---------------------
Once again we look for the biblical case for the ceasing of the "supernatural" gifts. The failures or excesses of certain people will not be considered. Contemporary expressions aren't evidence. The things that happened or didn't happen in church history isn't relevant. We want the BIBLICAL case, demonstrated from the Scriptures.
This rather long and repetitive article makes repeated assertions as if they were self-evident and thus didn't need to be documented. Well, they do.
The author will provide numerous biblical references, but quotes only a single Scripture right at the beginning. This is a troublesome characteristic of cessationists, they seem to hate quoting the actual Scripture. And, he will never actually explain how his interpretations are the correct ones, he simply makes assertions.
Once again we look for the biblical case for the ceasing of the "supernatural" gifts. The failures or excesses of certain people will not be considered. Contemporary expressions aren't evidence. The things that happened or didn't happen in church history isn't relevant. We want the BIBLICAL case, demonstrated from the Scriptures.
This rather long and repetitive article makes repeated assertions as if they were self-evident and thus didn't need to be documented. Well, they do.
The author will provide numerous biblical references, but quotes only a single Scripture right at the beginning. This is a troublesome characteristic of cessationists, they seem to hate quoting the actual Scripture. And, he will never actually explain how his interpretations are the correct ones, he simply makes assertions.
----------------------
(...)
“Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.” I Corinthians 13:8
1. Bible tongues had a definite beginning. They began on the day of Pentecost in 30 AD, fifty days after the Lord Jesus Christ was crucified, just as He had promised (Mark 16:17-20; Luke 24:49; Acts 1:8; 2:1-4). Their role as a sign gift to unbelieving Israel had been suggested by Isaiah's prophecy of God speaking to Israel with men of other tongues (I Cor 14:21-22; Isaiah 28:11-12). (The author seems to suggest this is the only reason. But that's false. For example,
(...)
“Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.” I Corinthians 13:8
1. Bible tongues had a definite beginning. They began on the day of Pentecost in 30 AD, fifty days after the Lord Jesus Christ was crucified, just as He had promised (Mark 16:17-20; Luke 24:49; Acts 1:8; 2:1-4). Their role as a sign gift to unbelieving Israel had been suggested by Isaiah's prophecy of God speaking to Israel with men of other tongues (I Cor 14:21-22; Isaiah 28:11-12). (The author seems to suggest this is the only reason. But that's false. For example,
1Co. 14:14: "For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful." Here there is speaking in tongues and praying in tongues.
1Co. 14:28: "If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God." Thus this form of tongues speaking is not what the author calls a "sign gift.")2. Bible tongues had a definite beginning. They began with Jesus empowering His apostles to preach the gospel to all nations before Rome destroyed Jerusalem and ended the ceremonial Law (Matt 24:14; 28:18-20). God used the gift of tongues to magnify the apostles as heavenly messengers, in spite of lacking education, reputation, and human authority (Acts 4:13; 5:12-13; 8:14-19; 19:1-7). (Again the author errs. Tongues were a sign to the apostles that the gentiles were included in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Corinthians Tongues were an expression of the whole church, not just the apostles.
1Co. 14:27: "If anyone speaks in a tongue, two — or at the most three — should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret." The word "anyone" is pretty broad, don't you think? Remember, Paul is instructing the church on the proper order. He isn't limiting the expression or definition of tongues.
1Co. 14:5 "I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy." Again, Paul expects a broad expression of gifts in the church. He spends quite a bit of time explaining, which seems odd if the gifts were going to cease in a few years.)3. Bible tongues had a definite beginning. They began with the empowerment of the church, which was to worship in an entirely new way (John 4:21-24). The Spirit was to guide the apostles into all truth for writing the New Testament as the new manual for religion, but He would reveal truth by gifts until then (John 14:26; 16:13; Acts 10:28; I Cor 12:7-11; 14:37; II Tim 3:16-17; II Pet 1:21). (None of these Scriptures say this. In fact, some of them aren't even relevant. Let's go ahead and quote them, since the author seems reluctant to do so:
John 14:26: But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Acts 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
1 Corinthians 12:7–11 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. 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: 11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
1 Corinthians 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
2 Timothy 3:16–17 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
The author makes a claim to a significant doctrine. If indeed tongues were simply to "fill in" until the Scriptures arrived on the scene, Paul would certainly make that point as he explains the operation of gifts in the context of the Body. Rather than do that, he not only encourages the Corinthian church to persist in the gifts, but to SEEK OUT the greater gifts.)
4. Bible tongues lasted only a short while. Paul told the tongues-speaking church at Corinth that the Spirit's revelatory gifts would end (I Cor 13:8). In spite of their emphasis on prophecy, tongues, and gifts of knowledge, Paul promised that these gifts were temporary. Charity was a more excellent way of serving, for charity was permanent and would never end (I Cor 12:31; 13:8,13). (Indeed, they are to pass away. But when?)
5. Bible tongues were very inadequate. The spiritual gifts of prophecy, the word of knowledge, and tongues brought only a partial revelation of God's will to any man or church (I Cor 13:9). (Again, let's actually quote the reference provided.
We must conclude that "all truth" is an action of the revelatory nature of God at work in all believers, bringing us to spiritual maturity. It is a universal condition of our Christian experience, a limitation we must deal with in this temporal life until such time as we are brought "face to face."
Which is why we are told to test prophecies and to let every matter be established by two or three witnesses. The Church is faced with the ongoing task, even to this day, of discerning the purposes and will of God through Body ministry where all the gifts are in operation for the edification of the Body.)
