To Cease or to Continue, that is the Question

[Guojing]

If the gifts did cease, where is the notice in scripture?

The notice is that Israel the nation has fallen, as Paul explained in great details in Romans 9 to 11.

So if signs and wonders are always linked to Israel, when Israel fell temporary, and the gospel is now open to all Gentiles, thru their fall (Romans 11:11), is it that incredible to believe that signs and wonders have also ceased temporary?

 

[John Mullally]

The two scriptures contain entirely different topics addressed to different parties. Matthew 19:28 is past tense and addressed to "you who have followed me" - we are not in that. John 14:12 is present tense speaking to believers like John 3:16.

 

[Guojing]

The two scriptures contain entirely different topics addressed to different parties. Matthew 19:28 is past tense and addressed to "you who have followed me" - we are not in that. John 14:12 is present tense speaking to believers like John 3:16.

Ahh, nice way of distinguishing. If you really follow that principle and its not just an ad-hoc usage, how about John 20:23 then?

Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

That is present tense right?

 

[Albion]

This would be a shock to the old-fashioned Pentecostals who see members of the Anglican and Lutheran churches as dead and lukewarm, and "lacking in the Holy Spirit."

WHAT would be a shock?

But Anglicanism and Lutheranism, along with Catholicism, Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy, are continuationalist by definition. Thats obviously because of the ritualistic liturgy of priests turning bread to the body of Christ, and their sacraments or ordinances of confession, anointing of the sick.

Well, that's cute enough to say, but we all know that this thread is about continuationism as referring to the gifts of the Holy Spirit that we've been talking about right along and as they were identified early in the discuscion. It's not about "continuing" something else entirely.

But the practice of glossia was practiced throughout church history between the apostles and Azusa. The Anabaptists practiced some glossia or miraculous gifts of the Spirit, including speaking in tongued. The early Methodist movement, an ancestor of the Holiness and Pentecostal movements. with John Wesley also reported miraculous tongue speaking.

There were scattered reports, yes, and usually among fringe groups of Christians, but this does not "continue" the gifts as they had been in the early church and, once again, as was referred to earlier in the thread.

Once this was a major feature of church life and served an important purpose; later, when there was no continuity and the experiences were no longer an important part of the life of the church, even to use a term like "continue" strains the meaning of the word.

 

[Albion]

If the gifts did cease, where is the notice in scripture?

Why must scripture pinpoint the decline and then absence of the gifts? There are all sorts of developments in Christianity that are not specifically identified or dated in Scripture, and yet we Christians adhere to them with little difficulty.

 

[JohnT]

Instead, its almost always the 4 Gospels and Acts.

Of course, it is most fitting that they use them! That is because they are major history books of the early church and of the life of Jesus.

The other 22 books, excepting Revelation are mostly doctrinal in focus.

 

[Guojing]

Of course, it is most fitting that they use them! That is because they are major history books of the early church and of the life of Jesus.

Well, you realized they also conveniently ignore these passages from the 4 gospels?

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Matthew 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

You realized that healing, raising dead, casting out demons are all linked to the gospel of the kingdom, which is not meant for Gentiles, but for the House of Israel, during Jesus earthly ministry?

 

[JohnT]

Jesus is YHWH said: ↑
I've never heard of such HERESY. The way you twist the scriptures are incredible.

Perhaps words like "misunderstanding" "eisegesis" or "out of context" would be more accurate?

I believe that from what I read, you are dealing with a person with a WoF background, or theology. My experience with those groups is that they doo not have a good understanding of the definition and importance of the word "context", so they will take something like the post to which you refer, and wish to make Scripture say just about anything and then they can "proof text" it saying "See it is in the Bible".

It is my opinion that such persons are well-intentioned dragons posing as sheep. they put on a pious-looking façade while they are spewing unlearned, simplistic heresy.

OOPS! I should not have used that word. Shame on me.

 

[JohnT]

You realized that healing, raising dead, casting out demons are all linked to the gospel of the kingdom, which is not meant for Gentiles, but for the House of Israel, during Jesus earthly ministry?

I do not buy into that sort of hyper Dispensational theology because Scripture is the whole Bible, written for the salvation of the whole world.

Therefore, since the OP is about ceasing or continuance of the Gifts of Holy Spirit I shall decline to go on that rabbit trail.

