The Baptism with the Holy Spirit provided God’s word through tongues and prophecy until the New Testament canon became complete. How do we know this? Paul says scripture thoroughly equips us 2 Timothy 3:17. Paul said tongues and prophecy provided only partial knowledge 1 Corinthians 13:9. So it makes sense scripture replaced them when completed.
Does I Corinthians 13 teach certain gifts ceased with the closing of the canon?
- Thread starter presidente
- Start date
-
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.
This is kind of like if you asked me to prove to you from examples in Acts that Irishmen and Englishmen can be saved. There are already doctrinal statements in scripture that include all Gentiles all men, which would include Irishmen. You do not need specific examples.
I have already shown you that in Matthew 3, John said that He will baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire to an audience that was made up, at least primarily, of those other than the 12 apostles. Joel's prophecy about the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was about 'all flesh', and continued with particulars about 'your sons and daughters', etc. which would have applied to Israel. In Peter's preaching afterward there in Acts 2, the promise of the Holy Spirit is also for them that are 'afar off', language Paul applies to the Gentiles.
In Acts 10, Peter refers to John the Baptist's baptism with the Holy Ghost teaching after telling what happened to the Gentiles in Cornelius' house. Taking with Acts 2, we see the promise of the Spirit is for Gentiles, too. And this chapter is a good example of people being baptized with the Holy Spirit without the laying on of hands.
The passage in Acts 8 does not even use the phrase 'baptized with the Holy Spirit. It says the Holy Ghost was given. Look at the context around the verse you quoted above. Simon observed that the Spirit was given with the laying on of hands. If you read on, Simon offers Peter money for this, and Peter does not tell him he has no part in this because he is not an apostle. He tells him he has no part in this because his heart is not right before God. Acts 8 was a unique event in which foreigners were accepted into what was later termed the church militant. The twelve apostles did not show up on every other occasion of Gentile conversion thereafter. Churches would also later have elders.
We also see that Timothy received a gift through prophecy. Someone prophesied and through that he received a spiritual gift. This was accompanied by the laying on of hands of the elders-- notice in this case it says elders, not even apostles. In Acts 13, Barnabas and Saul are separated by the laying on of hands of prophets and teachers. It doesn't even say they were ordained as elders. They had certain gifts. Have you thought about that, the laying on of hands of teachers who aren't even ordained as elders? The laying on of hands of prophets who aren't even ordained as elders. We do not know if they were ordained/appointed as elders or not, but the fact that scripture does not say that they were is significant.
Ananias came to Saul that he might be healed and that he might receive his sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
You can keep adding excuses and exceptions to try to make things fit your unbiblical paradigm. The fact is that you are trying to put limitations on the Holy Spirit. I have shown plenty of scripture that proves that the Spirit is not limited in working through the laying on of the apostles hands. We read in Acts 19 that the Spirit came upon men there. The Spirit came upon certain national leaders and prophets in the Old Testament. Acts 2 says they were filled with the Holy Spirit. Zecharias was filled with the Holy Spirit and prophesied about Christ and His Son John. The Holy Spirit is not restricted to only work through the apostles. A new apostle was appointed and sent out without going through the twelve. I would say at least two except that the apostles had sent Barnabas to Antioch. Ephesians 4 attributes the gift of the post-ascension apostles to Christ receiving them from God and giving them to men, and does not teach that they, or other gifts, had to come through the existing apostles. Nor do other doctrinal teachings on the subject like those found in I Corinthians 12 teach that spiritual gifts must come through the apostles.
I have already shown you that in Matthew 3, John said that He will baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire to an audience that was made up, at least primarily, of those other than the 12 apostles. Joel's prophecy about the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was about 'all flesh', and continued with particulars about 'your sons and daughters', etc. which would have applied to Israel. In Peter's preaching afterward there in Acts 2, the promise of the Holy Spirit is also for them that are 'afar off', language Paul applies to the Gentiles.
In Acts 10, Peter refers to John the Baptist's baptism with the Holy Ghost teaching after telling what happened to the Gentiles in Cornelius' house. Taking with Acts 2, we see the promise of the Spirit is for Gentiles, too. And this chapter is a good example of people being baptized with the Holy Spirit without the laying on of hands.
The passage in Acts 8 does not even use the phrase 'baptized with the Holy Spirit. It says the Holy Ghost was given. Look at the context around the verse you quoted above. Simon observed that the Spirit was given with the laying on of hands. If you read on, Simon offers Peter money for this, and Peter does not tell him he has no part in this because he is not an apostle. He tells him he has no part in this because his heart is not right before God. Acts 8 was a unique event in which foreigners were accepted into what was later termed the church militant. The twelve apostles did not show up on every other occasion of Gentile conversion thereafter. Churches would also later have elders.
We also see that Timothy received a gift through prophecy. Someone prophesied and through that he received a spiritual gift. This was accompanied by the laying on of hands of the elders-- notice in this case it says elders, not even apostles. In Acts 13, Barnabas and Saul are separated by the laying on of hands of prophets and teachers. It doesn't even say they were ordained as elders. They had certain gifts. Have you thought about that, the laying on of hands of teachers who aren't even ordained as elders? The laying on of hands of prophets who aren't even ordained as elders. We do not know if they were ordained/appointed as elders or not, but the fact that scripture does not say that they were is significant.
