Refuting The Cessationism Doctrine: Spiritual Gifts, Tongues, Miracles Haven’t Ceased Since Pentecost!!

[cv5]

I do not post or look to show anything. Jesus said a perverted and adulterous generation seeks a sign, I am not of that clan. I am of the ones Jesus said Sign and wonders would follow them that Believe, confirming the word of God. Go out and do your own to the glory of God. Stop trying to have other prove your doubt LOL

Don't put words in my mouth.....ever. I NEVER seek after a sign as it is perfectly evident that they have ceased. I was merely using not so subtle sarcasm to call you and the rest of the so-called Pentecostals to legitimize their bombastic claims. And BTW, it is the Pentecostals who are seeking after a sign....by definition and violition.

So just post the videos and put your money where your mouth is and we can end this debate once and for all like gentlemen.

 

[cv5]

I do not post or look to show anything. Jesus said a perverted and adulterous generation seeks a sign, I am not of that clan. I am of the ones Jesus said Sign and wonders would follow them that Believe, confirming the word of God. Go out and do your own to the glory of God. Stop trying to have other prove your doubt LOL

FYI, signs miracles and wonders in the early Church were publicly declared, well known, fully accepted by the ENTIRE Church, duly recorded by unimpeachable witnesses, and indisputable boilerplate facts.

Pentecostals utterly FAIL these tests, therefore their claims must be discarded. Unless of course you choose to step out into the light and edify the Church with these mighty signs that you claim you are an eyewitness to and are a commonplace occurrence at your Church? I mean who could contain the joy of such abundant miracles?

 

[Dave-L]

That is your statement, not the teaching of scripture.



No I rebutted your post with Biblical facts: "John the baptist said one coming after him would baptize with the Holy Ghost. He was not referring to the 12 apostles. The Bible does not say that the apostles gave Philip the Holy Spirit or the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. "

Matthew 3 disproves your assertions:
5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

John said these words to those who came out to him to be baptized. These were huge crowds. Peter quoted Joel 'Your sons and daughters shall prophesy...' He said that the promise of the Spirit was for them that are afar off.

I showed you specific examples of the Spirit being received without the laying on of hands of the apostles. Christ spoke of the Father giving the Holy Spirit to them that ask them.

There is this,
1 Timothy 4:14 "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."

Acts 10 disproves the idea that apostolic hands were required for gifts like speaking in tongues to be received. It also disproves the idea that spiritual gifts were only passed through the laying on of the apostles hands. Acts 2 uses the phrase 'filled with the Holy Ghost' to describe what happened, which shows up elsewhere. Paul told the Ephesians to be filled with the Spirit, also.



John said that He that came after Him who was greater than He would baptize with the Holy Ghost. He was not referring to the 12 apostles.[/QUOTE]
“And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,” Acts 8:18 (KJV 1900)

 

[7seasrekeyed]

wish the cessationists would find a new hobby

never anything postive

just negative negative negative with petty displays of anger and saying prove it to me or else

childish mouthing off

all about what they think, what they have seen but if anyone posts what they have seen, what God has done, back they come with prove it and show it to us

they say they believe in God whom they have never seen and believe that Jesus was raised from the dead

but they have never seen Jesus either

quiet perplexing

 

[notuptome]

wish the cessationists would find a new hobby

never anything postive

just negative negative negative with petty displays of anger and saying prove it to me or else

childish mouthing off

all about what they think, what they have seen but if anyone posts what they have seen, what God has done, back they come with prove it and show it to us

they say they believe in God whom they have never seen and believe that Jesus was raised from the dead

but they have never seen Jesus either

quiet perplexing

More of the same old stuff. Poor old Pentecostals. Nobody loves them and nobody cares for them. Woe is they misery on misery.

I would be careful about they have never seen Jesus either as that could be taken the wrong way.

Pr 25:14 Whoso boasteth himself of a false gift is like clouds and wind without rain.

No such thing as praying in tongues ever taught in the bible.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Absolutely]

More of the same old stuff. Poor old Pentecostals. Nobody loves them and nobody cares for them. Woe is they misery on misery.

I would be careful about they have never seen Jesus either as that could be taken the wrong way.

Pr 25:14 Whoso boasteth himself of a false gift is like clouds and wind without rain.

