What is the Scriptural Basis for Cessationism?

[Major1]

Who? I don't know why you would listen to them...I don't....you might learn about Pentecostalism better by visiting one of their assemblies.

Funny that you would say that. I was raised in such a religious situation and thanks be to God I did learn what was BIBLICAL and what was not.

 

[YeshuaFan]

One again I must tell you that you are in error.

The Bible does NOT say women "were forbidden to teach".

The Bible actually says ……..
"And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man".
(1 Tim. 2:11).

One of the things I have learned over the years is that “a text without a context is a pretext.” It is a basic hermeneutical principle that, to be properly interpreted, passages must be considered in their immediate context, in their historical context, and in the context of the entirety of Scripture. So when I began looking more deeply into this issue just prior to entering seminary, I was intrigued by the possibility the meaning of these passages was not as obvious as it seemed.

Observe 1 Tim. 2:11. I
It does not say women but a woman, and better still, a wife. The word in Greek is gune (1135), which indicates either a woman generically speaking or a wife, depending on the context. In this instance, since it stands in apposition to the word andros (the genitive singular of aner here meaning only “husband” and not “man” generically, 435), it must be translated as “a wife.” It is because of the mistranslations of these passages that the Christian world has had so much difficulty in understanding the proper position of a woman in the Christian Church…Verse 12 is again poorly translated in the K.J.V. It should not be “But I suffer not a woman to teach,” but “I suffer not a wife….”
Gospel Answers - Women Preachers: Forbidden in the Bible?

And with that I remind YOU of YOUR words...………
"[and I really wish you would abide by what the bible teaches]".

Women indeed can be involved in teaching , as many of them teach children or in missions, its just that the scriptures would not support them as being in roles of either Pastor/Elder of a local church.

 

[YeshuaFan]

Agreed! There are NO Prophets or apostles today.

They had a specific task, to lay the theological foundation down of the Church that was built upon the Rock of Jesus Christ, and so no need for them today, as the inspired ones still speak and teach us in the scriptures!

 

[YeshuaFan]

"The working of miracles" was one of the gifts of the Spirit. It does not negate that the other gifts were miraculous in nature also. Case in point is Paul telling Elymas that he would be blind for a time, and it happened. That was both a working of a miracle and a prophecy. Another case is when Paul cast the demon out of the psychic girl. It was both discerning of spirits and exercise of supernatural power. Whether one might say that was a miracle or not is debatable, depending on what limits you put on the definition. I would say it was miraculous, because Paul could not have discerned the evil spirit according to natural means, since she was telling the truth about them. If a person with the gift of knowledge tells the secrets of another person's heart, it is by supernatural means, and not by natural means. When Jesus told the woman at the well that she had 5 husbands and was living with a man not her husband, that information could not have been obtained by natural means, so it was miraculous in nature.

I could go on with many examples, but let this be sufficient to my point. I don't agree with your theory that just because one of the gifts was "the working of miracles" that the other gifts weren't miraculous. The description and narrative given to us in Acts proves without doubt that the gift of tongues given to the apostles was miraculous in nature. IMO you are merely trying to justify the usage of modern-day glossalalia and the claim that it is a gift of the Spirit, by your theory that Biblical tongues wasn't miraculous. I disagree with your theory. The scripture clearly tells me that all the gifts of the Spirit were miraculous by nature. And if you think that healings which Jesus and the apostles did were not miraculous in nature, IMO you haven't dug deep enough in the scripture.
TD

Many want to claim that the church in Acts is now getting recreated by the Charismatic Movement, but they have really watered down and have redefined what miracles and healings and tongues really meant back then, as most of what is done today nowhere comes close to what was happening back then!

 

[YeshuaFan]

But that is YOUR opinion. What does the Word of God say.

John 10:37-38, Jesus was responding to the Jews who wanted to stone Him for blasphemy, and He said, ………..
“If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father."

Just as in the Old Testament, the purpose of Jesus' miracles was to confirm God's hand on His Messenger. The "Miracles" VALIDATE the message as coming from God the Creator.

When the Pharisees asked Jesus to show them a sign, Jesus said in Matt. 12:39-41..... “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here”.

Jesus was very clear that the purpose of a sign was so people would acknowledge God's message and respond accordingly.

Likewise, in John 4:48..................…
" He told the nobleman, “Unless you see signs and wonders, you will not believe.”