They were short-term, incomplete fixes for immediate instruction and answers to questions. Because of this, prophets had to work together, for their gifts were very limited and partial (I Cor 14:29-31). (This is an extraordinary claim. Once again the Scripture cited does not speak to the point offered by the author:
6. Bible tongues were not needed after perfect revelation came. The New Testament scriptures were the perfect revelation that ended and replaced the Spirit's revelatory gifts, which were all partial (I Cor 13:9-10). (Again we quote the Scripture.
The author assumes without basis that the "perfect" is the Scriptures. But he can provide no reason for this assumption and offers no evidence or Scripture that this is correct. In fact, Paul is talking about something completely different, because he goes on to state in 1Co. 13:12:
Interestingly, he takes the idea of false prophets that "were among the people" and equates them with false teachers. We must ask the author, has the gift of teaching also passed? It's synonymous with prophecy!)
The context demands a comparison of partial and perfect revelation, (No, it demands a comparison of false prophecy and false teaching.)
not the coming of Jesus Christ. (This point has not been under discussion. Nor is it the only possible alternative.)
7. Bible tongues were childish and immature. Paul used a metaphor of human development to compare the inferior revelation of spiritual gifts to the perfect revelation of the Bible. (No, he uses the flawed humanity and our veiled understanding of the fullness of Christ to the eventual lifting of the veil when we will see "face to face.")
The church was then in its infancy, but it would soon pass to a mature stage with greater knowledge. As adults put away childish things, so Christians would put away childish things like tongues (I Cor 13:11). (No, he was not talking about the infant church. There is no reference to such an idea anywhere in Scripture. He was talking about the state of the Christian community, a state which persists to this day.)
8. Bible tongues communicated only vague knowledge. Paul told Corinth that the gifts only provided obscure knowledge of God and His will for the churches. He told them that the completed Scriptures would allow them to see in perfect detail, like face to face (I Cor 13:12a). The context demands a comparison of obscure and detailed knowledge, not the coming of Jesus Christ. (Such assertions are not justified by a plain reading of the passage in question. Tom Pennington while making his case for cessationism, grudgingly admits, "But cessationism does not rise or fall on 1 Corinthians 13." He then writes, "...as you know, this is a very highly disputed passage and there are a number of possible interpretations. There are disagreements about how to interpret that passage on both sides of the issue." So the situation is far from cut-and-dried.)
9. Bible tongues communicated only partial knowledge. Paul taught that revelatory gifts only provided partial knowledge, but the completed New Testament would provide perfect knowledge, even to the degree of detail that God knew Paul (I Cor 13:12b compared to 13:9-10). The context demands a comparison of partial and perfect knowledge, not the coming of Jesus Christ. (Basically a repeated point.)
10. Bible tongues could not touch Bible revelation. The Old Testament was perfect for that covenant (Ps 19:7; 119:96). The New Testament was more sure than God's voice from heaven, could make ministers perfect, and is called the perfect law of liberty (II Pet 1:16-21; II Tim 3:16-17; Jas 1:25). The perfect thing replacing the temporary gifts of prophecy, knowledge, and tongues did come! (Another repetition.)
11. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the apostles had finished writing the New Testament scriptures and such partial and obscure gifts of revelation were no longer needed (I Cor 13:8-12). While Paul was alive the apostles confirmed each other's writings (I Tim 5:18; II Tim 3:15-17; II Pet 3:15-16). The need for tongues had ended. (Simply a reassertion of an undocumented point.)
12. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the apostles' testimony came to an end. These sign gifts were given in the beginning to confirm the preaching of fishermen and tax collectors, and they ended when their witness was established throughout the Roman Empire and they had gone home to heaven (Mark 16:17-20; Heb 2:1-4). (Another repeated point. Apparently the author needs his list to be long to give the appearance of weighty and extensive evidence.)
13. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the time of reformation ended, and the kingdom of Jesus Christ was fully established in the earth (Matt 16:28;Heb 12:28-29). They were needed only for 40 years to help confirm the new religion and worship introduced by John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, and His apostles (Luke 16:16; John 4:21-24).
14. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the Roman armies destroyed the Jewish nation, Jerusalem, and the temple. Tongues were primarily a sign for unbelieving Jews, because the Jews required signs (Deut 18:21-22; I Cor 1:22; 14:21-22). But once Israel was scattered in judgment, the need for tongues was gone (Acts 2:17-21).
15. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, in perfect agreement with the prophecy about them (Micah 7:14-20; Acts 2:17-21; 7:36; Heb 9:10). God had prophesied the duration of this marvelous thing – forty years – and the climactic events ending it – the finished Bible and Israel's destruction! Give God the glory, and believe His prophecy!
16. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the special gift of fluently speaking a foreign language ceased forever. History confirms exactly what had been prophesied – no one spoke in tongues after 70 A.D. The gibberish of possessed Hindus, American Indians, Eskimos, and modern Charismatics and Pentecostals are not the gift of tongues.
17. Bible tongues were definite languages of mankind. The incoherent babbling, gibberish, barking, laughing, and oinking today are not close to the Spirit's gift, which was only and always definite human languages capable of translation (Acts 2:1-11; 10:46; I Cor 14:21-22). Jannes and Jambres of the Charismatics and Pentecostals cannot duplicate the Spirit's gift (Gen 8:16-19; II Tim 3:8-9). (This is patently false.
And why did the tongues of 1 Corinthians need interpretation [not translation], while the tongues of Acts required neither?)
18. Bible tongues were a sign to unbelievers. Today's emphasis on speaking among believers in church services, crusades, or so-called revivals is contrary to God's will for the gift (I Cor 14:22). Tongues were to convince unbelievers that the speaker was sent by God with a divine message, as at Pentecost (Acts 2:1-11). The use of tongues among believers misses God's purpose for them.