No such thing as praying in tongues ever taught in the bible.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Paul was mistaken huh?
Get a bible friend.

 

[notuptome]

Paul was mistaken huh?
Get a bible friend.

Get an education on reading comprehension. Learn how Paul used hyperbole to reprimand the Corinthians over their bad unbiblical behavior.

A little historical context and knowledge of Hebrew culture would go a long way in sorting out your gross misconceptions about praying in tongues.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[cv5]

wish the cessationists would find a new hobby

never anything postive

just negative negative negative with petty displays of anger and saying prove it to me or else

childish mouthing off

all about what they think, what they have seen but if anyone posts what they have seen, what God has done, back they come with prove it and show it to us

they say they believe in God whom they have never seen and believe that Jesus was raised from the dead

but they have never seen Jesus either

quiet perplexing

I wish Pentecostals would quit running under the bed to hide every time a sincere person asks them to publicly verify these miraculous signs. BTW.....I am no cessationist. God can dispense power for signs any time anywhere to anybody. I for one would be thrilled to see verified sign gifts. Nevertheless......there is ZERO reason to believe that they are operating today, and 100% reason to believe Pentecostals are faking it.

So pls redeem yourself and your Church by posting these "tongues" videos.

 

[presidente]

John said these words to those who came out to him to be baptized. These were huge crowds. Peter quoted Joel 'Your sons and daughters shall prophesy...' He said that the promise of the Spirit was for them that are afar off.

I showed you specific examples of the Spirit being received without the laying on of hands of the apostles. Christ spoke of the Father giving the Holy Spirit to them that ask them.

There is this,
1 Timothy 4:14 "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."

Acts 10 disproves the idea that apostolic hands were required for gifts like speaking in tongues to be received. It also disproves the idea that spiritual gifts were only passed through the laying on of the apostles hands. Acts 2 uses the phrase 'filled with the Holy Ghost' to describe what happened, which shows up elsewhere. Paul told the Ephesians to be filled with the Spirit, also.



John said that He that came after Him who was greater than He would baptize with the Holy Ghost. He was not referring to the 12 apostles.

“And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,” Acts 8:18 (KJV 1900)

You should quote the whole section there:

18 And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money, 19 saying, “Give me this power also, that anyone on whom I lay hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”

20 But Peter said to him, “Your money perish with you, because you thought that the gift of God could be purchased with money! 21 You have neither part nor portion in this matter, for your heart is not right in the sight of God.

Peter did not say he had no part in this matter because he was not an apostles, but because his heart was not right before God. Later, we see that elders laid hands on Timothy, who received a gift through prophecy. Timothy was warned to lay hands on no man suddenly. You seem to read the word 'only' into passages where it does not exist. It would be foolish to read this passage and conclude that the Spirit was imparted exclusively through the laying on of the apostles hands, because it does not say so, and implies something different, and there are other scriptures that contradict that idea, as I pointed out in the part you quoted.

Do you see a blank spot on the screen where those scriptures are quoted? Do the verses disappear from your mind as soon as you read them?

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

But there are those cases. There was that guy on 'Real People' in the '70's or '80's who comes to mind who'd lost an eye. There were a number of rather dramatic healings in the 1950's, too. The US seems to be a little drier for healing these days. Maybe it has to do with people relying on the medical profession as a first course of action. Reports of some of the more dramatic healings seem to come from the developing world.



I'd probably heard people talk about God healing them growing up, but when I was a child, I went to school and church with a girl who had severely crossed eyes and wore glasses that magnified the way her eyes looked many times over. An evangelist at church laid hands on her, and she was healed. I spoke with her before school one morning about it. It was very clear she had been healed. She could see normally and did not wear the giant glasses. Her eyes were not crossed.



It's a little dilemma if you want to pray for whoever needs it. What do you do with the leg length issue? I've read that over 40% of the population has one leg longer than the other. If it is a miniscule difference, we wouldn't notice it, but the bigger the difference, the more it can cause hip pain, back pain, and other issues.

So if you wanted to minister to someone like this and watch their leg grow back because you believed it was going to happen, what do you do? Do you say, sorry, I don't pray for that or lay hands on people for that, since that healing can be faked too easily?

Praying for anyone with a health issue is fine.

See, the dilemma is that I have to rely on second hand accounts by people I don't trust. If someone I trust tells me something like this, I am more apt to believe it.

