The gift of tongues, a biblical defense of a most controversial gift.

[Guojing]

What you need to do is to carefully read the OP and analyse what he is actually saying about tongues and his view of the reasons why some are saying that they ceased. Then you need to give feedback on whether You agree with him, or not, and why. That's how a forum discussion works.

Before I do that, I would like to have an idea how open he is towards understanding a different perspective.

If he is not, why bother? =)

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Before I do that, I would like to have an idea how open he is towards understanding a different perspective.

If he is not, why bother? =)

The best way is to present your understanding of a different perspective and see how he responds to it.

 

[Guojing]

The best way is to present your understanding of a different perspective and see how he responds to it.

I already did in "that" thread, if I recall correctly, his mind was rather closed then.

If there is a chance his mind is more open now, I might do that again here.

 

[swordsman1]

The undeniable fact that the spiritual gifts had declined and were very rare by the 4th Century is indisputable. The church fathers are very clear about that.

But what is missing from the discussion on both side of the debate is any reference from the church fathers as to their reasons why the gifts declined in the way they did.

You say that it is because of the spread of the Biblical canon among the churches - a reasonable theory, but are there any references that this is how the church fathers saw it as the reason why the spiritual gifts declined, or did they give other reasons?

I am sure that they gave their reasons why they thought the spiritual gifts declined and ceased, and it would be enlightening to include those in our discussion.

Good question. The reason Augustine said tongues ceased is because "the Church itself now speaks in the tongues of all nations". Chrysostom said the gifts ceased because the "faith had been sown everywhere abroad." Gregory the Great just said the miraculous gifts ceased because they were only needed for the foundation of the church (true).

The earliest person I know who suggested the revelatory gifts ceased due to the introduction of the NT Canon was John Owen in 1676.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Good question. The reason Augustine said tongues ceased is because "the Church itself now speaks in the tongues of all nations". Chrysostom said the gifts ceased because the "faith had been sown everywhere abroad." Gregory the Great just said the miraculous gifts ceased because they were only needed for the foundation of the church (true).

The earliest person I know who suggested the revelatory gifts ceased due to the introduction of the NT Canon was John Owen in 1676.

Interesting that the NT Canon suggestion was first mooted nearly 1700 years after the Apostolic Age. Also, Augustine, Chrysostom and Gregory the Great were 4th Century and later. What about some of the earlier church fathers, say from the 2nd and 3rd Centuries?

 

[ByTheSpirit]

So I am trying to "understand" what is his objective of posting this topic here for discussion.

If you recall, we already had such a long discussion about tongues in "that" thread =), where I recalled he also participated.

This is a Controversial Theology forum right. Do I need a reason other than it's controversial? I don't expect to convince people one way or the other honestly. But I do notice a lack of scriptural basis for the "con" side of tongues. Usually the only scripture that is used to refute it is 1 Corinthians 13, and it takes an effort at that. The rest of the arguments are human doctrines imposed upon people with no scriptural basis at all.

While the "pro" side of this topic can and often does have ample scriptural support for the operation of tongues even today. But again, not trying to convince anyone, because it's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than someone on CF to be open minded to new ideas in Christianity.

 

[Guojing]

But I do notice a lack of scriptural basis for the "con" side of tongues. Usually the only scripture that is used to refute it is 1 Corinthians 13, and it takes an effort at that. While the "pro" side of this topic can and often does have ample scriptural support for the operation of tongues even today. But again, not trying to convince anyone, because it's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than someone on CF to be open minded to new ideas in Christianity.

Thanks for the reply, appreciate the effort, you appear to be seeking to be understood, from the words you chose that I bolded.

You did participate in that previous thread titled "Speaking in Tongues" correct? There was so much discussion there about 1 Corinthians 14, especially the point about tongues being a sign to unbelievers. So its not just 1 Corinthians 13 that people used.

Did you learn anything new from that discussion? Once you are able to understand what Paul meant when he made that statement in 1 Corinthians 14:22, a lot of confusion about tongues, whether they are for today, will be cleared up.

