The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Re: Sign Gifts

J Edwards

The portion of the quote I was addressing was this "A service claiming to take care not only spiritual needs but also the physical needs is of the devil,"

This statement condemns any service that claims to take care of not only physical and spiritual needs as being of the devil. If William did not mean exactly what he said, that is another issue, but he has not retracted his statement. I am not deceving anyone. Do you agree with the wording of William's statement, even if the service claims to meet these needs by giving to the poor or having elders pray for the sick?


By the way, since you think the church has lost these gifts, and the Devil still has his version of them, do you believe the church still has the power to cast out demons?

Link, you make the same mistake here as you do in interpreting Scripture; you remove statements from there "context." A statement out of context is a pretext. William stated,

You cannot separte the statements as William was making one complete thought. He has nothing to retract; you own him an apology.

Begin a new thread <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/threaddevil.gif" alt="" />

Pray tell what "gift" was in operation there? Which of you all had the gift of healing? Since the gifts are associated with individual members of the body, rather than the body as a whole.

J Edwards

I was very clear that my problem was with part of William's post, which I quoted. I do not owe William an apology. He owes God and the brethren in Christ who minister to physical needs a repentant apology for his post. Even if one were wrong to offer physical healing in a meeting, it does not follow that the service is of the Devil.

I do not dispute that Satan can do signs and wonders. Exodus says that the Egyptian sticks turned into snakes. Satan may have power, with God's permission, to cause whirlwinds, as the book of Job may indicate.

The error is in thinking that if Satan can do lying signs and wonders that all signs and wonders are from Satan. If the end of Mark is accurate, then the Lord told the apostles that 'them that believe' would do signs and wonders.

William's ideas also leave us with the Devil running rampant doing signs and wonders, and the church powerless to cast out demons--because Christ classified casting out demons as a 'sign' or 'miracle' when he corrected the apostles for rebuking those who did signs and wonders in His name, though they were not apostles. If the church is without signs, then the church cannot cast out demons.

If the church can still cast out demons, then signs (miracles) can still be done, because Christ identified this is a type of sign or miracle.

It makes little sense to think that GOd would have the devil run rampant, even give him more power, and take away the power of the church to cast out Satan.

Benjamin Warfield's argument in the chapter "The Cessation of the Charismata"

-That these gifts served to witness to the apostles and the scriptures, and when the apostles were dead and scriptures that there was no more need for such gifts.
-That only those on whom the apostles laid their hands had gifts.
-That Justin, Ireneaus, etc. may have been writing of gifts among those on whom the apostles had laid their hands.

Warfield not only cannot prove his theories from scripture, but scripture actually contradicts his views.

Problem: Warfield's theory not supported by scripture.

* In the case of Philip, the apostles laid hands on him in connection with his service to the poor. There is no indication in scripture that the apostles laid hands on Philip so that he could perform miracles.

* Paul had not baptized all in Corinth, yet had he laid his hands on them all? 'To each' was given a gift, Paul wrote in chapter 12 of the first epistle, and the gifts listed here are classified as 'sign gifts' by cessationists.

* In the case of Philip, the apostles laid hands on him in connection with his service to the poor. There is no indication in scripture that the apostles laid hands on Philip so that he could perform miracles.

* The doctrinal teaching of the New Testament is not that gifts were given exclusively by the laying on of hands of the apostles, but rather that the gifts were given as the Spirit wills. As we can see in the scriptures God sometimes willed that gifts be given through the laying on of hands of the apostles, and sometimes willed that they be given apart from the laying on of hands of the apostles.

* Gifts _could be imparted_ through the laying on of the apostles hands. God apparently withheld of the Spirit from the Samaritans until the apostles laid hands on them. The Samaritans receiving the Gospel was a historically significant event, as this is the first account of non Jews receiving the Gospel after Pentecost.

* Gifts could be imparted through the gift of prophecy, accompanied by the laying on of hands of non-apostles. Timothy received a gift _through prophecy_ with they laying on of hands of the elders. He also received a gift through the laying on of Paul's hands. God works in both ways.

*In I Corinthians 12:13, Paul tells someone who speaks in tongues to pray that he may interpret. One way gifts can be received is through prayer.

*In Acts 10 and 11, we see that Cornelius and those with him received tongues and prophecy after hearing Peter preach, rather than through the laying on of his hands. This disproves the idea that the gifts only came through apostolic hands.

* Compare this to Paul and Barnabas. The Spirit spoke to a group of prophets and teachers, none of whom were one of the 12 apostles. To arrive at a doctrine that these gifts were given by a form of apostolic succession _exclusively_ by the laying on of hands, the scritpures need to clearly teach it. At the least we should expect all accounts of gifts to be _consistent_ with this theory. In the case of Paul, however, we see that God can grant gifts, even apostleship, without the laying on of hands of the 12 apostles.

* I Corinthians 12 tells us that God has 'set forth' in the church various ministers, including those who exercise the so-called 'sign gifts.' Ephesians 4 tells us that Christ gave some to be apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. Here we see these gifts come from God and Christ. I Corinthians teaches that the gifts are given as the Spirit wills. Scripture clearly teaches that it is the Lord who gives gifts and determines who receives them. He may choose to give them through the laying on of hands of apostles, elders, prophets and teachers, in response to prayer, through prophecy, or by any means of His choosing.

* Old Testament prophets like Moses and Elijah did miracles without the apostles laying hands on them. God granted that these miracles be done, and not the apostles. Once one of the apostles told Christ that some men, who were not of them, were doing what Christ described as a sign/miracle in His name. The apostles were not to suppose such people. It is clear from this account that miracles were not the exclusive domain of the apostles.

* Benjamin's Warfield's claims contradict the principle of 'sola scriptura' since scripture does not teach that these charismata only came through the laying on of hands of the apostles. Furthermore, his conclusions contradict the teaching of the scriptures listed above.

Link perhaps there is a lesson to be learned here for me. I have in the past made broad sweeping statements here on the Highway and have offended some of which I am truly sorry. But you my friend I believe are involved in nonsense to put it nicely. You see Link a true believer is completely content with the spiritual salvation of his soul from the wrath of God. His confidence rests upon the Word of God alone and not on an experience and certainly not upon physical miracles and physical healing. Please kindly do not use my name in any more of your posts. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I never argued that faith rests on physical miracles and healings. The apostles did such things, but that does not mean that is where their faith rested. (Of course, Thomas did not believe until he saw the risen Lord. The Lord told him to put his finger's in His hands and his hand in His side so that Thomas be not faithless, but believing.)