Spiritual gifts DEAD after 200 A.D.? What about these verses, cessationists?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Sep 10, 2012
758
4
0
Sep 10, 2012
758
4
0
G

GRA

Guest
tell me me what you mean, and how to do it, and i will GRA.
(i think:)).
zone
When you said:

i like the studies:)
zone
I assumed you meant the three "study" threads I started (links to which are currently in my signature, but I will also post them here for future reference).

If that is true - then, simply post in the thread(s) that you liked them. That is what I was saying.

Here are the links:

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/50825-study-second-coming-christ.html
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/51116-study-olivet-discourse.html
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/52068-study-order-events.html

:)

.
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
Zone - You still haven't shown why tongues ceased, of which the Apostle Paul said he spoke - "more than you all". - I Cor. 14:18
You separate the Holy Canon that Paul and Peter spoke about from the certain verses within it that you don't like.
Again.....I ask you, to show me were it is written that the gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased?
:)

no Rick.
it's continuationists who must show that what are practicing is exactly like the apostolic era gifts. if it isn't it's something else. and it is.

of course paul spoke more languages than all of them - not only was he a highly educated Pharisee prior to conversion, he was appointed an Apostle and received every gift he needed to fulfill his commission.

if we don't have anyone like Paul today (and we don't, we have something else...and we do).

Pyromaniacs: Continuationism and Credulity, East and West < click resource

zone
 
A

Ariel82

Guest
i hate to butt in the middle of a public conversation but I'm really confused by your definition of apostles feedme3

I don't think the definition of Apostle is someone commissioned or sent by Jesus because then there would be 82 Apostles in the gospels because Jesus sent out 70 people:

Luke 10:1
After these things the Lord appointed seventy others also, and sent them two by two before His face into every city and place where He Himself was about to go.

Jesus appointed TWELVE apostles to build the foundation:

Luke 6:13
And when it was day, He called His disciples to Himself; and from them He chose twelve whom He also named apostles:

Acts 1:24-26

New King James Version (NKJV)

24 And they prayed and said, &#8220;You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen 25 to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.&#8221; 26 And they cast their lots, and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles.


Ephesians 2


19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.


the only other two apostles mentioned in the Bible beside the twelve is Paul and Barnabas.

Ananias is called a disciple NOT an apostle:

neither in Acts 9 or Acts 22 is he referred to as an apostle

Acts 9
10 Now there was a certain disciple at Damascus named Ananias; and to him the Lord said in a vision, &#8220;Ananias.&#8221;
And he said, &#8220;Here I am, Lord.&#8221;
11 So the Lord said to him, &#8220;Arise and go to the street called Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for one called Saul of Tarsus, for behold, he is praying. 12 And in a vision he has seen a man named Ananias coming in and putting his hand on him, so that he might receive his sight.&#8221;

I don't understand this reasoning because even the OT prophets were able to lay hands and heal people and do miracles.
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
Oh, and this is another point, directed at feedm3. If the gifts of the Holy Spirit were only for the apostles, then why did many non-apostles speak in tongues?
Acts 2
5Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language. 7And they were amazed and astonished, saying, &#8220;Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language?

9Parthians
and Medes
and Elamites
and residents of Mesopotamia,
Judea
and Cappadocia,
Pontus
and Asia,
10Phrygia
and Pamphylia,
Egypt
and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene,
and visitors from Rome,
11both Jews and proselytes,
Cretans and Arabians&#8212;

we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God.&#8221;

were the tongues languages?
known human languages spoken and understood by men from every nation under heaven (the known world at the time)?
or was it unintelligible noises?
there was the little room of 'uneducated' disciples (Are not all these who are speaking Galileans?)....The Holy Spirit fell on them and.....they spoke about the wonderful works of God - Jesus Christ and salvation.

they spoke the languagess of the gentile nations...the jewish men who had come to Jerusalem at Pentecost heard the disciples miraculously telling the Gospel in their own native languages.

the ones who heard and believed became Christians and the Gospel launched out to all nations (when they went home). no fully revealed NT yet...gifts needed.
letters following. doctrine completed. gifts ceased.

