Cessationism vs. continuationism...does it make any difference?

[PaulChristensen]

I ask to see your statement of faith and whom it is your history ties itself to? This will help greatly in the examination of your claims but it is unlikely to happen as always is the case with charismatics....& their self-deceptions, please, let us see what it is your group stands for in their records of faith literature?

My foundation theology is 17th Century English Puritan Reformed. The basis of my Pentecostal theology can be found in:

Which I have on my bookcase. I also have Gordon Fee's commentary on 1 Corinthians, along with John Calvin's commentary on the same book. I also have Charles Finney's Systematic Theology. I have also read Jonathan Edward's work concerning his views on manifestations that affect the emotions, and find that he makes a lot of sense in distinguishing between what is from the Holy Spirit and what is from fleshly emotions. He was right in the middle of the 18th Century Great Awakening with all the good, bad and ugly aspects of it. Also I have read Jesse Penn Lewis "War on the Saints" in which she critiques manifestations that occurred in the Welsh Revival of the late 19th Century.
So, you can see that my source of information has not come just from a group of the lunatic fringe within a Charismatic church. For your information, I left the Charismatic movement in 1978, because I didn't like what was going on in my last church, especially the false Shepherding movement that had infected it with all the harm that movement caused for so many good people.

But I didn't ditch my Pentecostal theology. I just merged it with my Puritan Reformed theology that concentrates on what is true conversion to Christ and continued total commitment to Him as the sole foundation of faith, with any manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit pointing to Christ alone as the sole reason for edifying and encouraging the saints.

 

[Dino246]

Do your adherents not use tongues? Do healings? Predict the future? Become slain with the spirit? Continually as the spirit to come and bless them or rain fire down on them? None of that?

I don't have adherents, so your questions are irrelevant.

 

[Lookupnotback]

My foundation theology is 17th Century English Puritan Reformed. The basis of my Pentecostal theology can be found in:

Which I have on my bookcase. I also have Gordon Fee's commentary on 1 Corinthians, along with John Calvin's commentary on the same book. I also have Charles Finney's Systematic Theology. I have also read Jonathan Edward's work concerning his views on manifestations that affect the emotions, and find that he makes a lot of sense in distinguishing between what is from the Holy Spirit and what is from fleshly emotions. He was right in the middle of the 18th Century Great Awakening with all the good, bad and ugly aspects of it. Also I have read Jesse Penn Lewis "War on the Saints" in which she critiques manifestations that occurred in the Welsh Revival of the late 19th Century.
So, you can see that my source of information has not come just from a group of the lunatic fringe within a Charismatic church. For your information, I left the Charismatic movement in 1978, because I didn't like what was going on in my last church, especially the false Shepherding movement that had infected it with all the harm that movement caused for so many good people.

But I didn't ditch my Pentecostal theology. I just merged it with my Puritan Reformed theology that concentrates on what is true conversion to Christ and continued total commitment to Him as the sole foundation of faith, with any manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit pointing to Christ alone as the sole reason for edifying and encouraging the saints.

So i just don’t understand why one would hold onto any name associating oneself with the emotionalism of pentecostal movement/charismatic movement? Why do you do that?

 

[Lookupnotback]

I don't have adherents, so your questions are irrelevant.

So you don’t attend a church?

 

[Dino246]

So you don’t attend a church?

Did I say that? No.

 

[Lookupnotback]

Did I say that? No.

So, can you give us you church’s doctrinal statement and rules and regulations you operate by and the history it was built upon?

 

[PaulChristensen]

So then how do you not see the bible saying that the fireworks gifts were to pass then?

The Bible says definitely that the gifts will cease "when that which is perfect is come." It all has to do with the definition of "perfect". It is a bit silly to say it is the Scriptures, because we have so many translations, which translation is perfect? All we have in the Greek manuscripts are copies dating from the 4th Century. And Paul did not have the completed New Testament, and based his teaching on Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms. And they couldn't have been the perfect Scriptures, because Paul was speaking in the future tense in the 1 Corinthians 13 reference, and the existence of a canon of New Testament Scripture did not exist, and Paul had no idea of any future existence of a future New Testament canon. So when he wrote 1 Corinthians 13 he certainly wasn't referring to a future canon of Holy Spirit. How could he, if it didn't exist yet in his time?

But he knew that one day at the Day of Judgment, the gifts would cease because they would be no longer needed. The gifts are to compensate for our weaknesses because we don't have perfect knowledge yet. As Paul said, we see through a glass darkly, which in modern terms, through the wrong end of the telescope. So we need the ongoing involvement of the Holy Spirit and His gifts to compensate for our impaired view and weakness in naturally knowing the full counsel of God.

In actual fact, the gifts for us will cease on our physical death, and the gifts in general will cease on the Day of Judgment when the church age will be wound up. We won't need the gifts then because we will have face to face fellowship with Christ in glory.

