Why have the Sign Gifts Ended

I already stated in my point 8, signs and wonders are done among the Gentiles, yes, to alert Israel of the change in dispensation (Acts 15:12)

It says whether there be tongues, they shall cease, not that 'the gift of tongues' will cease. Tongues ceased wherever they were spoken in Paul's day.

Of course, in the context of the epistle, Paul had already written in chapter 1 about utterance and knowledge and 'so that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' After referring to the coming of the perfect in chapter 13, and how the perfect would render his speech, thought, and understanding to be like that of a child compared to what was to come, Paul wrote of the resurrection of the believer and the transformation of the body at the return of Christ in chapter 15. Chapter 13 should be interpreted in context, in line with the flow of argument in the epistle.

There is nothing in that ENTIRE CHAPTER to support the idea that signs were done among the Gentiles for the purpose of alerting Israel "of the change in dispensation".

I used both terms in regard to your actions, not to you personally. You began the thread with an attempt at a logical argument for your assertion. Instead of dealing squarely with criticism of your ideas, you have either treated it as inconsequential or avoided it altogether. That's a failure to engage. Taking personally the criticism of your ideas typically demonstrates that you have too much of your identity tied up in them. If you can't be wrong without crumbling, the problem is with you.

I get that many people cannot grasp the distinction between a comment directed at an idea (or a behaviour), and one directed at a person. As this is a discussion forum, ideas presented here are fair game for criticism and even ridicule. As for behaviour, I don't see a problem with calling out that which is unconstructive or unhelpful. It's exactly what you just did to me, by the way.

I cannot think of a specific scripture in Paul's writings, but there is the whole Bible to be considered. Something I read recently comes to mind: how that the Pharisees were upset about Jesus healing on the Sabbath rather than valuing how a man was made whole. Matthew 8 interprets verses from Isaiah 53 as being applicable to physical healing, and even Gentiles in the church are fellow heirs in Christ with Jewish believers.

They were discussing whether gentiles still needed to keep the Law of Moses for salvation, which Israel still had to follow even after the cross. (Acts 21:20-25)

Paul made it clear that he did not. This constant bad hermeneutics is a heart problem.

Titus 3:10, KJV: "A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;"

You can just state that you disagree with my view and offer your own view.

Are you now trying to tell me what is appropriate discussion etiquette? Where do you get off? I am well within the bounds of proper discussion etiquette to criticize your posts where you engage in fallacious or otherwise unsound reasoning, or when your assertions do not line up with the evidence. I have offered my view several times, and I will here again:

Your arguments are fallacious, your assertions have been refuted, and your position is wrong.

...I have offered my view several times, and I will here again:

Your arguments are fallacious, your assertions have been refuted, and your position is wrong.

I agree. The interpretation is that prophecies will fail. (not the word of God prophecies but the prophecies in the assemblies of the gifts of the Spirit) People will miss it sometimes, or that Tongues would cease, and word of knowledge would vanish, these are also all done "in part" not perfect because operating through imperfect people. But when that which is perfect is come, when we are made perfect we will no longer know in part. But it can also mean that we will not need the gift of tongues and interpretation of tongues when we are in heaven/eternal perfection. So they will cease in that day. Or I suppose one might conjecture that they will be perfected and we will all speak the same spiritual tongue.

It says whether there be tongues, they shall cease, not that 'the gift of tongues' will cease. Tongues ceased wherever they were spoken in Paul's day.

Of course, in the context of the epistle, Paul had already written in chapter 1 about utterance and knowledge and 'so that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' After referring to the coming of the perfect in chapter 13, and how the perfect would render his speech, thought, and understanding to be like that of a child compared to what was to come, Paul wrote of the resurrection of the believer and the transformation of the body at the return of Christ in chapter 15. Chapter 13 should be interpreted in context, in line with the flow of argument in the epistle.

You really contort the scriptures with this interpretation. 1 Cor 13:8 is not about the people but about the word of God. God has based His determinations upon what He is doing not men.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

As I have told you many times the perfect is the complete word of God, the bible. Tongues came into the world as judgment at the tower of Babel. Tongues were an evidence of judgment in Israel when they were carried away into captivity.

I is not about us but about the word of God.

I Corinthians 13:8 must be interpreted in line with the verses before and after it and in line with the teaching of the whole book.

No problem with a literal understanding of the verse. You have the scriptural contortions to go through to make it work not me.

You have never laid a scriptural foundation to justify that what you declare to be tongues gifted by the Holy Spirit to be anything like what God produced at Pentecost or anywhere in the book of Acts.

You are dealing with the tongues produced by Gods judgment and going beyond that into completely unknowable utterances which are not seen in scripture.

The argument that it has ceased is straightforward, with the necessary scripture:

1. Signs are for the nation Israel. (Exodus 4, Psalms 74:9, Judges 6:13)
2. The Messiah was promised to Israel and prophecy stated that he will perform many signs and wonders to prove his identity (Luke 7:20-23)
3. When Jesus appeared, he performed all the necessary signs to testify to the nation Israel (John 20:30-21, Acts 2:22, Hebrews 2:4)
4. Despite the numerous signs, Israel rejected him by putting him on the cross. (Luke 20:14, Acts 2:36)
5. God gave Israel a one year extension as God's favored nation (Luke 13:8-9, Acts 3:26), by sending the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, who performed numerous signs and wonders again in Acts 2-7, in a final attempt to convince Israel to repent of murdering the Messiah and be converted (Acts 3:19-21).
6. Israel rejected the Holy Spirit by their leaders stoning Stephen (Acts 7)
7. Israel the nation fell and now salvation has been released to the gentiles thru their fall, as God has planned since the foundation of the world (Romans 11:11)
8. Paul was given signs and wonders temporary to alert Israel of the change in dispensation (Acts 15:12)
9. By the time Acts 28 arrived, even the diaspora of Israel has rejected Jesus (Acts 28:28).
10. Signs and wonders have completely ceased at Acts 28.

Any comments and different perspectives?

No problem with a literal understanding of the verse.

If you are referring to the signs and acts that are supposed to follow all who believe in Christ (John 14:12); it is very simple, it is because we are all currently double minded, believing in both the Lord and Mammon, why we do not do the miracles and acts like those of Jesus, and even greater works.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.