ECT Challenge for modern day signs and wonders adherents

[musterion]

This is an article defending the cessationist position from a strict mid-Acts viewpoint. It explains not only that tongues, etc, passed away but when they did so. I think it's excellent; thorough and likely irrefutable. If you disagree, this thread is created for you to refute the article point by point. If you choose to attempt it, please answer Scripture with Scripture and logic with logic. Comport yourselves like adults; avoid emotionalism (looking at you, Tot), straw men (looking at you, Andy) and ad hominem (looking at you, Oatmeal).

CrossPurposes, don't even bother. This is way out of your depth.

 

[jamie]

The word "tongues" is defined in Acts 2 as languages.

Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together and were confounded because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, "Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?" (Acts 2:6-8 KJV)​

 

[OCTOBER23]

OLD TOPIC REPEATED MANY TIMES AND TIME AND HALF A TIME

 

[Cross Reference]

This is an article defending the cessationist position from a strict mid-Acts viewpoint. It explains not only that tongues, etc, passed away but when they did so. I think it's excellent; thorough and likely irrefutable. If you disagree, this thread is created for you to refute the article point by point. If you choose to attempt it, please answer Scripture with Scripture and logic with logic. Comport yourselves like adults; avoid emotionalism (looking at you, Tot), straw men (looking at you, Andy) and ad hominem (looking at you, Oatmeal).

CrossPurposes, don't even bother. This is way out of your depth.

CrossPurposes? That reads like you might be addressing me so here's my "solicited" comment:

Cessationism __ irrefutable you say?? LOL!!

Your "excellent paper" reads like something Leonardo De vinci would come up with and if that is all you have to offer ___ your OP won't last long.

 

[elohiym]

the Lord revealed to him that those sign gifts were going to cease:

“whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away” (1 Cor. 13:8).​

Paul's statement cannot mean those "sign gifts" were going to cease. Let us know when you see knowledge vanish away like you believe tongues have ceased.

 

[musterion]

Paul's statement cannot mean those "sign gifts" were going to cease. Let us know when you see knowledge vanish away like you believe tongues have ceased.

The supernatural gift of words of knowledge (1 Cor 12:8).

Chapter 13 comes after chapter 12. Did you know that?

Context can be your friend, if you let it.

 

[Stripe]

This is an article defending the cessationist position from a strict mid-Acts viewpoint. It explains not only that tongues, etc, passed away but when they did so. I think it's excellent; thorough and likely irrefutable.

It is not a useful article for someone committed to Pentecostalism, as it assumes the truth of cessatonism and uses arguments from silence to show the end of tongues and healing. It's not wrong because of those things, but it will not convince someone who does not want to consider reality.

 

[Cross Reference]

The supernatural gift of words of knowledge (1 Cor 12:8).

Chapter 13 comes after chapter 12. Did you know that?

Context can be your friend, if you let it.

And Chapter 14 comes after Chapter 13.

. . more Devinci style concocted theories that never got anywhere except in funny books.

 

[Cross Reference]

It is not a useful article for someone committed to Pentecostalism, as it assumes the truth of cessatonism and uses arguments from silence to show the end of tongues and healing. It's not wrong because of those things, but it will not convince someone who does not want to consider reality.

. . nor one with a wrong stripe living in reality.

 

[musterion]

It is not a useful article for someone committed to Pentecostalism, as it assumes the truth of cessatonism and uses arguments from silence to show the end of tongues and healing.

Paul indicating that he was no longer able to heal that which he'd healed before (and much worse) is hardly an argument from silence, but let's run with that for a moment. I grant you their minds are made up but it should still be a simple matter for a serious pentecostal (which excludes CrossEyed) to use the same passages of Scripture as cited in the article to demonstrate their assumption is true: that the sign gifts never stopped and are still active. That's the challenge.

 

[patrick jane]

This is an article defending the cessationist position from a strict mid-Acts viewpoint. It explains not only that tongues, etc, passed away but when they did so. I think it's excellent; thorough and likely irrefutable. If you disagree, this thread is created for you to refute the article point by point. If you choose to attempt it, please answer Scripture with Scripture and logic with logic. Comport yourselves like adults; avoid emotionalism (looking at you, Tot), straw men (looking at you, Andy) and ad hominem (looking at you, Oatmeal).