19. Bible tongues were the least gift in the church. The Holy Spirit ranked the gifts for Corinth, which had become distracted by their obsession for spiritual gifts, so the current emphasis on this gift disobeys the priority and emphasis of God (I Cor 12:28). Apostles, prophets, and teachers were clearly superior, because they communicated knowledge. Even helpers were more important!
20. Bible tongues were spoken only by some in a church. (Hmm. I thought they were signs for the apostles?)
The rest of the members were to be content without speaking them, so the obsession today for tongues is clearly wrong (I Cor 12:30). (This is clearly false.
For ministers and churches to demand speaking in tongues as evidence of the baptism of the Holy Ghost is contrary to the word of God, for only some ever had the real gift, which none have today.
21. Bible tongues were a sign to confirm the speaker. Today's babbling does not confirm anything but possible insanity, devil possession, drunkenness, or rude manners (Mark 16:17-20; Pr 23:29-30; I Cor 14:11,23). Unless a person was present that knew the language, or an interpreter translated the language, and it was clear the speaker never learned the language, the use of tongues was wrong. (No, this is false. Tongues, like all the gifts, are to edify the Body.
24. Bible tongues were never sought by spiritual saints. God gave the New Testament gifts according to His own will, and they sought the better gifts anyway (I Cor 12:11,31). Saints with spiritual understanding of God's gifts coveted the best gifts. They did not pursue or emphasis the least gifts. Speaking in tongues was the lowest gift, even below helpers, in apostolic churches (I Cor 12:28). (This is false. All the gifts are to be sought, but it happens that certain gifts are more valuable.
26. Bible tongues was the gift to speak foreign languages without study. (This is false, as we have already demonstrated.)
But Charismatic and Pentecostal missionaries study languages for years to be able to speak them, and they never expose their "gift" to linguists or native speakers of any language (Acts 2:1-11; 10:46). Benny Hinn, the greatest tongues speaker today, must use translators to communicate with anyone of any language! (Another appeal to contemporary expression, and as such is irrelevant.)
27. Bible tongues were sought and exalted by the Corinthians. But the church at Corinth was the most immature, carnal, and heretical of the New Testament churches (I Cor 1:11; 3:1-4; 5:1-2; 6:1-8; 11:18;15:12; etc.). (Indeed, but Paul's response was to correct, define, explain, and amplify their use.
28. Bible tongues were a very inferior gift compared to apostleship. But all honest Bible readers know that the gift of apostle disappeared during the first century. (That means that if one believes apostleship continues to this day, they can only be dishonest.)
No man in the last 1900 years could qualify as an apostle (Acts 1:20-26; I Cor 9:1; II Cor 12:12). If the most valuable gift had no further purpose after 70 AD, why should the least valuable gift (I Cor 12:28)? (Um, no. Let's actually quote the scriptures cited.
29. Bible tongues were a gift to the apostles and their hearers. Seeking this gift today overlooks its persons, promise, and purpose (Mark 16:14-17; Heb 2:3-4). The gift of tongues was the property of the apostles and those under their ministries (Acts 8:14-17; 10:44-48; 19:1-7). (Do you remember the author's point #25? "Bible tongues were under the control of the users." Now apparently they were under the control of the apostles. Let's again quote the referenced Scriptures:
Unless some of those original disciples are nearly 2000 years old, there is no legitimate gift of tongues here today.
30. Bible tongues were 2000 times inferior to Bible preaching. Paul valued 5 words of preaching over 10,000 words of tongues! Preaching is far superior in God's purpose and for the churches' profit, but Charismatics and Pentecostals reverse this priority to emphasize their novelty (I Cor 14:19,39). They are very quick to ridicule sound doctrine and Bible preaching, though far superior to tongues! (Another tiresome appeal to contemporary experience.)
31. Bible tongues submitted to Paul's commandments. Any other attitude toward Paul's teaching about tongues is arrogant and ignorant rebellion (I Cor 14:36-38). Thinking yourself spiritual means absolutely nothing! Speaking in "tongues" means nothing! A man or woman that is spiritual will recognize that Paul's confining restrictions for tongues were the commandments of Jesus Christ. (Irrelevant to the Scriptural case for or against tongues.)
32. Bible tongues could not be easily duplicated. Because they were real languages, they could not be faked very easily! This made them a sign and a wonder (Acts 2:1-11)! But modern babbling and gibberish are easily duplicated through psychosis, demons, or simply learned behavior. It is for this reason that tongues are so popular, rather than raising the dead or taking up snakes! (Sigh. Irrelevant.)
33. Bible tongues ended when the apostolic gifts disappeared. (This is the concept to be proved, and yet we have nothing but a bare assertion!)
Paul could heal early in his career with handkerchiefs, and Peter could heal by his shadow (Acts 5:12-16; 19:11-12). But Paul resorted to home remedies for Timothy's problems, and he had to leave Trophimus sick at Ephesus (I Tim 5:23; II Tim 4:20). Why didn't he call for the elders and the healing oil (Mark 6:13; Jas 5:14-15)? (As the narrative of the N.T. turns from the establishment of the early church and the fact of the presence of the Holy Spirit in power to other matters of concern, the presence or absence of the miraculous in the narrative is meaningless.
In fact, there is no evidence of the subsistence of the miraculous, and it is only by the sparser mentions that their ceasing is inferred. That is, by the silence of Scripture the author infers something he cannot know.)