Unfortunately, the charismatic/Pentecostal world is full of people I don't trust.

I do believe God heals according to his sovereign will, upon the prayers of elders in his church. It isn't a guarantee, though, because God has purposes higher than us in regards to suffering.

And, those that claim that believers don't suffer sometimes to further their sanctification are, simply, liars.

Therefore, I view all Word of Faith people as potential liars, because Scripture clearly teaches this principle.

 

[presidente]

I wish Pentecostals would quit running under the bed to hide every time a sincere person asks them to publicly verify these miraculous signs. BTW.....I am no cessationist. God can dispense power for signs any time anywhere to anybody. I for one would be thrilled to see verified sign gifts. Nevertheless......there is ZERO reason to believe that they are operating today, and 100% reason to believe Pentecostals are faking it.

So pls redeem yourself and your Church by posting these "tongues" videos.

If an atheist said Jesus raised the dead, so you do it or he won't believe, how is it that much different?

I believe in spiritual gifts. I don't claim to be able to operate in all of them. I don't believe the apostles did so purely 'at will'. They had already done miracles but prayed for God to stretch forth his hand to do signs and wonders and to heal for the sake of His Servant in Acts 4. Paul had an infirmity that caused him to minister to the Galatians (probably near the beginning of Acts 14, and certainly by Acts 16) and went on to do great miracles.

If I believe God raises the dead occasionally, that doesn't mean I have to raise the dead for you. It's not the same thing. It's like someone not believing Jesus raised the dead if you don't do it for that. The same sort of argument.

There is also the fact that Zecharias was struck dumb when he demanded a sign in a doubting way, and the fact that Jesus refused to give a sign to those who demanded it of Him, except the 'destroy this temple' and 'sign of the propheti Jonah' sign. Demanding signs in unbelief toward God's word is a bad thing. Jesus did do plenty of signs, but He wasn't too friendly toward people demanding them with an attitude of unbelief.

And isn't that what you are doing? Because the Bible teaches that God answers prayer, that the Spirit gifts individuals as He wills, that God raises the dead and heals. Shouldn't you believe that? Shouldn't your worldview and the way you consider and weigh testimonies you hear in your mind be colored by those teachings of scripture? Excessive skepticism in this area is not Biblical. If you are skeptical towards God's power or His right and willingness to act supernaturally when He chooses, that is an ungodly/impious way of thinking.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

That is the problem with post like this LOL they start with a blanket and cover all with their own personal experience and use it as gospel truth. I did not se any scriptural references only a personal opinion and long one at that.


The gifts of the Holy Spirit are for today and all Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ. Nothing in the word of God says they have stopped. If you can prove that statement wrong with the word of God I will be happy to listen. Yet you know more about a guy named Randy white than I do and I am Pentecostal and I have never heard of him. Maybe because he is in error ? And if you know it then call him and correct him. AS the word of God says to do.

I think Randy White is Paula White's ex husband. So, apparently you know him. You know, the woman who was married 3 different times. Personally, I have issues with charismatics who have multiple marriages too. That gives me some idea of their trustworthiness.

A Christian is supposed to have ONE wife or husband. I haven't been married, but if I was, it would be only one spouse, unless there was immorality or desertion.

Todd White is a chunky, dreadlocks wearing dude who goes around and finds bums and vagrants to "heal", claiming they have one leg longer than the other. He then wriggles their shoe heal down to make it look like he lengthen their leg. Many of them look to me to be simpletons, drug users, and drunks, and may be high when this occurs. You can see his videos on Youtube, and he is a very popular "healer" lately. He usually grasps the person's head and says "God loves you"...that's the extent of his gospel preaching.

Regarding "tongues", I will ask you, assuming you are Pentecostal or charismatic, does your church only allow ONE person to speak in tongues at a time, and is it ALWAYS accompanied by an interpretation?

If not then it is fake tongues. So, we don't have anything to talk about if your church practices fake tongues.

 

[presidente]

I do believe God heals according to his sovereign will, upon the prayers of elders in his church. It isn't a guarantee, though, because God has purposes higher than us in regards to suffering.

Doesn't the book of James give us to this as a guarantee, subject to the prayer of faith? (Possibly the confession of sin, also, depending on how you interpret the whole passage?) Isn't wisdom guaranteed in chapter 1 for those who pray in faith?

