Speaking in tongues

Paul’s Letters in the order that he wrote them:
and how this relates to the winding down of Spiritual Gifts....

https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/when-did-the-gift-of-tongues-cease/

When the gift of tongues ceased
Now we turn to the prison epistles, the four letters written shortly after the end of the Book of Acts, while Paul was a prisoner in Rome—Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon and Philippians…and we find that there is not one word about tongues, or the gift of healing. Even where we might have expected Paul to write of tongues in the passage about being “filled with the Spirit” in Ephesians 5:17, he has nothing to say about tongues. And as for the gift of healing, we read of a co-worker of Paul’s, Epaphroditus, who fell seriously ill during this time (Phil. 2:25-30) and Paul no longer had the gift of healing, and was no longer able to heal as he did only a few years earlier in Acts 28:9. The sign gifts were no longer operating at the time that Paul wrote the Prison Epistles.
Tongues in the Pastoral Epistles?
In the 3 Pastoral Epistles, as in the prison epistles, we do not read of tongues or the gift of healing operating at this time. We do read of prophecies that had been made about Timothy in 1 Timothy 1:18 and 4:14 and 2 Timothy 1:6, but these were given years before. So far as we read in these three letters, we wouldn’t even know that there had been a “gift of tongues.”
And, again, in places where we would have expected Paul to mention the sign gifts, he is silent. When Paul gives Timothy and Titus instructions regarding the choice of men to be elders in the churches, Paul says nothing about the desirability of these men having a gift such as prophecy, or healing, or other sign gifts (see Titus 1:6-9 and 1 Tim. 3:1-10). The gifts of tongues, prophecy, etc. were no longer in operation by the time Paul wrote the pastoral epistles.
It is clear that the gift of healing has ceased because, as in Philippians, Paul was no longer able to heal, even his co-workers. Timothy was suffering stomach problems and frequent infirmities (1 Tim. 5:23) and Paul can’t heal him, doesn’t recommend that he go to a healer in the church, doesn’t send a prayer cloth or a bottle of anointing oil (remember the miracles of some 8 years earlier in Acts 19:11-12). Likewise in 2 Timothy 4:20, Paul has to leave behind his co-worker Trophimus who had fallen sick on the last journey. Paul’s gift of healing (Acts 28:9) was no longer operating in Philippians 2:27, 1 Timothy 5:23 and 2 Timothy 4:20.

There are several problems in the cited article...

The author writes about the cessation of healing, which is not mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13. He links the alleged cessation of healing to cessation of the so-called sign gifts (prophecy, tongues, and knowledge).

The author overlooks Romans 11:29 "The gifts and call of God are irrevocable." That means that gifts don't "stop operating" once given. The author assumes that Paul had "the gift" of healing; Scripture never states this. He just wasn't able to heal whenever he chose. In the cases where he did heal, it was evangelistic in nature.

He makes the assumption later on that nobody today has the gift of healing, but God still heals. That's semantic wordplay.

He assumes that the absence of mention of gifts in the pastoral epistles means they weren't in operation. That's a fallacy.

His case that"the perfect" of 1 Cor 13:8 is the full revelation of the gospel is weak because it requires that the gospel was revealed to Paul progressively over his lifetime. In truth, Jesus must have revealed the full gospel early on; otherwise, he could not have proclaimed it as he claims in Romans 15:19.

Overall, the article is based on speculation rather than on Scripture. While the author has used Scripture as a starting point, he departs from it to make his key assertions. The author is clearly a cessationist and wrote the article from a cessationist presumption.

Actually....I agree with you. I just threw that out there as fodder.

I'm pleasantly surprised at this. Thanks... I think.

lol
I like the way you had answered anyway

Fyi, Healing ceases when the person is made whole. Teaching ceases when the lessons have been learned. Preaching ceases when all who will hear have heard. Prophecy ceases when the need for "edification, exhortation and comfort" is gone. etc, etc, etc.

The bible itself says we see through a glass darkly. It doesn't say "We see, know and fully understand the 90% of the scriptures we have... and we're just waiting for the last 10%."

Is anyone in here going to claim that now that they have the "whole Bible", they now see (know and understand) all things clearly? If not, you're acknowledging that you still only know in part, and see dimly.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

A sign that confirms what as to who ?

Two groups of people. Those who believe and those who believe not prophecy.

(1)"Not to them that believe," (2)but to them that believe not:

What does the law say?

In the law it is written, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, "not to them that believe," but to them that believe not: but "prophesying serveth" not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.1 Cor.14:21-22

If the sign of no faith is not to those who believe prophecy . What the sign of believing prophecy .Faith ?

Sounds like you are promoting dead works?

Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying. And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.John 3:25

Water baptism like tongues has its foundation in the Old testament .Getting wet does not remove the eternal wage of sin.

It is used as a ceremonial law as a shadow that points that someone has a desire to become a member of the priesthood of believers.

When Aarons sons took the vow they added to the word of God and fire consumed them. The new testament water baptism in many cases today as a oral tradition of men if it is not in respect to a kingdom of priest taking the gospel out into the world in order to makes disciples for Christ. It does not remit sin. it adds to the word making the foundation in Exodus without effect.

The same with the laying of hands. God is not served by human hands as if he who satisfies all needs needed something from the clay he is forming Christ in

No sign gifts all die not receiving the goal our new incorruptible bodies walk by faith as a living, abiding Hope. He promises us as the better things that accompany salvation he will not forget the good works we offer towards the name, authority not seen (not water) we are baptized in.

I am not stuck on signs. I am stuck on prophecy.