34. Bible tongues were not intended for this age. The three Pastoral Epistles, directing ministers how to take care of the church of God, do not contain a single word about spiritual gifts, especially speaking in tongues (I Tim 3:15; II Tim 3:16-17; Titus 1:5). With the overwhelming emphasis on tongues above anything else in Charismatic circles, this conspicuous silence is very condemning. (Again arguing from silence. And, the author artificially restricts the scope of his inquiry without justification. But we take the whole counsel of Scripture to ascertain the validity of doctrine and practice. Let's review what the Scriptures actually say about the gits.
(The next 12 points are irrelevant to the biblical case for cessationism, as they address contemporary occurrence.)
35. Modern false tongues had a definite beginning. They began on January 1, 1901, during a watch night service in Topeka, Kansas. A woman named Agnes Ozman babbled in gibberish after Charles Parham, a renegade Methodist minister, laid hands on her. This began the modern craze of speaking in tongues. It did not involve languages, the Holy Spirit, Pentecost, or the apostles.
36. Modern false tongues continued. They went from Kansas to Houston, where Charles Parham got William Seymour involved, who took the spirit fire to Los Angeles. There in 1906 on Azusa Street began a 3-year odyssey of obsessing about tongues that eventually affected the whole world. The problems with Parham, Seymour, and their followers are well documented and beyond this study.
37. Modern false tongues are emphasized over the other sign gifts. The reason is simple – tongues are much easier to counterfeit. Would you rather gibber or handle snakes and drink poison? So Benny Hinn goes to coliseums to heal, not to hospitals! Charismatic faith and power tremble, when real miracles are required! Remember how and why Pharaoh's magicians had to quit (II Tim 3:8-9)!
38. Modern false tongues have been proven to not be any language. If Charismatics disagree, they should take their gift to a linguist and preach to him. Or they can take their gift to a nation of that language and confirm it among native speakers. But they will not do this any sooner than Benny Hinn will clear a cancer ward or empty a morgue. He stages healings, and they fake tongues.
39. Modern false tongues claim Acts 2:17-21 as a prophecy of them. They apply Joel's prophecy of Holy Spirit gifts in the last days to their Charismatic activities of the last 100 years. But Joel wrote those words in the future tense to describe Pentecost over 500 years before it happened! Peter nailed the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy to the very event of tongues at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-16)!
40. Modern false tongues emphasize religious experience. Instead of faith, doctrine, and works, they emphasize feelings, froth, and foam. But the apostles emphasized knowledge and learning (Acts 17:11; Rom 16:17-18; Phil 1:9-11; I Cor 14:15-20; I Thes 5:21; II Pet 3:18). Tongues were never sought or promoted in the Bible for a thrilling personal experience, as they are marketed today.
41. Modern false tongues make babbling the test of the Spirit. But the apostles taught that spirits should be tested by doctrine, not a baptism of the Holy Spirit resulting in tongues (I John 4:1-6). Light and truth in any man is known by the degree he holds to scripture, not a babbling tongue (Is 8:20; I Tim 6:3-5). Judas Iscariot was as spectacular at miracles as any of the apostles.
42. Modern false tongues despise doctrine and preaching. They replace these New Testament mandates with praise bands, getting drunk in the spirit, dancing, tongues, slaying in the spirit, laughter revivals, interpretive dance, healing services, and other carnal inventions to scratch the itching ears of unregenerate hearers. But Paul condemned such as false Christianity (II Tim 4:3-4).
43. Modern false tongues emphasize women. Paul warned of televangelists entering homes and taking captive silly and lustful women (II Tim 3:6-7). The apostles taught that women are the most easily deceived by these seducers (I Cor 14:34-35; I Tim 2:14; I Pet 3:7). Paul warned women to be silent in the churches, but Charismatics promote women as pastors (I Cor 14:34-35; I Tim 2:11-12)!
44. Modern false tongues are not the heavenly language of angels. Angels do not babble, gibber, bark, cackle, laugh, or oink! Some take Paul's hyperbole of I Cor 13:1 and make it some mysterious heavenly language, and then they claim that is what they speak! But Paul merely drew an extreme illustration of how worthless even the most glorious gift of tongues would be without charity.
45. Modern false tongues are not God's anointing. Charismatics are sickening by their constant talk about a-noint-in! Listen to their guru, Benny Hinn, for any five minutes of any program! But Paul, the great apostle to the Gentiles and our example in following Christ, only used the word one time, and that in a different context (II Cor 1:21)! He never used it in the three Pastoral Epistles.
46. Modern false tongues are leading the perilous times. Paul warned Timothy of a terrible threat against the gospel of Jesus Christ – an effeminate, carnal, compromising, entertaining, and worldly brand of Christianity (II Tim 3:1 - 4:5). The cure was bold and unapologetic preaching of God's word, in spite of widespread resentment against it. The tongues speakers are leading this apostasy.
47. Conclusion! It is easy to see that today's speaking in tongues is an ungodly deception of the devil and a disgrace to Jesus Christ. The true gift of tongues ended nearly 2000 years ago. Tongues today are not a gift of the Spirit. And the doctrine and practice of Charismatics and Pentecostals prove them to be heretics under the delusion of the devil and his ministers (II Cor 11:3-4,13-15). (Mighty sure of himself, isn't he? Apparently he has not actually discussed his position with a hostile witness.)
4. Bible tongues lasted only a short while. Paul told the tongues-speaking church at Corinth that the Spirit's revelatory gifts would end (I Cor 13:8). In spite of their emphasis on prophecy, tongues, and gifts of knowledge, Paul promised that these gifts were temporary. Charity was a more excellent way of serving, for charity was permanent and would never end (I Cor 12:31; 13:8,13). (Indeed, they are to pass away. But when?)
