Is cessation an observation or theology?

[presidente]

Re-write that please?

Here is what I said:

Why should Paul say they will cease, if they were to do so when Christ returns?
It would just happen, and end. No need to explain.

Paul wrote what he did to make it known why they shall cease before Christ returns.

Here is your somewhat confusing unclear response...
Please clear it up?

Why do you need them, knowing what they enable, once you're with Yeshua when He Returns?

Paul was saying we were to stop needing them before Christ returns.

Your argument does not follow logically. Of course, Paul said 'So that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' before writing the rest of the epistle which goes into depth on speaking in tongues, interpretation and prophesying.

Here is a little article on the grammar:

1. The key Greek text​

1 Corinthians 13:8 (NA/UBS sense):

ἡ ἀγάπη οὐδέποτε πίπτει·
εἴτε δὲ προφητεῖαι, καταργηθήσονται·
εἴτε γλῶσσαι, παύσονται·
εἴτε γνῶσις, καταργηθήσεται.

Literal gloss:

• love never falls
• prophecies will be abolished (καταργηθήσονται)
• tongues will cease (παύσονται)
• knowledge will be abolished (καταργηθήσεται)

---

2. The argument you heard​

The claim usually goes like this:

• παύσονται (“will cease”) is middle voice → “cease of themselves”
• καταργηθήσονται (“will be abolished”) is passive → externally terminated
• Therefore:
  • tongues stop on their own before
  • prophecies and knowledge are abolished later

This is often used to argue that tongues ended earlier in church history.

---

3. Why this reasoning is considered faulty​

A. Greek voice ≠ temporal sequence​

The voice of a verb does not establish timing.

• Middle voice describes how an action happens
• It does not tell you when, especially relative to other actions

Greek grammars and commentaries consistently warn against importing chronology from verbal voice alone.

There is no temporal marker in the sentence (no “before,” “after,” “then”).

---

B. Parallel structure argues​

Paul uses a simple rhetorical parallelism:

εἴτε Α, X
εἴτε Β, Y
εἴτε Γ, X

This structure emphasizes contrast with love, not sequencing.

If Paul meant:

• tongues stop earlier
• prophecy later
• knowledge later still

he had very easy Greek ways to say so—and he did not.

---

C. παύομαι does not inherently mean “early cessation”​

παύομαι simply means “stop, come to an end.”

It can refer to:

• processes that stop temporarily or finally
• activities ended by circumstance
• things that end at an appointed telos

The verb itself carries no implication of an earlier or self‑initiated ending in time.

---

D. καταργέω ≠ “later”; it means “render inoperative”​

καταργέω is Paul’s favorite verb for:

• setting aside something partial when something complete arrives
• making something no longer function as it once did

He uses it in:

• 1 Cor 13:10 (the partial → the complete)
• Rom 7:6 (released from the law)
• 2 Cor 3 (old covenant glory)

It does not mean “later than παύομαι.”

---

4. Paul’s own explanation (vv. 9–12)​

Paul himself explains what he means:

“For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the complete comes, the partial will be abolished.”

Three observations:

1. Prophecy and knowledge are explicitly tied to the same event (“when the complete comes”)
2. Tongues are not re‑explained separately as an earlier phase
3. The controlling contrast is:
   • now (partial)
   • then (complete)

The timeline is binary, not staggered.

---

5. Scholarly consensus (across theological lines)​

Across cessationist and non‑cessationist scholarship, there is broad agreement on this point:

• The grammar alone cannot prove that tongues ceased earlier than prophecy
• Any such claim must be argued theologically or historically—not grammatically

Even scholars who believe tongues ceased early generally concede that 1 Cor 13 does not prove it by verb choice alone.

---

6. What Paul​

Paul’s point is ethical and eschatological, not chronological:

• Love endures
• Gifts are temporary
• All partial modes end when fullness arrives

The emphasis is enduring value, not order of disappearance.

