Dr. Tim wrote: Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick. (2 Timothy 4:20). Why did the Apostle Paul leave Trophimus sick? Because Paul couldn't heal him. Why couldn't Paul heal him? Because the apostolic sign gifts were already passing off the scene before Paul's execution. There's no mention anywhere in scripture of a "heavenly prayer language." God understands English quite well. There is CERTAINLY no mention in the Bible of anyone ever being slain in the spirit. This is an asinine sideshow and nothing more. Several years ago I read an article in National Geographic about some primitive tribesmen who would invite devils to come in and possess them. While under this demonic influence, they would speak in tongues. Careful! I don't believe a church exists anywhere in which people speak in tongues in accordance with biblical restrictions. Therefore, what they aren't doing is of man, and not of God. Case dismissed.
B....b.....b.....but, what about that which is perfect and the closing of the canon. Nothing can be proved from 1 Cor 13 and so you gotta be wrong! Like the rest of the Bible doesn't have anything to say to the issue!
Stop Resisting wrote: ...you dare resist his ordained powers which is *every* ordinance of *man*. You resist God and shall receive damnation as you were told you would.
In Acts 5 we read of the high priest and those with him being filled with indignation that so many of the sick gathered in Jerusalem so that Peter's shadow might fall on them for healing. They laid their hands on apostles and imprisoned them. An angel of the Lord loosed them from prison and commanded them to go speak in the temple the words of life.
Now read verse 28 which explains what the high priest and his company said to the apostles when they were brought before them again:
....Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.
According to you this is then the ordinance of man and the apostles should have obeyed, right?
Then, if you're correct in your stance that is precisely what the apostles should have done to avoid the judgement of God. BUT instead we read:
29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: How exactly is one edified by praying something about which they are clueless?
It seems some use a different definition of "edify". The word clearly means to build up, but more specifically in the context, to build up through the understanding.
So your question is spot on. How does speaking in a foreign language build anyone up in the understanding even if they only use the gift in their private prayers.
1 Cor 14.14
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
The problem with some unthinking continuists (and I acknowledge that this is not all of them) is that they do not make any allowance for the use of sarcarsm by Paul in his argumentation. I believe firmly that he uses this in 1 Cor 14. So for instance when he writes:
v2 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.
Speaking mysteries to God in a foreign language, and that a gift of God to boot? Wow! And that is not sarcarsm?
As I have pointed out from the scriptures the sign gifts are tied to fresh revelations. If you people want to believe that the Bible is not complete and that we can expect further additions to it despite Revelation 22 vs 18, 19, then it tells us more about you than it does what the bible teaches.
Some people's uncertainty even extends to what the gospel is and whether BG preaches it or not. The same who think that rather than follow scriptural injunctions about how we should treat false gospel peddlers we should not show antagonism or speak of "excommunication" but rather embrace them with liberal notions of fuzzy love that accepts all things and that this is somehow a mark of true Christian character.
So I for one am not going to be listening to the doubt sowers, the double speakers, the theological weather vanes and those who believe in a yes and no god of their own making or those who promote their false notions of love, which bears no resemblance to the love the Bible speaks of.
Perhaps Mr I am no YES man can tell us what miracles he has performed lately and what fresh revelations he has received, other than the mystic type enjoyed by Madame Guyon.
Dave wrote: Elder Brother observer, dearest Shane, I think it is a question of salvation if someone remains in that train of thought and pushes apostolic gifts for today, as it always leads to false worship, which in essence is idolatry and of Satan not God
I should have been more precise. I meant that I didn't think Shane's uncertainty on the issue touched on his salvation.
I take your point on the dangers of idolatry, and agree.
So that the unwary don't get taken in my this kind of proof texting, ask yourselves this:
Verse 17 - is this referring to those in verse 16 who will come to believe the gospel, or to verse 14 viz. to the disciples who would not believe the report of his resurrection and whom the Lord had to upbraid for their unbelief?
If the former is true, then every believer should have the signs following them. If you don't have them, what assurance do you have that you are saved? Also by implication every believer should be able to do all those signs, which is contrary to what Paul teaches in 1 Cor 12 about not every person having all the gifts because each has a different gift as part of the body.
But if the latter is true viz. that the reference was the to apostles, who had to be upbraided for their former unbelief then it is certainly true of them. The last verse of Mk 16 confirms this as does Heb 2.
Some don't like to study or think but consider their proof texting superior.
It is not a salvation issue, but is a critical hermeneutics issue. So it is an important topic.