5. Bible tongues were very inadequate. The spiritual gifts of prophecy, the word of knowledge, and tongues brought only a partial revelation of God's will to any man or church (I Cor 13:9). (Again, let's actually quote the reference provided.
1 Corinthians 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part."We." Despite the author's assertion that the apostles had "all truth" [Item 3], Paul includes himself in the limitations. Paul does not state or even hint that he or the other apostles had exclusive access to truth.
We must conclude that "all truth" is an action of the revelatory nature of God at work in all believers, bringing us to spiritual maturity. It is a universal condition of our Christian experience, a limitation we must deal with in this temporal life until such time as we are brought "face to face."
Which is why we are told to test prophecies and to let every matter be established by two or three witnesses. The Church is faced with the ongoing task, even to this day, of discerning the purposes and will of God through Body ministry where all the gifts are in operation for the edification of the Body.)
They were short-term, incomplete fixes for immediate instruction and answers to questions. Because of this, prophets had to work together, for their gifts were very limited and partial (I Cor 14:29-31). (This is an extraordinary claim. Once again the Scripture cited does not speak to the point offered by the author:
1 Corinthians 14:29–31: 29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. 30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. 31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.Paul is not describing a temporary condition that will be alleviated by the coming canon. He does not tell us this. He is describing the proper operation of the Body and establishing order in the Corinthian church so that "all may be comforted." There is no hint in any of this that Paul was saying that all this as a temporary condition.)
6. Bible tongues were not needed after perfect revelation came. The New Testament scriptures were the perfect revelation that ended and replaced the Spirit's revelatory gifts, which were all partial (I Cor 13:9-10). (Again we quote the Scripture.
1 Corinthians 13:9–10 9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.This is the key Scripture, upon which cessationists hang their hats. A single word, "perfect," is the basis for an entire doctrinal stance.
The author assumes without basis that the "perfect" is the Scriptures. But he can provide no reason for this assumption and offers no evidence or Scripture that this is correct. In fact, Paul is talking about something completely different, because he goes on to state in 1Co. 13:12:
"Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."We cannot see Scripture face to face. The Scriptures cannot fully know us. Paul is talking about a coming time when the fullness of revelation, salvation, the nature of God and the Body, and our ability to see and understand such things will will be unveiled.
2Co. 3:18 "And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit."Every church then had God's complete revelation (II Tim 3:16-17; II Pet 1:19). (Again, the actual Scriptures:
2 Timothy 3:16–17 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.Most certainly we honor and love and study the Scriptures for their incomparable value. The Bible is God's very word, wherein life, peace, salvation, and purpose are found. However, this wonderful Bible does not tell us that the Scriptures are exclusive and sole revelation of God.
2 Peter 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; where unto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:Let's look at context for this verse. Just a few verses before this, Peter told us this:
2Pe. 1:3 His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness.Peter focuses on God's power at work in us, he is not referring to the Scriptures. His work in us is accomplished by supernatural means. Now we continue on to the passage following the author's reference:
2Pe. 1:20-2:1 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
2Pe. 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them — bringing swift destruction on themselves.Peter refers to the prophets of old, then talks about the divine origin of prophecy. Notice that Scripture is nothing more than written down prophecy. Then, he moves to contemporary prophecy, and false prophets and teachers. We know that there were no scriptures as of yet other than the O.T., so he can only be talking about the operation and inspiration of prophecy, not the Scriptures to come.
Interestingly, he takes the idea of false prophets that "were among the people" and equates them with false teachers. We must ask the author, has the gift of teaching also passed? It's synonymous with prophecy!)
The context demands a comparison of partial and perfect revelation, (No, it demands a comparison of false prophecy and false teaching.)
not the coming of Jesus Christ. (This point has not been under discussion. Nor is it the only possible alternative.)
7. Bible tongues were childish and immature. Paul used a metaphor of human development to compare the inferior revelation of spiritual gifts to the perfect revelation of the Bible. (No, he uses the flawed humanity and our veiled understanding of the fullness of Christ to the eventual lifting of the veil when we will see "face to face.")
The church was then in its infancy, but it would soon pass to a mature stage with greater knowledge. As adults put away childish things, so Christians would put away childish things like tongues (I Cor 13:11). (No, he was not talking about the infant church. There is no reference to such an idea anywhere in Scripture. He was talking about the state of the Christian community, a state which persists to this day.)
8. Bible tongues communicated only vague knowledge. Paul told Corinth that the gifts only provided obscure knowledge of God and His will for the churches. He told them that the completed Scriptures would allow them to see in perfect detail, like face to face (I Cor 13:12a). The context demands a comparison of obscure and detailed knowledge, not the coming of Jesus Christ. (Such assertions are not justified by a plain reading of the passage in question. Tom Pennington while making his case for cessationism, grudgingly admits, "But cessationism does not rise or fall on 1 Corinthians 13." He then writes, "...as you know, this is a very highly disputed passage and there are a number of possible interpretations. There are disagreements about how to interpret that passage on both sides of the issue." So the situation is far from cut-and-dried.)
9. Bible tongues communicated only partial knowledge. Paul taught that revelatory gifts only provided partial knowledge, but the completed New Testament would provide perfect knowledge, even to the degree of detail that God knew Paul (I Cor 13:12b compared to 13:9-10). The context demands a comparison of partial and perfect knowledge, not the coming of Jesus Christ. (Basically a repeated point.)