 

[Guojing]

I do not buy into that sort of hyper Dispensational theology because Scripture is the whole Bible, written for the salvation of the whole world.

Therefore, since the OP is about ceasing or continuance of the Gifts of Holy Spirit I shall decline to go on that rabbit trail.

Well, I given you scripture, but I understand that most of us don't let scripture get in the way of our pre-existing doctrine.

Alright then.

 

[JohnT]

The notice is that Israel the nation has fallen, as Paul explained in great details in Romans 9 to 11.

That is not in Romans. In fact, those chapters things that are directly opposite of what you state:

Romans 9:
4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises.
5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.”
8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.

There are other verses, but true to my word (and your claim was so outrageously contrary to Scripture, I felt compelled to respond) so let's return to the OP..

 

[Guojing]

That is not in Romans. In fact, those chapters things that are directly opposite of what you state:

Romans 9:
4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises.
5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.”
8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.

There are other verses, but true to my word (and your claim was so outrageously contrary to Scripture, I felt compelled to respond) so let's return to the OP..

You forgot Romans 11:11?

 

[JohnT]

Well, I given you scripture, but I understand that most of us don't let scripture get in the way of our pre-existing doctrine.

Incorrect, again. I can state that because I quoted Scripture in its context to disprove your thesis.
OTOH you made a very B R O A D generalization without specific Scriptural support.

BTW, I am not intending to discuss Dispensationalism on this forum. Please return to the OP.

 

[Guojing]

Incorrect, again. I can state that because I quoted Scripture in its context to disprove your thesis.
OTOH you made a very B R O A D generalization without specific Scriptural support.

BTW, I am not intending to discuss Dispensationalism on this forum. Please return to the OP.

Have you addressed my use of Matthew 15:24 and Matthew 10:5 onwards?

 

[JohnT]

You forgot Romans 11:11?

I only quoted from half of Romans 9. Deal with that, but do so on another thread that you create yourself.


I meant what I said earlier:

BTW, I am not intending to discuss Dispensationalism on this forum. Please return to the OP.

 

[JohnT]

I meant what I said earlier:

↑ BTW, I am not intending to discuss Dispensationalism on this forum. Please return to the OP.

 

[JohnT]

Have you addressed my use of Matthew 15:24 and Matthew 10:5 onwards?

I only quoted from half of Romans 9. Deal with that, but do so on another thread that you create yourself.

 

[Guojing]

I only quoted from half of Romans 9. Deal with that, but do so on another thread that you create yourself.


I meant what I said earlier:

I said Paul explained the fall of the nation Israel from Romans 9 to Romans 11. Obviously Romans 11 is the conclusion of his lengthy explanation.

You used a passage from Romans 9, and you claimed Romans never stated my thesis. Obviously you have not even established your point yet.

 

[Francis Drake]

Have you ever wondered why people who teach that signs and wonders are for today, that the gospel of the kingdom is still to be preached today, and then healings always accompanied that preaching, they rarely use Romans to Philemon for that purpose?

Instead, its almost always the 4 Gospels and Acts.

Utter garbage.
Those who teach signs and wonders are still for today, in my experience use the whole of scripture from one end to another.
I have walked among such people for the last 50 odd years, and Romans is probably the most popular source of teaching.

 

[Francis Drake]

Actually, there is nothing in those passages that says these gifts will be present through all of time to come.

Like many other things we read in scripture, there's absolutely nothing to indicate they would cease.

They are obviously addressed to the those who were the readers and listeners at that time, whether or not anyone among us now thinks the gifts continued uninterrupted.

If you start claiming they were limited to only those present, then you have to adopt the same policy with the whole of scripture. And then you might as well burn your bibles and make up your own religion from scratch.

But there is also this, which no one ever seems to mention. The modern Pentecostal movement dates from several centuries ago, and involves several separate events which amounted to a call to RESTORE the gifts to the church.

That's because remnants the gifts had always been there, but illegal, subject to persecution and death, and consequently hidden away from the mainstream.

So today, the heirs of those people tell the rest of us that the gifts never ceased even though their own movement was based upon the idea of bringing them back into use!

Modern Pentecostalism was about legitimising an ancient ongoing biblical phenomena.

Your theory doesn't pan out when you look at the facts.