And, those that claim that believers don't suffer sometimes to further their sanctification are, simply, liars.

Therefore, I view all Word of Faith people as potential liars, because Scripture clearly teaches this principle.

I take serious issue with some of the doctrines taught in the WOF movement. There are extremes, even those who say God never caused illness, when He said that (contingent on certain conditions) He would lay upon the Israelites none of the illnesses that he lay upon the Egyptians. The concept of a 'good God' can be interpreted in a carnal way.

But even the WOFers would not say that there is no suffering or hardship in this life, for example through persecution. At least some of them allow for suffering. Hagin had some space for that in his teaching.

The question is whether or not their is provision for healing in our covenant, as there was for health and healing for Israel under theirs. Israel had a guarantee not to have any of the illnesses the Lord laid upon the Egyptians if they were obedient. If they were obedient... ay there's the rub. For Christians though, if the elders anoint with oil, the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise Him up. The Lord also heals through certain gifted members, and there are great promises in scripture for those who pray in faith even if they are not elders of the church.

Matthew quotes Isaiah 53 in relation to physical healing in Matthew 8, which undercuts the argument that it was esclusively about spiritual healing.

 

[Dave-L]

You should quote the whole section there:

18 And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money, 19 saying, “Give me this power also, that anyone on whom I lay hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”

20 But Peter said to him, “Your money perish with you, because you thought that the gift of God could be purchased with money! 21 You have neither part nor portion in this matter, for your heart is not right in the sight of God.

Peter did not say he had no part in this matter because he was not an apostles, but because his heart was not right before God. Later, we see that elders laid hands on Timothy, who received a gift through prophecy. Timothy was warned to lay hands on no man suddenly. You seem to read the word 'only' into passages where it does not exist. It would be foolish to read this passage and conclude that the Spirit was imparted exclusively through the laying on of the apostles hands, because it does not say so, and implies something different, and there are other scriptures that contradict that idea, as I pointed out in the part you quoted.

Do you see a blank spot on the screen where those scriptures are quoted? Do the verses disappear from your mind as soon as you read them?

It still says what it says.

 

[presidente]

I think Randy White is Paula White's ex husband. So, apparently you know him. You know, the woman who was married 3 different times. Personally, I have issues with charismatics who have multiple marriages too. That gives me some idea of their trustworthiness.

A Christian is supposed to have ONE wife or husband. I haven't been married, but if I was, it would be only one spouse, unless there was immorality or desertion.

I think Paula White's first husband may have been preconversion. I don't think Randy and Paula White told why they were divorcing, if it was over 'immorality' or not.

These things cause me concern. In the Pentecostal movement when I was growing up, they were strict about this, at least for those in ministry roles if not about attendees. Some of the denominations allow leaders to keep their credentials if the other party committed adultery these days. 'Charismatic' is more a theological position than anything else. There is no police force-- except maybe something God in His longsuffering has set up-- nothing set up as an organization over all Charismatics. It's like Baptists or Calvinists. It isn't a centralized organization. Southern Baptists can't stop some of the Primitives on this forum from having an incomprehensible soteriology.

Todd White is a chunky, dreadlocks wearing dude who goes around and finds bums and vagrants to "heal", claiming they have one leg longer than the other. He then wriggles their shoe heal down to make it look like he lengthen their leg. Many of them look to me to be simpletons, drug users, and drunks, and may be high when this occurs. You can see his videos on Youtube, and he is a very popular "healer" lately. He usually grasps the person's head and says "God loves you"...that's the extent of his gospel preaching.

I think he is in what they call the 'signs and wonders movement.' I didn't know he was chunky. I saw some old videos when he wasn't. Dreadlocks don't bother me that much. Maybe he's going for a Samson look, and street people might relate to him better if he looks funky. I did see a leg lengthening video of his, but there were others. I didn't see him actually explain the Gospel, either. There are lots of other people who post YouTube videos of praying for people on the street who actually do speak about the cross of Christ on YouTube, who aren't famous.

Regarding "tongues", I will ask you, assuming you are Pentecostal or charismatic, does your church only allow ONE person to speak in tongues at a time, and is it ALWAYS accompanied by an interpretation?

If not then it is fake tongues. So, we don't have anything to talk about if your church practices fake tongues.

