Bidam:
Once again i ask you, is the church fully mature NOW? This is not about the canons of scripture but about the Church(His body).

The church is mature. It has all the needed rudiments to transform anyone to the image of God from glory to glory. All that is needed for the church was fully provided by God in Christ through His Word.

shdemidemi:


The church is mature. It has all the needed rudiment to transform anyone to the image of God from glory to glory. All that is needed for the church was fully provided by God in Christ through His Word.

Can you provide a scripture for your assertion?

It also contradicts. Ephesians 4:10. "He who descended is Himself also He who ascended far above all the heavens, so that He might fill all things.) 11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, 12for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; 13until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. 14As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;…

vooks:
What is the scriptural basis for the highlighted?
Cessationism is extra-biblical. Like any other Christian theory, it should be subjected to a simple test; when first was it taught? When first did believers deem spiritual gifts unnecessary BECAUSE they had NT?

As far as pedigree is concerned, you can't compare Cessationism to today's trial and error miracle merchants. There are a flurry of situations that warranted miracles after pentecost but the Apostles simply retired and submitted to God's will. Even when prayer was made to God, He directed the Apostle to His grace and mercy which is solely in His hands.

vooks:
Could you please space the speeches/messages apart by 6 hour to 12 hours at least? A day would do fine. This is what am talking about.

Great job brining the debate to NL.

OK.

nlMediator:


It’s attitude such as the one you displayed in this post that keeps some WOFers from participating in your threads. To you, discussions in the Religion section are about competition, causing division and showing yourself to be right, not about enlightenment and edification of the brethren. You extended an invitation to me yesterday, but without waiting even for a reasonable period of time for response, you have already started mocking us.

That’s the same thing you did with the erased WOF thread. I naively thought you were seeking sincere discussions and was writing based on what you did not know about WOF. I stepped in to provide the correct WOF perspective on things, not the distortion I was reading. You commended me immediately I joined the discourse and even said you had me in my mind as one of those who’d join the conversation. Little did I know you had a hidden agenda. All along you knew what you’re doing and shortly afterwards showed your true colors, focusing more on mocking WOF, not a reasoned debate. At that point, we decided to abandon the thread for you, a stance I maintained even when you and your friends created a new one.

If you want people to discuss Bible truths with you, learn to approach them with respect and sincerity. Occasionally, insults would fly but that should not the underlying philosophy among those who care about honest dialogue.

While I’m here, I’ll say a few things in a second post to keep this one from being too long.

well said bro...

i remeber asking him when he was DB why he never discussed

Soul Wining
Love
fruit of the Spirit
How to spread the gospel further
fasting
etc

he side stepped it. when others do, they NEVER seem to have interest in them. But when it s MONEY - tithes, offerings, seeds, etc. Come see them in their best, with all form of baloney.

this was same thing that happened in the WOF thread they did. Now, same is repeating itself, and all he could say is we have had tough times on NL, like seriously? .... you gotta admit bro, That chap has a great sense of humour.

shdemidemi:


The church is mature. It has all the needed rudiments to transform anyone to the image of God from glory to glory. All that is needed for the church was fully provided by God in Christ through His Word.

Dear Lord Jesus!

Eph 4
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:

13 [size=16pt]Till [/size] we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

Father, thank you for giving me a bible...

You have not answered the question. Roman Catholicism thrived and invented the most damnable heresies without spiritual gifts. So let's not contrast cessationism with continuitionism 'effects'. We don't judge doctrine by their imagined effects. So,kindly explain the BASIS for cessationism as highlighted in your post OR simply say you don't know. Acknowledged ignorance is wisdom

shdemidemi:


As far as pedigree is concerned, you can't compare Cessationism to today's trial and error miracle merchants. There are a flurry of situations that warranted miracles after pentecost but the Apostles simply retired and submitted to God's will. Even when prayer was made to God, He directed the Apostle to His grace and mercy which is solely in His hands.

shdemidemi:


Maturity or growth does not mean we will all come to agree the same thing. Maturity of the faith means we have God's mind documented in a book for our collective edification.

The church had no bible like we have it today. There was nothing like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John at the time, people who were gifted at the time speak/prophesy to the church in line with what the Apostle had taught them. Today we have a complete guide, a sure word of prophecy collated and canonized from the works of those who God used as the foundation of christianity.

We are fully grown as a body today because we have the complete Word. Our growth has nothing to do with our individual or sectional volition to follow or not to follow the infallible Word.

vooks:
You have not answered the question. Roman Catholicism thrived and invented the most damnable heresies without spiritual gifts. So let's not contrast cessationism with continuitionism 'effects'. We don't judge doctrine by their imagined effects. So,kindly explain the BASIS for cessationism as highlighted in your post OR simply say you don't know. Acknowledged ignorance is wisdom

I will rather present my argument within the confines of scripture. What people do outside scripture is their prerogative, it isn't scripture.

