Why have the Sign Gifts Ended

Do you think TULIP Calvinists who believe in total depravity are unsaved, then?

My response was to this comment by you:

"They were saved by hearing the Gospel preached, the Gospel we read in the New Testament, not the theological musings and debates of Augustine in the 300s or Calvin in the 1500s."

You implied the salvation points brought to light by men like Augustine and Calvin were mere "musings". A disrespectful comment to be sure.

You also ignored the point I was making, in regards to those saved, being brought in by the Lord. Therefore, I posed the previous questions, in the form of indictments, for you to answer.

Good point and thank you for the post.

In a perfect world, every believer would dutifully study the Bible in prayerful dependence upon the Holy Spirit’s illumination. As can be clearly seen, this is not a perfect world. Not everyone who possesses the Holy Spirit actually listens to the Holy Spirit. In the real world today just as 2000 years ago there are "Make-believers' instead of believers as everyone who says he is a born again Christian certainly is not.

There are Christians who grieve God . Ask any educator—even the best classroom teacher has his share of wayward students who seem to resist learning, no matter what the teacher does. So, one reason different people have different interpretations of the Bible is simply that some do not listen to the Teacher—the Holy Spirit. Following are some other reasons for the wide divergence of beliefs among those who teach the Bible.

1. Unbelief .....
Matthew 7:22-24
" Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

2. Lack of training.
2 Peter 3:16
" as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures."

3. Poor hermeneutics.
Much error has been promoted because of a simple failure to apply good hermeneutics (the science of interpreting Scripture). Taking a verse out of its immediate context can do great damage to the intent of the verse. Ignoring the wider context of the chapter and book, or failing to understand the historical/cultural context will also lead to problems.
Accepting "Denominational" dogma above written Scripture leads to false understandings.

4. Ignorance of the whole Word of God.
Apollos was a powerful and eloquent preacher, but he only knew the baptism of John. He was ignorant of Jesus and His provision of salvation, so his message was incomplete. Aquila and Priscilla took him aside and “explained to him the way of God more adequately” in Acts 18:24-28. After that, Apollos preached Jesus Christ. Some groups and individuals today have an incomplete message because they concentrate on certain passages to the exclusion of others. They fail to compare Scripture with Scripture.

5. Selfishness and pride.
Sad to say, many interpretations of the Bible are based on an individual’s own personal biases and pet doctrines. Some people see an opportunity for personal advancement by promoting a “new perspective” on Scripture. (See the description of false teachers in Jude’s epistle.)

6. Failure to mature.
When Christians are not maturing as they should, their handling of the Word of God is affected. “I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly” = 1 Corth. 3:2-3. An immature Christian is not ready for the “meat” of God’s Word. Note that the proof of the Corinthians’ carnality is a division in their church (verse 4).

7. Undue emphasis on tradition.
Some churches claim to believe the Bible, but their interpretation is always filtered through the established traditions of their church. Where tradition and the teaching of the Bible are in conflict, tradition is given precedence. This effectively negates the authority of the Word and grants supremacy to the church leadership.

They had to believe to. My point is the message they heard preached was the Gospel, not later theological discussions.



It depends on the topic. There is a lot of content to go through, but Calvin certainly does let readers know when he is supposing certain things. And I was being gracious about some of Augustine's allegorical interpretations and theological suppositions. I am not saying it was all bad. I did not mean it in a disrespectful way. If all of the concepts they explored were required to be believed for one to be saved, then the saints in the churches in the first century would not have been saved.



When threads veer off topic, sometimes I am selective about what I respond to. That doesn't justify lying about my beliefs.

Number 7 is probably the most relevant of them all. If anyone is a member of a denominational church, it stands to reason that you are only going to hear the interpretation of that denomination so you are automatically shut off from the whole counsel of God.

I doubt if any denominational church will give its members an overview of what is taught acrossd the spectrum as it does not want the members to make up their own mind. As far as they are concerned there is only one truth and that is the one they teach so why bother with looking at the full spectrum.

I am thankful for my six years at university because in the subjects I studied, the lecturers wanted information on more than one point of view. I didn't lose marks because I didn't present only the prevailing view.

Why don't you go to the hospital and tell the administrators you want to meet with all the people with Covid-19 to pray for them and see of they will let you back there. You could try with non contagious conditions like broken legs and see if they will let you in.

Why even go there? Why not use your gift of healing and simply claim it done from the comfort of your house? Just like Hinn, Copeland, and the rest of the charlatans do.

Why couldn't Paul heal Timothy's stomach issues? Why didn't Timothy heal Paul's affliction?

Why do faith healers always run to the doctor instead of another faith healer when they themselves get sick?

