---REPOST FROM XANGA JUNE 2010---
The point is not to prove a side correct, but to show that these arguments are no good at destroying Continuationism. My responses are in italics.
from http://www.realgospel.org/articles/Cessationism-Defended :Reason 1 - The Scriptures Are Sufficient For Every Good Work
2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." This passage explains that the scriptures are sufficient for our sanctification. It doesn't say that the scriptures equip us for some works, but we need the gifts of tongues or prophecy to really experience super spirituality. It says that the scriptures are sufficient to equip us for every good work.
The basics of Continuationism do not claim that the gifts of tongues or prophecy are needed to experience super spirituality. There is no need in even mentioning super spirituality. The verse plainly says that the Scriptures are enough to equip us for every good work - it's sharper than a double-edged sword. Nobody disagrees with this. This does not prove that gifts are not available, only that they are not necessary. A pair of scissors is fine for cutting a lawn - it'll do the job - but if you are gifted with a lawn mower, you'll use it. We can do works with or without the 1 Cor 12 spiritual gifts. Everyone agrees on this.
The basics of Continuationism do not claim that the gifts of tongues or prophecy are needed to experience super spirituality. There is no need in even mentioning super spirituality. The verse plainly says that the Scriptures are enough to equip us for every good work - it's sharper than a double-edged sword. Nobody disagrees with this. This does not prove that gifts are not available, only that they are not necessary. A pair of scissors is fine for cutting a lawn - it'll do the job - but if you are gifted with a lawn mower, you'll use it. We can do works with or without the 1 Cor 12 spiritual gifts. Everyone agrees on this.
Reason 2 - The Scriptures Are Sufficient For Salvation
The scriptures are also sufficient for saving souls. Romans 1:16 says, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek." Those who would promote so called "power evangelism" argue that the gifts are important evangelistic tools. They would argue that miracles and demonstrations of the power of God would cause someone to believe in the gospel. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus, told by Jesus in Luke 16, the rich man in hell begs Abraham to send Lazarus "to my father's house, for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment" (vs. 27b-28). Abraham then says "They have Moses and the prophets". The rich man argued the same argument as "power evangelists" do today. "No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent" (vs. 30). Abraham's reply is this, "If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead." So miracles do nothing to save the lost. God must first perform a sovereign work of regeneration before someone can believe.
The children of Israel witnessed many many miracles. They witnessed the 10 plagues in Egypt. They saw the parting of the Red Sea. They were guided by the pillar of fire at night and the pillar of cloud during the day. They were fed manna (a picture of Christ) for food. The drank from the rock (a picture of Christ) in the dessert. They heard God's very voice on Mt. Sinai. But, was this enough to give them faith? No, Hebrews says that they all died in the wilderness (except the families of Moses, Aaron, and Caleb) because of unbelief.
For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses? Now with whom was He angry forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose corpses fell in the wilderness? And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. - Hebrews 3:16-19
What did those miracles accomplish for those who died in the wilderness? They served as greater judgement for them in hell. But to God's elect they serve as a witness of God's power and deliverance in salvation.
God has not chosen the gifts of tongues and prophecy as His means of producing faith in unbelievers. Instead, "it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe." (1 Cor. 1:21).
Continualists do not necessarily believe that 'power evangelism' is needed. Thus, the Romans 1 passage also has nothing to do with Continuationism vs. Cessationism. The funny thing about this passage is that it says 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.' You cannot use the argument that sign gifts are useless at saving the lost if they worked for Moses. The point of this passage is not that these revelatory gifts (like prophecy, by Moses in this case) are useless in evangelism, but that all things are useless to someone as stubborn as this rich man! He didn't even hear the profound and capturing words through Moses. [side note: We know that miracles were okay for persuading belief in Jesus' authority - John 10:38 - But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.']
Continualists do not necessarily believe that 'power evangelism' is needed. Thus, the Romans 1 passage also has nothing to do with Continuationism vs. Cessationism. The funny thing about this passage is that it says 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.' You cannot use the argument that sign gifts are useless at saving the lost if they worked for Moses. The point of this passage is not that these revelatory gifts (like prophecy, by Moses in this case) are useless in evangelism, but that all things are useless to someone as stubborn as this rich man! He didn't even hear the profound and capturing words through Moses. [side note: We know that miracles were okay for persuading belief in Jesus' authority - John 10:38 - But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.']