10. Bible tongues could not touch Bible revelation. The Old Testament was perfect for that covenant (Ps 19:7; 119:96). The New Testament was more sure than God's voice from heaven, could make ministers perfect, and is called the perfect law of liberty (II Pet 1:16-21; II Tim 3:16-17; Jas 1:25). The perfect thing replacing the temporary gifts of prophecy, knowledge, and tongues did come! (Another repetition.)
11. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the apostles had finished writing the New Testament scriptures and such partial and obscure gifts of revelation were no longer needed (I Cor 13:8-12). While Paul was alive the apostles confirmed each other's writings (I Tim 5:18; II Tim 3:15-17; II Pet 3:15-16). The need for tongues had ended. (Simply a reassertion of an undocumented point.)
12. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the apostles' testimony came to an end. These sign gifts were given in the beginning to confirm the preaching of fishermen and tax collectors, and they ended when their witness was established throughout the Roman Empire and they had gone home to heaven (Mark 16:17-20; Heb 2:1-4). (Another repeated point. Apparently the author needs his list to be long to give the appearance of weighty and extensive evidence.)
13. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the time of reformation ended, and the kingdom of Jesus Christ was fully established in the earth (Matt 16:28;Heb 12:28-29). They were needed only for 40 years to help confirm the new religion and worship introduced by John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, and His apostles (Luke 16:16; John 4:21-24).
14. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the Roman armies destroyed the Jewish nation, Jerusalem, and the temple. Tongues were primarily a sign for unbelieving Jews, because the Jews required signs (Deut 18:21-22; I Cor 1:22; 14:21-22). But once Israel was scattered in judgment, the need for tongues was gone (Acts 2:17-21).
15. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, in perfect agreement with the prophecy about them (Micah 7:14-20; Acts 2:17-21; 7:36; Heb 9:10). God had prophesied the duration of this marvelous thing – forty years – and the climactic events ending it – the finished Bible and Israel's destruction! Give God the glory, and believe His prophecy!
16. Bible tongues had a definite end. They ended by 70 AD, forty years after they began, when the special gift of fluently speaking a foreign language ceased forever. History confirms exactly what had been prophesied – no one spoke in tongues after 70 A.D. The gibberish of possessed Hindus, American Indians, Eskimos, and modern Charismatics and Pentecostals are not the gift of tongues.
17. Bible tongues were definite languages of mankind. The incoherent babbling, gibberish, barking, laughing, and oinking today are not close to the Spirit's gift, which was only and always definite human languages capable of translation (Acts 2:1-11; 10:46; I Cor 14:21-22). Jannes and Jambres of the Charismatics and Pentecostals cannot duplicate the Spirit's gift (Gen 8:16-19; II Tim 3:8-9). (This is patently false.
1Co. 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.Sir, what "definite languages of mankind" is the tongues of angels?
1Co. 14:28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.Sir, why would a tongues-speaker speak silently to god in a definite language of mankind?
1Co. 14:9 So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air.Sir, how is a definite language of mankind "speaking into the air?"
1Co. 14:16 If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying?Sir, how is praising God in your spirit a definite language of mankind?
And why did the tongues of 1 Corinthians need interpretation [not translation], while the tongues of Acts required neither?)
18. Bible tongues were a sign to unbelievers. Today's emphasis on speaking among believers in church services, crusades, or so-called revivals is contrary to God's will for the gift (I Cor 14:22). Tongues were to convince unbelievers that the speaker was sent by God with a divine message, as at Pentecost (Acts 2:1-11). The use of tongues among believers misses God's purpose for them.
19. Bible tongues were the least gift in the church. The Holy Spirit ranked the gifts for Corinth, which had become distracted by their obsession for spiritual gifts, so the current emphasis on this gift disobeys the priority and emphasis of God (I Cor 12:28). Apostles, prophets, and teachers were clearly superior, because they communicated knowledge. Even helpers were more important!
20. Bible tongues were spoken only by some in a church. (Hmm. I thought they were signs for the apostles?)
The rest of the members were to be content without speaking them, so the obsession today for tongues is clearly wrong (I Cor 12:30). (This is clearly false.
1Co. 14:5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.
1Co. 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.Tongues were widespread in the church. Paul's purpose was to clarify and correct the expression of them in Corinth.)
For ministers and churches to demand speaking in tongues as evidence of the baptism of the Holy Ghost is contrary to the word of God, for only some ever had the real gift, which none have today.
21. Bible tongues were a sign to confirm the speaker. Today's babbling does not confirm anything but possible insanity, devil possession, drunkenness, or rude manners (Mark 16:17-20; Pr 23:29-30; I Cor 14:11,23). Unless a person was present that knew the language, or an interpreter translated the language, and it was clear the speaker never learned the language, the use of tongues was wrong. (No, this is false. Tongues, like all the gifts, are to edify the Body.
1Co. 14:12-13 So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church. For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.)22. Bible tongues were only used publicly with an interpreter. Today's babbling without interpretation is manifestly wrong in the sight of God (I Cor 14:27-28). Giving some vague religious lesson from the babbling of another is not interpretation of tongues. Linguistic experts or persons knowing both languages would easily recognize true tongues and their interpretation. (This is false. Tongues may be a silent expression to God.
1Co. 14:28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.)23. Bible tongues were only spoken by one person at a time. Today's emphasis on assemblies with more than on person speaking at the same time is plainly wrong (I Cor 14:27). Paul feared that even one person speaking in tongues without proper interpretation would give the appearance of barbarians or insanity (I Cor 14:11,23). What would he think of today's mass hysteria? (This is an appeal to contemporary expressions, and thus does not speak to the scriptural case for tongues.)