I got a little help from Co-Pilot on the article above, based on prompting it to describe the problem of assuming the middle voice assumes sequence in this passage.

 

[presidente]

Something else to point out is that where it says 'whether there be tongues, they will cease'... the idea that he may be saying whenever anyone speaks in tongues, it stops, as opposed to talking about the ending of the gift of tongues.

We we are children, we experience childlike speech, knowledge, and understanding, but that doesn't mean in adulthood, we have no speech, knowledge, or understanding. We just have a more mature version of it.

If prophesying is speaking according to the moving of the Spirit, do we really think that we will never speak according to the moving of the Spirit in the age to come?

 

[Genez]

Your argument does not follow logically. Of course, Paul said 'So that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' before writing the rest of the epistle which goes into depth on speaking in tongues, interpretation and prophesying.

Here is a little article on the grammar:

1. The key Greek text​

1 Corinthians 13:8 (NA/UBS sense):


Literal gloss:

• love never falls
• prophecies will be abolished (καταργηθήσονται)
• tongues will cease (παύσονται)
• knowledge will be abolished (καταργηθήσεται)

---

2. The argument you heard​

The claim usually goes like this:

• παύσονται (“will cease”) is middle voice → “cease of themselves”
• καταργηθήσονται (“will be abolished”) is passive → externally terminated
• Therefore:
  • tongues stop on their own before
  • prophecies and knowledge are abolished later

This is often used to argue that tongues ended earlier in church history.

---

3. Why this reasoning is considered faulty​

A. Greek voice ≠ temporal sequence​

The voice of a verb does not establish timing.

• Middle voice describes how an action happens
• It does not tell you when, especially relative to other actions

Greek grammars and commentaries consistently warn against importing chronology from verbal voice alone.

There is no temporal marker in the sentence (no “before,” “after,” “then”).

---

B. Parallel structure argues​

Paul uses a simple rhetorical parallelism:


This structure emphasizes contrast with love, not sequencing.

If Paul meant:

• tongues stop earlier
• prophecy later
• knowledge later still

he had very easy Greek ways to say so—and he did not.

---

C. παύομαι does not inherently mean “early cessation”​

παύομαι simply means “stop, come to an end.”

It can refer to:

• processes that stop temporarily or finally
• activities ended by circumstance
• things that end at an appointed telos

The verb itself carries no implication of an earlier or self‑initiated ending in time.

---

D. καταργέω ≠ “later”; it means “render inoperative”​

καταργέω is Paul’s favorite verb for:

• setting aside something partial when something complete arrives
• making something no longer function as it once did

He uses it in:

• 1 Cor 13:10 (the partial → the complete)
• Rom 7:6 (released from the law)
• 2 Cor 3 (old covenant glory)

It does not mean “later than παύομαι.”

---

4. Paul’s own explanation (vv. 9–12)​

Paul himself explains what he means:


Three observations:

1. Prophecy and knowledge are explicitly tied to the same event (“when the complete comes”)
2. Tongues are not re‑explained separately as an earlier phase
3. The controlling contrast is:
   • now (partial)
   • then (complete)

The timeline is binary, not staggered.

---

5. Scholarly consensus (across theological lines)​

Across cessationist and non‑cessationist scholarship, there is broad agreement on this point:

• The grammar alone cannot prove that tongues ceased earlier than prophecy
• Any such claim must be argued theologically or historically—not grammatically

Even scholars who believe tongues ceased early generally concede that 1 Cor 13 does not prove it by verb choice alone.

---

6. What Paul​

Paul’s point is ethical and eschatological, not chronological:

• Love endures
• Gifts are temporary
• All partial modes end when fullness arrives

The emphasis is enduring value, not order of disappearance.

I got a little help from Co-Pilot on the article above, based on prompting it to describe the problem of assuming the middle voice assumes sequence in this passage.

How is anyone supposed to respond to that???

Thank you, Robby. (I did not know that Robby the Robot got saved)

 

[presidente]

How is anyone supposed to respond to that???

