The question cessationists must answer.

[SkyWriting]

No only tongues ceased as per the advise of Paul. The rest has continued.

What did Paul say?

 

[SkyWriting]

Unbiblical nonsense.
If tongues, prophecy, visions, words of knowledge signs and wonders are ceased, so have ALL ministry gifts. You cannot pick and choose.

Everything has a season. You don't harvest in the spring thaw.

 

[swordsman1]

Why they would need to be interpreted if is a known language?

So that everyone in the congregation knew what was spoken and be edified. Not everyone spoke Persian or Arabic.

and this:

Intelligibility in Worship
14 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit,especially prophecy. 2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit.

No one in the congregation recognized the language spoken. That doesn't mean it wasn't a human language. If someone was speaking Persian in a small Greek house church its not surprising no one understands them.

 

[SkyWriting]

So that everyone in the congregation knew what was spoken and be edified. Not everyone spoke Persian or Arabic.
No one in the congregation recognized the language spoken. That doesn't mean it wasn't a human language. If someone was speaking Persian in a small Greek house church it not surprising no one understands them.

27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two, or at most three, should speak in turn, and someone must interpret.
28 But if there is no interpreter, he should remain silent in the church and speak only to himself and God.


(not my rules)

 

[Deborah D]

If you read, it says the gifts are to convert others and not for believers.
So that is your only worthwhile measure. Not the level of hostility you face.

Actually, Paul said the gifts are for both. 1 Cor. 14:26 says,

"What then is the conclusion, brothers? Whenever you come together, each one has a psalm, a teaching, a revelation, another language, or an interpretation. All things must be done for edification."
​

He's saying, as he said in other scriptures, that all things must be done for the edification of the body of Christ because he goes on in this verse to talk about how the church service should be conducted.

 

[Deborah D]

Why they would need to be interpreted if is a known language?

and this:

Intelligibility in Worship
14 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit,especially prophecy. 2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit.

You're leaving some things out of Paul's message. He clearly says that when a message in an unknown tongue is given to the church, there must be an interpreter. (Sorry if I misunderstood what you were saying!)

1 Cor. 14:27-28--

If any person speaks in another language [i.e. unknown tongue], there should be only two, or at the most three, each in turn, and someone must interpret. But if there is no interpreter, that person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God.
.​

 

[SkyWriting]

Actually, Paul said the gifts are for both. 1 Cor. 14:26 says,

"What then is the conclusion, brothers? Whenever you come together, each one has a psalm, a teaching, a revelation, another language, or an interpretation. All things must be done for edification."
​

He's saying, as he said in other scriptures, that all things must be done for the edification of the body because he goes on in this verse to talk about how the church service should be conducted.

Advice from the chief of all sinners.

 

[SkyWriting]

Actually, Paul said the gifts are for both. 1 Cor. 14:26 says,

"What then is the conclusion, brothers? Whenever you come together, each one has a psalm, a teaching, a revelation, another language, or an interpretation. All things must be done for edification."
​

He's saying, as he said in other scriptures, that all things must be done for the edification of the body because he goes on in this verse to talk about how the church service should be conducted.

If no translator, then shut up, he says.

 

[Deborah D]

Advice from the chief of all sinners.

I don't get your point.

 

[NBB]

Do you have translators providing prophesy? Not that you've mentioned.

This doesn't say that needed to become prophesy, but that who speak in tongues no one can understand them, so no foreign language in this case

Intelligibility in Worship
14 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit,especially prophecy. 2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit. 3 But the one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort. 4 Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church. 5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified.

 

[NBB]

So that everyone in the congregation knew what was spoken and be edified. Not everyone spoke Persian or Arabic.



No one in the congregation recognized the language spoken. That doesn't mean it wasn't a human language. If someone was speaking Persian in a small Greek house church its not surprising no one understands them.

They utter mysteries and speak only to God and no one can understand them, thats a foreign language? i don't think so.

 

[swordsman1]

They utter mysteries and speak only to God and no one can understand them, thats a foreign language? i don't think so.

Yes, if someone was speaking a foreign language that no one in the congregation understood, then what they said was a mystery. Only God, who understands all languages, knew what was spoken.