 

[philadelphos]

Although the early church fathers (c.200ad, eg Irenaeus, Tertullian) confirmed that tongues were still active, the mid church fathers (c. 300ad, eg Origen, Hilary of Poitiers) reported they were dying out, and the late fathers (c. 400ad, eg Chrysostom, Augustine, Theodoret) reported they had ceased completely. This coincides with the gradual distribution of the NT canon in the church.

Notice in your quote from Origen he says "only traces" of the supernatural gifts remain. Later in the same book, "Against Celsus", he says:

For they have no longer prophets nor miracles, traces of which to a considerable extent are still found among Christians, and some of them more remarkable than any that existed among the Jews; and these we ourselves have witnessed, if our testimony may be received. (2.8)

Moreover, the Holy Spirit gave signs of His presence at the beginning of Christ’s ministry, and after His ascension He gave still more; but since that time these signs have diminished, although there are still traces of His presence in a few who have had their souls purified by the Gospel, and their actions regulated by its influence. (7.8)​

Bishop Hilary of Poitiers (c. 315-367ad)

On The Trinity
"The gift of the Spirit is manifest where there is the gift of healings or by the working of miracles or by prophecy or by discerning of spirits or by kinds of tongues, that the speaking in tongues may be bestowed as a sign of the gift of the Holy Spirit; or by the interpretation of tongues. ... Verily how rare and hard to attain are such spiritual gifts!" (8.34)​

Augustine (354-430ad)

Commentary on 1 John
In the earliest time, “the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed; and they spake with tongues,” which they had not learned, “as the Spirit gave them utterance.” These were the Sign adapted to the time. For there behooved to be that betokening of the Holy Spirit in all tongues, to show that the Gospel of God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done for a betokening, and it passed away. (6.10)

Retractions
For not even now, when a hand is laid on the baptized, do they receive the Holy Spirit in such a way that they speak with the tongues of all nations; nor are the sick now healed by the passing shadow of the preachers of Christ. Even though such things happened at that time, manifestly these ceased later. (1.12.7)​

Chrysostom (347-407ad),

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 12
This whole place is very obscure; but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to, and by their cessation, being such as then used to occur, but now no longer take place.
...
Now then after [Paul] in every way had shown her [the Church] to be very exceedingly great, he does so again from another most important head, by a fresh comparison exalting her dignity, and saying thus; “but whether there be prophecies, they shall be done away; whether there be tongues, they shall cease.” For if both these [gifts of prophecy and tongues] were brought in for the sake of the faith; when that is every where sown abroad, the use of these is henceforth superfluous. . . . It is no marvel that prophecies and tongues should be done away. (Homily 29)
​

Theodoret (393-466ad)

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians
In former times those who accepted the divine preaching and who were baptized for their salvation were given visible signs of the grace of the Holy Spirit at work in them. Some spoke in tongues which they did not know and which nobody had taught them, while others performed miracles or prophesied. The Corinthians also did these things, but they did not use the gifts as they should have done. (82:319)​

Hilary ime is admirable and reliable. But since his life's work was against Arianism, I wonder if he wrote much on tongues/cessationism? Do you have the source reference?

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Good question. The reason Augustine said tongues ceased is because "the Church itself now speaks in the tongues of all nations". Chrysostom said the gifts ceased because the "faith had been sown everywhere abroad." Gregory the Great just said the miraculous gifts ceased because they were only needed for the foundation of the church (true).

The earliest person I know who suggested the revelatory gifts ceased due to the introduction of the NT Canon was John Owen in 1676.

I can certainly see why tongues would die out if the church had spread around the world and was no longer needed to bridge gaps, etc. But then that removes the most vital part from THE GIFT. The Holy Spirit. Nothing about how the Spirit operates or works is logical or accomplished by the efforts of man. It's good the the church has spread and has people all over the globe for the work of the kingdom. But that doesn't necessitate the removal of a gift of the Spirit.

The statement of "the gifts were only needed for the foundation of the church" is a statement of man, not of God. Show us where in the Bible it says that. Doctrines of man will ALWAYS fail in light of God's word.

 

[swordsman1]

The statement of "the gifts were only needed for the foundation of the church" is a statement of man, not of God. Show us where in the Bible it says that. Doctrines of man will ALWAYS fail in light of God's word.