~

captivity at the hands of gentiles was God's punishment on Israel.
everytime they were taken away they had other ppl rule over them, in languages they did not understand.

in the case of Acts 2, it was both His sign (tongues are for a sign) and a blessing. for those who received it. those who didn't couldn't understand or hear.

ex - predicting the Babylonian captivity (and return for JESUS AND Pentecost):

Isaiah 28
Judgment on Ephraim and Jerusalem

1 Ah, the proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim,
and the fading flower of its glorious beauty,
which is on the head of the rich valley of those overcome with wine!
2 Behold, the Lord has one who is mighty and strong;
like a storm of hail, a destroying tempest,
like a storm of mighty, overflowing waters,
he casts down to the earth with his hand.
3 The proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim
will be trodden underfoot;
4 and the fading flower of its glorious beauty,
which is on the head of the rich valley,
will be like a first-ripe fig before the summer:
when someone sees it, he swallows it
as soon as it is in his hand.

5 In that day the LORD of hosts will be a crown of glory,a
and a diadem of beauty, to the remnant of his people,
6 and a spirit of justice to him who sits in judgment,
and strength to those who turn back the battle at the gate.

7 These also reel with wine
and stagger with strong drink;
the priest and the prophet reel with strong drink,
they are swallowed byb wine,
they stagger with strong drink,
they reel in vision,
they stumble in giving judgment.
8 For all tables are full of filthy vomit,
with no space left
.

9 &#8220;To whom will he teach knowledge,
and to whom will he explain the message?
Those who are weaned from the milk,
those taken from the breast?
10 For it is precept upon precept, precept upon precept,
line upon line, line upon line,
here a little, there a little.&#8221;

11 For by people of strange lips
and with a foreign tongue

the LORD will speak to this people,
12 to whom he has said,
&#8220;This is rest;
give rest to the weary;
and this is repose&#8221;;
yet they would not hear.

13 And the word of the LORD will be to them
precept upon precept, precept upon precept,
line upon line, line upon line,
here a little, there a little,
that they may go, and fall backward,
and be broken, and snared, and taken.

A Cornerstone in Zion
14 Therefore hear the word of the LORD, you scoffers,
who rule this people in Jerusalem!
15 Because you have said, &#8220;We have made a covenant with death,
and with Sheol we have an agreement,
when the overwhelming whip passes through
it will not come to us,
for we have made lies our refuge,
and in falsehood we have taken shelter&#8221;;
16 therefore thus says the Lord GOD,
&#8220;Behold, I am the one who has laidc as a foundation in Zion,
a stone, a tested stone,
a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation:
&#8216;Whoever believes will not be in haste.
 
Last edited:
F

feedm3

Guest
Oh, and this is another point, directed at feedm3. If the gifts of the Holy Spirit were only for the apostles, then why did many non-apostles speak in tongues?


I never said the gifts were only for Apostles. Did you not read where we disscussed Acts 8? Philip was able to do miracles, he was not an Apostle, and many in the church did miracles.

IT is about who could give this ability.

Mega this statement really shows you not paying much attention to anything I am saying.
 
Sep 10, 2012
758
4
0
I never said the gifts were only for Apostles. Did you not read where we disscussed Acts 8? Philip was able to do miracles, he was not an Apostle, and many in the church did miracles.

IT is about who could give this ability.

Mega this statement really shows you not paying much attention to anything I am saying.
Philip was so an apostle..I just looked up the names of the twelve in the concordance and he was listed in the gospels as an apostle
 
F

feedm3

Guest
Philip was so an apostle..I just looked up the names of the twelve in the concordance and he was listed in the gospels as an apostle
Yes, but Philip in Acts 8, was the Philip in chapter 6:5, the deacon.

Just has the same name.
 