The signs were a help to those who struggled to believe, but the message of salvation in Christ was always the focus.

John uses the healings and miracles performed by Jesus as the signs that God was among them now in Jesus, and to confirm the ministry and salvation of Him!

 

[YeshuaFan]

What you say is simply ludicrous. I believe the Bible, not you. From what I can figure, the context of scripture is not your authority. Your authority is your personal subjective experience in which you learned to judge it by what others told you, and it is that judgment that you impose on the scripture. The first 25 years of my Christian life was in Pentecostal and Charismatic churches, so I think I know what I am talking about. It is the typical mode of interpretation in those churches, and that interpretation is used to propagate the movement's agenda. That manner of interpretation is used to justify the claim that typical modern day glossalalia is a gift of the Spirit. But it can't be, because it is not miraculous, whereas the Biblical tongues were miraculous.

I'm not saying that what those churches teach is all wrong, as I am not in any way claiming that Pentecostals or Charismatics are not brothers and sisters in Christ. What I do claim is that many things taught in those churches is wrong, and their teaching about the gifts of the Spirit being in common operation today, and that every Christian ought to be practicing them - that this is wrong teaching, and whoever believes that theory simply has not dug deep enough into scripture.
TD

I was a teaching Elder in the AOG for over a decade, and from the scriptures, was convinced that there was no second act of Grace as evidence in speaking in tongues, no health and wealth and divine healing as defined by Charismatics, as we now have all spiritual blessings in Christ, but they tend to focus on JUST financial and physical ones!

 

[YeshuaFan]

Funny that you would say that. I was raised in such a religious situation and thanks be to God I did learn what was BIBLICAL and what was not.

I was taught at one of them, and would recommend all to read the book A Different Gospel, DR McConnell, as he is charismatic and also shows much of the WoF and extreme version of it is heretical!

 

[tdidymas]

This is ALL about you, your experiences, your views

not a scrap of scripture support.

If you got it wrong for 25 years why are you so sure you got it right now?

My views are based first and foremost upon what I received, the baptism in the Holy Ghost according to scripture with accompanying gifts. Then I looked for a church fellowship that was in agreement with what I received.

So 1st came the experience
2nd came the doctrine
3rd came the fellowship.

Your order is wrong. Doctrine is of top importance to the apostles:
John: "If anyone goes beyond, and does not adhere to our teaching, do not let him into your house."
"He who is from God listens to us."
James: "Let not many of you be teachers, since teachers will be judged more harshly."
Jude: "Contend earnestly for the faith which has been delivered to the saints."
Peter: "Scripture did not come by men's private interpretation, but the prophets were carried along by the Holy Spirit."
Paul: "All scripture is by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness."
"from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus."

We don't even get started down the right path until we have heard the truth from the Bible, as it is the foundation of all that true Christians believe and trust in. Only the apostle Paul could boast that he received his teaching as a direct revelation from Christ, and when he compared what he learned to what the other apostles believed and taught, there was no conflict.

So if you interpret scripture based on your subjective experience, you will be deceived. Such is the mode of interpretation of all the cults. And to answer your question how am I so sure I got it right now? Because (by the grace of God) I got curious about what the Bible actually teaches, and took the time to examine it carefully, along with my familiarity of what scripture actually says, not only in the immediate context of passages, but also in the wider context of all scripture.

If you believe something you were told, because your experience seems to concur, that conflicts with what the Bible actually describes, then your experience is wrong, or your interpretation of your experience is wrong. Scripture is not wrong, but your interpretation of it certainly could be, even if you are a true believer and received the Holy Spirit. This is absolutely proven by the fact that there are many varieties of interpretation of scripture by Christians all over the world. And when one interpretation contradicts another, then one or the other, or both, must be wrong, because scripture is in harmony with itself and obeys the law of non-contradiction.

This is why I admit that I got it wrong for 25 years, but have it right now, because I am relying on what scripture actually says, and my personal subjective experience is subject to scripture. This is why I can confidently say that I believe what scripture says, not what you say, and not what the modern Pentecostal/Charismatic movement says about the gifts of the Spirit, or what that movement says specifically about tongues.