Paul said the church was "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone" (Eph 2:20)

 

[spiritfilledjm]

You mean post right...

In any case

Regarding the extant of tongue speaking:

The patristic writings further evidence that all Christians did not speak in tongues. Clement of Alexandria explains that “each [believer] has his own proper gift of God—one in one way, another in another.”8 Hippolytus is even more explicit: “It is not necessary that every one of the faithful should cast out demons, raise the dead, or speak with tongues. But only such a one who has been graciously given this gift—for the purpose that it may be advantageous.


Below is excerpt from The gifts of the Spirit never left the early church

Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Novatian and Cyril of Jerusalem are just some examples of men who were fully convinced that the gifts of the Spirit were still very much operational in their post-apostolic days.

JUSTIN MARTYR (100-165)
In Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho, he makes it abundantly clear that the prophetical gifts of the Jews had been transferred to the Christians. He starts chapter 82 of his apologetic book declaring, “For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to the present time.” He continues the same line of reasoning in chapter 87 arguing that the Spirit continues to impart gifts of grace “to those who believe in Him, according as He deems each man worthy thereof.” The following chapter, 88, is also explicitly affirmative of the presence of spiritual gifts: “Now, it is possible to see among us women and men who possess gifts of the Spirit of God.” Justin believed the charismata were plainly at work during his lifetime.

In his Second Apology he also claims that many believers are still casting out devils. “And now you can learn this from your own observation. For numberless demoniacs throughout the whole world, and in your city, many of our Christian men exorcising them in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, have healed and do heal, rendering helpless and driving the possessing devils out of the men, though they could not be cured by all the other exorcists, and those who used incantations and drugs” (chapter 6). The Spirit had not stopped working in the second century!

IRENAEUS (130-202)
Irenaeus’ magnum opus Against Heresies also bears witness to the wide range of spiritual gifts on display within the second century church. Irenaeus goes so far as to use the charismata as a clear indication of discipleship of the true Jesus (in contrast to the Gnostic one).

He writes, “Those who are in truth Jesus’ disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform miracles, so as to promote the welfare of other men, according to the gift which each one has received from Him. For some do certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed from evil spirits frequently both believe in Christ, and join themselves to the Church. Others have foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still heal the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years” (2:32:4). The Spirit, then, does miracles, casts out demons, reveals the future, delivers the sick and even raises the dead!

Another relevant paragraph to speaking in other tongues is found in 5:6:1 wherein he explains, “For this reason does the apostle declare, “We speak wisdom among them that are perfect”, terming those who have received the Spirit of God, and who through the Spirit of God do speak in all languages, as he used himself also to speak. In like manner we do hear many brethren in the Church who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of God, whom also the apostle terms “spiritual”, they being spiritual because they partake of the Spirit, and not because their flesh has been stripped off and taken away, and because they have become purely spiritual.”

Ireanaeus openly confessed that the Spirit imparted charismatic gifts to his Church.

TERTULLIAN (150-220)
Tertullian was so entirely caught up in the dynamism of God’s Spirit that some have dubbed him as the church’s first authentically ‘Pentecostal’ theologian (although it’s a blatant anachronism, a bit like calling Augustine a ‘Calvinist’). Tertullian loved the Holy Spirit.

In the context of baptism, he urged new disciples to earnestly seek after spiritual gifts. “Therefore, my blessed ones, whom the grace of God awaits, when you ascend from the most sacred font of your new birth [baptism], and spread your hands for the first time in the house of your mother [the Church], together with your brethren, ask from the Father, ask from the Lord, that His own specialties of grace and distributions of gifts (1 Corinthians 12:4-12) may be supplied you. “Ask,” says He, “and you shall receive.” Well, you have asked, and have received; you have knocked, and it has been opened to you. Only, I pray that, when you are asking, you be mindful likewise of Tertullian the sinner.” (On Baptism, 20)

Another useful passage in his Against Marcion is recorded in 5:8. Here Tertullian does much the same as Irenaeus in laying a hold of the spiritual gifts to show that his Church was really the true Church of Christ. He challenges the heretic Marcion to produce anything like the gifts of the Spirit that were in clear operation in Tertullian’s Church. These gifts- Tertullian believed- proved that he served the one true God of the Old and New Testament in contrast to Marcion’s modified deity.