M

megaman125

Guest
I never said the gifts were only for Apostles. Did you not read where we disscussed Acts 8? Philip was able to do miracles, he was not an Apostle, and many in the church did miracles.

IT is about who could give this ability.

Mega this statement really shows you not paying much attention to anything I am saying.
If you were paying attention, Zone was quoting a much older post of mine.
 
F

feedm3

Guest
If you were paying attention, Zone was quoting a much older post of mine.
I was paying attention, it was 17 hours ago. Not that old, and look at all the coversation before it, and how much we discussed Acts 8 and Philip.
 
A

Ariel82

Guest
I'm at a lost in this conversation because I do believe that there is a difference between the generation of the apostles who walked with Jesus and present day. However I do believe that the gifts of the Spirit are still working today as they did back then. the only difference is the lack of apostles and prophets because they were for laying down of the foundation of the church just as Jesus was the cornerstone.

God used them to tell the world about the NEW covenant mediated by Jesus and they had special signs and wonders and miracles to accompany that generation but that generation has pass and we are in a time of darkness for Jesus told us:
John 9:3-5

New King James Version (NKJV)

3 Jesus answered, &#8220;Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but that the works of God should be revealed in him. 4 I[a] must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work. 5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.&#8221;


2 Peter 1


16 For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. 17 For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: &#8220;This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.&#8221; 18 And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.
19 And so we have the prophetic word confirmed,[a] which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,[b] 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God[c] spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.


I think there is difference between prophecy and a Prophet of God.



King Saul spoke prophecy but was not a PROPHET.



many people can speak prophecy by just reading the Bible and the promises therein but that does not make them a prophet.



Just as God can answer prayer and heal people but that does not make that person a healer.



I don't believe that the gifts of the Spirit are given as ownership for one person but are blessings that flow through people as God wills it. I believe people should make a distinction between the gifts of the Spirit and the various ministries God entrust to people as the work they are to do for Him in this life. If someone claims God gave THEM a certain gift then I would seriously pray for that person.



1 corinthians 12

4 There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all. 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all
 
Sep 10, 2012
758
4
0
Yes, but Philip in Acts 8, was the Philip in chapter 6:5, the deacon.

Just has the same name.
and you are right..certain spiritual gifts were exercised in the early church but once John finished the final Revelation so that we have all the inspired words of God, prophecy did cease as there was nothing more to be added to our knowledge of God..it is all in His word..at the point in time in which you speak of the completed word of God was not yet complete
 
M

megaman125

Guest
1. you cannot prove annias was not an Apostle according to the defintion.


You cannot provide one scripture the specifcally states he was an apostle.

2. His laying on of hands does not mean it was HS impartation.

Acts 9:17 specifically says Ananias laid hands on Paul so he could be filled with the Holy Spirit.

I told you I believe his laying on of hands had nothign to do with Paul receiving the HS, because I believe Paul received him the same way the Apostles did in Acts 2.

Your belief is just that, a belief, one that doesn't line up with what Acts 9 says.

Acts 8 - Demonstrates without a doubt ONLY the Apsotles could lay their hands on the Samaritians, which even simon said plainly.

No, that's an assumption you have to add in. Acts 8 does not say "Only apostles can lay hands on someone to receive the Holy Spirit."

1. He was not an Apostle, though he meets the definition of the word.
2. His laying on of hands gave teh HS, and was not a common gesture that Jews did.

Statement 1 - Annias fit the definition of an Apsotle? see the defintion - NOT STATEMENT 2


I'm sure most Christians would fit the definition of apostle that you gave.


This is getting comical.

And I see you're right back to your long winded posts, which I will have no part of. It's not like you really said anything else of substance, just repeating yourself over and over. You keep claiming that Acts 8 says only apostles can impart the Holy Spirit, but that's just something you have to ASSUME. I'm not going to take part in your assumptions just because you repeatedly try to force them down my throat, nor am I going to waste hours responding to you posts because you decided to make them a mile long.
 