Therefore, since Paul writes that first comes the fleshly, then the spiritual, the correct order of application of the Christian life in those 3 areas is:
1. Doctrine
2. Fellowship
3. Experience
We first must have the doctrine to correct the fleshly ideas we live by. If you don't have correct doctrine, you won't have correct experience. You cannot correctly apply the scripture to your life until you correctly interpret the teaching. This is why we cannot just use tradition, experience, and reason to interpret the scripture. Such things may be helpful, but they are fallible. We also need other elements to interpret the scripture, such as: the "historical grammatical method," familiarity with the whole Bible, memorization, among the usage of other rules of interpretation such as the law of non-contradiction, usage of words, continuity of context, scripture interprets scripture, and other such rules of interpretation that get to the original and correct meaning of the text.

One rule I have which is a very basic one, is if someone quotes a verse of scripture as a proof text to support an idea, I always examine the context of that verse to see if the idea fits well in the context, as well as fitting well within the whole of scripture. In addition to "fitting well" in the context, I use all the rules of interpretation I've learned. If the idea does not fit well, then the idea is false, since the verse quoted was taken out of its context, or another way to see it is that an idea has been imposed on the scripture. A typical mode of interpretation by the P/C (modern Pentecostal/Charismatic) movement is the imposition of ideas on the scripture. In fact, every major movement and denomination has done it, and still do it, and this is why there is little agreement on the secondary issues.

So then your religious jargon "the baptism in the Holy Ghost according to scripture with accompanying gifts" doesn't sway me in the least, because I know by what scripture says (first), and also my personal experience with the wider context of Christianity, that such jargon is not based on Biblical teaching, but on ideas that are imposed on the scripture. In order to more fully live in the truth of God, we must be willing to "crucify" our inadequate interpretation of our experiences, the Bible, and everything else we hear and read, and "take up the cross" of learning how to correctly interpret scripture and the Christian walk by means of the disciplines of correct interpretation. Our understanding of God and of our salvation depends on it.
TD

 

[YeshuaFan]

You have a bible as I do, if you won't believe that even if I were to testify of resurrections you would not believe.

Are you saying that one MUST hold to the "full Gospel" in order to be saved, or at least having the real Gospel; message?

 

[YeshuaFan]

Your order is wrong. Doctrine is of top importance to the apostles:
John: "If anyone goes beyond, and does not adhere to our teaching, do not let him into your house."
"He who is from God listens to us."
James: "Let not many of you be teachers, since teachers will be judged more harshly."
Jude: "Contend earnestly for the faith which has been delivered to the saints."
Peter: "Scripture did not come by men's private interpretation, but the prophets were carried along by the Holy Spirit."
Paul: "All scripture is by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness."
"from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus."

We don't even get started down the right path until we have heard the truth from the Bible, as it is the foundation of all that true Christians believe and trust in. Only the apostle Paul could boast that he received his teaching as a direct revelation from Christ, and when he compared what he learned to what the other apostles believed and taught, there was no conflict.

So if you interpret scripture based on your subjective experience, you will be deceived. Such is the mode of interpretation of all the cults. And to answer your question how am I so sure I got it right now? Because (by the grace of God) I got curious about what the Bible actually teaches, and took the time to examine it carefully, along with my familiarity of what scripture actually says, not only in the immediate context of passages, but also in the wider context of all scripture.

If you believe something you were told, because your experience seems to concur, that conflicts with what the Bible actually describes, then your experience is wrong, or your interpretation of your experience is wrong. Scripture is not wrong, but your interpretation of it certainly could be, even if you are a true believer and received the Holy Spirit. This is absolutely proven by the fact that there are many varieties of interpretation of scripture by Christians all over the world. And when one interpretation contradicts another, then one or the other, or both, must be wrong, because scripture is in harmony with itself and obeys the law of non-contradiction.

This is why I admit that I got it wrong for 25 years, but have it right now, because I am relying on what scripture actually says, and my personal subjective experience is subject to scripture. This is why I can confidently say that I believe what scripture says, not what you say, and not what the modern Pentecostal/Charismatic movement says about the gifts of the Spirit, or what that movement says specifically about tongues.