The real test for me whether the use of a spiritual gift is genuine or not is not on the basis of half a verse with a false definition of "perfect", but whether the manifestation of the gift points a believer directly to Christ as the sole foundation of his faith and spiritual development. If it points to the creature rather than the creator then it is being misused, and I acknowledge that there is a lot of misuse of the gifts for personal promotion within the Pentecostal and Charismatic movement. This is not to say the gifts itself are false; it is the way they are being used that is the issue here.

My point is that if the gift of tongues is being used correctly, you would not hear anyone speaking in tongues during public church services, unless there is a specific utterance followed by an interpretation. Most who have no desire to use the gift as a ministry in the church, would be saving it to pray to God in private, and Paul was quite clear about that if you are prepared to read 1 Corinthians 14 with an open not prejudiced mind.

 

[Blackpowderduelist]

3:11 PM
Friday, April 16, 2021 (PDT)

I asked you to post a Pentecostal service that exemplifies your beliefs, with all that's going on you could even post one of the services from your church. I said I would gladly watch it and God knows I would be happy to be wrong. I hope that there are some who are not out of line.

 

[PaulChristensen]

So i just don’t understand why one would hold onto any name associating oneself with the emotionalism of pentecostal movement/charismatic movement? Why do you do that?

Because the use of the gifts of the Spirit is Bible, and is not linked with emotionalism. Love, joy, and peace are emotions, but are fruit of the Spirit. Self control is also a fruit of the Spirit. There is a difference between true emotion, and worked up hype and emotionalism.

Most of the hypo stuff is seen in Hillsong and Bethel type churches, but these are based on heretical teaching, pagan influences and occult corruption. They don't reflect what true Pentecostals practice and believe.

Faith is a total dependence on God's Word. It is cool, calm, and self controlled and not dependent on emotion at all. A person can become emotional as the result of insights provided by the Holy Spirit and their realisation of the wonderful grace of God, but it comes from within the heart, not hyped up by yelling through a microphone, hypnotic suggestion, or paganised music as is common in Hillsong and Bethel. Women employed in putting golden glitter in the ventilation system of a Bethel church doesn't prove that God rains gold dust from heaven on the people.

I've seen a guy roll around the floor in a state of hypo, and other standing around thinking, "Who's this idiot?" I admit that there are some on the lunatic fringe that don't employ self control on their conduct, and see that conduct is entirely of the flesh and not the Spirit.

When the Holy Spirit is present, people get healed, demons get cast out, and the Gospel is preached with conviction and power so that sinners get saved. People getting hyped up, falling over, shaking, etc., are no indications of the presence of the Holy Spirit in a meeting. In actual fact, the hypo stuff quenches the Spirit and grieves Him. This is because of the Scripture that says, "Those who are in the flesh cannot please God."

In fact, because without faith no one can please God, those who believe that hyping themselves up brings the presence of the Holy Spirit are being unbelieving and presumptuous because they are putting their faith in emotions rather than God's Word.

I was taught the things of the Spirit by a strict, traditional Pentecostal pastor whose background was the Methodist Holiness movement. He taught that if one desired to move in the spiritual gifts one had to be a man of prayer and of the Word, also he needed to live a strictly holy personal life.

It is sad that a lot of this is not taught in many Charismatic churches and that is why there is the hype and misuse of the gifts in so many of them. If churches follow the Bethel or Hillsong model they will presently move into heresy and become pseudo-christian cults, if they haven't already done so.

 

[Dino246]

So, can you give us you church’s doctrinal statement and rules and regulations you operate by and the history it was built upon?

What does the doctrinal statement of the church I attend have to do with your broad-brush statements about charismatics? Draw a logical connection and I'll consider it.

 

[PaulChristensen]

What does the doctrinal statement of the church I attend have to do with your broad-brush statements about charismatics? Draw a logical connection and I'll consider it.

My post containing the image of the cover of the book, "Foundations of Pentecostal Theology" points to what I think sums up the basics of the doctrinal statement of the traditional Pentecostal movement. Those churches that abide by the doctrinal statement in the book, remain what we know of the traditional Pentecostal movement.

The WOF type churches of Kenny Copeland and his confederates, along with Bethel and Hillsong churches have departed from the foundation of sound traditional Pentecostal doctrine and therefore cannot be termed as true Pentecostal churches.

 

[Lookupnotback]

The Bible says definitely that the gifts will cease "when that which is perfect is come." It all has to do with the definition of "perfect". It is a bit silly to say it is the Scriptures, because we have so many translations, which translation is perfect? All we have in the Greek manuscripts are copies dating from the 4th Century. And Paul did not have the completed New Testament, and based his teaching on Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms. And they couldn't have been the perfect Scriptures, because Paul was speaking in the future tense in the 1 Corinthians 13 reference, and the existence of a canon of New Testament Scripture did not exist, and Paul had no idea of any future existence of a future New Testament canon. So when he wrote 1 Corinthians 13 he certainly wasn't referring to a future canon of Holy Spirit. How could he, if it didn't exist yet in his time?

