Does I Corinthians 13 teach certain gifts ceased with the closing of the canon?

Can you show me a verse that say scripture replace the gift?

For example, this disproves your theory.

Matthew 3
5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
...
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentanc e. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:



And this,
Acts 2
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;

17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

...

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

I have thoroughly disproven your theory by referring you to scripture on the subject.

If you want to prove your point, show one example where the Baptism of the Holy Spirit came in a way besides the two outpourings or through an apostle's hands.

“And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,” Acts 8:18 (KJV 1900)

But keep in mind, only the Apostles spoke in tongues at Pentecost. No mention of any others.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit is part of being an Apostle. Ananias administered healing and ministered to Paul But Jesus was the Baptizer.

Paul says tongues and prophecy will cease. When the complete comes = scripture that thoroughly furnishes us. Prophets spoke God's word. Today's "prophets" only speak false prophecy if you check the fulfillment rate.

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

I think you are on to something. You should apply that reasoning to other people. Jesus is the Baptizer, even if no apostles lay on their hands.

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.

Another proof is; originally tongue speakers knew what they were saying. Today they do not.

It is not Prof at all.

There is speak in tounge that No body know the meaning

1 Corinthians 14:2 King James Version (KJV)
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Prophecy provided the NT. No longer needed.

But it was confirmation of an apostle's authority. We have scripture alone today.

Paul says the basis for edification is understanding. He says tongue speakers edify themselves. And they should interpret so all can be edified (understand) = Tongue speakers knew what they were saying. Nothing like this today.

Cessationism is the belief that gifts of the Spirit, or certain gifts, ceased in the first century or at some later time. One theory is that I Corinthians 13 teaches this idea. Many cessationists reject the idea that 'that which is perfect' in the passage refers to the completed canon.

John Calvin's commentary on the chapter argued that the idea that the perfect referred to the 'intervening time' between either resurrection or death as 'stupid' or 'foolish' depending on your translation. While the idea that 'that which is perfect' seems to be out of favor with the more academic cessationists who study Greek, it still retains some popularity among the rank and file.

Is there any hint in I Corinthians that Paul discusses a completed canon of scripture? No. Does this assumption fit the context? No.

I Corinthians 13
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.

Paul compares his speech, thought, and understanding before the perfect came to that of a child, whereas that afterward would be as an adults.

Did Paul's speech, thought, and understanding change into that of an adult's when Revelation was written? No. He was asleep in Christ. Paul makes the passage personally about him. He will, however, experience the resurrection.

Suppose you want to 'stretch' this passage. Can you say that the speech, thought, and understanding of believers who lived after Revelation was so advanced compared to 1st century Paul's that his seemed like that of a child?

Not only does that position put the reader in a superior position to the apostles who wrote scripture, but it also is not true. Many of us read Paul's writings as believers, and years later gain a deeper understanding of them as we continue to read. The light bulb goes off and we get a new insight that Paul clearly had before us...an area where he was more 'perfect' than we were in our understanding.


It also does not make sense that if a group of kindergarteners write a book for infants, and if the infants gain a copy of the book or read it all, that they will suddenly grow up in their understanding to be like adults. Making yourself out to be an adult in understanding and the apostles to be children is not a good way too look at the scriptures, either.

Ephesians 3:4
Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

The New Testament is written so that we might attain to the level of the understanding the apostles had of the mystery of Christ. There is no guarantee in it that we will make their understanding like that of a child's in comparison by reading the scriptures.

I Corinthians 1
4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;
5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
8 Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Here, as Paul starts out a letter in which he will address a number of themes, he hints at some of the topics he will address in chapters 12 through 15. Chapter 12 teaches on spiritual gifts, while chapters 13 through 14 and especially 14 focus on tongues and prophesying-- utterance gifts. Notice all utterance and all knowledge and compare to knowledge, tongues, and prophecy in chapter 13.

Chapter 15 teaches about the resurrection of the dead at the return of the Lord Jesus (at his coming.) Paul also refers to the 'end' in chapter 15 when he writes 'and then cometh the end'-- a grammatically inflected form of the same Greek word used here in 1:8 (Strong's G5056.)

Here in chapter 1, we see writes of the Corinthian church and believers everywhere coming behind in no spiritual gift waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is the 'lens' or 'exegetical key' we should use to interpret chapter 13. We should not read in some later theory or concept that is not even hinted at in the whole book, as those who argue that he is writing about the completed canon do.