Your reasoning is clearly unbiblical. The Corinthians apparently were using genuine tongues and prophecy in a disorderly manner, or at least it is obvious they could have done so or Paul wouldn't have written I Corinthians.

Like I posted earlier, I have been to churches where tongues as interpreted and you didn't hear tongues that weren't uninterpreted in the service. I've heard teaching against that in a Pentecostal context.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

And then you go on to talk about flopping on the floor and acting crazily. I've rarely heard or seen Charismatics claim cessationists believe the Bible is a part of the trinity, if at all. 'Doesn't believe in the gifts'-- I've probably heard that. It's inaccurate-- doesn't believe some gifts operate now is more accurate, usually. Though there are cessationists who will claim there is no more charismata. This is a rather bleak and ignorant position, IMO, since teaching, exhortation, and service are gifts. I suppose they think we are left with only carnal energies to work for God, or just haven't thought it through. But that is not a typical position.

I have known Charismatics who seemed to think it was spiritual to shake and act weird. There was a movement of that in the early 1990's. Be that as it may, there are things in scripture like priests not being able to minister when the kavod of God was present, or the soldiers falling down or Daniel being weak after a visionary experience. If you were praying with someone and that person fell down, would you be out of order?

The vast majority of Pentecostal churches I've been in have not had people shake or flop around. That's not the norm.

As far as disorder goes, I spent many years in the Assemblies of God (A/G) growing up and I went to an independant 'full gospel' church for many years. Someone would speak out in tongues, and another would interpret. One of the churches i attended (we moved quite a bit) had teaching against just speaking in tongues without interpretation. I just considered that an odd Charismatic practice. Some of the Charismatic groups, particularly WOF, seem to take one verse or two out of I Corinthians 14 about speaking in tongues and how edifying it is to the individual, but I wonder if they never study out the whole chapter. Other churches don't do that.

Now some of the Pentecostal churches, particularly the ones that started in the Appalachian region had been Holiness churches before the Azusa Street Revival, and they had a custom of everyone praying at the same time when they prayed. Maybe it had to do with Acts 4 where they prayed. I've heard that used as an argument, that they prayed at the same time. In the A/G churches I grew up in, I didn't see that. Some of the churches that pray at the same time do that in tongues, too, and take Paul's words in I Corinthians about interpretation just to apply to messages spoken out to the congregation, and some of the A/Gs do that too, apparently.



Historically, Pentecostals understood 'tongues' to be languages. I found The Apostolic Faith newsletter from the early 1900's, and there many testimonies of people identifying tongues as languages they knew. Someone who was there said that is what drew the crowds, with people hearing their own languages 'in tongues.' There are many accounts of this in the A/G also, with the missionaries. One missionary was trying to decide how to transliterate Jesus' name in the target language in the Bible when he was on furlough in the US, and he heard someone speak in tongues in that language and use one of the pronunciations he was considering. I haven't experienced it myself, but I have known several people who have either spoken in tongues and someone understood the language or heard a language they knew 'in tongues.'

Of course, I think most Pentecostals who consider such things and the teaching of scripture would allow for speaking in tongues to be 'tongues of angels.'

From what I have read, the early Charismatics in the US had the same understanding of what tongues is. Some linguists have labeled some kind of artificial language as 'glossalalia'. Some Christians use that term without knowing it is meant to mean a fake language, since it is made of terms used in the Biblical passages. I am not sure where the idea of tongues as some kind of spiritual language no one understands came in as a teaching. Maybe it's WOF. I think there are also academic theologians who want to embrace the glossalalia concept, (as opposed to xenoglossia, though glossalalia is made of words form the passage) who have promoted the idea of nonlanguage tongues. There are also liberals, one commentator from Germany, for example, who thought the actual speaking in tongues in Corinth was identical to what pagans did. This may also influence theologians.



Paul has a list of people who have different gifts starting with first apostles, then prophets, then teaching, then miracles, then gifts of healings...(I Corinthians 12:28.)

That implies people who are not apostles or prophets heal.



The foundation is not part of the building? That's like saying water is not wet. I suppose you wouldn't mind if someone removed the foundation from your house if it is not a part of it, then. If apostles and prophets are part of the foundation, that is not the same as saying all are.

