I Corinthians 1:7 shows that gifts continue

today or not

If I am hearing correctly, this is the train of thought introduced years ago that I here Bob Ryan speaking toward. That there are still twelve positions of Apostolic nature in operation today. That God established twelve Apostolic positions and maintained Twelve even after Judas, Paul being the Twelth God chose, not the one chosen by the presbetry. This doctrine belongs to another denomination. Five fold ministry, the belief that says that any of the gifts stated, of which Paul number (first Apostles) are still alive until the return of Christ in the same power as the first century church. Is this the type of refernce you are basing your argument?
Jtown5

 

jtown

I have never heard that spin on things. Paul is not one of the 12 according to I Corinthians 15, since Christ appeared to the 12 with Judas' dead before Paul was a Christian.

There were more than 12 apostles in the first century. i believe there have been several apostles throughout history. Some possibilities are men like Patric, apostle to Ireland, and a few others.

 

BobRyan

I see nothing in scripture to limit the 'big miracles' to transitional periods. Jesus said he that believeth in Me, the works that I do, shall he do also, and greater works than these shall he do.

Btw, I heard of an account of a missionary in Irian Jaya (on the island of New Guinea) living among a stone age tribe. They really mourned over death and had no hope. One time a boy drowned in a muddy area. The people really mourned over it. The missionary laid hands on him and he came back. The village opened to the Gospel from that day forward.

Before I met my wife, she was on a bus here in Jakarta that had a traffic accident. The bus had hit someone. The driver was really scared. Moved with compassion, she got out of the bus, went over to the guy, and started praying for him out loud in the name of Jesus. She commanded his spirit to come back in his body in the name of Jesus. Just after she did that, the man exhaled and started breathing again. She opened her eyes, and everyone was looking at her, mostly Muslims probably. She told them to get the man a taxi to take him to the hospital and got back in the bus. The person travelling with her was upset saying she could have gotten into trouble doing that. They were on their way to a Bible study.

 

You don't have any scriptural authority to interpret these events as gifts gradually dying out. When it comes to revelation, there is an increase in cases of gifts toward the end of the lives of the 12, as John received a very spectacular revelation toward the end of that era.
Also, Paul DID NOT HEAL HIMSELF EARLY ON when he had the eye problem mentioned in Galatians. Galatians is most likely a very early epistle, written before the events of Acts 15. That seems to be the majority view among Bible-believing commentators these days from what I've read. Paul was among the Galatians because of an infirmity, and if they could, they would have plucked out their own eyes and given them to him. He probably had an eye disease.
So early on, Paul didn't just heal all the time like Superman using his powers. The will of God came into play. The apostles did just always heal based on their own will. In Acts 4, early on, they had to pray for God to grant that signs and wonders be done, and then there was a big batch of them. Peter didn't just run in and raise Tabitha from the dead. He prayed first.
So this idea that Paul's ability to do signs just waned away at the end isn't accurate. The will of God came into play from early on until late in his ministry.

And I see nothing in the II Corinthians passage, many, many years after Paul mentioned his eye problem in Galatians, to think that the 'thorn' was a medical problem. Paul calls it/him/her a messenger of Satan (or angel of Satan) sent to buffet him. The context is about Paul enduring persecution. The 'thorn' could have been a devil sent to stir up persecution. Or perhaps it was a false apostle, a messenger of Satan who stirred up persecution against him.

DHK,
The difference between the two of us on this is that you have to see the word of God in practice to believe it. I believe what it says. I have seen some healing. have I seen a multitude healed? No. Does that mean it doesn't happen? No it doesn't. And God can heal a multitude by the gift of healing if He chooses to, and there is nothing in the Bible to say that He won't. I don't see any scripture that says that DHK has to experience something in order for it to be true. The Bible is enough. I don't need to add your experience to the Bible to make the Bible true.
And you have not answered my challenge to you. Show me in scripture that someone has to heal a whole multitude for it to be the gift of healing. If someone says, "In the name of Jesus Christ, walk" that is not prayer, so how can you call it God healing in response to prayer? On some occasions, Paul healed one person. How can you say that was not the gift of healing?
And I don't think someone has to be as dramatic as the apostles to have a gift of the Spirit.
I would like you to clarify something. I noticed that 'pneumatika' in I Corinthians 12:1 is translated as 'spiritual gift.' Elsewhere, 'charisma' is usually translated as 'gift.' Do you not believe in 'charisma' operating today or 'pneumatika' or both?