Where do I say I can heal people?

What is your point? That you don't believe God heals today and that you don't think God healed through Paul or Timothy?

Paul had some kind of infirmity that caused him to spend time among the Galatians, and they would have given him their own eyes. So maybe he had an eye problem. This was probably around Acts 14, since some of those churches were in the province of Galatia. Yet Paul and Barnabas were doing signs among the Gentiles that they reported in Acts 15. In Acts 16, they took the decision of the council to various places including Galatia, and Paul went on to do extraordinary miracles and to heal all who were brought to him on an island after this ailment.

Do you think the apostles could heal and do miracles automatically at will like Superman using his X-Ray vision? If so, why did Paul have an infirmity early in his ministry, and do great miracles after this point? Why did the twelve pray for God to stretch forth His hand to do heal and to do signs and wonders in Acts 4 if they could do them completely at will?

Where do I say I can heal people?

What is your point? That you don't believe God heals today and that you don't think God healed through Paul or Timothy?

Paul had some kind of infirmity that caused him to spend time among the Galatians, and they would have given him their own eyes. So maybe he had an eye problem. This was probably around Acts 14, since some of those churches were in the province of Galatia. Yet Paul and Barnabas were doing signs among the Gentiles that they reported in Acts 15. In Acts 16, they took the decision of the council to various places including Galatia, and Paul went on to do extraordinary miracles and to heal all who were brought to him on an island after this ailment.

Do you think the apostles could heal and do miracles automatically at will like Superman using his X-Ray vision? If so, why did Paul have an infirmity early in his ministry, and do great miracles after this point? Why did the twelve pray for God to stretch forth His hand to do heal and to do signs and wonders in Acts 4 if they could do them completely at will?

If you read the context of 2 Cor 11 and 12 you will easily see that Paul described his many persecutions as his infirmity that he would glory in. Not sure why people don't take him at his word and try and come up with another application to the word infirmity than the one he specifically used several times in that context. It is undeniable once you read chapter 11 first and mark where he uses the word infirmity. And then when he brings it up again he would naturally assume that the reader knows that he is still talking about the same infirmities he described in detail. Nothing about the eyes except maybe a black eye from being stoned.

His point is that God still heals today but it is no longer guaranteed to happen. And there is no one with the "gift of healing" today.

Paul in his letters to the Body of Christ, never taught us, even once, to use the favorite "incantation" of the Word of Faith churches, "By his stripes you are healed".

His point is that God still heals today but it is no longer guaranteed to happen. And there is no one with the "gift of healing" today.

Paul in his letters to the Body of Christ, never taught us, even once, to use the favorite "incantation" of the Word of Faith churches, "By his stripes you are healed".

Where in Scripture is healing "guaranteed to happen"?

Where does it say in Scripture that the "gift of healing" is the ability to heal any infirmity at will?

Just because you aren't aware of anyone who has the gift of healing, it is not proof that nobody has it.


Agreed.

Do you have any scripture at all that indicates that I Corinthians 12 is no longer valid?

How would you know that that is his point? Isn't that a point you are making?



I don't go to one of those churches. But I notice that Matthew 8 quotes from Isaiah 53 about physical healing.

Acts 3:1-7

Nothing in that passage responds to either of my questions.

I'm not quite sure your point. Are you trying to say Paul was never sick?

This is a verse from chapter 12.
10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.

Paul does not equate infirmity with persecution, but includes them in a list alongside persecutions. My understanding is that it refers to a 'weakness'-- which can mean sickness. A closely related word is used of Lazarus and of the sick calling for the elders of the church.

It may be that an injury could be a 'weakness' also.

If you did not follow my suggestion and read Chapter 11 first then you would have missed what I said was obvious and undeniable.

Check this out:
24Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. 25Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; 26In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; 27In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. 28Beside those things that are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches. 29Who is weak, and I am
not weak? who is offended, and I burn not? 30If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern mine infirmities.
(Remember there were no chapter divisions in Paul's original Letter so you want to keep his train of thought as you continue.)
1It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. 2I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth such an one caught up to the third heaven. 3And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth 4How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. 5Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities.

Now don't you think that Paul was talking about the same thing in verse 5 as he was in verse 30? I think it is the most natural interpretation to think that Paul intended the reader to understand that "mine infirmities" was the same kind. There were Jewish Pharisees that followed him where ever he went and stirred up persecution. That is probably what he was talking about.

As to whether Paul ever got sick he probably did.

The healing was guaranteed to happen then because the Holy Spirit performed that healing as a sign to the nation Israel

Matthew 8 is in time past, when the gospel of the kingdom is still valid, together with their signs and wonders. So the point I made about Paul remains true.