24. Bible tongues were never sought by spiritual saints. God gave the New Testament gifts according to His own will, and they sought the better gifts anyway (I Cor 12:11,31). Saints with spiritual understanding of God's gifts coveted the best gifts. They did not pursue or emphasis the least gifts. Speaking in tongues was the lowest gift, even below helpers, in apostolic churches (I Cor 12:28). (This is false. All the gifts are to be sought, but it happens that certain gifts are more valuable.
1Co. 14:1 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.)25. Bible tongues were under the control of the users. Today's spontaneous, wild use outside of Scriptural limits is wrong. The gift of prophecy, far superior in every way to tongues, was under the control of the prophets (I Cor 14:32). Paul's repeated instructions about the right use of the gift of tongues required it to be a very controllable gift, not a force or power controlling the user. (Another appeal to contemporary usage. Therefore, not relevant.)
26. Bible tongues was the gift to speak foreign languages without study. (This is false, as we have already demonstrated.)
But Charismatic and Pentecostal missionaries study languages for years to be able to speak them, and they never expose their "gift" to linguists or native speakers of any language (Acts 2:1-11; 10:46). Benny Hinn, the greatest tongues speaker today, must use translators to communicate with anyone of any language! (Another appeal to contemporary expression, and as such is irrelevant.)
27. Bible tongues were sought and exalted by the Corinthians. But the church at Corinth was the most immature, carnal, and heretical of the New Testament churches (I Cor 1:11; 3:1-4; 5:1-2; 6:1-8; 11:18;15:12; etc.). (Indeed, but Paul's response was to correct, define, explain, and amplify their use.
1Co. 14:39 Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.Why do Charismatics make a mockery of Christianity by aping the most problematic church in the Bible and rebelling against the plain guidelines given to that church? ("Aping?" No, they're attempting to embrace the clear teaching of Scripture, albeit in an often faulty way. And we not yet again the author appeals to contemporary experience.)
28. Bible tongues were a very inferior gift compared to apostleship. But all honest Bible readers know that the gift of apostle disappeared during the first century. (That means that if one believes apostleship continues to this day, they can only be dishonest.)
No man in the last 1900 years could qualify as an apostle (Acts 1:20-26; I Cor 9:1; II Cor 12:12). If the most valuable gift had no further purpose after 70 AD, why should the least valuable gift (I Cor 12:28)? (Um, no. Let's actually quote the scriptures cited.
Acts 1:20–26 20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take. 21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. 23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of allmen, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, 25 That he may take part of ithis ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go lto his own place. 26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
1 Corinthians 9:1 Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?
2 Corinthians 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.Do you see anywhere that apostleship has ceased?)
29. Bible tongues were a gift to the apostles and their hearers. Seeking this gift today overlooks its persons, promise, and purpose (Mark 16:14-17; Heb 2:3-4). The gift of tongues was the property of the apostles and those under their ministries (Acts 8:14-17; 10:44-48; 19:1-7). (Do you remember the author's point #25? "Bible tongues were under the control of the users." Now apparently they were under the control of the apostles. Let's again quote the referenced Scriptures:
Acts 8:14–17 14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: 15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: 16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) 17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
Acts 10:44–48 44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, 47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Acts 19:1–7 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, 2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. 3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto eJohn’s baptism. 4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. 7 And all the men were about twelve.You will note that none of this has anything to do with the control of the apostles. What these Scriptures illustrate was the coming of the Holy Spirit to the gentiles, which was no small matter for the Jewish Christians.)
Unless some of those original disciples are nearly 2000 years old, there is no legitimate gift of tongues here today.
30. Bible tongues were 2000 times inferior to Bible preaching. Paul valued 5 words of preaching over 10,000 words of tongues! Preaching is far superior in God's purpose and for the churches' profit, but Charismatics and Pentecostals reverse this priority to emphasize their novelty (I Cor 14:19,39). They are very quick to ridicule sound doctrine and Bible preaching, though far superior to tongues! (Another tiresome appeal to contemporary experience.)
31. Bible tongues submitted to Paul's commandments. Any other attitude toward Paul's teaching about tongues is arrogant and ignorant rebellion (I Cor 14:36-38). Thinking yourself spiritual means absolutely nothing! Speaking in "tongues" means nothing! A man or woman that is spiritual will recognize that Paul's confining restrictions for tongues were the commandments of Jesus Christ. (Irrelevant to the Scriptural case for or against tongues.)
32. Bible tongues could not be easily duplicated. Because they were real languages, they could not be faked very easily! This made them a sign and a wonder (Acts 2:1-11)! But modern babbling and gibberish are easily duplicated through psychosis, demons, or simply learned behavior. It is for this reason that tongues are so popular, rather than raising the dead or taking up snakes! (Sigh. Irrelevant.)
33. Bible tongues ended when the apostolic gifts disappeared. (This is the concept to be proved, and yet we have nothing but a bare assertion!)
Paul could heal early in his career with handkerchiefs, and Peter could heal by his shadow (Acts 5:12-16; 19:11-12). But Paul resorted to home remedies for Timothy's problems, and he had to leave Trophimus sick at Ephesus (I Tim 5:23; II Tim 4:20). Why didn't he call for the elders and the healing oil (Mark 6:13; Jas 5:14-15)? (As the narrative of the N.T. turns from the establishment of the early church and the fact of the presence of the Holy Spirit in power to other matters of concern, the presence or absence of the miraculous in the narrative is meaningless.
In fact, there is no evidence of the subsistence of the miraculous, and it is only by the sparser mentions that their ceasing is inferred. That is, by the silence of Scripture the author infers something he cannot know.)