M

megaman125

Guest
the gift of spontaneous tongues, that is spontaneously being able to speak an intelligible dialect is not around today..
So I guess the people from my church that went on a mission trip to another country where lying when they said they spoke in tongues and the native people understood what they were saying but they didn't know what they were speaking?
 
A

Ariel82

Guest
So I guess the people from my church that went on a mission trip to another country where lying when they said they spoke in tongues and the native people understood what they were saying but they didn't know what they were speaking?
did you click on her youtube video?

just wondering....

so if the native people understood what they were saying what was the translation? were they speaking of Jesus in that other language? were they preaching the Gospel?
 
Sep 10, 2012
758
4
0
So I guess the people from my church that went on a mission trip to another country where lying when they said they spoke in tongues and the native people understood what they were saying but they didn't know what they were speaking?
I know of early explorers who came to Australia and asked the natives what the furry creature was jumping around and were told..Kangaroo..so the explorers went back to their country of origin telling people of a strange creature called Kangaroo by natives..when years later the dialects of the natives were learned it was discovered that Kangaroo means..I do not understand you..I do not understand what you are talking about so the people from your church may not have been lying but may have been confused
 
G

GRA

Guest
The only "true" way to confirm that someone has understood you is if they communicate it back to you in some way that you understand -- and, it "matches" what you told them at the first.

Otherwise, they must perform some action that makes it exceedingly clear that they understood what you said.

:)

.
 
Aug 15, 2009
9,745
179
0
What make you think because there were other writings, means their missing from cannon? Do you not believe the HS had anything to do with the cannon?

The fact that they wrote other letters, does not indicate they are missing, but that they were not intended to be in the cannon, for reasons unknown. Yet what we do have is sufficient to guide us to heaven, and evidence from passages mentioned a million times above is sufficient to understand
they were temporary until the completion, when the church was no longer in it's infancy.


If the church was "mature'', we wouldn't be sitting here talking about this, would we?
If the church was "mature'', the modern day church wouldn't be in such a mess with all it's denominational problems, now would it?
If the church was "mature'', there would be no falling away, for only christians can "fall away" in the first place!
If the church was "mature'', it wouldn't be rolling over the hill at a breakneck pace into apostasy.
The "so-called" "infant church" with its "temporary anointing" was doing a hundred times better than the modern church could ever dream of.... yet we have a "complete canon" so we can show everybody how much smarter & better off we are today..... sheesh! I wish somebody would back up a half mile or so & take another look at the church! We're more worse off than the Corinthians! Solomon said it best... "There's nothing new under the sun".
Say what you want.... the modern church doesn't look anything like what this teaching of yours says.
I can't believe a christian with eyesight would look at today's church, then say we no longer need the power of God as the early church had,especially when Satan is running rampant right in our own nation, in our own back yard!

The only way we will ever hope to be complete is when we stand before Jesus face to face. Period.
 
Last edited:
F

feedm3

Guest
If the church was "mature'', we wouldn't be sitting here talking about this, would we?


"muture" in complete, not like childish.


If the church was "mature'', the modern day church wouldn't be in such a mess with all it's denominational problems, now would it?
I am sure you and me have different views of what the church is.

yet that is another topic.


The "so-called" "infant church" with its "temporary anointing" was doing a hundred times better than the modern church could ever dream of.... yet we have a "complete canon" so we can show everybody how much smarter & better off we are today..... sheesh!
Have you read Corintians, Gal? The early church had problems, just as we do today. The HS did not remove all problems, and false views people could become wrapped up in then, and not now.

I wish somebody would back up a half mile or so & take another look at the church! We're more worse off than the Corinthians! Solomon said it best... "There's nothing new under the sun".
You misunderstand what I am talking about completely. Never did I say the church was perfect as in flawless, I said scripture is complete.

Everything your saying here is beside the point.


Who said we no longer need the power of God? We get that from scripture.

You seem to think miracles as in healing, tongues etc, must continue, if not then the church should be perfect? Or what are you getting at?

It was never flawless, never will be.

With or without miracles.