In another metaphor, Paul, and apostle laid foundations. The found of Christ no doubt had been laid in Jerusalem decades before, but Paul still laid a new foundation in Corinth. A house can have foundations continually laid if it expands sideways and not just up. If you want to add a nursery to a one-story house, you'd need to dig a foundation for it.

Historically, there are records that support ongoing prophecy in the second and third centuries. There is evidence for prophesying being done in church meetings in the second century. Apparently, liturgy was embraced instead of actually obeying the scriptural commands for church meetings. Not that liturgy is necessarily bad, but ignoring what was specifically commanded is.
planted.

First, I would like some clarification on whether you think all believers should speak in tongues, because my understanding is that AOG teaches this. I am not positive, though.

That's a major issue I have with Pentecostals and charismatics. Some of them believe that if you don't speak in tongues you are some inferior believer who is not fully actuated.

Second, regarding the "foundation", I should have said the "superstructure" rather than the building.

My point is that cessationists believe that the foundation are Christ and the apostles, and their gifts were associated with their witness as authoritative teachers within the Church. Christ's gifts, in particular, showed that the Kingdom of God was already here, and that the Curse was being reversed. His signs proved that he was, in essence, the Serpent-crusher who was rolling back the effects of Adam's sin.

Third, I was part of a cult where the founder claimed to be an apostle and prophet. I view ALL such contemporary claims to be false, and to be reflective of a vain, prideful man.

Fourth, maybe your sect is more reasonable, but surely you must know that wild behavior happens ALL THE TIME in Pentecostal/charismatic sects. I have watched videos of various charismatic/Pentecostal congregations where these things occur. And, numerous individuals have told me personally about them.

I know two different people who claimed to raise corpses. Of course, they can't produce the proof, but that is their claim. Perhaps, though, you really don't know people like this. If all your church does is speaks in tongues in order, one at a time and providing interpretation, I really can't discuss much with you. I wouldn't actually have such a problem with that. But, I don't believe that is the norm. I think the norm is a wild, frenzied blabbering of many individuals at once, some running up and down the aisles, collapsing on the floor, etcetera. But, maybe your circle is different.

 

[presidente]

It still says what it says.

And apparently you have a difficulty comprehending that. You don't seem to realize that you are eisegeting and idea that contradicts other scripture.

 

[Dave-L]

And apparently you have a difficulty comprehending that. You don't seem to realize that you are eisegeting and idea that contradicts other scripture.

How so? When Simon saw (Luke speaking) that through the Apostle's hands the Holy Spirit was given"...... Don't you think it's time to start over and learn what the bible says?

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

I already pointed out there are churches that do interpret tongues and don't go for tongues without interpretation, praying in tongues en masse, etc. But the Corinthians were being disorderly with their gifts. You wouldn't say their gifts were false, would you? Doesn't I Corinthians prove that Christians could be disorderly with genuine gifts?

And secondly, if Paul says for the church to let one who speaks in tongues speak and let one interpret, then the churches who do not allow the one to speak in tongues and the one to interpret, what do we say of them? Why wouldn't you call such churches disobedient also? The solution to this is for us all to be obedient. That includes being orderly. But forbidding letting 'the prophets speak two or three," and letting 'the other judge' is not decent or in order either.

If they disobey the Lord in one area, your response should not be to support disobedience in another. How is cessationism consistent with obeying the order of I Corinthians 14? When it interacts with someone with the gift of tongues or prophecy who wants to use the gifts, then that's a situation ripe for disobedience. Paul said to forbid not to speak with tongues. Speaking in tongues should be done in order, but forbidding it from being done in the proper order is disobedience, also.

I suppose cessationists want us to believe the way the Holy Spirit interacts with the church changed without any real warning for scripture, and that the way we are supposed to conduct church meetings just suddenly changed, leaving us with little to no scripture about how to do church, and leaving the scriptures about church order obselete. Why include all that in the New Testament if it was only good for the immediate audience and those who lived a few decades afterwards?



I understand that and share your concern. On an emotional level, I can see why that would make one wary of these Charismatics. On an intellectual level, I do not see why that is a reason for rejecting spiritual gifts.



Let's say you were an atheist and you witnessed this. Someone said Jesus raised the dead. Would you conclude that Jesus did not raise the dead because you saw people like this?

As far as raising the dead goes, I wouldn't dismiss such claims out of hand, claims of miracles including resurrection of the dead. I would be suspicious of someone who sleeps around then makes spiritual claims.

