.

Presbyterian Continuist · Aug 2, 2018

swordsman1 said:
So what was Paul referring to as 'the church' in these verses? A particular local congregation?

Eph 5:23 "For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church"

Eph 2:25 "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her"

Col 1:18 "And he is the head of the body, the church"

Col 1:24 "for the sake of his body, which is the church."

1 Cor 15:9 "because I persecuted the church of God."

Gal 1:13 "how intensely I persecuted the church of God"

Eph 1:22 "And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church,"

Eph 3:10 "His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms"

Phil 3:6 "as for zeal, persecuting the church"

Because it was the twelve Apostles, plus Paul who were planting the churches, these churches would have had the same character and guided by the same Spirit. So in that sense Paul would have seen each local church as a part of the whole church, although the concept of a universal Church would not have been viewed like that until the Church had become more formalised under the Bishop of Rome, which placed himself at the head of the universal Church which became the Roman Catholic Church.

swordsman1 · Aug 2, 2018

Oscarr said:
Because it was the twelve Apostles, plus Paul who were planting the churches, these churches would have had the same character and guided by the same Spirit. So in that sense Paul would have seen each local church as a part of the whole church, although the concept of a universal Church would not have been viewed like that until the Church had become more formalised under the Bishop of Rome, which placed himself at the head of the universal Church which became the Roman Catholic Church.

Okay. So can you now answer my question.

What was Paul referring to as 'the church' in these verses? A particular local congregation?

Eph 5:23 "For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church"

Eph 2:25 "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her"

Col 1:18 "And he is the head of the body, the church"

Col 1:24 "for the sake of his body, which is the church."

1 Cor 15:9 "because I persecuted the church of God."

Gal 1:13 "how intensely I persecuted the church of God"

Eph 1:22 "And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church,"

Eph 3:10 "His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms"

Phil 3:6 "as for zeal, persecuting the church"

Albion · Aug 2, 2018

Saint Steven said:
In the church I grew up in tongues was cautioned against because it was considered to possibly be a demonic manifestation. Decades later they said speaking in tongues in your prayer closet was fine, just don't bring it to church. So, not forbidden, I suppose, but certainly not encouraged, or condoned.

...and that was my point. It is not forbidden. There are plenty of churches where it is practiced.

On the other hand, if the questioner means to ask How to get every last Christian congregation in the world to be in favor of glossolalia like they should!?, that's a different matter.

Saint Steven · Aug 2, 2018

swordsman1 said:
1 Cor 12:13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body

Paul makes it clear that the Baptism of the Spirit is what unites believers into the body of Christ. If you are not baptized in the Spirit you are not part of the body of Christ. I don't think scripture could be much clearer. It's what happens when you become a Christian. Virtually all theologians are agreed on this, including the most respected charismatic and Pentecostals ones. The old school Pentecostal idea of it being a '2nd blessing' is clearly wrong.

I follow your presentation of logic, but are you prepared to claim that anyone that has not had the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is not saved? I'm not.

Presbyterian Continuist · Aug 2, 2018

Dave L said:
We have zero scripture to support your claims for tongues outlasting the Apostles who administered them.

Tongues, prophecy, healing and deliverance were normal occurrences in the Church right up to the fourth century, if you are to believe the Church fathers. Then the Emperor Constantine closed the pagan temples and required them to join the Christian Church. As a result the purity of Christian holiness declined and so did the supernatural. When the genuine Christian leaders died out the were replaced by "nominal" ones who could not access the supernatural gifts and so the gifts died out. To try and explain away and hide their own lack of holiness and commitment to Christ as the cause, they introduced the teaching that the gifts ceased when the last Apostle died. Every Christian movement that has required holiness and commitment to Christ has had the supernatural gifts emerge.

Saint Steven · Aug 2, 2018

Dave L said:
The two outpourings and the Apostle's hands were the only means of distributing the charismatic gifts according to scripture. All you claim above supports this.

I guess you neglected to READ all that I claimed "above". Reposted at the bottom.

Note what is said about Saul. Ananias was NOT an Apostle, nor was this one of the two major outpourings. (I think we are missing the third - Acts 4:31) Anyway...

Acts 9:17-18
Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord—Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here—has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”
18 Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized,

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I disagree, of course.

Let's look at my list. (see below)
- On Pentecost the gifts did not come only through the hand of the Apostles.
- Saul was prayed for (and received the Spirit/gifts) by Ananias, who was not an Apostle.
- Cornelius household manifested prior to being baptized, therefore not through the hand of the Apostles.