“Let Marcion then exhibit, as gifts of his god, some prophets, such as have not spoken by human sense, but with the Spirit of God, such as have both predicted things to come, and have made manifest the secrets of the heart (1 Corinthians 14:25); let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer (1 Corinthians 14:26)- only let it be by the Spirit, in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture, whenever an interpretation of tongues has occurred to him; let him show to me also, that any woman of boastful tongue in his community has ever prophesied from among those specially holy sisters of his. Now all these signs (of spiritual gifts) are forthcoming from my side without any difficulty, and they agree too with the rules, and the dispensations, and the instructions of the Creator; therefore without doubt the Christ, and the Spirit, and the apostle belong severally to my God. Here, then, is my frank avowal for anyone who cares to require it.”

Tertullian believed that the spiritual gifts at work in his congregation (and the lack of them in Marcion’s sect) proved once and for all that he was in line with the God of Scripture. He also spoke much about the gift of prophecy. He dedicated the whole ninth chapter of his book A Treatise on the Soul to testify of the powerful prophetic experiences of a godly sister in the Lord. “For, seeing that we acknowledge the spiritual charismata, or gifts, we too have merited the attainment of the prophetic gift, although coming after John the Baptist.”

ORIGEN (185-254)
Origen was also conscious of the charismata. His most well-known book On First Principles is the first attempt that any Christian writer had ever made at presenting a comprehensive systematic theology. He severely warns against the misuse of spiritual gifts. This leads us to believe that they were in operation in his generation.

He thunders, “When, whether by baptism or by the grace of the Spirit, the word of wisdom or the word of knowledge or of any other gift has been bestowed upon a man, and not rightly administered, i.e. either buried in the earth or tied up in a napkin, the gift of the Spirit will certainly be withdrawn from his soul, and the other portion which remains, that is, the substance of the soul, will be assigned its place with unbelievers, being divided and separated from that Spirit with whom, by joining himself to the Lord, it ought to have been one spirit.” (2:10:7).

If one has a spiritual gift, it must be used diligently and in the fear of the Lord. God does not impart His gifts lightly. Each grace entails great responsibility. He also reports that: “There are still preserved among Christians traces of that Holy Spirit which appeared in the form of a dove. They expel evil spirits, and perform many cures, and foresee certain events, according to the will of the Logos” (Against Celsus 1:46).

NOVATIAN (200-258)
Novatian the ‘Puritan’ (yet another anachronism) was persuaded that the Spirit of God granted fullness to Church of Christ. Whereas the Old Testament had only known the Sprit in a partial sense, the redeemed in Christ experience manifold blessing thanks to the office of the Holy Spirit. His testimony is the following:

“This is He who places prophets in the Church, instructs teachers, directs tongues, gives powers and healings, does wonderful works, often discrimination of spirits, affords powers of government, suggests counsels, and orders and arranges whatever other gifts there are of charismata; and thus make the Lord’s Church everywhere, and in all, perfected and completed.” (On the Trinity, 29).

Novatian, thus, adds his voice to those of Tertullian and Origen to confess the ongoing work of the spiritual charismata in the third century. Church was an exciting and energetic place to be!

CYRIL OF JERUSALEM (313-386)
The last writer worth mentioning is Cyril of Jerusalem who recorded various comments about the Spirit’s work in his Catechetical Lecturesduring the fourth century. He promises the faithful that, “If you believe, you shall not only receive remission of sins, but also do things which pass man’s power. And may you be worthy of the gift of prophecy also! […] All your life long will your Guardian the Comforter abide with you; He will care for you, as for His own solider; for your goings out, and your comings in, and your plotting foes. And He will give you gifts of grace of every kind, if you grieve Him not by sin […] Be ready to receive grace, and when you have received it, cast it not away.” (17:37).

He also makes an allusion to the casting out of evil spirits in the preceding chapter, explaining, “If you be counted worthy of the grace, your soul will be enlightened, you will receive a power which you had not, you will receive weapons terrible to the evil spirits; and if you cast not away your arms, but keep the Seal upon your soul, no evil spirit will approach you; for he will be cowed; for verily by the Spirit of God are the evil spirits cast out.” (17:36).