Hebrews 1:1-2 says the following:
God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;
The Greek word elalesen (spoken) is an aorist tense verb. The aorist tense indicates an action that has been completed in the past. Is God still speaking to us today through new revelation (tongues and prophecy)? No, because God has already spoken through His Son. His revelation is complete. But when did God speak by His Son? The answer can be found in John.
"These things I have spoken to you while being present with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. - John 14:25-26
“I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you. - John 16:12-15
From these passages we see that the Apostles are not given anything apart from Jesus. Jesus was the true prophet. He had a set doctrine or teaching that he wanted to pass on to the disciples. However, the Holy Spirit would cause them to remember the things that Jesus taught. Even Paul was directly taught by the risen Jesus Christ (see Gal. 1:12 & 1 Cor. 11:23). Jesus is very clear in this passage that the Holy Spirit will speak only the things He hears from the Son (see "He will take of Mine and declare it to you" in vs 15). That is why the early church needed the gift of prophecy and tongues while the canon (list of books considered scripture) was being completed by the disciples. Theses gifts (as well as miracles) also authenticated the message being delivered.
The canon of scripture was eventually finished by John with the following warning in Revelations.
For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. - Rev. 22:18-19
When John wrote Revelation, he was aware of the fact that he was the only surviving eye witness and apostle. Therefore, this warning can be understood in a much broader sense than just the book of Revelation.
I have yet to find a new translation of the Bible that contains new revelation from a modern day tongues and prophecy. But why not? If a new tongue or prophecy is from God, then it should be recognized as the very words of God and added to the back of every Bible. Why should there be any distinction? If God has really spoken through a modern day prophet, then His words today should cary the same authority as His words spoken long ago. Many who argue that tongues and prophecy are for today would balk at such an idea. They know that their modern day tongue or prophecy do not have the same authority as scripture. But they fail to explain why.
My take on Hebrews 1:1-2 is that 'these last days' refers literally to these last days when Jesus was with them. Jesus' ministry was obvious. Plus, this is only half the sentence. In the greek, vv. 1-4 are all one sentence. The point of the sentence is to declare how superior Christ is. Usually when you are declaring something as the best, you compare it to the next best thing. Prophets were regarded as the greatest spiritual people. They were equipped with messages from God and outstanding miracles. I believe the reason the writer of Hebrews (and so many other writers of the NT) point out the prophets is to show that not even these 'great' people are a worthy comparison to that of Christ. The point is this: Christ is superior, even to the prophets.
To be clear, I agree that the Spirit brought things into remembrance at least for the disciples. The passages in John can also be understood to be further revelation by the Spirit through prophecy. We also need to note that the Spirit will not ONLY bring things to remembrance, for we were to be taught more by the Spirit after Jesus' Ascension (John 16:12-15). wups i put this in the wrong section: Another big problem with this argument is that many of the churches legitimately spoke in tongues and prophesied over each other, but we do not have records of what they spoke or said to each other in our canon of the Bible. why? because they are not expected to be part of the Bible - they're expected to edify the church.
My take on Hebrews 1:1-2 is that 'these last days' refers literally to these last days when Jesus was with them. Jesus' ministry was obvious. Plus, this is only half the sentence. In the greek, vv. 1-4 are all one sentence. The point of the sentence is to declare how superior Christ is. Usually when you are declaring something as the best, you compare it to the next best thing. Prophets were regarded as the greatest spiritual people. They were equipped with messages from God and outstanding miracles. I believe the reason the writer of Hebrews (and so many other writers of the NT) point out the prophets is to show that not even these 'great' people are a worthy comparison to that of Christ. The point is this: Christ is superior, even to the prophets.
To be clear, I agree that the Spirit brought things into remembrance at least for the disciples. The passages in John can also be understood to be further revelation by the Spirit through prophecy. We also need to note that the Spirit will not ONLY bring things to remembrance, for we were to be taught more by the Spirit after Jesus' Ascension (John 16:12-15). wups i put this in the wrong section: Another big problem with this argument is that many of the churches legitimately spoke in tongues and prophesied over each other, but we do not have records of what they spoke or said to each other in our canon of the Bible. why? because they are not expected to be part of the Bible - they're expected to edify the church.
Reason 4 - Our Hearts Are Deceitful Above All Things
Jeremiah 17:9 says the following about our hearts
“The heart is deceitful above all things, And desperately wicked; Who can know it?