 

[AbbaLove]

Scripture also warns us about Doctrines of demons.
That includes the demonic doctrines of those who damn the gifts of the Holy Spirit and miracles today.

(Question 1) Having reviewed all 17 pages why is it that cessationism can't explain why the nine supernatural Gifts are/were no longer needed after the Apostle John died? Doesn't that thinking also lead to a watering down of the significance of a supernatural Baptism by the Holy Spirit ... "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire" (Matthew 3:11). Makes one wonder if cessationism also interpret this verse as no longer applicable after the Apostles Pentecost experience (Acts 2:3). It's generally believed that there may have been as many as 120 that received this Baptism with fire during the Jewish Festival of Shavuot.

This photo was taken in 2005 by a team member who was part of a mission trip to Mozambique Africa. At the time the photo was taken, they were having an intense worship session and dancing with joy, as they were setting up to show the Jesus film. The mission trip was led by James Goll, author and President of Encounters Network. Those that know of Heidi Baker's testimony and ministry in Pemba, Mozambique would agree that her supernatural Giftings are from the LORD.

The photo has been getting a new round of attention lately because on July 11 2016, James Goll posted the following comment on his Facebook page regarding this photo:

“This picture was probably one of the major highlights in Michal Ann’s (his wife?) travels and ministry of Compassion Acts that took her around the globe. This photo is not doctored up in any manner. This was in Pemba, Mozambique. I think when Michal Ann was ministering. Flames of fire, like in Acts 2, appeared. Come on Jesus, baptize us in the Holy Spirit and fire!”​

​

But it is not unbiblical. Scripture says tongues, prophecy, and words of knowledge would cease, and history proves they did indeed cease.

During the 1st Century AD the Pharisees and Sadducees most likely thought these nine Supernatural Gifts were demonic. Remember what they said to Jesus (Matthew 12:22-32 and Luke 11:14-23). It's my belief that these supernatural Gifts (1 Corinthians 12:1-11) have always been in operation, but the Church (e.g. RCC) has pretty much downplayed them for centuries and even demonized them. Likewise even today many evangelicals are taught that these Supernatural Gifts have ceased.

Yet, it seems the only scripture they use to justify their belief is 1 Corinthians 13:8. Can someone provide another interpretation of Paul's inspired words ...

The love doth never fail; and whether [there be] prophecies, they shall become useless; whether tongues, they shall cease; whether knowledge, it shall become useless; (YLT)​

(Question 2) This seems to be the only scripture that cessationists use to justify their belief. It would be helpful if others would offer what they believe is the correct interpretation of this scripture that supports the belief of continualists... Thanks

 

[Strong in Him]

It does say when. It says they would cease "when completion comes".

Has completion come?
Jesus came, lived, died, rose again, ascended and then sent the Spirit upon the apostles - with the result that they spoke in tongues.

Do you have any evidence that people were persecuted for speaking in tongues or prophesying?

No; do you have any evidence that no one at all spoke in tongues of prophesied, and this was because God had withdrawn these gifts?

Scripture doesn't say they would cease and then be restored.

Well in that case, they must never have ceased.
Though I've no doubt that you'll say they did cease and any reports of such gifts today are false.

Do they really speak in tongues?

Personally, if I hear/read about my fellow Christians praying to receive the Spirit, being baptised in the Spirit and then speaking in tongues, I'm inclined to believe that's what happened.
If it didn't, then ultimately it's between the Christian and God; it's their relationship and honesty that's on the line. I would rather accept the testimony of my brothers and sisters in Christ and risk looking mildly foolish if it's false, than declare that their testimonies are false/made up and have to answer to God when I find out that they aren't.
I have heard people speaking in tongues - born again, Spirit filled Christians in a prayer meeting. I'm not going to assume that they are making up a nonsense language, or that the devil is fabricating it. Scripture says that people spoke in tongues; clearly they still do today.

If what people have suddenly discovered are the New Testament gifts then they would match the descriptions of those gifts in scripture. They don't. Today's tongues are unintelligible strings of syllables; in scripture they were foreign human languages.