The Spirit gives various gifts (prophecy included) and He also casts out devils.

CONCLUSION
This brief study of the second, third and fourth centuries reveals that the church’s greatest thinkers were in unanimous agreement that spiritual gifts were still to be found in the body of Christ. There was no conviction that the gifts had somehow died out alongside the apostles. That concept was an invention of two late fourth/ early fifth century theologians, namely, John Chrysostom in the East and Augustine of Hippo in the West.

There are hundreds of patriotic references to expecting gift of the spirit listed in 1 Cor 12- 14 not only after the Apostolic age but also after the closing of the canon. Even Augustine writes about the gifts but hasn't run across tongues.

So don't be fooled by the early false claim about "The" church fathers agreeing on cessation it is a total misrepresentation.

And one wonders how serious the cessation scholars are if they haven't taken a few minutes to engage the patristic sources?

Now that we have just a smattering of a large number of church fathers let's reverse your question:

Which Early Church Father or Aposolic leader taught that the gifts ceased with the Apostolic Age or the closing of the canon?

Did an essay for one of my classes last semester using these sources to argue continuation of the gifts.

 

[Monowhite]

Sounds like the gift of schizophrenia.

Lol. Did you intend this to be an appeal to mockery instead of a discussion among disciples about how best to serve and obey God's call for us to usher in the Kingdom of God the way he did?

In college one learns that such appeals are fallacious.
God Bless you anyways.

I was merely sharing an anecdote. A true story. No mockery involved.

God bless you too. God bless us all.

 

[Monowhite]

But all of that is testimonial / historical evidence (i.e. hearsay), where is the hard scientific evidence?

I agree, at least in the written form. All we have are the words of the witnesses. Which I generally trust.
However, there's genuinely plenty of evidence of the speaking of tongues. I personally know someone who does this. But, we also live in the age of technology, so let's embrace it.
Tongues - it's not some ludicrous notion.

^ This woman spoke in a language so beautiful she actually cried.

5:36 onwards on the video.

 

[Monowhite]

Can anyone translate? I'm genuinely curious as to what she's trying to channel.

 

[Uber Genius]

Did an essay for one of my classes last semester using these sources to argue continuation of the gifts.

Do you find that christains are general completely ignorant of and in fact propping up conspiracy theories about cessation.

I argued the same arguments back in 1979 and 1980 with professors at Trinity Theological Seminary, Ashland theological seminary...they had not even read the patristics but repeated mindlessly these conspiracy theories. The lack of rationality in The Christian church is a travesty. That is one of the main reasons I don't engage in Christian forums, there is only one of ten who is willing to engage openly.

The patristics argue continuation and even Augustine argued for jubilation which is most like his misunderstanding of the gift of tongues.

God bless you journey to be confirmed to his image.

 

[Uber Genius]

I was merely sharing an anecdote. A true story. No mockery involved.

God bless you too. God bless us all.

Your ability to stumble into mockery is fantastic. So you actually conflated schizophrenia with gloosolalia? What part of edifying the body of Christian believers or edifying and building up oneself in Christ like Paul claimed he did more that any of his followers, did your story point to?

God bless us everyone

 

[Uber Genius]

would say that the absence of the NT canon, and relying instead on visiting apostles and prophets for snippets of doctrine on the Christian faith was indeed "seeing dimly

Point in quest is "When the perfect comes", we will have no need in gifts to build up the body. Makes no sense.

Secondly, the context of above is that Paul, who has more revelation than anyone at the time, including end times revelation from his trip to the third heaven (whatever that is)...so the addition Revelation of a handful of books is according to you, going to transport Paul from the state of "seeing dimly," to "seeing face-to-face...that thesis strains credulity.

on't see Christ's return at all in that passage. I see Paul talking about the disappearance of revelatory gifts and being gradually replaced by "completeness" resulting in much greater clarity of revelatio

The perfect is a. Christ which makes sense why gift would be meaningless, or
The perfect is the closing of the canon (a canon that give very small amount of additional revelation to Paul, but yet that small amount is considered to lead him from seeing dimly to seeing face to face.