Therefore, since Paul writes that first comes the fleshly, then the spiritual, the correct order of application of the Christian life in those 3 areas is:
1. Doctrine
2. Fellowship
3. Experience
We first must have the doctrine to correct the fleshly ideas we live by. If you don't have correct doctrine, you won't have correct experience. You cannot correctly apply the scripture to your life until you correctly interpret the teaching. This is why we cannot just use tradition, experience, and reason to interpret the scripture. Such things may be helpful, but they are fallible. We also need other elements to interpret the scripture, such as: the "historical grammatical method," familiarity with the whole Bible, memorization, among the usage of other rules of interpretation such as the law of non-contradiction, usage of words, continuity of context, scripture interprets scripture, and other such rules of interpretation that get to the original and correct meaning of the text.

One rule I have which is a very basic one, is if someone quotes a verse of scripture as a proof text to support an idea, I always examine the context of that verse to see if the idea fits well in the context, as well as fitting well within the whole of scripture. In addition to "fitting well" in the context, I use all the rules of interpretation I've learned. If the idea does not fit well, then the idea is false, since the verse quoted was taken out of its context, or another way to see it is that an idea has been imposed on the scripture. A typical mode of interpretation by the P/C (modern Pentecostal/Charismatic) movement is the imposition of ideas on the scripture. In fact, every major movement and denomination has done it, and still do it, and this is why there is little agreement on the secondary issues.

So then your religious jargon "the baptism in the Holy Ghost according to scripture with accompanying gifts" doesn't sway me in the least, because I know by what scripture says (first), and also my personal experience with the wider context of Christianity, that such jargon is not based on Biblical teaching, but on ideas that are imposed on the scripture. In order to more fully live in the truth of God, we must be willing to "crucify" our inadequate interpretation of our experiences, the Bible, and everything else we hear and read, and "take up the cross" of learning how to correctly interpret scripture and the Christian walk by means of the disciplines of correct interpretation. Our understanding of God and of our salvation depends on it.
TD

I am still looking for that verse in the NT where any Apostle commands us tobe looking for the second act of Grace, the so called Baptism in the Holy Spirit, and still have not found it!
And why is it that there seems to be such a large percentage of WoF and extreme Charismatic teachers/pastors /leaders involved in money scams and sexual sinning than the other "not full gospel" groups? Isn't that a sure sign that the Holy Spirit is not really in that movement as they all claim Him to be, as he is the Spirit of truth and Holiness?

 

[tdidymas]

I am still looking for that verse in the NT where any Apostle commands us tobe looking for the second act of Grace, the so called Baptism in the Holy Spirit, and still have not found it!
And why is it that there seems to be such a large percentage of WoF and extreme Charismatic teachers/pastors /leaders involved in money scams and sexual sinning than the other "not full gospel" groups? Isn't that a sure sign that the Holy Spirit is not really in that movement as they all claim Him to be, as he is the Spirit of truth and Holiness?

Yes, the only commands I see in the NT are to believe in Christ, love others, live a holy life, and make sure we're saved, in which these commands are said in various ways. However, I wouldn't go so far to say that they all are not Christians just because some of the leaders are dirty rotten sinners.
TD

 

[YeshuaFan]

Yes, the only commands I see in the NT are to believe in Christ, love others, live a holy life, and make sure we're saved, in which these commands are said in various ways. However, I wouldn't go so far to say that they all are not Christians just because some of the leaders are dirty rotten sinners.
TD

No, we cannot judge is really saved, but can judge their fruit and their theology, as many times its been rotten fruit!

 

[Major1]

I was a teaching Elder in the AOG for over a decade, and from the scriptures, was convinced that there was no second act of Grace as evidence in speaking in tongues, no health and wealth and divine healing as defined by Charismatics, as we now have all spiritual blessings in Christ, but they tend to focus on JUST financial and physical ones!

God bless you my friend!

 

[Major1]

Yes, the only commands I see in the NT are to believe in Christ, love others, live a holy life, and make sure we're saved, in which these commands are said in various ways. However, I wouldn't go so far to say that they all are not Christians just because some of the leaders are dirty rotten sinners.
TD

And sometimes there is this...…….

Matthew 7:23...……..
"And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

Not all who say they are saved are in fact saved.

 

[Major1]

Are you saying that one MUST hold to the "full Gospel" in order to be saved, or at least having the real Gospel; message?

He probably will not admit that, but YES, that is exactly what I was taught.

That is why we were told to ask people upon visitation to their homes...……
"Are you born again, WITH THE EVIDENCE OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES".

 

[Billy Evmur]

Are you saying that one MUST hold to the "full Gospel" in order to be saved, or at least having the real Gospel; message?