34. Bible tongues were not intended for this age. The three Pastoral Epistles, directing ministers how to take care of the church of God, do not contain a single word about spiritual gifts, especially speaking in tongues (I Tim 3:15; II Tim 3:16-17; Titus 1:5). With the overwhelming emphasis on tongues above anything else in Charismatic circles, this conspicuous silence is very condemning. (Again arguing from silence. And, the author artificially restricts the scope of his inquiry without justification. But we take the whole counsel of Scripture to ascertain the validity of doctrine and practice. Let's review what the Scriptures actually say about the gits.
Ro. 11:29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.
Ro. 12:6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given us.
1Co. 12:1 Now about spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant.
Ep. 4:7-8 But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. 8 This is why it says: “When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men.”
He. 2:4 God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.And of course, there is the long treatise of 1Cor. 12 to 1Cor. 14, dedicated to explaining the gifts and their operation in the Body.
(The next 12 points are irrelevant to the biblical case for cessationism, as they address contemporary occurrence.)
35. Modern false tongues had a definite beginning. They began on January 1, 1901, during a watch night service in Topeka, Kansas. A woman named Agnes Ozman babbled in gibberish after Charles Parham, a renegade Methodist minister, laid hands on her. This began the modern craze of speaking in tongues. It did not involve languages, the Holy Spirit, Pentecost, or the apostles.
36. Modern false tongues continued. They went from Kansas to Houston, where Charles Parham got William Seymour involved, who took the spirit fire to Los Angeles. There in 1906 on Azusa Street began a 3-year odyssey of obsessing about tongues that eventually affected the whole world. The problems with Parham, Seymour, and their followers are well documented and beyond this study.
37. Modern false tongues are emphasized over the other sign gifts. The reason is simple – tongues are much easier to counterfeit. Would you rather gibber or handle snakes and drink poison? So Benny Hinn goes to coliseums to heal, not to hospitals! Charismatic faith and power tremble, when real miracles are required! Remember how and why Pharaoh's magicians had to quit (II Tim 3:8-9)!
38. Modern false tongues have been proven to not be any language. If Charismatics disagree, they should take their gift to a linguist and preach to him. Or they can take their gift to a nation of that language and confirm it among native speakers. But they will not do this any sooner than Benny Hinn will clear a cancer ward or empty a morgue. He stages healings, and they fake tongues.
39. Modern false tongues claim Acts 2:17-21 as a prophecy of them. They apply Joel's prophecy of Holy Spirit gifts in the last days to their Charismatic activities of the last 100 years. But Joel wrote those words in the future tense to describe Pentecost over 500 years before it happened! Peter nailed the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy to the very event of tongues at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-16)!
40. Modern false tongues emphasize religious experience. Instead of faith, doctrine, and works, they emphasize feelings, froth, and foam. But the apostles emphasized knowledge and learning (Acts 17:11; Rom 16:17-18; Phil 1:9-11; I Cor 14:15-20; I Thes 5:21; II Pet 3:18). Tongues were never sought or promoted in the Bible for a thrilling personal experience, as they are marketed today.
41. Modern false tongues make babbling the test of the Spirit. But the apostles taught that spirits should be tested by doctrine, not a baptism of the Holy Spirit resulting in tongues (I John 4:1-6). Light and truth in any man is known by the degree he holds to scripture, not a babbling tongue (Is 8:20; I Tim 6:3-5). Judas Iscariot was as spectacular at miracles as any of the apostles.
42. Modern false tongues despise doctrine and preaching. They replace these New Testament mandates with praise bands, getting drunk in the spirit, dancing, tongues, slaying in the spirit, laughter revivals, interpretive dance, healing services, and other carnal inventions to scratch the itching ears of unregenerate hearers. But Paul condemned such as false Christianity (II Tim 4:3-4).
43. Modern false tongues emphasize women. Paul warned of televangelists entering homes and taking captive silly and lustful women (II Tim 3:6-7). The apostles taught that women are the most easily deceived by these seducers (I Cor 14:34-35; I Tim 2:14; I Pet 3:7). Paul warned women to be silent in the churches, but Charismatics promote women as pastors (I Cor 14:34-35; I Tim 2:11-12)!
44. Modern false tongues are not the heavenly language of angels. Angels do not babble, gibber, bark, cackle, laugh, or oink! Some take Paul's hyperbole of I Cor 13:1 and make it some mysterious heavenly language, and then they claim that is what they speak! But Paul merely drew an extreme illustration of how worthless even the most glorious gift of tongues would be without charity.
45. Modern false tongues are not God's anointing. Charismatics are sickening by their constant talk about a-noint-in! Listen to their guru, Benny Hinn, for any five minutes of any program! But Paul, the great apostle to the Gentiles and our example in following Christ, only used the word one time, and that in a different context (II Cor 1:21)! He never used it in the three Pastoral Epistles.
46. Modern false tongues are leading the perilous times. Paul warned Timothy of a terrible threat against the gospel of Jesus Christ – an effeminate, carnal, compromising, entertaining, and worldly brand of Christianity (II Tim 3:1 - 4:5). The cure was bold and unapologetic preaching of God's word, in spite of widespread resentment against it. The tongues speakers are leading this apostasy.
47. Conclusion! It is easy to see that today's speaking in tongues is an ungodly deception of the devil and a disgrace to Jesus Christ. The true gift of tongues ended nearly 2000 years ago. Tongues today are not a gift of the Spirit. And the doctrine and practice of Charismatics and Pentecostals prove them to be heretics under the delusion of the devil and his ministers (II Cor 11:3-4,13-15). (Mighty sure of himself, isn't he? Apparently he has not actually discussed his position with a hostile witness.)
No comments:
Post a Comment