We have knowledge in the future when we are in heaven where there will be perfect knowledge and no disagreements, and knowledge at the closing of the canon where we can't agree on basic soteriological, ecclesiological, anthropological, eschatological questions (shoot some fathers even deny men have freewill making God the author of sin and evil and predestination men to damnation), 2000 years later and you are calling it "the perfect"????

Seems reasonable to me. Revelation at the time of Paul's writing was like seeing a dim reflection in a mirror, but when "completeness" comes God's revelation to man would be like seeing "face to face" in comparison.

See above

Notice in your quote from Origen he says "only traces" of the supernatural gifts remain. Later in the same book, "Against Celsus", he s

You missed the point. The claim was the church fathers agreed there was no role. I responded that statement was false and backed it up. No one claims that the gifts didn't be and flow. Shoot we have little church history of any practice for half a millennia after the fall of Rome.

More importantly you are in the position of Thomas. When eye witnesses report the miraculous works Thomas denied the power of God unless he personally engaged all his senses. But why then are you a Christian?

If you don't trust eye witness testimony, and historical accounts, how are you possibly a follower of Christ since in order to become that you had to believe eye witness accounts and historical accounts.

My evangelical friends tell me they don't want to use the gifts because the supernatural opens them up to mockery.
They will do whatever they can to avoid public shame. The 1 Cor thesis of perfect being canon Has little explanatory power. But being interested in how others view you has great explanatory power.

I remember one time sharing a word with a female bar tender. God showed me her two daughters cheer leading. And as I looked at the picture I saw their names. I saw her boyfriend was jealous of her time with her daughters. He berated her and said she was a bad mother. God showed me his heart for this woman and Asked her if she had a minute when she was done working to talk. Since we had had 30 minutes of pleasant conversation and I had left her a big tip she said sure. 10 minutes later we walked to a private part of the dinning room and I shared that God had a word for her. I told her how Satan had been lying about her being a bad mother. That he had been using a boyfriend to bring that message. I told her the name of her daughters and that she was driving to Cleveland in three days to take them to a completion. At this point she broke down crying and said she had given up belief in God years ago, I told her that God loved her and told her he was proud of the mother she was, to stop believing the lies of Satan and that he was drawing her into a relationship with him.

Now we did say a prayer but she was still a long way from committing her life to Christ.

After watching that episode and the woman in tears of joy realizing that God was real and caring for her and pursuing her, my cessation friend (Timothy) at the bar said, "I would never risk embarrassing myself like that!"

Many are called, few are chosen.

I will use every measure of scripture knowledge, and HS gifting to save some.

Others, maybe most Christian in the US, would never risk embarrassment in order to bring God's goodness crashing into people's lives.

Have ministered with the Thomases and Timothys for 45 years now and I would rather take a new born Christian who cares little for how others in church think of him but all for those who are lost any day.

 

[Monowhite]

Your ability to stumble into mockery is fantastic. So you actually conflated schizophrenia with gloosolalia? What part of edifying the body of Christian believers or edifying and building up oneself in Christ like Paul claimed he did more that any of his followers, did your story point to?

God bless us everyone

Unless you have the credentials, you have zero authority to spouting your nonsense and pseudo-diagnostics. In some countries you'd be locked up for your behaviour, but I'll just barely tolerate you as an angry, frustrated person.

Count yourself lucky.

 

[JosephZ]

If one has faith in Christ they have no need for signs and wonders, they were always for the benefit of unbelievers.

The gift of tongues were given as a sign for the Jews. It was a sign that God was bringing judgement on the nation of Israel. The purpose of the gift of tongues has already been fulfilled.

Brothers and sisters, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature. In the Law it is written: “By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers I will speak to this people [The Nation of Israel], and even so they will not listen to Me,” says the Lord. So then, tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers... (1 Corinthians 14:20-22).