Yet so many charismatics blindly follow inclinations and feelings in their heart that they think are from God. I once did this myself. My heart was deceiving myself into thinking that I was receiving revelation from God, when that revelation actually was coming from my own imagination and vanity. I was so deceived, that I actually thought that by making strange nonsensical noises, I was able to speak in an "angelic language". Jeremiah 23:25-26 explains that false prophecy comes from the deceit of our own hearts.
"I have heard what the prophets have said who prophesy lies in My name, saying, ‘I have dreamed, I have dreamed!’ How long will this be in the heart of the prophets who prophesy lies? Indeed they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart," - Jer. 23:25-26
"Is not My word like a fire?” says the LORD, And like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?" - Jer. 23:29
How do we know if a tongue or prophecy is from God? After all, it could be our imagination, or a hallucination. Charismatics usually have two answers for this.
- They quote 1 John 4:1 out of context, which says, "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God." The charismatic would interpret this passage by saying that we are to ask the spirit (the voice in our head) whether Jesus came in the flesh. But this is not what John is asking us to do. He is telling the church to test those who claim to be prophets by examining their doctrine. That is why John warns them that "many false prophets have gone out into the world".
- Secondly, those who believe that tongues and prophecy are for today usually say that a tongue or prophecy can be validated by comparing it with scripture. But if every prophecy must be compared with scripture, then why do we need the new tongue or prophecy.
The second point is based on the assumption that we need these gifts, which we don't. It's just nice to have them - they are extra, just like the lawn mower - just like mercy, pastors & teachers, just like encouragement. Also, a prophecy or tongue is not validated by Scripture, it can only be proven false by Scripture. I could say a million things that conform with Scripture, but none of them may be true. I would say that most people understand this fact and do not use the Bible as a means to VALIDATE, but only to DISPROVE.
Another big problem with this argument is that many of the churches legitimately spoke in tongues and prophesied over each other, but we do not have records of what they spoke or said to each other in our canon of the Bible. why? because they are not expected to be part of the Bible - they're expected to edify the church.
Reason 5 - We Are To Focus on God's Revealed Will
Many would argue that tongues and prophecy help us to understand God's secret plan for our lives. In this way, it is said that we can "get in on what God is going". Should we be focused on God's secret will? Actually, the Bible tells us the opposite.
“The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law. - Deut. 29:29
Instead of worrying about missing out on God's plan, we should trust that God is sovereign enough to direct us by orchestrating events according to His providence. This is tremendously freeing because we no longer need to worry about looking for signs of God's secret will (which is superstition). Believers never miss out on something "better" because "all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose" (Romans 8:28). This frees us to focus on obeying His revealed will (i.e. ten commandments). God will take care of the rest. Jesus says "If you love Me, keep My commandments" (John 14:15). He doesn't tell us to focus on new revelation. Instead, we are to focus our attention and energies on what He has revealed, "My commandments".
We are also told several times in the scriptures not to "interpret omens" (see Lev. 19:26 Deut. 18:10). However, this is exactly what Charismatics do when they interpret current events as signs from God.
This can be read to mean exactly the opposite. The secret things belong to the Lord our God (things that we do not know), but those things which are revealed (possibly through prophecy or tongues) belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of his law. It's ambiguous and not very good for making this point. Nevertheless, I understand what he meant. Many Continualists get caught up in seeking prophecy and tongues while ignoring other commands the Bible clearly gives us. That is a problem, but it is not the problem of the ideal Continualist who we are talking about.
I would also hazard to say that people who do not seek prophecy and tongues are MORE prone to seeking out 'God's secret will' through the physical, 'orchestrated' events and coincidences. If someone offers you a job out of the blue, it must be God's plan for you - this is not true! Satan offered Jesus all the kingdoms of the world. These are the people more prone to superstition by these terms.
I entirely disagree with the statement: 'Believers never miss out on something 'better' because 'all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.' Romans 8:28 is basically saying that God will never again forsake us, and the evidence is that all things will work for the good of those who love Him. Let's say that you know that God's will for you is to do thing A (preach to Nineveh). Instead of going to location A, you decide to disobey and go to location B (let's say.. Tarshish). Of course, going to location A would have been best, it was the will of God! But, going to location B opened up a lot of doors, like getting in a huge storm and being swallowed by a big fish. By the author's understanding, this is much better than just going straight to Nineveh. However, we can understand that this verse means that regardless of our decision to obey His will, He will love us and work for our good - it's His promised character after the covenant with Noah (not to destroy His created people). What I am saying is that Jonah probably would have had a much more pleasant time going straight to Nineveh than taking the round-about trip. This proves that Romans 8:28 doesn't talk about things being the BEST for those who love Him. Obviously, things are the best for those who follow His will, because He is faithful.