Ananias came to Saul that he might be healed and that he might receive his sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
You can keep adding excuses and exceptions to try to make things fit your unbiblical paradigm. The fact is that you are trying to put limitations on the Holy Spirit. I have shown plenty of scripture that proves that the Spirit is not limited in working through the laying on of the apostles hands. We read in Acts 19 that the Spirit came upon men there. The Spirit came upon certain national leaders and prophets in the Old Testament. Acts 2 says they were filled with the Holy Spirit. Zecharias was filled with the Holy Spirit and prophesied about Christ and His Son John. The Holy Spirit is not restricted to only work through the apostles. A new apostle was appointed and sent out without going through the twelve. I would say at least two except that the apostles had sent Barnabas to Antioch. Ephesians 4 attributes the gift of the post-ascension apostles to Christ receiving them from God and giving them to men, and does not teach that they, or other gifts, had to come through the existing apostles. Nor do other doctrinal teachings on the subject like those found in I Corinthians 12 teach that spiritual gifts must come through the apostles.
That is an awkard and extremely unlikely interpretation of the text. I have had that specious argument that 'they' in Acts 2:1 must refer back to the word 'apostles.' I had a conversation with a retired chair of Classics who used to teach Greek at a university who had worked at a Harvard center before. He used to post on the old B-Greek list as well. I asked him about this claim, and he felt grammatically that the chances of it referring back to the word for apostles was maybe 25%, and 75% to the 120 in the upper room. Some people try to invent Greek rules to handle what are basically semantic issues.
The disciples speaking in tongues was loud enough to gather some attention, more likely if there were 120 of them than 12, and the people heard them speaking in more than 12 languages.
The disciples speaking in tongues was loud enough to gather some attention, more likely if there were 120 of them than 12, and the people heard them speaking in more than 12 languages.
2 Timothy 3:17 King James Version (KJV)
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
What is all God work?
When Jesus come oN earth, He (God) work and His work is
1. Teaching a salvation
2. Show His love by heal the sick, feed 5000 people through miracle etc.
3. The most importance of His work is die oN the cross
So He do what ever He can to save us.
Teaching for direction and miracle to help people, prophecy to warn people etc.
Bible is a teaching, Jesus not oN eart anymore, so teaching must continue in the Form of bible.
Also God send Holy Spirit for teaching purpose
The way you Logic,
God allready sent Holy spirit to teach us, why we need bible, so we do not need to read bible.
Is this what you believe!
1 Corinthians 13:9 King James Version (KJV)
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
This verse do not say after Canon we do not need prophecy anymore.
II Timothy 3:17 does not say that scripture alone thoroughly equips us. You are eisegeting. I could give a US soldier a rifle that he may be fully equipped.
That makes sense if he has a uniform, helmet, and bullets. But saying I can give him a rifle that he might be fully equipped is not the same as saying that the rifle is all he needs.
Christians need grace from God, not just the book that talks about grace. We need faith, not just the book that talks about faith. We also need spiritual gifts, not just the book that tells us of our need for spiritual gifts and how to use them to edify others.
If II Timothy 3 teaches cessationism, then II Timothy 4 would not be inspired because the gift of prophecy would have been withdrawn.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
King James Version (KJV)
It do not say prophecy cease when scripture come.
Logically speaking, scripture is the document of the teaching of Christ and what Christ did to anounce salvation, than apostle and Christians continue It.
Not only apostle and Christian, in act we read Holy spirit also did spread the gospel, Holy Spirit talk to Paul oN his way to persecute christians.
The teaching of Jesus is complete, yet He also prophecy
So your formula when the complete come, No more prophecy is not biblical at all
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
King James Version (KJV)
It do not say prophecy cease when scripture come.
Logically speaking, scripture is the document of the teaching of Christ and what Christ did to anounce salvation, than apostle and Christians continue It.
Not only apostle and Christian, in act we read Holy spirit also did spread the gospel, Holy Spirit talk to Paul oN his way to persecute christians.
The teaching of Jesus is complete, yet He also prophecy
So your formula when the complete come, No more prophecy is not biblical at all
No, we don't have 'scripture alone' today. Today, the Holy Spirit is still active. We have grace. We have faith. We have the forgiveness of sins. We have not only scripture, but the stuff scripture writes about.
An atheist can have scripture alone. If we had scripture alone, no one would be saved. We are saved by grace, not by having a copy of the Bible.
An atheist can have scripture alone. If we had scripture alone, no one would be saved. We are saved by grace, not by having a copy of the Bible.
If the speaker in tongues knew what he could saying, why would he have to pray that he may interpret (I Corinthians 14:13.) Paul said if prayed spoke in tongues, his spirit prayed, but his understanding was unfruitful (v.14.) He contrasts praying with his mind with praying with the Spirit (v. 15.)
In verse 15, he writes,
19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
If he understood what was spoken in tongues, that also would be words spoken with his understanding. This is a supernatural thing going on, where he speaks in a language and it can be understood by the congregation through the gift of interpretation. He goes on to give instructions about interpreting tongues in the assembly.
In verse 15, he writes,
19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
If he understood what was spoken in tongues, that also would be words spoken with his understanding. This is a supernatural thing going on, where he speaks in a language and it can be understood by the congregation through the gift of interpretation. He goes on to give instructions about interpreting tongues in the assembly.
-
1
- Show all