There are actually academic articles on miracles. I've come across some of this stuff on Google Scholar. I need to order Craig Keener's Miracles when I get some other reading and work done. You may want to read that book. I hear it is good and I've heard a little about the content.

Paul mentions praying in tongues. I don't see where he actually says it is superior. Associating it with 'groanings which cannot be uttered' in Romans 8 never made sense to me because tongues were spoken as the Spirit gave utterance. I think some of these teachings thrive on a lack of vocabulary-- like not knowing what 'utter means.' It's kind of like some of the teachings on blaspheming the Holy Spirit thriving on people not knowing the meaning of 'blaspheme.' That has given Augustine's teaching some legs with some Americans.


There are some people who make prophecies that just aren't right. There were also large numbers of such people at certain times in the Old Testament. What was it, 400 court prophets prophesying good things about Ahab's battles to one Micaiah? And there was Jeremiah also. If you lived then, would you conclude that all prophets were false?

It seems to me from scripture and personal experience that most prophecies aren't directly about the future.

There is also Jeremiah 18 and the book of Jonah. In Jeremiah 18, if evil is decreed for a city or nation and the city or nation repents, the LORD will relent of the evil for that city or nation. If building up and planting is decreed for a city or nation and that nation does evil, the LORD will relent of the city being built up and

Firstly, yes, I would have considered those prophets to be false if their prophecies did not come true. Are you not aware that Israel was full of false prophets?

Secondly, concerning the individual who was clubbing with her son's friends and bragged about being a MILF, and the other guy who claimed to have raised the dead, he was a person who was in a mental hospital prior or after this incident, so his mental health was in question. I find this is common with people who make extraordinary claims.

Thirdly, I think you answered in an evasive manner regarding the "first tier" and "second tier" of Christians...and that speaking in tongues was indicative of being at a higher spiritual level than other Christians. That is a common claim. They will claim they are spirit-filled and the rest are not. Is this a position you hold, or do you reject this position? Do you think a non-tongues speaker is some lower level of Christian, and that all Christians should speak in tongues?

Some will even claim non-tongues speakers aren't even saved.

Fourthly, I see a lot of charismatics and Pentecostals who are very hesitant about criticizing ANYONE in the charismatic or Pentecostal world. I think the idea is, if I criticize him for his activity, it will come back to me because I make strange claims, too. One good example of this is Michael Brown. He won't even criticize Bill Johnson and Bethel Church. In fact, he rarely criticizes extremely vile charismatics and Pentecostals like Todd Bentley, who was allowed to continue ministry even after leaving his wife for his secretary. Apparently he's been engaging in homosexuality and sexual harrassment of male employees, and finally Michael Brown has publicly criticized him, but my guess is he will have some restoration of his position in the near future through fake repentance and the charismatic crowd will forget it.

It never would happen in a Reformed context, because Scripture forbids an elder who is reproachable.

Fifthly, concerning the Corinthians, the canon of Scripture had not been assembled yet, and they did not have proper instruction. Contemporary Pentecostals and Charismatics are not in that position. Therefore, their disobedience is willful. They know what the Bible teaches but they choose to do otherwise. So, I don't find such individuals to be credible.

Concerning speaking in tongues, I wouldn't even attend services if I knew that people were going to be speaking in tongues there. This is because I cannot verify what true tongues are. And, I don't know that it is for today. So, if someone wants to blabber in something I don't think is tongues, why would I want to be there to listen to it? I want to hear hymns, a good service, and testimonies. I don't care to hear some mindless blabbering. How does that help anything?

Am I to believe Charismatics and Pentecostals concerning THEIR understanding of tongues?

And by the way I hate using the word "tongues" to start with. It makes me think of ignorant, toothless Southern people who can barely speak English. I wish Bible translations would use the word "languages" and that would help a lot.

 

[presidente]

First, I would like some clarification on whether you think all believers should speak in tongues, because my understanding is that AOG teaches this. I am not positive, though.

That's a major issue I have with Pentecostals and charismatics. Some of them believe that if you don't speak in tongues you are some inferior believer who is not fully actuated.

I don't believe in the 'classical Pentecostal' initial evidence doctrine, meaning that I don't believe someone is not filled with the Spirit if they don't speak in tongues, but that is the general idea held to in the A/G and other Pentecostal denominations and many of the Charismatic groups.