Thus, there really isn't any more 'safety and assurance' than the Continalist. Both parties have the same right to this truth, their belief in the continuation of spiritual gifts does not effect this.
This can be read to mean exactly the opposite. The secret things belong to the Lord our God (things that we do not know), but those things which are revealed (possibly through prophecy or tongues) belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of his law. It's ambiguous and not very good for making this point. Nevertheless, I understand what he meant. Many Continualists get caught up in seeking prophecy and tongues while ignoring other commands the Bible clearly gives us. That is a problem, but it is not the problem of the ideal Continualist who we are talking about.
I would also hazard to say that people who do not seek prophecy and tongues are MORE prone to seeking out 'God's secret will' through the physical, 'orchestrated' events and coincidences. If someone offers you a job out of the blue, it must be God's plan for you - this is not true! Satan offered Jesus all the kingdoms of the world. These are the people more prone to superstition by these terms.
I entirely disagree with the statement: 'Believers never miss out on something 'better' because 'all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.' Romans 8:28 is basically saying that God will never again forsake us, and the evidence is that all things will work for the good of those who love Him. Let's say that you know that God's will for you is to do thing A (preach to Nineveh). Instead of going to location A, you decide to disobey and go to location B (let's say.. Tarshish). Of course, going to location A would have been best, it was the will of God! But, going to location B opened up a lot of doors, like getting in a huge storm and being swallowed by a big fish. By the author's understanding, this is much better than just going straight to Nineveh. However, we can understand that this verse means that regardless of our decision to obey His will, He will love us and work for our good - it's His promised character after the covenant with Noah (not to destroy His created people). What I am saying is that Jonah probably would have had a much more pleasant time going straight to Nineveh than taking the round-about trip. This proves that Romans 8:28 doesn't talk about things being the BEST for those who love Him. Obviously, things are the best for those who follow His will, because He is faithful.
Thus, there really isn't any more 'safety and assurance' than the Continalist. Both parties have the same right to this truth, their belief in the continuation of spiritual gifts does not effect this.
Reason 6 - The Imperatives in 1 Corinthians 12:31 and 14:1 Are Mistranslations
Some would quote the following verses to show that we should "earnestly desire the best gifts" (prophecy, tongues, etc).
"But earnestly desire the best gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way." - 1 Cor. 12:31
"Pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy." - 1 Cor. 14:1
The Greek word for "earnestly desire" in vs 12:31 and "desire" in vs. 14:1 is zhlouvte (zaloute), which is a second person plural present active verb. The question at hand is whether this verb is in the imperative (a command) or indicative (a statement of fact) mood. The Greek verb ending -te is the verb ending for both imperative and indicative. In fact, Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida's Greek-English Lexicon even states that "It is also possible to understand zhlouvte in 1Cor 12:31 as being indicative and therefore translated as ‘you set your hearts on the more important gifts.’"
So, we need to look at the context to tell us if this verb is in the imperative or indicative mood. I would argue that the indicative mood makes much more sense with the subversive "yet I show you a more excellent way". In other words, Paul was stating the fact that they were zealously desiring the best gifts, which was causing divisions (chap. 12). Instead of desiring tongues and prophecy, they should have been desiring love, which in Paul's terms was "a more excellent way" (chap. 13).
The same is the case for 14:1. He tells them to pursue (diw¿kete - follow with haste) love. This verb should be translated as an imperative because of the context of chapter 13. Then the next verb "desire" (zhlouvte) should be translated indicative (statement of fact). Why? Because of the context of verse 14:12, which is a summary of 14:1-11.
"Even so you, since you are zealous for spiritual gifts, let it be for the edification of the church that you seek to excel." - 1 Cor. 14:12
Paul is stating that "since" they were zealous for spiritual gifts (indicative again), their overall concern should be for the edification of the church. There are no commands in scripture to seek spiritual gifts. Spiritual gifts are sovereignly given by the Holy Spirit and are not given to everyone in the same way (1 Cor. 12:30). That is why they are called gifts.