Thank you, Robby. (I did not know that Robby the Robot got saved)

It seemed pretty straightforward and was easier than writing it up myself. But there is a lot there that could be responded to.

I saw a post from a theological on John MacArthur's faulty assumptions about the middle and assuming sequence a while back, but it was in a Facebook discussion, and those are difficult to dig up.

 

[Genez]

It seemed pretty straightforward and was easier than writing it up myself. But there is a lot there that could be responded to.

I saw a post from a theological on John MacArthur's faulty assumptions about the middle and assuming sequence a while back, but it was in a Facebook discussion, and those are difficult to dig up.

You want me to write a book?

It was a bombardment of facts.

 

[presidente]

You want me to write a book?

It was a bombardment of facts.

If you accept them as facts, then there is nothing to disagree about.

There isn't that much information there. There is a lot of white space.

 

[Genez]

It seemed pretty straightforward and was easier than writing it up myself. But there is a lot there that could be responded to.

I saw a post from a theological on John MacArthur's faulty assumptions about the middle and assuming sequence a while back, but it was in a Facebook discussion, and those are difficult to dig up.

I have little to do with John MacArthur's teachings.

This is whom I learn from:
https://rbthieme.org/about-us

......

 

[Genez]

If you accept them as facts, then there is nothing to disagree about.

There isn't that much information there. There is a lot of white space.

Do not confuse facts with conclusions.

 

[Lamar]

Seeing that the Apostle Paul wrote in 2 Thessalonians that the {Holy Spirit} (being the Restrainer) holding back the coming of the Antichrist [Revelation 13 which connects to the Last Days] means the Holy Spirit is active until at least until the 2 Witnesses fulfill their roles.

The 2 Witnesses need the Holy Spirit to do the miracles written about.

The Churches mentioned in Revelation shows great works that could only happen via the Holy Spirit are active until the Resurrection.

When multiple Holy Spirit filled people are together it allows Yeshua to be in the midst. Of course this couldn't happen if the Holy Spirit had ceased.

So actually Scripture defends Continuation more so than anything else.

The Blind will always be BLIND!

How does this have anything to do with the claims that the miraculous events of the New Testament are still ongoing???

 

[lrs68]

Re-write that please?

Here is what I said:

Why should Paul say they will cease, if they were to do so when Christ returns?
It would just happen, and end. No need to explain.

Paul wrote what he did to make it known why they shall cease before Christ returns.

Here is your somewhat confusing unclear response...
Please clear it up?

Why do you need them, knowing what they enable, once you're with Yeshua when He Returns?

Paul was saying we were to stop needing them before Christ returns.

Because Chapter 13 isn't a Chapter. It's an entire thought by Paul that someone made into a Chapter with Verses. Therefore it's all a single thought and he continues with they end whenever the perfect comes.

 

[lrs68]

How does this have anything to do with the claims that the miraculous events of the New Testament are still ongoing???

The original kickoff was a local event throughout the centralized MEDITERRANEAN area. But we continue throughout history seeing many like written accounts of miracles but now on a worldwide spectrum. Obviously, because these events were happening during a period where communication to share was very limited and we now only are able to put the pieces together from the writings that unfortunately many had no idea this was continuing. But we can put the writings together and see it was now happening worldwide.

 

[Genez]

Because Chapter 13 isn't a Chapter. It's an entire thought by Paul that someone made into a Chapter with Verses. Therefore it's all a single thought and he continues with they end whenever the perfect comes.

Chapter and verses were not in the original text.
Chapter and verses were invented so that everyone could be on the same page and sentence.

"Perfect" back then meant mature.
You can Google it.

The temp gifts were given for the "baby stage" of the church when the NT was still being developed.

 

[presidente]

The temp gifts were given for the "baby stage" of the church when the NT was still being developed.

Where does the Bible teach this? If you try to get this from first corinthians 13 how do you get around the implication that you are making yourself out as superior to the apostle Paul?