For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; (1 Corinthians 1:22)

“In the earliest times, ‘the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they spoke with tongues,” which they had not learned, “as the Spirit gave them utterance.’ These were signs adapted to the time. For it was necessary for there to be that sign of the Holy Spirit in all tongues, to show that the Gospel of God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth” (Augustine)

“They spoke with foreign tongues, and not those of their native land; and the wonder was great, a language spoken by those who had not learned it. And the sign is to them that believe not, and not to them that believe, that it may be an accusation of the unbelievers, as it is written, ‘“With other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people, and not even so will they listen to Me” says the Lord’” (Gregory of Nazianzus)

 

[swordsman1]

Point in quest is "When the perfect comes", we will have no need in gifts to build up the body. Makes no sense.

There are still plenty of gifts remaining that can build up the church.

Secondly, the context of above is that Paul, who has more revelation than anyone at the time, including end times revelation from his trip to the third heaven (whatever that is)...so the addition Revelation of a handful of books is according to you, going to transport Paul from the state of "seeing dimly," to "seeing face-to-face...that thesis strains credulity.

Although Paul uses the pronoun "we", it is obvious he is speaking more on behalf of the Corinthians whom he was teaching rather than himself personally. But even so, I am sure not even Paul himself was given prior knowledge about everything that appears in the New Testament. I suspect he was unfamiliar with many elements of Jesus's life from the gospels, the eschatology of John's Revelation, etc. So yes he could also class himself as "seeing dimly".

We have knowledge in the future when we are in heaven where there will be perfect knowledge and no disagreements, and knowledge at the closing of the canon where we can't agree on basic soteriological, ecclesiological, anthropological, eschatological questions (shoot some fathers even deny men have freewill making God the author of sin and evil and predestination men to damnation), 2000 years later and you are calling it "the perfect"????

Knowledge in this passage is not general knowledge. Remember the context is about certain spiritual gifts ceasing (tongues, prophecy and knowledge), and being replaced by something better. The knowledge that ceases is therefore the spiritual gift of words of knowledge (1 Cor 12:8), a revelatory gift like prophecy. If it is the revelatory gifts that cease when "completeness" comes it follows that their replacement would also be revelatory in nature. At the time of Paul's writing the early church needed prophecy and words of knowledge to guide them in the faith in the absence of a New Testament. However when a church had a completed canon, it would no longer need those gifts to guide them. Thus, the completed canon would replace prophecies and words of knowledge. Then they would "know fully" God's complete revelation to the church.

My evangelical friends tell me they don't want to use the gifts because the supernatural opens them up to mockery.
They will do whatever they can to avoid public shame. The 1 Cor thesis of perfect being canon Has little explanatory power. But being interested in how others view you has great explanatory power.

I remember one time sharing a word with a female bar tender. God showed me her two daughters cheer leading. And as I looked at the picture I saw their names. I saw her boyfriend was jealous of her time with her daughters. He berated her and said she was a bad mother. God showed me his heart for this woman and Asked her if she had a minute when she was done working to talk. Since we had had 30 minutes of pleasant conversation and I had left her a big tip she said sure. 10 minutes later we walked to a private part of the dinning room and I shared that God had a word for her. I told her how Satan had been lying about her being a bad mother. That he had been using a boyfriend to bring that message. I told her the name of her daughters and that she was driving to Cleveland in three days to take them to a completion. At this point she broke down crying and said she had given up belief in God years ago, I told her that God loved her and told her he was proud of the mother she was, to stop believing the lies of Satan and that he was drawing her into a relationship with him.

Now we did say a prayer but she was still a long way from committing her life to Christ.

After watching that episode and the woman in tears of joy realizing that God was real and caring for her and pursuing her, my cessation friend (Timothy) at the bar said, "I would never risk embarrassing myself like that!"

Many are called, few are chosen.

I will use every measure of scripture knowledge, and HS gifting to save some.

Others, maybe most Christian in the US, would never risk embarrassment in order to bring God's goodness crashing into people's lives.

Have ministered with the Thomases and Timothys for 45 years now and I would rather take a new born Christian who cares little for how others in church think of him but all for those who are lost any day.

The reason I don't engage in today's charismatic practices, is not because I would be embarrassed to do so, but because I do not believe the gifts they claim to have are really the gifts of the New Testament. Today's 'tongues', healings, and prophecies do not match the biblical descriptions of those gifts.