This type of thinking is at the root of some heretical beliefs. You know, I ran across a hyperdispensationalist on the Internet once who had his 'time periods' set up so that water baptism was no longer necessary, and was only for the Jews in the early part of the church age. Of course, she didn't have scripture to back up her time periods. Just like you don't have any scripture that shows that God deal differently than he did in the first century, or for gifts of healing or miracles ceasing.

I have heard and read of a similar incident in Timur in the 60's as they crossed a lake to evangelise and did a number of other miracles during a revival. I met a Timurese fellow here in Jakarta a couple of years ago who went to the same neighborhood fellowship with me. He said he did his thesis on this, and had talked with people who saw some of the miracles and gave their accounts of them. I moved and never did get a copy of the thesis, as he had offered.
By the way, have you ever seen someone who did not believe in the continuance of the gifts pray for the sick and that sick person get healed? Have you ever seen a die-hard cessationist elder lay hands on the sick and sick got better? I suppose it could happen, but it would seem people who have faith for these things have a bigger view of God than that.

 

I've run accross Independant Baptists and some from the ('Plymouth') Brethren movement who believe in apostles as church planters. I see the role more that way, though I'd be hesitant to accept that someone was an apostle who had not done signs and wonders.
I once moderated a church planting list of predominantly house church people. There were a number of church planters on there. A lot of people in the house church movement have really gone to radical extremes in doing things Biblically. They meet in homes, have meetings where 'every one of you' can use their gifts in their meetings based on the guidelines in I Corinthians 12, getting rid of just one sermon per meeting. They also have accepted the role of the church and plural elders in a congregation instead of the pastoral system. A lot of them, that is. There is such an openness to just going with what the Bible says. Therefore, a lot of them believe in apostles ministering today. If someone is an apostle, they don't think of him as a superhuman person who they all have to flock around. The ones on the list seemed to think of apostles more like church planters sent by God, usually recognized by the saints.
There were several church planters on the list. I asked if any of them were apostles, and if they had ever done signs and wonders. Two or maybe three said yes. They had done signs and wonders in their ministries. One of them is well-known in missions circles among for planting churches and doing 'coaching' for church planters who work in the Mslim world. He is probably not well known outside of those missions circles and the house church movement, however.
I wouldn't be surprised if I know a few apostles. I may have had one spend the night in my house a week or two ago. He is from a 'Baptistic' denomination. One way he wins people to the Lord, particularly guys who've been to Mecca, is ministering to them until their cancer, crippled condition, etc. is healed and then sharing the Gospel with them and their families. He has won people in the part of this country that most resembles Saudi for being closed to the word, or used to before a year and a half ago.
By the way, Bob, it is a blessing to hear your testimonies of howyou ahve seen God work.

 

I agree the gifts given to the church in 1Cor 12 - and Eph 4 indicate no sign of "ending" before the 2nd coming.

What a witness!

Praise God.

In Christ,

Bob

 

err - umm . you might want to find a "quote" to that effect from me.

Hint: in the special case of an "apostle" what was the "criteria" for determining that someone was an "Apostle" in the NT?

Think about it.

 

You will strain at a gnat to try to prove your point. The Book of Revelation has nothing to do with the gifts of the Spirit. I think you know that. So why bring another red herrring into this discussion? What gift of the Spirit was John exercisin? None! God was giving him revelation--the last book of the completed canon. This had nothing to do with the gifts of the Spirit.

Again another red herring. This also had nothing to do with the gifts of the Spirit. It was a special circumstance. Read the context. Paul had just stated that God had taken him up to the "third heaven," where he saw things that were unlawful for him to speak of. In other words he saw things similar to what John wrote about. And lest he be proud and puffed up about this great experience God humbled him with this physical affliction which he refers to as a thorn in the flesh. Read the conclusion.

2 Corinthians 12:9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.
--He in as much says it was an infirmity, a weakness. The following verse verifies the same. However this had nothing to do with spiritual gifts did it? It is just a red herring to get us off topic, or to try, in a vain attempt to prove a point that cannot be supported by Scripture.

I agree with that. There were only certain times in their ministry when they used these gifts. The Charismatics don't agree. Look at the Charismatics today. "Come and get your miracle today." (Literature I received in the mail)
Everyone should speak in tongues.
All should prophesy.
--The above statements are heretical even in Biblical times, much less in our age when the gifts have ceased. Satan imitates the things that are of God, and deceives the very elect.

This is an usubstantiated claim. As time went on in Paul's ministry he prayed for individuals--Timothy, Epahproditus, Trophimus, himself included, and many others. Some of them were healed and some were not. He spent much time in prison. There was no prison doors miraculously opening as in the case of Peter in Acts 12. Prayer is not a gift of the Spirit. We all have the ability to pray. Paul rightly points out in 2Cor.12:12 that signs, wonders, and mighty deeds were the signs or marks of an apostle. But your unbelief keeps you from believing the straightforward statement of the Word of God.

The key word in your statement is could have, but it wasn't. I pointed out the context to you. He immediately says: "Most gladly therefore will I glory in my infirmities. The word infirmity refers back to the thorn in the flesh, not to persecution. The messenger of Satan was sent by God, even as God allowed Satan to attack Job. This is not unususal for God to allow Satan to test us, as he did Jesus also. Paul writes to the Galatians: See how large a letter I have written you, referring to the large letters that he wrote in. He wrote the letter himself, not using an emmanuensis. His letters were big because his eyesight was poor.

Rather, the difference is that you base your theology on experience and I base my theology on the Word of God. Let's use some other examples of the same sort.
I say that God doesn't speak anymore through burning bushes that are not consumed. You say he does. We just don't see it happening.
I say that God doesn't divide great bodies of water like the Red Sea by simply stretching out a rod. You say God does. We simply don't see it.
I say that we don't see the sun, moon, and stars stand still. You say they do. We just don't personally observe it.
I say we don't observe miraculous events like the sundials shadow turning back instead of forward. You say it happens, but we don't observe it.
I say that people can''t walk on water (like Peter did). You say they can, we just don't observe it.

And on and on it goes. Charismatics base their religion on experiences that either don't happen, can't be verified, or are so outlandish that they can't be believed in the first place. You theology is all experience based. It has nothing to do with the Bible, and everything to do with experience. Without experience your entire religion falls apart. Your Christianity is bogus simply because it is based on experience rather than the Word of God. Sorry to be so harsh but it is true. If the Word of God is not the foundation, than all is in vain.

1 Corinthians 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
--This is not true of the Charismatic movement. The foundation is experience; not Christ; not the Word of God.

When Peter and John told lame man to rise up and walk. The result was; "He walking and leaping and praising God." He was healed instantly. This was more a miracle than a healing, though both were involved. Even the Pharisees conceded that "a notable miracle has been done." These miracles do not take place in spite of you lame claim that they do, we just don't see them. We just don't see the sun moon and stars stand still either.
We just don't see the gift of healing as deommstrated by Peter in Acts 5:16 take place today either. The gift of healing has passed. It is up to you to demonstrate that it hasn't and you can't. You can't just like you can't demonstrate that people walk on water or communicate with God through burning bushes that burn and yet are not consumed.

I don't believe that the gifts of the Spirit as listed in 1Cor.12:28 and 12:4-11 are for today. That should be good enough to answer your question.

I have plenty of Scripture. And you know I do. I have given it to you. So has Briguy and others. The fact that you don't accept Scriptural evidence doesn't make the evidence go away. Don't deny that there isn't any evidence just because you don't believe it.
DHK

 

I am a cessationist (in case you didn't know). I have laid hands on the sick according to James chapter five (not a gift of the Spirit). I have seen people healed accordingly. This is Biblical. This is another red herring from you to try and justify your theology based on experience. I feel sorry for you.
You need to study the Word of God, and get grounded in it. Your theology needs to be based on God's Word, centered on Christ. Instead everything is centered around experiences. That really is pitiful.
DHK

 

Link,

bmerr here. In 1 Cor 13:8-12, Paul contrasts "that which is in part", or incomplete, with "that which is perfect", or complete. At the time of his writing, the things that were in part were knowledge and prophecy. Paul says that these, as well as tongues, shall fail, cease, and vanish away (13:8).

Each of these were methods used to reveal the word of God through the apostles and others endued with such gifts. Other gifts were used to confirm the word (Mark 16:20).

Keeping with the context of miraculous knowledge and prophecy, Paul goes on to compare "that which is in part" with speaking and understanding as a child (13:11), and "that which is perfect" with becoming a man, at which time childish things are put away.

There are no more miraculous spiritual gifts today, as there is no longer a need for them. The word has long since been confirmed. The faith has once for all been delivered to the saints (Jude 3). We are now to study to shew ourselves approved unto God, workmen that need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Tim 2:15), because there is no more miraculous knowledge.

In addition to this, the church at Corinth no longer exists, if I'm not mistaken.

In Christ,

bmerr

 

And this is exactly why it cannot refer to the completed canon. The coming of the perfect was something Paul would experience himself. Also, if you say having the canon is being perfect/mature, then that makes Paul like a child in comparison to you, because you have the canon, and you do not.

And if we know the NT scriptures are authoritative because they came to us through apostles, and the apostles had a childish understanding because they did not have the scriptures, then why would they be so authoratative. Martin Lloyd Jones realized this flaw in reasoning and pointed this out in one of his articles, though not in the same words.

God did confirm the word with signs and wonders. But the Bible does not teach that this is _the purpose_ of signs and wonders. And it certainly does not say that this is the purpose of the I Corinthians 12 gifts.

I Corinthians 12 and the subsequent passages tell us that these gifts are 'to profit withall' and to edify the body of Christ. The body of Christ is still here and still needs edifying. Therefore, it does not make sense that the purpose of the gifts has ceased.

Signs bore witness to the word over and over again in the record of scripture. The idea that signs would confirm a specific set of books is not found in scripture. That is a doctrine not based on scripture, so you should reject it if you want to be sola scriptura. If it is not a doctrine that has no scriptural basis, show me the scripture that says that signs were to confirm the books of the New Testament.

Clearly there is a difference from the listeners perspective between Peter saying, the message I preach to you was confirmed by all the miracles Jesus did, and Peter actually doing a miracle. There is a difference between Paul saying the word he preached was confirmed by Jesus' miracles and the miracles that occured in the early days of the Jerusalem church, and Paul actually doing miracles. Do you expect people hearing about the miracles of scripture having the same effect as their seeing miracles today? It does not have the same effect, but not everyone demands to see a miracle before they believe. And many who saw what Jesus did still did not believe.

Paul wrote that verse about studying in a time when there was revealed knowledge. Jude wrote that verse about the faith having been delivered to the saints before the New Testament scriptures were complete, and during a time when there was revealed knowledge.

I met an evangelical believer from Corinth a few years ago who would diagree with you.

The epistle was written to all of us, too, if you will check the beginning of it.

 

I wrote,
Originally Posted by Link
You don't have any scriptural authority to interpret these events as gifts gradually dying out. When it comes to revelation, there is an increase in cases of gifts toward the end of the lives of the 12, as John received a very spectacular revelation toward the end of that era.

 

I wrote

DHK wrote

Where do I argue from experience? I argue from scripture. You argue from experience.
You say we don't see everyone healed like in Acts 5, and therefore argue that the gift of healing is gone. You have not seen it. You have not experienced it.
I ask you for scripture that shows that the gift of healing ceased, and you give me lame arguments like the fact that Paul did not always heal everyone. You have yet to show a scripture that shows that the gifts of healing or miracles ceased.

First, quote me and show me where I said that.
What I would say is that God could speak in such a way now if He so chose. There is no scripture that says He will not.
You say He does not. But you have no scripture to back you up. You have a theology that limits God's sovereignty based on your own opinion and not scripture.

I don't say He does or does not. I say God is God and He can do that if He wishes. He never promised not to. What you see is irrelevant to what God can do. God can do a lot of things DHK has not seen.

I say God can do so if He wishes.

I say, God can still work miracles He chooses. The fact that your experience is lacking, and you depend on experience for your belief system on matters like this, does not make the Bible any less true.

The irony here is I am backing up my arguments with scripture, and you are backing yours up by dismissing things you have not experienced.
The Bible says God gives gifts of the working of miracles and healing to the church. It also shows miracles being done when the Gospel was brought to a new area. If not a single person in a whole country does a miracle for 100 years, that does not mean that God does not give the gift. If the Bible says the Spirit gives the gift as He wills, then we need to believe the scriptures. You obviously have a problem with that. You have not produced any scripture that says that the gifts of healing and working of miracles have ceased, and yet you do not believe they operate.
The Bible also shows us that we are to desire spiritual gifts, and Christ taught His disciples to pray for what they wanted. So God can answer prayers in faith for gifts of the Spirit as well.
By the way, it is not true that experience has nothing to do with our faith. Have you experienced being born again? Romans 5 shows us that experience in the faith is a good things. God can use experiences to mold us and strengthen our faith. We should not base doctrine on our intepretation of experience. But we should not reject things the Bible teaches are real just because we haven't experienced them.

The 'Charismatic movement' is diverse like the 'dispensational movement.' There are plenty of born again charismatics built on the foundation of Christ, just as there are Baptists. And there are some who go to Charismatic churches, or Baptists churches, who do not have true faith in Christ. So your wide-brush attempts at painting movements border on slander if they do not cross the line.
Besides, the Bible says 'if so be ye have tasted, that the Lord, He is gracious...' We are to experience God and His grace, not just read about it.

What is your Biblical criteria for identifying whether something is a healing or a miracle? In Acts 5, when they were all healed, how can you say that was not also a miracle? If someone is healed by a miracle, how can you say it was not also a healing?
If you don't even have criteria for this, how can you set up Acts 5 as the standard for what the gift of healing is and insist that only those who heal them all have it?
Since you don't have any scripture to back up the idea that the gift of healing has ceased, the only way for you to logically argue that they have ceased with integrity is to research every single claim that is made and ever has been made. Of course, your results would not be conclusive. I have never exercised these particular gifts and I do not make it a habit to collect data on them. Find someone who does collect data on them and go interview some people.

I have not heard reports of these particular miracles. I have heard reports of others. I have seen some other manifestations of the gifts, particularly words of knowledge, some that were rather spectacular. Gifts don't have to be spectacular, but they should be done in a way that is edifying.
If you don't see a demonstration of something for yourself, do you not believe in it? Did you see Jesus raised from the dead? What would you say to an unbeliever who said he would not believe in Jesus' resurrection unless he saw the risen Christ? Is not seeing something grounds for rejecting Biblical truth?
I wrote,

DHK responded

I suspect you have not thought the issue through yet. Romans 12 lists several 'gracious bestowals', or 'gifts' (charismata) including teaching. I do not think the passage calls them 'pneumatika.' Do you see a distinction?
I Corinthians calls those nine gifts 'charismata' as well.

 

The problem is that the scripture you give does not support your views. And you cannot answer my points when I point out the flaws in your reasoning. For example, you can't explain away the fact that the apostles being marked by signs, wonders, and mighty deeds does not exclude non apostles from using gifts of the Spirit. The fact that God confirmed the word to the Hebrews through signs wonders and mighty deeds is not an argument against the continuation of the gifts. etc.

DHK,
This is not something I base theology on. Just something I wanted to ask. It seems like a lot of those who pray the 'prayer of faith' have a pretty big view of God and how He can operate in this world. But God is a lot bigger than my experience and I acknowledge that. I am glad to be proven wrong, however.
Btw, what would you say to someone who said he did not believe you and dismissed the healings you have seen that were healed as either lies or coincidence?

Take your own advice. If you have not seen God do something, particularly something that lines up with the word, that does not mean God does not do such things. Notice, I am the one here basing my belief in the continuance of the gift of healing on the word. Your biggest argument against it is that you just don't see these things these days.

 

Thats some very good points Link~ :wavey:

 

I have explained the Scripture in Hebrews. You simply say: "no, no that is not what it means." Thus you stay in a state of denial and unbelief accepting a twisted interpretation of the Scripture. Heb.2:3,4 is quite plain. The gospel message was "confirmed to us by them with..." And the signs and wonders and specifically gifts of the spirit that are mentioned as accompanying the apostles then do not exist today. We don't have the Apostles either today, for the sign accompanied them to verify their message. We have the Word of God.
It is an evil and adulterous generation that seeks after a sign. We have the Word of God, and don't require a sign.

Now consider carefully. There were only three times in all of Biblical history where there was a great manifestation of miracles, God working through mankind.
1. In the days of Moses. There were the 10 plagues, the crossing of the Red Sea, and many other miracles performed in the presence of the Israelites by God through the hand of Moses. Why?
Moses was the instrument of God through which the Law came. We have the Books of Moses. Much of the Old Testament came by the hand of Moses. God's revelation came through Moses. Revelation to the Jews was accompanied by signs and wonders.

2. There was a great display of miracles during the time of Elijah and Elisha. This is the second period in history when God poured out an unusual number of miraculous events for His people. Why? Because it was a time of giving of His revelation to His people. This was the time of the prophets. It signified prophetic revelation. The prophets wrote most of the rest of the Old Testament, and Elijah and Elisha were representative of those prophets.

3. The time of Jesus and the Apostles. This was the final time of revelation. It was the time of the writing the New Testament. It was also the time of the life of Christ. The miracles pointed to the divinity of Christ and the revelation of the New Testament. In each period signs and wonders verified the messengers of God's revelation.

Hebrews 1:1-2 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
--God used various methods to speak to Israel through the prophets: audibly, in visions, dreams, theophanies, etc.
But today he speaks "through his son," which is through the Word of God. At one time His Son was in the flesh on this earth. But since His ascension into heaven he has left us this Book. Everything we need to know about Christ is contained in this Book. There is no revelation outside of this Book, which we call the Bible. It is God's revelation of Himself to mankind.

This your problem. You are banging head aganst the wall saying over and over again that "the gifts continue; the gifts continue; the gifts contihne, etc.," when in fact the Bible teaches they have ceased. You have based you theology on something that doesn't exist anymore You can't even come up with the evidence that it is in existence though I have challenged you over and over again.
1. God did miracles in the age of Moses. Thus Moses could bring forth miracles such as the Ten Plagues before Pharaoh. They have never again been duplicated.

2. God did miracles in the age of Elijah and Elisha. Thus we saw miracles like the iron axehead float, the calling of fire down from heaven, rain not coming for three and a half months, the crossing of the Jordan river, etc. All of these miracles have never been duplicated.

3. God did miracles in the days of Christ and the Apostles.
Peter walked on water. Peter demonstrated the gift of healing in Acts 5:16
The gift of tongues was demonstrated on the Day of Pentecost where "each one heard in their "own language."
The signs and miracles of this time have never been duplicated to this day.
And yet you say they have and cannot produce the evidence. So why should anyone believe you? It makes your entire religion fraudulent.
DHK

 

DHK wrote

DHK
Again, the verse still says anything about gifts ceasing. It tells us that they that heard the Lord and preached the word to 'us' (apparently the group the readers and writer were a part of) with signs, wonders, and gifts of the Holy Ghost.
1. It does not say anything about gifts only being for the immediate readers. In fact, we know from other scripture that the apostles and others did signs, wonders, and exercised gifts of the Spirit to groups other than the Hebrews.
2. It does not say that these things were restricted only to those who heard the Lord. Other scripture shows that the Corinthian church also had gifts of the Spirit. Are you saying this passage contradicts I Corinthians 12? Please do not ignore the question.
I wonder how you can honestly hold to the idea that this passage says anything against the continuing of the gifts. You aren't just sticking to your guns so as not to conceed a point, even when you realize you are wrong, are you? If you are being sincere, please consider enrolling in a Logic 101 class or reading a book on logic. If this is the best argument you can come up with for gifts ceasing, that is pretty pitiful.
This is the first time I recall seeing you make the MacArthur time period argument for gifts ceasing. Your reasoning has some major flaws.
1. It rests on human opinion. Scripture does not say that miracles, etc. were only for these time periods. This requries your human opinion and interpolation to fill in the gaps.
So you end up rejecting direct teachings and even commands about gifts of the Spirit in scripture in favor of human opinion. (E.g. the teaching that the Spirit gives the gifts as He wills, despise not prophesyings, commands to desire the gifts.)
2. You don't give any reasons why miracles would only be in these periods. You certainly don't give any reasons from scripture. You get the reasons from your own opinions. MacArthur argued that miracles were only for times of revelation. The problem is that scripture was apparently not being written, much anyway, in Elijah and Elisha's time, as their stories were written some time later.
3. It totally disregards the fact that there is a difference between the New Covenant and Old Covenant.
Christians now have the indwelling Spirit. The relationship of Israel in the OT and the Holy Spirit was different from that of the saint in Christ and the Spirit.
The Holy Spirit came at Pentecost. Peter described what was happening and explained that in the last days, God would pour out His Spirit on all flesh, and that various groups of people would prophesy, see visions, dream dreams, etc. We see the Spirit poured out, with gifts, in Acts 2. Decades later, we see that the saints still were receiving gifts of the Spirit. We see doctrinal teaching that these gifts are given according to the Spirit's will. And we see Revelation talking about two witnesses late in the age, before the Lord's return, prophesying.
We live in an age characterized by the work of the Spirit in the church, including working through gifts of the Spirit. This is what the Bible shows us.
Your interpretations just don't line up with the record of scripture. If you see the two witnesses as in the future, then you should realize your eisegetion of scripture that have the gifts ceasing in the first century contradict other scripture and should be rejection.

You accuse me of twisting scripture. Hebrews 1 says that God has spoken to us 'by His Son.' Are you saying that the Son is the completed canon of scripture? If that is what you mean to say, that is borderline blasphemous if it does not cross the line. Christ, and not the scriptures, are the ultimate Revelation of God to man.
Do you believe in a quadrinity with the Bible as the fourth member?
Hebrews makes a lesser to greater argument. God has spoken in a greater way now than before. This is not a passage that argues that God no longer spoke through prophets. Instead, we see that when Christ ascended, he received gifts for men and gave gifts unto men, including the gift of 'prophets' which he gave to the church. See Ephesians 4 and the passage from the Psalms quoted therein. Acts shows that there were prophets after the ascension.
God speaking through Christ is greater than God speaking through the prophets in the Old Testament. This passage has nothing to do with the idea that the canon replaced gifts. Please do not try to twist scripture to back up your views. Please stop quoting scripture that is irrelevant to your argument and then arguing as if the scripture you quote backs up what you are saying.
It is clear from scripture that not all revelation from God is recorded in scripture. Christ is the ultimate revelation of God to man, yet from John we know that not all of His acts are in scripture. John did not write down a thunder peal, and Paul wrote of a man who got revelation in the third heaven that was not lawful to be utterred. The OT mentions prophecies not included in the OT.

The irony here is that it is you, and not me, who is requiring a sign. I believe in miracles because the Bible says so. You require to see them by yourself, instead of just believing what the word says.
There is a difference between requiring a sign and praying for signs and wonders for a godly purpose. Those who demanded a sign from Christ 'required a sign.' The apostles prayed for God to do signs and wonders for the sake of Jesus (Acts 4) and God answered them. Their motivation was righteous, not evil and adulterous. So while the evil and adulterous seek a sign, it is illogical to conclude that all who seek a sign are evil and adulterous. Witches brush their teeth, but if you brush your teeth, that does not make you a witch.
If I tell you about supernatural things I have witnessed, no doubt you will use that as an excuse to say I base doctrine on experience. I believed the word, and I saw some of the kinds of things the word talks about. You refuse to believe the word on these things, and refuse to believe them unless you see them for yourself. If you saw, would you even believe?

 

1Cor. 1:7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:

:wavey: :praise: :Fish:

 

That is right. You have it:
So that ye (Corinthians) come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:

It doesn't say anything about anyone else except the Corinthian believers. It was Paul writing to them. For just a few verses later he says:

1 Corinthians 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

Are you also among the house of Chloe?
DHK

 

Do you try and make it an art of twisting people's words?
Your religion depends on signs. Without them your religion collapses. You need to see signs and wonders or there is no Charismatic movement. It is based on "signs and wonders." The Charsimatics exist because of their need for signs and wonders. Why are you twisting words, and in fact, making false accusations. An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign. I don't seek after a sign, but the Charismatic movement does. Jesus said that there shall be no sign but the sign of Jona, that is as Jona was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of the whale so was Christ in heart of the earth 3 days and 3 nights. In other words the only sign that this generation needs and is getting is the gospel.
I don't seek a sign. I don't require a sign. But the Charismatics do. So, no more false allegations please.
You say you believe in miracles. I believe in miracles too. I never said I didn't; just like I never said that I didn't believe in healing. But the propensity of laying false allegations continues.
What I did say however, is that I don't believe that the gift of healing, or the gift of miracles is operational today. These gifts have ceased. As far as miracles are concerned there are certain types of miracles that God has chosen not to perform any longer. Christ performed miracles that were in a class by themselves to prove to the world that He was God; to show forth His deity. Could any one else take two fish and five barley loaves and feed a crowd of about 20,000 (5,000 men). Who else could calm the winds and the sea, cause the lame to walk and the blind to see? He walked on water, and enabled Peter to do the same. Who else could command a man who had been four days dead and buried in the grave, wrapped in tomb clothes, to come to life again? Jesus could. At no other time in history could any man do such a miracle as that: not before Christ, and not after. Those were miracles that verified the deity of Christ. They don't happen today. I believe the Bible, when I say that. If you say that you believe the Bible and still believe those miracles happen then you deceive yourself, and your belief is not real. Faith has an object. The object of my faith is Christ. The outworking of my faith in Christ is seen in my walk with Him. That walk does not demand miracles, signs, and wonders as your religion demands. It is the fruit of the Spirit that Christ demands of the Christian walk. Signs and wonders are what an evil and adulterous generation seek after.

Here is a true comparison:
You keep saying over and over again: "Miracles are for today; miracles are for today; the gifts are for toda; the gifts are for today," etc. etc. and on and on like a broken record player.
If I were to repeat to you over and over again "I can bench press 2,000 pounds; Hey, I can bench press 2,000 pounds; Did you know that I can bench press 2,000 pounds?" etc. etc. Would you believe me? Just because I can sit behind a computer or even stand before a crowd and proclaim it over and over, does that mean it is true? No. There is no good reason to believe in my words unless I can demonstrate them by my actions. Why should a person believe that I can bench press 2,000 pounds unless I am willing to do it; to demonstrate it. If I can't demonstrate it, then my claim is useless and I am just a fraud, just like all the faith healers and miracle workers of today who claim they can work miracles but can't demonstrate them, who claim that they can heal but can't demonstrtate. You live in a make-believe world full of false prophets declaring things that they cannot demonstrate neither prove. You say that you and they believe the Bible, and yet you have no Biblical proof, no deomonstrable proof for what you believe. Why should anyone believe what you say. You are like the man who says that he can jump over the empire state building. He can stand there and say it all day. But until he will demonstrate it who will believe him? He is a fool stuck in his folly.
"Yea a man may say, thou hast faith; I have works. Show me your faith without your works and I will show you my faith by my works."
So stand and holler all you want about miracles and such. I'll be waiting for you to demonstrate your faith when you can walk on water like Peter did, demonstrate the gift of healing like Peter did in Acts 5:16 where the multitudes from all the cities around Jerusalem were healed every one of them. You say you believe the Bible. But you can't demonstrate your beliefs. They are fraudlulent.
DHK