Shane wrote: Dave, observer... As with some other things, i just find it fearful to popeishly declare for certain that the Lord will not allow his gifts anymore. Is that not his business? Does this seem like foolishness to you? ..
I gave you plenty of scriptures and explanations of them to back up what I am saying. In return you offer no refutation to what I have written but then insist that I am the one who is making popish declarations?!
From where I am standing you are the one who is making popish declarations about the gifts continuing without offering any scripture foundations for your beliefs.
You can believe what you will, I can't stop you, but if you want to be biblical then at least try and argue from the bible and make a half decent case.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Let me help All temporary sign gifts have ceased There you go I have spoken!!! No need for further discussion :mod: Donâ€™t thank me , just trying to be a help because thatâ€™s the kind of person I am ðŸ˜€
How do you determine what is descriptive vs what is prescriptive?
Of course while the gifts were present the Corinthians had instructions concerning them. But does that mean that this becomes prescriptive for us? The early church had apostle and prophets. Are these continuing ministries? Do we have apostles today; people who were eye witnesses of our Lord's life, death and resurrection?
The apostles raised the dead? Have you known instances of this? If not why not? Are you able to do that? Have you prayed to be able to do it if these things are to continue?
Instead of asking about the purpose of things you are stuck on "its in the NT therefore without specific verses about them ceasing we have to continue to expect these things."
I'm going to make this my last .. it's way past bedtime!
So the picture so far is that God sends messengers with fresh revelation and He authenticates them with the ability to perform sign miracles. In other words the 2 go hand in hand.
But let's take a trivial example to demonstrate a point that is often missed.
Let's take the example of smoking. Smoking is permitted but those businesses that don't want people smoking on their premises may put up signs to say "NO SMOKING ALLOWED HERE".
Let's say that the government in its wisdom decided to ban smoking altogether.
What do you suppose would happen to the signs?
Does there need to be specific legislation to say that since the government has now banned smoking, all those signs need to be taken down?
Of course not!!
But that is exactly the same with apostles and prophets. If they cease, new revelation ceases with them and hence there are no "new revelation" messengers to authenticate. The sign miracles vanish with them. No specific scripture reference is necessary to establish this because the 2 go hand in hand.
People who wish to argue for their continuation today are really ignorant of the scriptures. And as with all ignorant people, they are the boldest to affirm their ignorant beliefs!
Consider the apostle Paul. There were many false apostles and teachers in the early church who took exception to Paul and did everything in their power to undermine his person and his teachings. So Paul has to defend his apostleship and how does he do that? One of the arguments he uses is found in 2 Corinthians 12:12
"Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds."
Now think on this. If everyone in the NT was going around performing sign miracles etc then what was there specifically that Paul could appeal to that was peculiar to himself in terms of authenticating his apostleship?
The other thing to note is that sign miracles are not continuous on every page of the bible. Typically they occur with fresh bouts of revelation. Is that a coincidence?
Now please don't get me wrong. We do not deny that God can perform miracles even today. BUT that is not the issue. The issue is are there people with the ability to perform sign miracles? Does God attest people today with sign miracles?
If there is no fresh revelation because the canon of the Bible is closed and therefore there is no need for prophets/apostles today, why would the authenticating "sign" miracles and gifts still be extant?
Shane wrote: ... I just find it presumptuous to say that these things no longer exist without the scripture to back it.
You think I believe what I do without scriptural warrant?
Ok, Shane let's start looking at the whole issue from scratch. The law of first mention is extremely important. Who was the first recorded person to perform miracles? Why were they able to perform these miracles?
Let's look, shall we?
The answer is Moses, and the precise reason why he was enabled to perform miracles is plainly stated. Turn with me to Exodus 4 verse 1, where Moses expresses his concern that the Israelites may not believe him or that it was God who had really appeared to him and sent him. It is only at this point that the Lord tells him to cast the rod onto the ground etc and shows him what He is capable of and then verses 8, 9 reads "..8 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of of the latter sign 9 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice...."
Chase wrote: Although most manuscripts do have this portion of Scripture, our most reliable manuscripts do not.
And that is precisely the problem. You give too much credence to textual popelings! Since we don't have the autographs who is to say which are reliable and which not, leaving aside the 2 Romish corruptions, and those which are derived from areas where obvious heresy was being hatched?
No one said that Mark 16 was the only place which is contorted and used to teach something that it does not support.
Michael Kruger is an authority because he has written books on it?! Wow! I'm really impressed!