No, in Acts 2 they were foreign languages. Other Scriptures don't say what the tongues were, only that believers were filled with the Spirit and spoke in tongues.
In 1 Corinthians 13 Paul talks about the language of angels - how d you know that's not tongues?
In 1 Corinthians 14:6 Paul says that praying in tongues is your spirit praying to God. Why does that have to be a recognisable language; it's private prayer between you and God?

Today's prophecies are feelings that are verbalized and presumptuously declared to be 'a word from the Lord';

I think it rather presumptuous to declare that they are NOT a word from the Lord. Of course, some may not be; they may be what the speaker thinks should happen, or may be from a desire to sound spiritual, or control things. But that's precisely why you don't rush to declare that God has spoken and people have to obey, but put the prophecy before respected Christians to pray over and find if the Lord really has spoken.
Scripture tells us not to treat prophecies with contempt, 1 Thessalonians 5:20 but to test everything, 1 Thessalonians 5:21.

in scripture it was God speaking actual words to the prophet who could then infallibly say "Thus says the Lord....".

And why can't God do this today then?

 

[SkyWriting]

And why can't God do this today then?

Not needed. There is a season for everything.

"But if there is no interpreter, that person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God."

 

[Strong in Him]

Not needed. There is a season for everything.

You're going to tell God that his gifts, and manifestaions of the Spirit, aren't needed today and past their sell by date?
Good luck with that.

"But if there is no interpreter, that person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God."

That doesn't say that tongues aren't needed or have stopped.

 

[AbbaLove]

So far through 17 pages you guys haven't been able to answer the following two questions. You just keep going round and round getting nowhere. Both views can't be empowered by the indwelling presence of the His Spirit. Cessationists don't believe in the supernatural Gift of Discernment; whereas continualists are more likely to be empowered via His Spirit with the supernatural Gift of Discernment.

Question 1: Having reviewed all 17 pages why is it that cessationism can't explain why the nine supernatural Gifts are/were no longer needed after the Apostle John died?​

Question 2: 1 Corinthians 13:8 seems to be the only scripture that cessationists use to justify their belief. It would be helpful if others (continualists) would offer what they believe is the correct interpretation of this scripture verse that supports their belief ... Thanks​

So, those following this thread would have to deduce/conclude that those that are cessationists also don't believe in supernatural Baptism of the Holy Spirit with fire and likewise the supernatural Gift of Discernment (or the other supernatural Giftings 1 Corinthians 12:1-11). Therefore cessationists are less likely to know His Truth having been taught by men that are themselves cessationist theologians.

 

[NBB]

Yes, if someone was speaking a foreign language that no one in the congregation understood, then what they said was a mystery. Only God, who understands all languages, knew what was spoken.

Speaking in tongues is not limited to foreign languages, you would say people that speak in tongues speak made up words and are crazy thinking they are doing something, do you think people can be that dumb? maybe someone but not all christians that speak in tongues.

 

[Alithis]

Let me jump in here to clarify something: There is a distinction between "evangelizing" and "witnessing."

"Evangelizing" means telling people what Jesus did for them.

"Witnessing" means telling people what Jesus did for you.

The model we see in scripture is that evangelists must be:

1. Called by the Holy Spirit,

2. Trained in the gospel by the congregation,

3. Commissioned to a specific evangelistic mission by the congregation, and then

4. Held accountable to the congregation, reporting his results at the end of his mission.

OTOH, every believer is obligated to give a witness to the first-hand experience of what Jesus has done in his or her only life. That's what John and Peter said when told to stop speaking of Jesus, but they said (pointing to Leviticus 5) that they were obligated to speak of what they had seen and heard.

Thorough knowledge of the gospel is necessary for evangelizing, but not for witnessing. You can't "witness" to Christ's death and resurrection because you weren't there. That's evangelism.

Your witness is your own first-hand experience with Jesus.

When Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman, Jesus evangelized--the woman then witnessed. She didn't even know for sure that Jesus was the Christ, only what He had done for her.

The same was true of the man who had been born blind. He didn't know for sure who Jesus was:

He replied, "Whether he is a sinner or not, I don't know. One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!"

Never let any unbeliever in the power of Christ--and that includes cessationists--take away your witness.

One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!

pretty much a load of traditionalism .man made restrictions hindering people from the work of the gospel to which ALL believers are called . mens tradition based theology always seems to bring death and ineffectiveness

 

[swordsman1]

Has completion come?