Your order is wrong. Doctrine is of top importance to the apostles:
John: "If anyone goes beyond, and does not adhere to our teaching, do not let him into your house."
"He who is from God listens to us."
James: "Let not many of you be teachers, since teachers will be judged more harshly."
Jude: "Contend earnestly for the faith which has been delivered to the saints."
Peter: "Scripture did not come by men's private interpretation, but the prophets were carried along by the Holy Spirit."
Paul: "All scripture is by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness."
"from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus."

We don't even get started down the right path until we have heard the truth from the Bible, as it is the foundation of all that true Christians believe and trust in. Only the apostle Paul could boast that he received his teaching as a direct revelation from Christ, and when he compared what he learned to what the other apostles believed and taught, there was no conflict.

So if you interpret scripture based on your subjective experience, you will be deceived. Such is the mode of interpretation of all the cults. And to answer your question how am I so sure I got it right now? Because (by the grace of God) I got curious about what the Bible actually teaches, and took the time to examine it carefully, along with my familiarity of what scripture actually says, not only in the immediate context of passages, but also in the wider context of all scripture.

If you believe something you were told, because your experience seems to concur, that conflicts with what the Bible actually describes, then your experience is wrong, or your interpretation of your experience is wrong. Scripture is not wrong, but your interpretation of it certainly could be, even if you are a true believer and received the Holy Spirit. This is absolutely proven by the fact that there are many varieties of interpretation of scripture by Christians all over the world. And when one interpretation contradicts another, then one or the other, or both, must be wrong, because scripture is in harmony with itself and obeys the law of non-contradiction.

This is why I admit that I got it wrong for 25 years, but have it right now, because I am relying on what scripture actually says, and my personal subjective experience is subject to scripture. This is why I can confidently say that I believe what scripture says, not what you say, and not what the modern Pentecostal/Charismatic movement says about the gifts of the Spirit, or what that movement says specifically about tongues.

Therefore, since Paul writes that first comes the fleshly, then the spiritual, the correct order of application of the Christian life in those 3 areas is:
1. Doctrine
2. Fellowship
3. Experience
We first must have the doctrine to correct the fleshly ideas we live by. If you don't have correct doctrine, you won't have correct experience. You cannot correctly apply the scripture to your life until you correctly interpret the teaching. This is why we cannot just use tradition, experience, and reason to interpret the scripture. Such things may be helpful, but they are fallible. We also need other elements to interpret the scripture, such as: the "historical grammatical method," familiarity with the whole Bible, memorization, among the usage of other rules of interpretation such as the law of non-contradiction, usage of words, continuity of context, scripture interprets scripture, and other such rules of interpretation that get to the original and correct meaning of the text.

One rule I have which is a very basic one, is if someone quotes a verse of scripture as a proof text to support an idea, I always examine the context of that verse to see if the idea fits well in the context, as well as fitting well within the whole of scripture. In addition to "fitting well" in the context, I use all the rules of interpretation I've learned. If the idea does not fit well, then the idea is false, since the verse quoted was taken out of its context, or another way to see it is that an idea has been imposed on the scripture. A typical mode of interpretation by the P/C (modern Pentecostal/Charismatic) movement is the imposition of ideas on the scripture. In fact, every major movement and denomination has done it, and still do it, and this is why there is little agreement on the secondary issues.

So then your religious jargon "the baptism in the Holy Ghost according to scripture with accompanying gifts" doesn't sway me in the least, because I know by what scripture says (first), and also my personal experience with the wider context of Christianity, that such jargon is not based on Biblical teaching, but on ideas that are imposed on the scripture. In order to more fully live in the truth of God, we must be willing to "crucify" our inadequate interpretation of our experiences, the Bible, and everything else we hear and read, and "take up the cross" of learning how to correctly interpret scripture and the Christian walk by means of the disciplines of correct interpretation. Our understanding of God and of our salvation depends on it.
TD

Just looking at the scriptures you quote for eg "if anyone goes beyond and does not adhere to our teaching"

But you don't...

John was baptised in the Holy Spirit and ministered the gifts of the Holy Spirit along with Peter.

No Apostle taught that the gifts would not remain in the church until that which is perfect is come when we no longer see as through a glass darkly.

It is silly to suggest that the canon of scripture is that which is perfect for Paul was the writer of most of it, his writings are not more perfect than his actual words as he expounded those doctrines. And his doctrine is that we should covet the gifts.