My point is that cessationists believe that the foundation are Christ and the apostles, and their gifts were associated with their witness as authoritative teachers within the Church. Christ's gifts, in particular, showed that the Kingdom of God was already here, and that the Curse was being reversed. His signs proved that he was, in essence, the Serpent-crusher who was rolling back the effects of Adam's sin.

I don't see an argument for cessationism in those arguments by themselves. That is not the line of reasoning all cessationists, take, I notice. I Corinthians 12:28 implies there are non-apostles, and non-profits who work miracles and heal. So those gifts are not the exclusive domain of apostles and prophets.

Third, I was part of a cult where the founder claimed to be an apostle and prophet. I view ALL such contemporary claims to be false, and to be reflective of a vain, prideful man.

I still see role of apostle for those who are sent out by the Spirit, generally through the church. Historically, the word was used of those who introduced the gospel in unreached reasons, like Patrick apostle of Ireland, Gregory Apostle of the Armenians, Cyril and Methodius, apostles to the Slavs and a long list of other peoples. The term apostolos is used more broadly than Paul and the twelve in the New Testament. If there is no apostolic ministry left, what ministry role do missionaries fit into, the church planting kind? We end up with an ecclesiological problem. I also see the role of prophet as ongoing, as apparently it was after the apostles passed away and going forward, to refer to those who are particularly gifted in a ministry of prophesying.

Someone could claim these titles with an arrogant attitude, but ho

And I sure get the impression that there are a lot of people calling themselves 'apostles' who do not function in an apostolic function when we consider the role in scripture. Some of the NAR people have redefined the term to either be the head over elders or pastors, or else to be some kind of societal 'mover and shaker.' Both ideas seem to be off as far as what the term meant in scripture. I am not in the A/G now. The church I go to was a merger between an A/G, a Baptist church, and another ministry.

Fourth, maybe your sect is more reasonable, but surely you must know that wild behavior happens ALL THE TIME in Pentecostal/charismatic sects. I have watched videos of various charismatic/Pentecostal congregations where these things occur. And, numerous individuals have told me personally about them.

I know two different people who claimed to raise corpses. Of course, they can't produce the proof, but that is their claim. Perhaps, though, you really don't know people like this. If all your church does is speaks in tongues in order, one at a time and providing interpretation, I really can't discuss much with you. I wouldn't actually have such a problem with that. But, I don't believe that is the norm. I think the norm is a wild, frenzied blabbering of many individuals at once, some running up and down the aisles, collapsing on the floor, etcetera. But, maybe your circle is different.

Pentecostals are known for having 'lively' singing and worship services. The movement was influenced by the style of African-American churches and Holiness churches in the Appalachian region and other places. Raising hands and clapping is common, or was. There are a lot of Pentecostal churches you couldn't tell from other evangelical churches these days since a lot of churches have just gone with 'contemporary music' which was more of a Charismatic thing 25 years ago. In my experience, it is unusual for a __Pentecostal__ church to be like what you described. Some of the churches that were part of the Holiness movement in the southeast interpret references to 'shouting' in the Psalms to allow for people shouting out praises and such during the meetings. The A/G seemed to be a little more reserved as you went west in my experience in the 1980s in terms of 'excited' behavior related to praise. The Psalms talk about praising the Lord and dancing and some Charismatic churches do that.

But in the US, I do not find what you type to be typical of Pentecostal or Charismatic meetings. But they may be the types of things that make YouTube. There are some churches that seem to emphasize this type of thing. But it isn't typical. And sadly, in the A/G and some of the other Pentecostal churches, it seems like tongues and interpretation and prophecy may be a bit rarer. That may be from people coming in who have no experience with it who wouldn't know they would be allowed to do it if they received something because they have no background in it, along with pastors who have no experience with it who program the service so tightly and don't teach there is freedom to exercise gifts.

I see Pentecostal church meetings as a tension between the unconscious desire to stick with Protestant liturgy why trying to synchretize it with the Biblical commands for church meetings. In some ways, Pentecostalism has moved more toward the Biblical meeting, but the theological and Biblical framework for how to meet and why to meet that way has not really taken hold for the most part, and the influence of Protestant traditional ideas of 'order', as opposed to Biblical order, is still predominant.