But he knew that one day at the Day of Judgment, the gifts would cease because they would be no longer needed. The gifts are to compensate for our weaknesses because we don't have perfect knowledge yet. As Paul said, we see through a glass darkly, which in modern terms, through the wrong end of the telescope. So we need the ongoing involvement of the Holy Spirit and His gifts to compensate for our impaired view and weakness in naturally knowing the full counsel of God.

In actual fact, the gifts for us will cease on our physical death, and the gifts in general will cease on the Day of Judgment when the church age will be wound up. We won't need the gifts then because we will have face to face fellowship with Christ in glory.

The real test for me whether the use of a spiritual gift is genuine or not is not on the basis of half a verse with a false definition of "perfect", but whether the manifestation of the gift points a believer directly to Christ as the sole foundation of his faith and spiritual development. If it points to the creature rather than the creator then it is being misused, and I acknowledge that there is a lot of misuse of the gifts for personal promotion within the Pentecostal and Charismatic movement. This is not to say the gifts itself are false; it is the way they are being used that is the issue here.

My point is that if the gift of tongues is being used correctly, you would not hear anyone speaking in tongues during public church services, unless there is a specific utterance followed by an interpretation. Most who have no desire to use the gift as a ministry in the church, would be saving it to pray to God in private, and Paul was quite clear about that if you are prepared to read 1 Corinthians 14 with an open not prejudiced mind.

Do you see that Paul gets rather sarcastic with his use of “tongue” vs “tongues”? The difference being in the singular is a counterfeit gibberish of the pagans and the plural as known languages of mankind, also to this when charismatics get into the languages of angels? The verses are again actually plural and nowhere in the bible do we have angels talking to mankind in anything other than a known language of men. Next the Holy Spirit uttering things we are unable to know is used by charismatics to justify their antics too but the reference has nothing to do with men being able to use such utterances.

 

[Lookupnotback]

What does the doctrinal statement of the church I attend have to do with your broad-brush statements about charismatics? Draw a logical connection and I'll consider it.

I am asking about your stance and where you are in supporting these folks, your church’s faith statements would fo far in revealing just what it is the group you are associating with stand for.

 

[Dino246]

I am asking about your stance and where you are in supporting these folks, your church’s faith statements would fo far in revealing just what it is the group you are associating with stand for.

Who are "these folks", and again, what does the church I attend have to do with anything? I am not representing them in this discussion.

 

[Lookupnotback]

Who are "these folks", and again, what does the church I attend have to do with anything? I am not representing them in this discussion.

Hummmm....sorry, too many reply's coming into me i guess then and i fot you confused with the charismatics?-)

 

[Lookupnotback]

My post containing the image of the cover of the book, "Foundations of Pentecostal Theology" points to what I think sums up the basics of the doctrinal statement of the traditional Pentecostal movement. Those churches that abide by the doctrinal statement in the book, remain what we know of the traditional Pentecostal movement.

The WOF type churches of Kenny Copeland and his confederates, along with Bethel and Hillsong churches have departed from the foundation of sound traditional Pentecostal doctrine and therefore cannot be termed as true Pentecostal churches.

Ok, so the surfers who changed the face of doing your daddy’s church then....yep, your one of them then and don’t even know your own history or where the emotionalism’s sprang from.

 

[CS1]

You know there are many big name Baptists, and you can believe the are the epitome of baptist teaching. Ed young, Albert Muller. Why don't you point me to a Pentecostal big timer that is a real exemplary so I see something different. If you post a video I wl watch it.

Sure Peter and paul to start with you will find them in the book of Acts

 

[Lookupnotback]

My post containing the image of the cover of the book, "Foundations of Pentecostal Theology" points to what I think sums up the basics of the doctrinal statement of the traditional Pentecostal movement. Those churches that abide by the doctrinal statement in the book, remain what we know of the traditional Pentecostal movement.

The WOF type churches of Kenny Copeland and his confederates, along with Bethel and Hillsong churches have departed from the foundation of sound traditional Pentecostal doctrine and therefore cannot be termed as true Pentecostal churches.

....sorry, hippies not surfers!-)

 

[Dino246]

Hummmm....sorry, too many reply's coming into me i guess then and i fot you confused with the charismatics?-)

Fair enough. I've mixed up folks before too.

I have attended a charismatic church in the past, and I do believe in continuation of the gifts. That said, I'm no wild-eyed nutter chasing experiences, and don't encourage such behaviour in others.

 

[CS1]

It is you who is injecting your bias into the verses. Here are the verses:

1 Corinthians 13:8–10
8 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.

These verses clearly state that the gifts will end when "the perfect comes", what is the "prefect" we cannot be sure. But whatever it is it's something that would come in Paul's future. Was it 97 AD, 112 AD, 200 AD or April 8, 1584 AD? If Paul thought it was the return of Jesus Christ he would have written it so.

Prove to me that Paul meant Jesus from the Bible only and not any Holy Spirit esoteric knowledge. If you cannot then I suggest you are the troll and the hater.

Here is your chance, these are the verses you picked, why should someone believe Paul meant the return of Christ and not the coming of the Holy Bible.

IF you can't be sure what it is then you can't say it is not for today.