The book of Romans includes teaching among the charismata along with exhortation and prophecy. Would you say that there is no need for teaching in the body of Christ?

 

[Aussie52]

Where does the Bible teach this? If you try to get this from first corinthians 13 how do you get around the implication that you are making yourself out as superior to the apostle Paul?

The book of Romans includes teaching among the charismata along with exhortation and prophecy. Would you say that there is no need for teaching in the body of Christ?

Your insistence that there be 'chapter & verse' in the Bible for a thing to be legitimate has its problems. While Scripture is our final authority, it is not the sole authority.
Experience is also an authority. And the experience of the Church is that the sign gifts ceased with the death of the Apostles.
The so called 'gifts' in the Pentecostal/Charismatic Movements are not the same as those in the New Testament.

 

[TrustandObey]

Your insistence that there be 'chapter & verse' in the Bible for a thing to be legitimate has its problems. While Scripture is our final authority, it is not the sole authority.
Experience is also an authority. And the experience of the Church is that the sign gifts ceased with the death of the Apostles.
The so called 'gifts' in the Pentecostal/Charismatic Movements are not the same as those in the New Testament.

Very well said.

 

[Cameron143]

Aren't sign gifts predicated upon faith? Doesn't unbelief in their existence become self-fulfilling?

 

[TrustandObey]

If the supernatural tongues of the New Testament were going on today, this debate would not be happening.

The need to defend its existence beyond prima facie is all that needs to be said.

The Pentecostal/Charismatic Movement is a farce. It is truly absurd.

This is real New Testament tongues.

Acts 2:6-8​

When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language?

This is not happening in the Pentecostal/Charismatic Movement and they know it!

 

[TrustandObey]

Aren't sign gifts predicated upon faith? Doesn't unbelief in their existence become self-fulfilling?

Is the lack of prima facie predicated upon unbelief?

Be honest.

 

[Cameron143]

Is the lack of prima facie predicated upon unbelief?

Be honest.

So rather than answer a question, you decide to ask one. And then insinuate insincerity on my part. You must be a lot of fun at parties.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

I find little in scripture to defend cessation but even less to support the claims of physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit continuing today as it was during the New Testament.

It seems that the miraculous New Testament types of manifestations have ceased to exist.

Most New Testament miracles were meant to be observed and not simply claimed.

They were used as a means to increase faith and their supernatural essence was not debated.

This is not true of modern day claims of physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit.

It seems the claims of Pentecostals and Charismatics are but wishful thinking and self-delusion.

Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit --- he who claims must prove.

Jesus did.

So should the Pentecostals, Charismatics and their sort.

“Most New Testament miracles were meant to be observed and not simply claimed.

They were used as a means to increase faith and their supernatural essence was not debated.“
also imagine you are trying to make a message that’s going to last and have people so convinced of it that they would give thier lives for the message you’ve sent forth


If the message has come with power and many convincing events and miracles nonone can deny or explain it gives the message power and longevity . Because of those who saw it that’s different from those of us who heard thier message and believed . They saw and touched and walked with Jesus we heard thier witness .

imagine in rome at that time a message like the gospel lasting if there wasn’t many miraculous signs and wonders . But so many witnesses and people saw the events of the gospel and the book of acts and whatever else we never read about that happened

“And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people. And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them. And there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judæa, and from beyond Jordan.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭4:23-25‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Imagine if Jesus never did anything miraculous or the apostles didn’t ….. how far would his message have gotten before people gave up hope ? How much persecution would they have refused to endure had they believed in something without that powerful witness of God

Which is what I believe those things came from God witnessing by his spirit with signs and wonders that the word of the gospel is true

“how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, ( Jesus ) and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; ( his apostles )

God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭2:3-4‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Notice everyone who did those things was preaching the message and had been empowered called and annointed by him as his witnesses of the gospel ?

And the message is still strong 2000 years later what if nothing miraculous ever happened though ? Seems part of a design