Honestly, I'm not very good with these words and definitions, but I do know that even if they are to pursue mostly after love, the other gifts can still exist. We are to pursue after God, yet marriage and the world and the sky and heaven all exist. So, I believe that when we are told that love is the greatest of these, that we should pursue love the most. By my view, spiritual gifts are ways of expressing love towards the church and expressing praise to God. Encouragement is a perfect example of this. We encourage others in the church and express love, and glorify God by acknowledging and proclaiming that His creation is good.
I don't understand how he got to the conclusion that the Bible never says to seek after spiritual gifts. I figured it out. But, Solomon asked for wisdom after sacrificing a thousand burnt offering on Gibeon.
I'm really not sure whether we should desire spiritual gifts at this point, but I will find out soon.
Either way, the gifts still exist even if we do not desire after them. This argument is no good against Continuationism.
Either way, the gifts still exist even if we do not desire after them. This argument is no good against Continuationism.
Reason 7 - The Scriptures Tell Us That The Revelatory Gifts Have Ceased
Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away. When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known. And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love. - 1 Corinthians 13:8-13
It is clear from this passage that tongues, prophecy, and words of knowledge will cease. The main issue is when they will cease. It is interesting to note that these three gifts are specifically called out as being temporary, in contrast to faith, hope and love. Why? I believe it is because they are revelatory.
Verse 10 tells us exactly when these gifts will cease, namely "when that which is perfect has come". The Greek word telios (perfect) means "brought to its end, finished; lacking nothing necessary to completeness; perfect" according to Thayer's Greek Lexicon and "having reached its end, finished, complete" according to the Liddell & Scott Greek lexicon. In other words, when the finishing of something has come, these gifts will cease. Here are some common interpretations of the word "perfect" (telios) in 1 Cor. 13:10.
- maturity attained in our glorified state. This mixes metaphors (explained below).
- the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ. However, Christ is never described in the neuter gender. This also mixes metaphors (explained below).
- the completion of the canon.
I believe the 3rd interpretation is correct for the following reasons. Firstly, this interpretation better explains how prophecy, tongues and words of new knowledge are incomplete (see "For we know in part and we prophecy in part" in verse 9). They are incomplete because, at that period in history, God had not completed them. Secondly, the third interpretation fits perfectly with the two metaphors that Paul uses to explain how the church's knowledge will become complete. The two metaphors that Paul uses to explain the contrast between knowing or prophesying in part and complete knowledge are as follows:
- knowledge of a child vs. knowledge of a man
- seeing through a dim mirror vs. seeing face to face
It can not be emphasized enough that these metaphors must be taken as metaphors. The first mistake people make in this passage is to interpret the "face to face" as the 2nd coming of Christ. But this would be mixing the metaphor ("seeing in a mirror") with something real (seeing Jesus Christ at His 2nd coming). Paul would never mix a metaphor with reality. If the first part is metaphorical (seeing in a mirror) so must the 2nd part (seeing in face to face). So, Paul is telling us that the completion of the canon will be like looking at someone face to face, compared to looking through the dim reflection of a 1st century mirror.
I believe that they are temporary because they are partial. We know them only as partial, because they are certain occurrences in time, revelations. When the perfect comes, Second Coming, the partial will pass away and complete KNOWING will be. There will be no need for revelation in this sense because 'all things will be made known to us.'
The older, mature man puts away his childish thoughts, but he doesn't stop thinking. He puts away his childish words, but doesn't stop speaking. When complete knowledge comes, we will put away the partial because we have something greater, just like the man has greater vocabulary and a greater mental/reasoning capacity.
My Thoughts:
This guy may have left because his church was teaching him that these gifts were necessary for the advancement of the church. He may have been in a church that believed in tongues as proof of salvation and who believed in 'baptism of the spirit' as necessary for salvation. These do not have anything to do with Cessationism vs. Continuationism. They are side problems.
Making arguments based off of assumptions that a smaller party holds the same beliefs as the larger party's core beliefs is dangerous. Charismatics are a sect of Continuationism - not the measuring stick to make arguments based off of.
You also need to address the CORE and NECESSARY beliefs of the idea, not the ones that can be viewed as possible.
You also need to look at the situation ideally, or theoretically, rather than pointing out the flaws in the humans who are involved in the situation.
another one - this should be labeled an Offense against Charismatics rather than a Defense of Cessationism. Slightly misleading, but it's good to go through these arguments anyways.