Yes. “Completeness” is the antithesis of “in part”, so it is obvious these two quantitative expressions are related. Whatever ‘in part’ is referring to, almost certainly applies to ‘completeness’. That which is ‘in part’ is the practice of the gifts of prophecy and words of knowledge (v9), both of which are revelations from God. It follows therefore that ‘completeness’ would also involve revelation. “In part” refers to the fact that the revelation communicated by these gifts was partial or piecemeal. The corresponding “completeness”, as the counterpart to “in part” must then refer to a full or complete revelation from God. This can only be seen as the completed revelation God as preserved in the New Testament. 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 the gift of prophecy to guide them. Thus, the completed canon would replace the partial prophecies and words of knowledge.

No; do you have any evidence that no one at all spoke in tongues of prophesied, and this was because God had withdrawn these gifts?

That scripture says it would cease and the overwhelming consensus in the Church from the witness of Church Fathers right up until the start of the pentecostal movement that tongues did indeed cease, I think is sufficient evidence.

Personally, if I hear/read about my fellow Christians praying to receive the Spirit, being baptised in the Spirit and then speaking in tongues, I'm inclined to believe that's what happened.
If it didn't, then ultimately it's between the Christian and God; it's their relationship and honesty that's on the line. I would rather accept the testimony of my brothers and sisters in Christ and risk looking mildly foolish if it's false, than declare that their testimonies are false/made up and have to answer to God when I find out that they aren't.

So you believe everything you hear? How do you know they are not mistaken? Do you believe they received the Spirit subsequent to their salvation because they said so? Scripture says otherwise. Do you believe that the 'baptism of the Spirit' is something subsequent to salvation because they said so? Scripture says otherwise. Do you believe they spoke in tongues as described in the New Testament? Scripture says otherwise.

I have heard people speaking in tongues - born again, Spirit filled Christians in a prayer meeting. I'm not going to assume that they are making up a nonsense language, or that the devil is fabricating it. Scripture says that people spoke in tongues; clearly they still do today.

How do you know it was New Testament tongues. Did it match the biblical description?

No, in Acts 2 they were foreign languages. Other Scriptures don't say what the tongues were, only that believers were filled with the Spirit and spoke in tongues.

And in the absence of any re-definition, it must be presumed that the other instances of tongues are exactly the same as the first.

In 1 Corinthians 13 Paul talks about the language of angels - how d you know that's not tongues?

Because Paul is portraying an exaggerated scenario to make a point. He is saying even if someone could speak in tongues to the ultimate degree conceivable (speaking the language of angels), but not have love, it would be worthless. We can tell this because he does the same with 3 other gifts in the following verses - having the gift of prophesy to the ultimate degree of knowing ALL mysteries and ALL knowledge (ie. omniscience); having the gift of faith to the ultimate degree of moving mountains; and having the gift of giving to the ultimate degree of giving up ALL you possess to the poor and even giving up your own life. Paul is saying that even if someone had those gifts to such a superlative degree, without love, it would be to no avail.

In 1 Corinthians 14:6 Paul says that praying in tongues is your spirit praying to God. Why does that have to be a recognisable language; it's private prayer between you and God?

It wasn't private prayer, it was corporate prayer spoken in the congregation. It doesn't say it was a non-human language.

I think it rather presumptuous to declare that they are NOT a word from the Lord.

Where in scripture does it ever say prophecies come from a feeling?

Of course, some may not be; they may be what the speaker thinks should happen, or may be from a desire to sound spiritual, or control things. But that's precisely why you don't rush to declare that God has spoken and people have to obey, but put the prophecy before respected Christians to pray over and find if the Lord really has spoken.

And if it is a false prophecy, as it would be if it was from a feeling, then clearly they do not have the gift of prophecy.

Scripture tells us not to treat prophecies with contempt, 1 Thessalonians 5:20 but to test everything, 1 Thessalonians 5:21.

That was written when the gift was still active in the church, and even then there were false prophets around so they had to be tested.

And why can't God do this today then?

Because prophets, along with apostles, were only for the foundation of the church (Eph 2:20).