That is the complete canon of scripture, there IS no word about no longer earnestly coveting the higher gifts.

If you say there is a doctrine exhorting us to not earnestly covet the gifts you are going beyond what the scripture says, you are not abiding in the apostle's doctrine.

SOME of it you abide in, mebbe the most essential parts as far as your personal salvation is concerned...I am not saying anybody is not saved, I am not even saying I would not invite you into my house. But John was baptised with the Holy Ghost and ministered in signs and wonders.

The same applies to the other scriptures you quote. For your faith is not the one which was once delivered to the saints...it has enough to save the soul but it lacks the baptism of the Holy Spirit with accompanying gifts.

You talk alot...ALOT about interpreting scripture but Peter said "no scripture ever came by private interpretation of man" You don't need to puzzle and fret with scripture...just read it and believe what it says...it is not written for scholars, it is written for simple folks to read and understand.

And the Holy Spirit is WELL able to make you understand it.

 

[Billy Evmur]

Funny that you would say that. I was raised in such a religious situation and thanks be to God I did learn what was BIBLICAL and what was not.

I would politely suggest that you didn't

I would politely suggest that you looked around you and decided upon that basis that Pentecostalism is wrong....

 

[Major1]

Just looking at the scriptures you quote for eg "if anyone goes beyond and does not adhere to our teaching"

But you don't...

John was baptised in the Holy Spirit and ministered the gifts of the Holy Spirit along with Peter.

No Apostle taught that the gifts would not remain in the church until that which is perfect is come when we no longer see as through a glass darkly.

It is silly to suggest that the canon of scripture is that which is perfect for Paul was the writer of most of it, his writings are not more perfect than his actual words as he expounded those doctrines. And his doctrine is that we should covet the gifts.

That is the complete canon of scripture, there IS no word about no longer earnestly coveting the higher gifts.

If you say there is a doctrine exhorting us to not earnestly covet the gifts you are going beyond what the scripture says, you are not abiding in the apostle's doctrine.

SOME of it you abide in, mebbe the most essential parts as far as your personal salvation is concerned...I am not saying anybody is not saved, I am not even saying I would not invite you into my house. But John was baptised with the Holy Ghost and ministered in signs and wonders.

The same applies to the other scriptures you quote. For your faith is not the one which was once delivered to the saints...it has enough to save the soul but it lacks the baptism of the Holy Spirit with accompanying gifts.

You talk alot...ALOT about interpreting scripture but Peter said "no scripture ever came by private interpretation of man" You don't need to puzzle and fret with scripture...just read it and believe what it says...it is not written for scholars, it is written for simple folks to read and understand.

And the Holy Spirit is WELL able to make you understand it.

You stated...………
"John was baptised in the Holy Spirit and ministered the gifts of the Holy Spirit along with Peter."

And John and Peter were APOSTLES.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit may be defined as that work whereby the Spirit of God places the believer into union with Christ and into union with other believers in the body of Christ at the moment of salvation.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit does two things,
1) it joins us to the body of Christ, and
2) it actualizes our co-crucifixion with Christ.

Then you said...………..
"No Apostle taught that the gifts would not remain in the church until that which is perfect is come when we no longer see as through a glass darkly."

BUT the Scriptures say in 1 Corinthians 13:8...…….
"Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will cease; where there is knowledge, it will pass away."

Paul KNEW that Jesus had come, died and been resurrected so the argument that Jesus Christ was the PERFECT makes no sense what so ever.

 

[Major1]

I would politely suggest that you didn't

I would politely suggest that you looked around you and decided upon that basis that Pentecostalism is wrong....

And you would be wrong my friend.

I looked around is correct. And When I SAW people doing what was NOT recorded in the Bible, I knew they were doing what they wanted to do not what God told us to do.

Where is the INTERPRETAION???

WHY is there LAUGHING????

Does this look like the Holy Spirit of God is in control?????

This is what goes on in Pentecostal churches all the time.

This is what YOU are advocating.

Now WHERE in this is the Lord Jesus Christ lifted up and praised?????????

 

[Major1]

Women indeed can be involved in teaching , as many of them teach children or in missions, its just that the scriptures would not support them as being in roles of either Pastor/Elder of a local church.

Correct. If women had not been involved in teaching there would be NO church today.