1) Pentecost: Water baptism followed by receiving the "promised Holy Spirit"
2) Samaria: The Apostles were sent to lay hands on the new believers who had ONLY been baptized in water. (Acts 8:14-16)
3) Saul: Ananias of Damascus (not an Apostle) lays hands on Paul (Saul) to receive the Holy Spirit, followed by water baptism. (Acts 9:17-18)
4) Cornelius: The gentiles were filled with the Spirit prior to water baptism. (Acts 10 and 11)
5) Ephesus: The Apostle Paul encounters disciples of John the Baptist. They are water baptized in Jesus' name and Paul lays hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit. (Acts 19:1-7)

swordsman1 · Aug 2, 2018

Saint Steven said:
I follow your presentation of logic, but are you prepared to claim that anyone that has not had the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is not saved? I'm not.

Yes, anyone who is not part of the body of Christ is not a Christian.

Hillsage · Aug 2, 2018

Dave L said:
If your mind is unfruitful, your spirit must be fruitful. Or there is no point to the comparison. And your mind does not bear fruit unless you pray with your mind so others can share the blessing. Or unless you explain (interpret) what your spirit is praying for the sake of others with your mind. This passage only proves my point.

And your response just proves you are in the same 'group' as Swordsman. Neither of you can speak from experience.

Would you care to declare publically where you fit? Are you like the 'Charismatic Corinthian church', the "ungifted/unlearned" Christian or the "unbeliever", those are the only three options in the verse.

1 Corinthians 14:23 Therefore if the whole Charismatic church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?

When you can speak from experience your theology will change.

Albion · Aug 2, 2018

However...

Being able to make sounds and convince oneself that it is a supernatural gift is not, after all, proof of anything.

Paul. · Aug 2, 2018

Dave L said:
God imparts the new birth to those Christ redeemed on the cross. He justified them by his blood.

Do you believe this impartation randomly happens to people or is only by God's choosing? Do you believe that the new birth was assigned to those in the past, present and future and only those people will be born again?

Dave L · Aug 2, 2018

Paul. said:
Do you believe this impartation randomly happens to people or is only by God's choosing? Do you believe that the new birth was assigned to those in the past, present and future and only those people will be born again?

Whoever believes in Christ can know for certain Christ died for them. They could not believe had he not.

Dave L · Aug 2, 2018

Hillsage said:
And your response just proves you are in the same 'group' as Swordsman. Neither of you can speak from experience.

Would you care to declare publically where you fit? Are you like the 'Charismatic Corinthian church', the "ungifted/unlearned" Christian or the "unbeliever", those are the only three options in the verse.

1 Corinthians 14:23 Therefore if the whole Charismatic church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?

When you can speak from experience your theology will change.

I experienced many years in charismatic circles. And possibly have more experience than you.

Dave L · Aug 2, 2018

Saint Steven said:
I guess you neglected to READ all that I claimed "above". Reposted at the bottom.

Note what is said about Saul. Ananias was NOT an Apostle, nor was this one of the two major outpourings. (I think we are missing the third - Acts 4:31) Anyway...

Acts 9:17-18
Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord—Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here—has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”
18 Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized,

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I disagree, of course.

Let's look at my list. (see below)
- On Pentecost the gifts did not come only through the hand of the Apostles.
- Saul was prayed for (and received the Spirit/gifts) by Ananias, who was not an Apostle.
- Cornelius household manifested prior to being baptized, therefore not through the hand of the Apostles.

1) Pentecost: Water baptism followed by receiving the "promised Holy Spirit"
2) Samaria: The Apostles were sent to lay hands on the new believers who had ONLY been baptized in water. (Acts 8:14-16)
3) Saul: Ananias of Damascus (not an Apostle) lays hands on Paul (Saul) to receive the Holy Spirit, followed by water baptism. (Acts 9:17-18)
4) Cornelius: The gentiles were filled with the Spirit prior to water baptism. (Acts 10 and 11)
5) Ephesus: The Apostle Paul encounters disciples of John the Baptist. They are water baptized in Jesus' name and Paul lays hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit. (Acts 19:1-7)

Paul and Ananias were both commissioned by Christ. This was a mark of an Apostle.

Dave L · Aug 2, 2018

Oscarr said:
Tongues, prophecy, healing and deliverance were normal occurrences in the Church right up to the fourth century, if you are to believe the Church fathers. Then the Emperor Constantine closed the pagan temples and required them to join the Christian Church. As a result the purity of Christian holiness declined and so did the supernatural. When the genuine Christian leaders died out the were replaced by "nominal" ones who could not access the supernatural gifts and so the gifts died out. To try and explain away and hide their own lack of holiness and commitment to Christ as the cause, they introduced the teaching that the gifts ceased when the last Apostle died. Every Christian movement that has required holiness and commitment to Christ has had the supernatural gifts emerge.

Tongues were a warning sign of doom to the wicked Jews. After 70 AD they no longer had a purpose.

Speaking in Tongues a Cessationists’ View

You can call me Steve

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Facilitator

You can call me Steve

Senior Veteran

You can call me Steve

Well-Known Member

One 4 Him & Him 4 all

Facilitator

I think therefore I post

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency