Tongues

[time like this]

DHK

You have shown in scripture that some "gifts" would cease . But not when. Do you accept these?

Justin Martyr(died 165)"For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to the present time."
ref:dialgue with Trypho, LXXXII, in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed by Roberts and Donaldson, vol 1 p.240

Novation(died 257) "This is He who places prophets in the church, instrucs teachers, directs tongues, gives powers and healings, does wonderful works, offers discrimination of spirits, affords powewrs of government,suggests counsels, and orders and arranges whatever other gifts there are of the charismata; and thus makes the Lord's Church everywhere, and in all perfected and completed,"
The Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed by Roberts and Donaldson, vol 5, p. 641

Augustine(430) Experienced a revival that swept North Africa where he was bishop. He wrote of miraculous healings from breast cancer,paralysis,hernia-even raising from the dead after the funeral was arranged. In his own church, two epileptics were instatly healed after they had fallen to the floor in convulsions.
ref:Spencer Gear,"St. Augustine: The skeptic who Believed," Charisma, Sept. 1984, p.45

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Briguy:
please respond directly to Walguy's question of "verb" uses and my question on "helps" and "governments" (you know, showing themselves as miraculous in their use).

I hope this is an OK way for us to continue. If nothing else it will make for better reading for others.

In the church in Jerusalem, 3000 were saved on the day of Pentecost. 4000 were saved a short time later. The Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. The church grew rapidly to over 100,000. There was a need of spiritual gifts in the early church for a variety of church. The church was in a period of transition. It needed authentication for the Jews to show that it was a viable religion from God. It needed revelatory gifts until the complete revelation of God was completed. It needed other gifts because of the rapid growth it experienced, and it did not have the instruction we have from the Word of God to administer such a church (or churches). Thus such gifts were given.

What was the gift of helps? Taking flowers to a hospital patient? No. Helping someone who fell down? No. Giving to the poor or needy? No. These are every person's obligations: saved or unsaved. What gift is there in fulfilling the second great commandment to love your neighbor as yourself. This is not a spiritual gift. Can we agree on that much?

All the spiritual gifts were supernatural in nature. That's what made them a spiritual gift. I don't completely understand the gift of helps because of the lack of information, but I do know that it was a supernatural gift that enabled some people (not all) to help people in such a way that others were not able to. It was a supernatural gift.

Likewise the gift of admistration. It was a supernatural gift. It was not just a talent. We have many individuals today with a talent, an ability, to administer. They are better at it than most people. That does not mean that they have the spiritual gift of administration. It does not exist today. It was a supernatural gift back in the first century. Who today operates or administers their church by the "supernatural" power of God?! They may be guided by the Holy Spirit in the decisions they make, but that is not a supernatural gift. Look up in the dictionary what supernatural means, and don't demean the word to mean common place. It was not common, or a common ability. It was a supernatural ability that God gave for a certain period of time in history, for a special purpose in history that we no longer need. The Word of God is complete. Our instruction or guide book is in our hand. The Holy Spirit works through His Word to show us the way.
DHK

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by time like this:
DHK

You have shown in scripture that some "gifts" would cease . But not when. Do you accept these?

Read over my posts again. Over and over again, I have asserted that the gifts will cease with the completion of God's Word which happened near the end of the first century when the Book of Revelation was completed. "when that which is perfect is come," refers to the perfect or completed Word of God.
DHK

 

[Walguy]

I'm just going to generally reply to a few points without quoting anything from other posts.
I don't know why it's so hard for some people to get certain facts straight about Spiritual gifts. ALL the gifts were and are miraculous in nature. They are provided by the Holy Spirit in the heart of a believer. Some of the original gifts were OBVIOUSLY miraculous, and these were signs to authenticate the message being preached.
Tongues, casting out demons, healing, etc. were miracles that no honest observer could dispute. In the early Church the gifts like prophecy and knowledge included new revelations from God. This was more miraculous than the current more limited versions of those gifts, but still not OBVIOUSLY miraculous. The only way that could be claimed is if you say that the miraculous revelations were of something about another person (an unbeliever, presumably) that the person exercising the gift couldn't possibly have known, and the unbeliever would thus be convicted that way. Other than that, whether the revelation was genuinely miraculous was unprovable. Even in that case, you're only talking about one gift. Paul, however, mentions TWO of this type of gift in I Cor 13. So that can't be what he's talking about there. A gift is only a sign if the miraculous nature cannot be seriously disputed. The exercise of prophecy and knowledge in the first century was no more obviously miraculous than the more limited modern versions of those gifts. There is no practical reason why these gifts had to vanish completely with the completion of Scripture. I feel very confident that these gifts were used for BOTH revelatory purposes AND digging deeper into already received revelation back then.
As I've said before, Spiritual Gifts have purposes. All of them have the broad purposes of ministering to others and building up the body of Christ, but different gifts have different specific purposes within that broader plan. The sign gifts were to authenticate the message before the written Scripture was complete. That purpose was fulfilled, and those gifts ceased through the eventual death of all who had them. They died out of their own accord, just as Paul said tongues would do in I Cor 13.
Other gifts have different purposes. Some gifts still function largely behind the scenes, as they have always done. Gifts like service, contributing, giving aid (Romans 12), helpers, administrators (I Cor 12) still function as they have from the beginning, without a lot of fanfare, just empowering certain people to better serve others in relatively small but still very important ways.
Still other gifts, like knowledge and prophecy, originally had dual purposes. One of those purposes ran its course, and that part of the gift ended. The other purpose is still relevant, so it still remains, and will until that second purpose has outlived its usefulness. That can only refer to a point in time when there are no longer people who need to be taught what we need to learn now, and THAT can only refer to God's eternal 'new Heaven and new earth' of Rev 21:1 - again, fully consistent with I Cor 13.
"Then I shall understand FULLY, even as I have been fully understood." (I Cor 13:12) In spite of what you keep suggesting, DHK, in an obvious effort to discredit someone whose arguments you can't adequately answer, this does NOT mean that we will be gods. It does not mean we will know everything God knows (even if we did that would still not make us gods, of course, so your suggestion is silly on its face). It means that where now we struggle to try to master small parts of everything the Bible has to teach us, then we will know and understand ALL of it. There is still far more that we will NOT know, because we are not and never will be God. Don't worry, you'll get your chance to sit at Jesus' feet and be taught. I'll be there with you. We'll be listening to Jesus together in silence, because we'll both know the complete truth about all this stuff we're talking about now, and won't need to argue about it any more!
It all fits together nicely if you just give it the chance.

 

[Wisdom Seeker]

This topic comprises 34 pages?! Is that an all time record?

 

[Walguy]

Stay tuned, we're just getting warmed up!

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Walguy:
I'm just going to generally reply to a few points without quoting anything from other posts.
I don't know why it's so hard for some people to get certain facts straight about Spiritual gifts. ALL the gifts were and are miraculous in nature.

They were; since they have ceased, they are no longer.

They are provided by the Holy Spirit in the heart of a believer.

If you are speaking of today, do you have Scripture for this.

Some of the original gifts were OBVIOUSLY miraculous, and these were signs to authenticate the message being preached.
Tongues, casting out demons, healing, etc. were miracles that no honest observer could dispute. In the early Church the gifts like prophecy and knowledge included new revelations from God. This was more miraculous than the current more limited versions of those gifts, but still not OBVIOUSLY miraculous.

Why the dichotomy between "miraculous" and "obviously miraculous," or "more miraculous"? There is only one kind of miraculous. Either it is or it isn't. My contention is that all the gifts of that era were miracultous in nature, and thus have ceased.

The only way that could be claimed is if you say that the miraculous revelations were of something about another person (an unbeliever, presumably) that the person exercising the gift couldn't possibly have known, and the unbeliever would thus be convicted that way. Other than that, whether the revelation was genuinely miraculous was unprovable. Even in that case, you're only talking about one gift.

Never did I suggest that prophecy was a revelation of another person. If you read what I posted I have consistently held to the position, as Paul does in 1Cor.14, that prophecy is for edification of the church, and it is for revelation; that revelation that was needed for the Word of God was not yet complete. When that which was perfect (the Word of God) was come, then that which was in part (prophecy, etc.) would be done away.

Paul, however, mentions TWO of this type of gift in I Cor 13. So that can't be what he's talking about there. A gift is only a sign if the miraculous nature cannot be seriously disputed. The exercise of prophecy and knowledge in the first century was no more obviously miraculous than the more limited modern versions of those gifts. There is no practical reason why these gifts had to vanish completely with the completion of Scripture. I feel very confident that these gifts were used for BOTH revelatory purposes AND digging deeper into already received revelation back then.

Alright then, let's take prophecy as an example since it is the most discussed gift by Paul. What reason can you give that the nature of the gift would have changed since the first century? What reason can you give that prophecy would mean simply digging into the Word deeper and receiving revelation back. Tongues and prophecy were essentially the same gift according to Paul. They were both used for the edification of the church. Tongues had the extra purpose of being a sign to the unbelieving Jew, and had more restrictions put on it. It was to be used for people present of another language. There had to be an interpreter. But the basic message of the tongue-speaker and the prophet would be the same. Apart from the one being in a different language, the miraculous nature of the message from God (a New Testament message without a New Testament) was apparent to all. It was something they had never heard before. It was all new to them. For the student of the Word of God today, it should not be that new. One should be well acquainted with the Scriptures. But they did not have the New Testament Scriptures. Thus these miraculous sign gifts: tongues, prophesy, and revelatory knowedge were given. They all had to do with knowledge given miraculously by God, and knowledge specifically relating to what is in our New Testament today.

As I've said before, Spiritual Gifts have purposes. All of them have the broad purposes of ministering to others and building up the body of Christ, but different gifts have different specific purposes within that broader plan. The sign gifts were to authenticate the message before the written Scripture was complete. That purpose was fulfilled, and those gifts ceased through the eventual death of all who had them. They died out of their own accord, just as Paul said tongues would do in I Cor 13.

Agreed

Other gifts have different purposes. Some gifts still function largely behind the scenes, as they have always done. Gifts like service, contributing, giving aid (Romans 12), helpers, administrators (I Cor 12) still function as they have from the beginning, without a lot of fanfare, just empowering certain people to better serve others in relatively small but still very important ways.

I disagree. Bill Gates gives a lot of his money to charity. Does that mean he has the gift of giving? Confucious, Plato, and Socrates all were great teachers. Does that mean they had the spiritual gift of teaching? Mother Theresa helped many; so did Albert Schweitzer. Does that mean that they had the gift of helps? Not at all.

All the gifts were supernatural in nature. That is the key point. There are many talented people in this world. Each church ought to use the talents and abilities of the members that they have. But the spiritual gifts were miraculous and supernatural. They have ceased. It doesn't mean you can't help someone; it just means you can't help someone in a supernatural way like they did in NT times.

Still other gifts, like knowledge and prophecy, originally had dual purposes.

That's a common thought, but you will be hard pressed to prove it from Scripture.

One of those purposes ran its course, and that part of the gift ended. The other purpose is still relevant, so it still remains, and will until that second purpose has outlived its usefulness. That can only refer to a point in time when there are no longer people who need to be taught what we need to learn now, and THAT can only refer to God's eternal 'new Heaven and new earth' of Rev 21:1 - again, fully consistent with I Cor 13.

That of course is pure supposition. It relies on your supposition that the gifts have more than one meaning. And that "that which is perfect" refers to the new Heaven and New earth, which the context doesn't support. The context is revelation. It is speaking of the Word of God.

"Then I shall understand FULLY, even as I have been fully understood." (I Cor 13:12) In spite of what you keep suggesting, DHK, in an obvious effort to discredit someone whose arguments you can't adequately answer, this does NOT mean that we will be gods. It does not mean we will know everything God knows (even if we did that would still not make us gods, of course, so your suggestion is silly on its face). It means that where now we struggle to try to master small parts of everything the Bible has to teach us, then we will know and understand ALL of it. There is still far more that we will NOT know, because we are not and never will be God. Don't worry, you'll get your chance to sit at Jesus' feet and be taught. I'll be there with you. We'll be listening to Jesus together in silence, because we'll both know the complete truth about all this stuff we're talking about now, and won't need to argue about it any more!
It all fits together nicely if you just give it the chance.

There was no attempt to discredit you. I only pointed out an error in your statement which you failed either to acknowledge or correct. Here is what you have said at the top of page 33:

But I'm not done yet! In the other half of verse 12, Paul refers to 'then,' the point 'when the perfect comes,' as when WE no longer see as in a mirror dimly, but face to face. 'We' in that context refers to 'all believers.' So when the perfect comes, all believers will understand perfectly

'ALL BELIEVERS WILL UNDERSTAND PERFECTLY.
My point is that this perfect knowledge can only be attributed to God, and not to any human.
This is not a silly suggestion. Omniscience belongs only to God. For others to claim omniscience is akin to claiming Godhood.

As pointed out before the comparison: as a child with a man, is about growing into maturity. With the completed New Testament the believer will be much more mature in his knowledge of Christ. He will no longer see through a glass darkly. See the illustration that James uses starting in James 1:22 about the mirror of God's Word. Paul uses the same illustration here.
DHK

 

[Walguy]

If you are speaking of today, do you have Scripture for this.

"Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them; if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; if service, in our serving; he who teaches, in his teaching; he who exhorts, in his exhortation; he who contributes, in liberality; he who gives aid, with zeal; he who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness." (Romans 12:6-8)
"As each has received a gift, employ it for one another, as good stewards of God's varied grace; whoever speaks, as one who utters oracles of God; whoever renders service, as one who renders it by the strength which God supplies; in order that in everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ." (I Peter 4:10-11)
Paul's first letter to the Corinthians was one of his earliest, and the only one in which he refers to the sign gifts. His letter to the Romans was written a few years later, and when he talks about gifts there there is no mention of tongues or healing or any of those. The sign gifts were already declining in importance. Yet Paul did speak of other kinds of gifts 'that differ according to the grace given to us.' So he's talking about gifts given by God to believers as part of His grace, which means we're NOT talking about natural abilities that everyone, believer or non-believer, was born with or has learned through ordinary means. We're talking about something that the person did NOT have prior to receiving God's grace, and was GIVEN to him at that point.
Look at the gifts Paul mentions here. There are seven on this list (which I don't believe is intended to be exhaustive, btw, just representative). Two of them, #s 1 and 3, are also mentioned in I Corinthians, so it's clearly the same kind of gifts he's talking about here. Interspersed with those two are five other gifts of different kinds, gifts which have absolutely nothing to do with communicating God's truth in a revelatory way. One of them is listed BETWEEN the two gifts also mentioned in I Corinthians, so they can't be separated. They are all different varieties of the same God-ordained, Holy Spirit empowered phenomenon of Spiritual Gifts.
The point is, if the whole purpose of Spiritual Gifts was merely to hold down the fort until the Bible was completed, why does Paul's understanding of the concept include gifts that have nothing whatsoever to do with revealing or authenticating God's truth? My view of Spiritual Gifts is in complete harmony with I Corinthians 13 and Romans 12. Your view contradicts both.

Peter also addresses the issue of Spiritual Gifts in his first letter. Again, notice that no sign gifts are mentioned. They were temporary, and of declining importance at this time. Peter confirms Paul's teaching about the nature of the Gifts, stating that each of us has RECEIVED one as part of God's 'varied grace.' Peter speaks of two categories of gifts. The second he mentions is of particular relevance to this discussion: "whoever renders service, as one who renders it by the strength which God supplies." What other possible meaning could this sentence have than that God has given some believers a gift to aid them in serving others, the source of which is THE STRENGTH THAT GOD SUPPLIES. Again, service gifts have nothing whatsoever to do with revealing or confirming God's truth, so there would be no reason for those gifts to end with the completion of the Bible.

Why the dichotomy between "miraculous" and "obviously miraculous," or "more miraculous"? There is only one kind of miraculous. Either it is or it isn't.

As we have just seen, the service gifts, like all Spiritual Gifts, are powered by 'the strength that God supplies.' God-supplied strength is not something natural. A miracle is something supernatural. Miracles don't have to be obviously supernatural. Have you ever heard of 'Providential' miracles? These are things that happen that are technically possible, but which are so against all the odds that Divine influence is implied. At this moment in my life I am the happiest I have ever been in my 49 years. This is the result of an amazing series of 'coincidences' in recent months that have lifted me out of a long depression cycle (in which I learned much, but which I was stuck in because of my overactive emotions). This has not been 'obviously' miraculous. Many would say I just got lucky, but I see God's hand clearly guiding the process. Miraculous, but not obviously miraculous.

In a similar way, God empowers some people to serve in various ways at an unusually high level. I'm sure you have known Christians over the years who just seem to be unusually self-sacrificial, unusually compassionate, unusually empathetic. Is it just that these people were born that way, or is that part of their gift, 'the strength that God provides?' Miraculous, but not obviously miraculous. Now when someone had leprosy one minute and was completely cured the next, that was an OBVIOUS miracle. No one could deny that SOMETHING supernatural had just happened. That's the difference.

'More miraculous' might not have been the best possible choice of words, but all I meant was that in the early years people with some of the gifts were receiving completely new revelation, in addition to guidance in understanding and teaching others about revelations that had already been received. The revelatory messages were a second level of the gift, so there was additional miraculous activity going on then with those gifts. But when those with the revelatory gifts used them (to those who spoke the same language), those gifts were not sufficient in and of themselves. The speaker had no way to prove that the message was from God. It was miraculous, but not obviously miraculous. That's why there were also people with the sign gifts, to show that God's power was among them, and authenticate the otherwise unprovavbly miraculous message that was being preached.

What reason can you give that the nature of the gift would have changed since the first century?

The very reason you yourself keep giving! That the Bible was completed! Some gifts had a revelatory component while the Bible was still being written. Once there was a Bible, that revelatory component was no longer needed. What was needed then, even more than before, was Spirit-empowered guidance in understanding and teaching the completed revelation. We still need that now, which is why God hasn't taken away those gifts.

Tongues and prophecy were essentially the same gift according to Paul.

If they were essentially the same gift to Paul, why did he go to the trouble of using those different verbs and voices in reference to them? You still haven't answered that one, other than to blame it on literary style or something. Which is tantamount to saying that the Holy Spirit doesn't choose His words carefully, so you might want to rethink that answer.

Bill Gates gives a lot of his money to charity. Does that mean he has the gift of giving? Confucious, Plato, and Socrates all were great teachers. Does that mean they had the spiritual gift of teaching? Mother Theresa helped many; so did Albert Schweitzer. Does that mean that they had the gift of helps?

No, no, and VERY LIKELY!

Bill Gates seems to be primarily concerned with PR, and the teachers you cited did NOT teach God's truth. Apples and oranges there, my friend. Thanks for helping my case!

Omniscience belongs only to God. For others to claim omniscience is akin to claiming Godhood

Do I need to speak slower or use smaller words? I know you're smart enough, DHK, so let's try it again:

...this does NOT mean that we will be gods. It does not mean we will know everything God knows... It means that where now we struggle to try to master small parts of everything the Bible has to teach us, then we will know and understand ALL of it. There is still far more that we will NOT know, because we are not and never will be God.

Now listen carefully, I'll try not to go too fast. In I Corinthians 13:8-12 Paul is talking about our limited knowledge now, versus the complete knowledge we will have 'then,' 'when the perfect comes.' Now please look carefully at verse 12. For the greatest possible clarity I'm going to use the KJV, because it is a more literal translation of this verse:

"now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known."

Now clearly the last part means 'known BY GOD.' So 'when the perfect comes,' we will know as completely as we ourselves are known by God. If this refers to the completion of the Bible, then Paul was wrong. We have the whole Bible, have had it for a long time now, and no one in all that time has come anywhere close to knowing the truth revealed in it as completely as we are known by God. Only when the limitations of sinful mortality are lifted can we reach that level, and that has nothing to do with when the Bible was finished. As I've pointed out before, Paul himself was dead when that happened. It just doesn't fit.

Now here's the important part (and if you really pay attention, maybe you can finally get past accusing me of wanting to be God): 'I shall know even as also I am known' does NOT mean 'I shall know everything God knows!' If Paul had meant that, he would have said it. He did not. The verse does NOT refer to omniscience! It does NOT refer to anyone becoming like God! It does NOT refer to Mormonism! It does NOT refer to spinach quiche! Do we have that straight now? Can you FINALLY stop accusing me of saying things that are the exact opposite of what I've actually said? I think you're basically a good guy, so I really do hope so.

So what DOES 'I shall know even as also I am known' mean? In the context of Paul's discussion, it refers to HUMANLY RELEVANT KNOWLEDGE. The stuff that is in the Bible. All the basic teaching about God. And I say basic, because that's what the Bible is. God's full truth is VASTLY greater than what's in the Bible, because God's mind is immeasurably deeper than ours. The Bible contains all of God's truth THAT HUMANS ARE CAPABLE OF KNOWING AND UNDERSTANDING. The revelatory gifts were a temporary way of communicating pieces of this truth. The Bible contains all of it, but no mortal human has ever been able to know and understand more than a small percentage of everything that's in it. Even though we have the Bible, we still 'see in a mirror dimly'; we 'know in part,' because of our sinful, mortal limitations. 'Then,' we shall understand it all. BUT THAT'S STILL ONLY A TINY PARTICLE OF ALL THAT GOD KNOWS. It is only the elemental level of God's truth that he has given us in the Bible that we will someday 'know even as [we] also are known.' We'll have completed 'Introduction to God's Truth.' At the feet of Jesus, 'God's Truth 101' will convene.

Are we clear now? Can you stop accusing me of being a Mormon and a heretic and a Samaritan and a tax collector and whatever else you've been calling me? I'm confident the answer is 'yes.'

(Just to be clear, I was smiling when I was writing that last section. I'm not mad at you, my brother in Christ. In the future, though, you may want to think twice before tossing loaded words like 'heresy' around. It doesn't help your case.)

 

[Briguy]

Hi all, Great discussion. I hope it continues and stays positive. I see know where in 1 Cor. 12 where Paul indicates that God would stop equiping the body, His body, to do His work. Wouldn't churches be worse off if god's holy Spirit didn't gift people in certain areas. Walguy, to clarify something. Are you saying that Spiritual gifts are more vast in number then the ones listed in the Bible or that the way we use our gifts broadens the range of gifts?

In Christ,
Brian

 

[Walguy]

Thanks for your question, Bro!
Like John MacArthur and others I've read and heard, I believe that Spiritual Gifts are as individual as the people who they have been given to. It only makes sense that since each person is unique, he or she would be given a unique Gift that best fits that person's unique qualities.
I believe the Bible speaks of general categories of gifts in most cases, especially the non-sign gifts. Tongues or healing was pretty specific and basically the same in all who had it, for example, but the 'service gifts' are much more adaptable to the individual. In fact, I think many people may have a 'combination' gift, with multiple attributes, including some not even specifically mentioned in Scripture.
I think it's very important, when trying to understand Scripture, to never put artificial limitations on God. To say that because Paul listed some specific gifts means that these are the only ones there are, and everyone has exactly one that is exactly the same as millions of other people's, reduces the working of the Holy Spirit to a very simplistic level. God is smart, and He can keep complicated things straight with no trouble at all!

 

[DHK]

Rom.12:5-8
5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.
6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;
7 Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching;
8 Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that showeth mercy, with cheerfulness.

There are many lists of “gifts” given in the New Testament. The key to each list is the context in which they are written. 1Cor.12-14, these three chapters specifically deal with spiritual gifts. Paul introduces the section at the beginning of chapter 12 with:

12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
--There was something different about the spiritual gifts. They were miraculous in nature, all of them. And thus Paul says, “:I would not have you ignorant concerning them.” He then lists what these miraculous gifts are:

8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
--This is one of two lists given in this chapter. They are lists of spiritual gifts or miraculous supernatural gifts.
Further, the immediate context of 1Cor.13:8-13 and continuing on into chapter 14 becomes that of Revelation. How are these gifts, specifically prophecy, tongues, and knowledge, relevant to the revelation of God’s Word? They were all miraculous in nature, and they all ceased when the Word of God was completed. They became unnecessary after the perfected Word of God had come to a full completion. This is the meaning of 1Cor.13:8-13.

The gifts that are mentioned in Romans 12:5-8 are different. As listed they are: prophecy, ministry, teaching, exhorting, giving, ruling, showing mercy. The context of Romans 12 has nothing to do with spiritual gifts, but rather with practical Christian living. Look at the next few verses:

9 Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.
10 Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another;
11 Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord;
12 Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;

There is no hint of spiritual gifts here; just advice on practical Christian living. Likewise, that is how the chapter started out in verses 1 and 2.

12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Presenting your bodies to the Lord, being separate from the world—this is practical Christian living.
Thus, there is no reason to believe that the gifts that are mentioned here are not miraculous in nature, but are gifts only in the sense that they are natural abilities and talents that are given to us, or learned by us. In saying this I must concede that the term prophecy would therefore have a twofold meaning: that of foretelling, and that of forthtelling the Word of God. The miraculous nature of prophecy is the one spoken of in 1Cor.12-14, since its context is specific to the spiritual gifts. Here it may be defined as forthtelling, or proclaiming the Word of God, much as you previously defined it. The other “gifts” mentioned here can be learned as well, or just come naturally to a person. They are not necessarily miraculous in nature.

I believe we have a very good example to consider in Eph.4:

7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

It has been said that there is one interpretation, but many applications in Scripture. The proper interpretation of this passage is to take it in its historic context, that the early churches were built on a foundation that involved: apostles, prophets, teachers, evangelists, and pastors.
Now we know that there are no apostles today. Strictly speaking I don’t believe there are any prophets today. So, in this list the only offices that are relevant to the church today are pastors, teachers, and evangelists.
However in application one may say that:
1. apostle means “one sent” from “apostolos” translated into mittere (Latin) from which our English word missionary comes from. In a sense every Christian is a missionary: one sent with a message—the gospel message. Today’s apostle could refer to the modern day missionary. (Remember I am just giving these terms a relevant application).

2. The word prophet is one who proclaims the word of God, just as the Old Testament prophet’s ministry was not always predictive, but involved rebuking and exhorting the nation of Israel, so would the modern day prophet for his own church.

3. An evangelist as we are acquainted with preaches the gospel, and has a specific evangelistic ministry.

4. A teacher has a specific ministry in teaching and expounding the Scriptures.

5. A pastor is not only involved in preaching but in feeding the flock of God, an in being their shepherd, the overseer of the church.

There is one interpretation here but more than one application. That especially applies when one considers the word “apostle,” since the office of the apostle has long since been done away with.
I hope that gives some insight into some of these Scriptures.
DHK

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Walguy:

Are we clear now? Can you stop accusing me of being a Mormon and a heretic and a Samaritan and a tax collector and whatever else you've been calling me? I'm confident the answer is 'yes.'

(Just to be clear, I was smiling when I was writing that last section. I'm not mad at you, my brother in Christ. In the future, though, you may want to think twice before tossing loaded words like 'heresy' around. It doesn't help your case.)

I know you are not mad or angry Walguy. You're not that kind of 'guy'. I think we agree on the passage more than we think. If you look back on the previous posts made it was you that originally said or made an ambiguous statement that we would have "perfect knowledge." You have clarified what you have meant since, and I accept that. I'll try and tone down my rhetoric. Keep on smiling brother.
DHK

 

[Walguy]

DHK:
Your discussion of Romans 12:5-8 is interesting, but there are serious problems. How can you claim that the lists in Romans and I Corinthians are speaking of completely different things, when two of the gifts appear in both lists? In addition, Paul repeats in Romans 12 the same illustration about the body having many members with different functions that he used in I Corinthians. He does not use the word 'Spiritual' in Romans, but he does say that we have gifts that differ according to the GRACE that has been given us. Grace refers to salvation, the point at which we received the Holy Spirit. So the clear implication is that these are Spiritual empowerments he's talking about, not simple talents. The similarities in the two letters are strong enough that it's just not credible to claim that Paul is talking about two completely different things. The I Peter 4 passage I discussed in my earlier post further confirms this, and adds more problems to your view.
You may have addressed this somewhere else, but included in the I Corinthian lists are things like 'faith' and 'helpers' and 'administrators.' It's hard to imagine any obviously miraculous function of these, and in any case these things have nothing to do with the revealing and confirming of God's truth. The idea that all the gifts ended when the Bible was completed is only credible if ALL the gifts were directly related to revealing and confirming God's truth. If any of the gifts had other functions, there would be no reason for those gifts to end, and thus no reason for Spiritual Gifts generally to end.
H.L. Mencken made the famous observation, "Complex problems have solutions that are simple, easy to understand, and wrong." I suspect that the simplicity of your view of Spiritual Gifts is part of its appeal to you. It's simple and easy to understand; and it is wrong. My view is much harder to learn and understand, but that's part of the reason why it makes more sense. God operates on a VERY complex level. He simplifies things for us as much as He can, but the way the Holy Spirit works in believers is not a simple thing. Spiritual Gifts are part of the complexity. As I said before, you can't put limits on God. He can handle complicated things just fine. We try our best now to understand His working in us, and we can get some of it; but it's still looking in a mirror dimly. I have the completed Bible and study it regularly as I have for years, but even with the gift of knowledge I only understand particles of all the truth in it. I need God to help me now, both directly and through other gifted people. But only when the limitations of this mortal flesh are removed will I be capable of understanding everything God wants me to know.
If your view was true, DHK, it would be possible for people to master the Bible now. There should be many examples throughout the 2000 years of Christian history of people who have nailed the whole thing down. But those examples are as completely absent as are true transitional forms to the evolutionist. Instead what we have is 2000 years of disagreement and fragmentation of the Church. Why? Because we see in a mirror dimly. We see different things in the same texts. I'm greatly looking forward to knowing as I am known, and it ain't gonna happen no matter how hard I study the Bible on this earth, even though the truth is in there.
Don't worry, my friend, I'm gonna keep smiling! I got yet another piece of good news today. I'm on the roll of a lifetime right now, and I'm enthusiastically praising God both for what's happening now, and for the dark days I had to go through to get here. Another example of the complex way in which God works!

 

[atestring]

Wow !!!!!!!!
over 500 post on this thread. Is this a record?
This subject sure has a lot of interest.

 

[Briguy]

DHK, I have mentioned this before but did not pose it as a question so I will now. In 1 Cor. Paul details the the comparrison of the human body with the "body" of Christ. He spends basically all of Chapt. 12 on this idea. He tells us that God picks our gift/s and and we are joined as a part of the total body, or better placed in a local assembly. Paul says how each part is needed, toes, fingers, hidden parts, etc... to make the body complete. My question is two-fold, if this is a scripture only was meant for the Corinthians to read why did Paul so through so much detail? Secondly, Doesn't the "body of Christ" still need to be made complete today?

Those questions maybe aren't exactly what I was getting at but lets start there.

Hope you had a good weekend DHK!

In Christ,
Brian

 

[DHK]

It's a good question Brian. The entire epistle was written to the church at Corinth. Paul was writing specifically to answer questions and problems that they were having. It was an answer to a specific letter that they had already written to him. See 1Cor.7:1,

7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
--Note the expression here, "the things whereof ye wrote unto me." It is apparent that from this point onward Paul is addressing their particular questions or problems.

In chapter 7 he deals with matters pertaining to marriage.
In chapter 8 the subject is things offered to idols.
In chapter 9 he gives a defence of his apostleship.
In chapter 10 he comes back to the subject of idolatry using examples from the Old Testament.
In chapter 11 he speaks about the custom of women having their hair covere in church and then proceeds to the abuses of the Lord's Table.
In chapters 12-14 he discusses the spiritual gifts in much detail.
And in chapter 15 he writes a beautiful chapter on the resurrection, for their were some that denied it.

All of these were problems directly related to the local assembly in Corinth. They had nothing to do with any world-wide universal invisible church. I don't believe any such animal exists. I don't beleive that the Corinthians would have even had that concept in mind. These were answers to problems directed to them in particular. But just as they received instruction in chapter 12 pertaining to their own situation, does not mean that we cannot apply those same principles that Paul taught, to our churches today just as we do in every other chapter in First Corinthians.

In 1Cor.12, Paul uses the illustration of the body to illustrate the local church, specifically in this case, the churh at Corinth. If you go back to the first chapter, he says:

4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;
5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:

They were enriched by Christ in all utterance and in all knowledge. They came behind in no gift. In other words, in this church all the spiritual were manifest. None were lacking.

In chapter 12 he explains how their are different gifts all with a different purpose, just as their are different parts of the body all with a different purpose. Each part of the body needs each other. We all need to work in harmony with each other. This is true only of the local church.

20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.
21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

--Not everyone in the local church can be the pastor; not everyonee can be a deacon; not everyone can be a Sunday School teacher. What would happen if every person (including those that were tone deaf) wanted to lead music??) We each have our own talents and abilities. That is the principle that is being taught here that we get out of this chapter. It is applicable only to local churches.
This can be seen even more clearly in the following verse:

25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
--How do you care for those in Nigeria, Brazil, India, China, etc.? When they suffer, do you suffer with them? This is an impossibility if you take this so-called body to be the world wide body of Christ, or the Church universal. There is no universal church. Church means assembly. Paul was addressing this assembly at Corinth. When one of its members suffered, all them members suffered with him/her. They had no knowledge of believers elsewhere in the world.

It is my postition that the gifts mentioned in this chapter are supernatural gifts by definition in chapter 12:1, being designated specifically as spiritual gifts. In other lists elsewhere in the Bible they may not have the same context, and may not always be talking of supernatural gifts. But the context here gives credence to the view that the Corinthians were given a great display of supernatural gifts, and Paul is writing these three chapters to correct the abuse of these gifts in the local church. It was an answer to their question that they had written him. It wasn't a universal church that had written him a letter, it was a local church. The principles taught here apply to every Bible believing church today. Every church or assembly composes a body of believers. Christ is the head of every assembly of believers that has organized themselves into a local church.
DHK

 

[Walguy]

All of these were problems directly related to the local assembly in Corinth. They had nothing to do with any world-wide universal invisible church.

Spiritual Gifts are given to all believers, to be used primarily in their local congregations. There's no dichotomy there, as you seem to suggest. The sign gifts are more prominent in I Corinthians than in later letters because those gifts were more active then. They declined in use and importance as time went on, and only a few years later when Paul again mentioned Spiritual Gifts in Romans he focused mostly on the other gifts.
You haven't addressed the things I pointed out in my previous post about the strong similarities between the I Cor 12 and Romans 12 passages, and about how gifts like 'administators' and 'faith' would 'display' their supernatural character.
Once again, let me point out that ALL Spiritual Gifts are supernatural BY DEFINITION. I've carefully explained how something doesn't have to be OBVIOUSLY supernatural (like the genuine gift of tongues) to BE supernatural. You continue to suggest that if something is not indisputably supernatural, it's not supernatural at all. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit in a believer's heart is a CONSTANT supernatural occurance. Why should it be so hard to believe that special abilities tailored by God to each specific believer could be part of that supernatural presence? That's all that Spiritual Gifts are.
If your view is to have credibility, these points need to be successfully addressed.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Walguy:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />All of these were problems directly related to the local assembly in Corinth. They had nothing to do with any world-wide universal invisible church.

Spiritual Gifts are given to all believers, to be used primarily in their local congregations. </font>[/QUOTE]I don't find evidence that spiritual gifts, as defined in 1Cor.12, are given to all believers, at least not in this era. God has given to all (saved and unsaved alike) talents and abilities. When one is saved the Bible teaches that we ought to use those talents for the Lord. Let me give you an example.

I have a son who made a profession of faith at an early age. He also learned to play the piano very well. He seemed to have an innate ability, and learned very quickly. He was soon playing as the pianist for the church. He is now qualified to teach others. However, he was only saved a couple of years ago. His "gift" of piano playing still blessed many before he was saved, as it does now after he was saved. Did God give him this gift before or after salvation. It is obvious that it came after. His musical abilitiy did not change just because he got saved. He has a gift of music. The difference is: now he can use it for the Lord, and reap reward in Heaven. Before, when he "used it for the Lord," the Lord considered it as "filthy rags," even though that music may have blessed the hearts of many.
God expects every believer to use those talents and abilities that God has bestowed upon him for the Lord. I believe that those gifts or abilities are given at birth, or are learned, but may be made more manifest as one submits to the Lord.

There is also the fruit of the Holy Spirit, which again is different then the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Does the Bible give any evidence that faith is a gift, other than in 1Cor.12, where it is listed among the spiritual gifts? I don't believe that faith is a gift. Salvation is a gift that is given when one receives it by faith. But the faith itself is not a gift. It is simply confidence in the giver that what he says is true; what He accomplished is real and genuined; confidence in His Word that what He has said is true.
It is not a giftt to believe my wife, or my earthly father. It is not a gift to have faith in them. Then why should it be a gift to have faith in God?
DHK

 

[Briguy]

Hi DHK, Thanks for the post and answering my question. I do believe, like you, that Paul was writing to the local church in Corinth when he wrote 1 Cor. 12. I do think that the message of chapt. 12 applies to all local assemblies. I think you would agree that it applied to all local assemblies of the 50-60AD time period. I also agree here that there is no universal church per se but I see Biblically that there is a "body of Christ". Some have a hard time seperating those thoughts but I see it. In logically looking at the Bible it still seems that Walguy's postion hold more scriptual consistancy, though I fully understand both positions. I asked my pastor, a couple months ago about this question. He said that though he holds to the belief (as stated my Walguy and myself) that non-miraculous spiritual gifts remain that the postion that spiritual gifts ended with the completion is a good position as well and that it does make some sense. I thunk he holds, as I have said, that the positions are closer then outsiders may realize. We at least agree that God uses those in the local assembly to fill positions in the local assemblies, thus completing them. I argue he does it through the dispertion (sp?) of certain gifts you believe he does it through the utilization talents and abilities. I also think in giving of SG's God looks at our strengths and weaknesses, though not exclusively. All for now,

In Christ,
Brian

 

[Briguy]

Bump - any other takers to discuss arguments made by Walguy and myself. Open to all!!!

What is the official Catholic doctrine in regards to the gift of tongues?

-Brian