CrossPurposes, don't even bother. This is way out of your depth.

excellent thread and post. i tried to touch on the "timeline" of Paul's writings in other threads and posts, not nearly as detailed as the article. this is very important when rightly dividing - understanding. awesome ! ! ! - atrol:

 

[oatmeal]

This is an article defending the cessationist position from a strict mid-Acts viewpoint. It explains not only that tongues, etc, passed away but when they did so. I think it's excellent; thorough and likely irrefutable. If you disagree, this thread is created for you to refute the article point by point. If you choose to attempt it, please answer Scripture with Scripture and logic with logic. Comport yourselves like adults; avoid emotionalism (looking at you, Tot), straw men (looking at you, Andy) and ad hominem (looking at you, Oatmeal).

CrossPurposes, don't even bother. This is way out of your depth.

and ad hominem (looking at you, Oatmeal).

So

ad hominem

you throw the first

ad hominem

punch!

Nice start!

 

[Stripe]

Paul indicating that he was no longer able to heal that which he'd healed before (and much worse) is hardly an argument from silence.

That point would have made the article more compelling.

It should still be a simple matter for a serious pentecostal (which excludes CrossEyed) to use the same passages of Scripture as cited in the article to demonstrate their assumption is true: that the sign gifts never stopped and are still active. That's the challenge.

That is a good challenge. :up:

The presuppositionalist point of view holds that what is a man believes make sense in the light of reality. Reality today is that there are no healings and that tongues are the ravings of the weak-minded.

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Mar 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
Mar 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

 

[musterion]

That point would have made the article more compelling.

The writer made precisely that point (bold mine):

And as for the gift of healing, we read of a co-worker of Paul’s, Epaphroditus, who fell seriously ill during this time (Phil. 2:25-30) and Paul no longer had the gift of healing, and was no longer able to heal as he did only a few years earlier in Acts 28:9. The sign gifts were no longer operating at the time that Paul wrote the Prison Epistles ...

And, again, in places where we would have expected Paul to mention the sign gifts, he is silent. When Paul gives Timothy and Titus instructions regarding the choice of men to be elders in the churches, Paul says nothing about the desirability of these men having a gift such as prophecy, or healing, or other sign gifts (see Titus 1:6-9 and 1 Tim. 3:1-10). The gifts of tongues, prophecy, etc. were no longer in operation by the time Paul wrote the pastoral epistles.

It is clear that the gift of healing has ceased because, as in Philippians, Paul was no longer able to heal, even his co-workers. Timothy was suffering stomach problems and frequent infirmities (1 Tim. 5:23) and Paul can’t heal him, doesn’t recommend that he go to a healer in the church, doesn’t send a prayer cloth or a bottle of anointing oil (remember the miracles of some 8 years earlier in Acts 19:11-12). Likewise in 2 Timothy 4:20, Paul has to leave behind his co-worker Trophimus who had fallen sick on the last journey. Paul’s gift of healing (Acts 28:9) was no longer operating in Philippians 2:27, 1 Timothy 5:23 and 2 Timothy 4:20.

That is a good challenge. :up:

Notice that, for now, they only snipe at it but haven't actually taken it yet. Maybe they took Sunday off.

 

[elohiym]

Reality today is that there are no healings ...

How are you defining healings?

 

[musterion]

Originally Posted by Stripe
Reality today is that there are no healings ...

I disagree with that. What I agree with is that God isn't using healers.

 

[elohiym]

The supernatural gift of words of knowledge (1 Cor 12:8).

Give an example. I think you are misinterpreting the verse.

 

[musterion]

Give an example. I think you are misinterpreting the verse.

Show I've misinterpreted it without my example.

 

[elohiym]

I disagree with that. What I disagree with is that God still uses healers.

God's not involved when a physician heals? You know he is.

So be more specific. I might not disagree.