Same thing different purposes depending on (1) believing or (2)not believing .And yes they involve the same thing "prophecy" .Some believe (no sign) other believe not prophecy (the sign)

Look at the law and read it carefully .

Prophecy, the living, abiding word of God for edification has not ceased just new prophecy or new revelations and therefore new knowledge coming from prophecy. We have the perfect/ complete. Unless the last book is not Revelation ? It has not changed in over two thousand years, it still teaches, guides,comforts us and the Holy Spirit brings to our minds that which he has taught us .No laws missing.

The Catholics have developed a way around obey ing the final warning not to add or subtract from the whole. Its called "private revelations" . It teaches them if they believe have a dream or a vison or any experience and it is found false Mother Mary will happy because you leave the air way open to new signs and wonders.

That's one option to those who look to widen the authority of the perfect.

There are many oral traditions of men. In fact if every time a oral tradition of men was challenged by the word of God and was written down .The whole world would not be able to contain the books needed to record those oral traditions as recorded in John 21

We have the knowledge of the glory of God as our treasure in these earthen bodies of death .But it not of us.. but face to his face or unseen glory, to the unseen glory, also called faith to faith. That glory will be revealed in the new heavens and earth.

Hi thanks for the reply and a opportunity for us to share our bread.

I am the ones saying he is not adding or subtracting. We have the perfect not one jot or tittle will be removed from it or added to it .

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.Revelation22:18-21

Amen?

Remove or add to the book of Revelation you remove from the whole book. Remove or add to the book of Genesis is the same, removing or adding from the one book of prophecy, the Bible. Why is the whole not sufficient for some to know God not seen? What do they think is missing, that's the mystery to me??

That's good.
And there is a pervasive thought that we have ALL the answers. (not so)
This used to bother me when I believed it.
It finally occurred to me that faith requires us to NOT have all the answers.
If there were no questions left unanswered, it would not require faith to believe.
I can rest on that realization.

Very well said!

The mystery to me is why you keep asserting that others think something is missing from Scripture.

NOBODY CLAIMS THAT!

So instead of railing continually against a non-existent foe, how about you seek to understand what others DO claim.

No, you do not know what prophecy is in context to 1cor 12 to 14. We have been very careful to read. You do not know what you are talking about .

However.....an argument from silence is still an argument, albeit a weak one.
But ultimately, I must trust my own perceptions and observations, and IMO the "sign gifts" are not operative today. Nor are healings. Certainly not in the magnitude and genuineness of those indicated in Scripture. The supposed tongues today are almost universally bogus. The gibberish babble is also undoubtedly bogus, despite the unsupportable claim of Angelic speech. I don't think Angels babble incoherently.

Obviously not in your church;
but in my Pentecostal church healings and miracles abound by the power of God through his indwelling Holy Spirit.
We pray for those in need in tongues and where possible lay hands on them whilst praying.

The laying on of hands. Is it a ceremonial law non effect as a shadow or does it move God to perform the will of the one who hands are applied? Does making noises without meaning magnify the healing bringing quicker healing. How does falling back slain in the spirit work with the laying on of hands mixed with sounds that have no meaning or drinking poison as in all things work together??

Here is the verse in question:
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

I was on a discussion list in the early days of the Internet with a Greek scholar who had worked as a chair at a university. He pointed out that the word translated 'man' there is 'tis', meaning one, and that one person does not become two or three people when he speaks in tongues. So he took this to one person speaking 'by two, or at the most by three' to refer to something one individual was doing.

Apparently, many Bible translators who are also Greek scholars disagree and translate that verse differently. Maybe they consider his approach to be hyper-literal on the grammatical level. Be that as it may, if we are going to look at it literally like that it says 'in an unknown tongue' and not 'in unknown tongues.' Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic are not 'a tongue.' They are many.

His understanding of the passage, in my own words as best I understand it, is that in Greek the word logos can be ommitted by elipses. He took this to mean something like one person speaking two or three utterances in a tongue before someone else interprets.

He also interpreted verse 29 in a similar light. While, grammatically, it could refer to two or three prophets, based on analogy to verse 26, he was inclined to see 'let the prophets speak two or three' to refer to the prophets speaking two or three things... and let the other weigh carefully what is said.

I do not see how the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic interpretation fits with the passage. Seeing the one who interprets as God is totally out of left field. In chapter 12, he presents interpretation of tongues as a manifestation of the Spirit a member of the body of Christ might be given. He asks 'do all interpret.' In I Corinthians 14:5, he writes about the one who speaks in tongues interpreting. In verse 13, he tells the one who speaks in an unknown tongues to pray that he may interpret. Throughout the chapter, the parts on tongues and interpretation lead up to his instructions there in verse 27-28 about speaking in tongues and one interpreting. So it does not make sense to assert that the one who interprets is a member of the congregation throughout the passage, but suddenly refers to God in verse 28.

Incidentally, this is the only really long passage in the New Testament that really goes into detail on how to conduct our meetings. There is no reference to a pastor or one long sermon. 'Every one of you' may speak within the parameters given in the passage. The speaker in tongues and interpreter is specificially allowed to speak. Prophets are allowed to speak. Ye may all prophesy. There is no instruction here to have three hymns followed by one sermon, followed by a prayer, communion, and three hymns. Yet many religious people insist that these elements must be present in that order for there to be a real church service, but actually oppose the operation of the gifts the passage clearly allows. There is also the implication in the passage that the Corinthians did not have the authority to change the God ordained way of meeting that other churches apparently followed, because he asks, what came the word of God out from you or unto you only did it come? And he also calls his instructions commandments of the Lord.