Then substantiate the highlighted from scriptures

Where are we told to wait for the NT canon?

shdemidemi:


I will rather present my argument within the confines of scripture. What people do outside scripture is their prerogative, it isn't scripture.

shdemidemi:


Maturity or growth does not mean we will all come to agree the same thing. Maturity of the faith means we have God's mind documented in a book for our collective edification.

The church had no bible like we have it today. There was nothing like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John at the time, people who were gifted at the time speak/prophesy to the church in line with what the Apostle had taught them. Today we have a complete guide, a sure word of prophecy collated and canonized from the works of those who God used as the foundation of christianity.

We are fully grown as a body today because we have the complete Word. Our growth has nothing to do with our individual or sectional volition to follow or not to follow the infallible Word.

vooks:
Then substantiate the highlighted from scriptures

Where are we told to wait for the NT canon?

1 cor 13
8 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.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

We must understand Paul's style of writing and must always link every verse and chapter of his writing cos they all came as one. They were divided in to verses and chapters for easy reading.

Something was present in verse 8 but in 9 Paul never talked about it.

He mentioned LOVE PROPHECIES TONGUES KNOWLEDGE in verse 8. He asserted that love will never fail, so we are left with three things that will cease.

He went on to verse 9 to say we have some things in part- KNOWLEDGE AND PROPHECY excluding tongues.

The two gifts left were knowledge and prophecy though in part. He went on to say-

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

When the perfect comes only the gifts we have in part will cease, we don't speak in tongue in part so tongue was certainly done away with.

Perfect in the context used here refer to the complete revelation of God's mind, will and ways in the completed scripture.

Gombs:



Dear Lord Jesus!

Eph 4
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, [size=32pt]for the edifying of the body of Christ[/size]:

13 [size=16pt]Till [/size] we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

Father, thank you for giving me a bible...

God gave these gifts not because he needs the people empowered to be chasing after the devil or private jet. He gave the gifts for the sole purpose of edifying and establishing a mystical body of Christ- the church.

Apostles were mainly those who were appointed by God with a mission statement from Him. Paul understood the office and the church understood Paul's authority as an Apostle. We don't have Apostles today, the title can be used loosely but the twelve disciples and Paul were the main Apostles God used to pen down scriptures.

Prophets in the old is quite different from that of the new. Prophets in the new don't hear directly from God (Agabus' case was that of the old testament prophet and it marked the end of God speaking directly to any one within the church), they interpret and teach what they hear from the Apostle. Now that the bible is here, it remains the single and infallible word of prophecy the church need.

The two gifts relevant today are evangelists and pastor/teacher.

And am asking the bolded. Who/what informed you that the perfect, the coming of which these things cease is the New Testament?

If I ask you to define a bird, your definition should not include the very thing you are defining.

shdemidemi:

1 cor 13
8 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.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

We must understand Paul's style of writing and must always link every verse and chapter of his writing cos they all came as one. They were divided in to verses and chapters for easy reading.

Something was present in verse 8 but in 9 Paul never talked about it.

He mentioned LOVE PROPHECIES TONGUES KNOWLEDGE in verse 8. He asserted that love will never fail, so we are left with three things that will cease.

He went on to verse 9 to say we have some things in part- KNOWLEDGE AND PROPHECY excluding tongues.

The two gifts left were knowledge and prophecy though in part. He went on to say-

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

When the perfect comes only the gifts we have in part will cease, we don't speak in tongue in part so tongue was certainly done away with.

Perfect in the context used here refer to the complete revelation of God's mind, will and ways in the completed scripture .

^^^
I subscribe and/or endorse 110%, the two shdemidemi's posts above mine
- the whole of 1 Corinthians 13 is instructive, 1 Corinthians 13:10 makes the pivotal statement in the whole 1 Corinthians 13 chapter

Where do you get this spurious distinction between NT prophets and OT prophets? Scriptures please
Why would you force a disciple at least twenty years AFTER Pentecost to be an OT prophet?

shdemidemi:


God gave these gifts not because he needs the people empowered to be chasing after the devil or private jet. He gave the gifts for the sole purpose of edifying and establishing a mystical body of Christ- the church.

Apostles were mainly those who were appointed by God with a mission statement from Him. Paul understood the office and the church understood Paul's authority as an Apostle. We don't have Apostles today, the title can be used loosely but the twelve disciples and Paul were the main Apostles God used to pen down scriptures.

Prophets in the old is quite different from that of the new. Prophets in the new don't hear directly from God (Agabus' case was that of the old testament prophet and it marked the end of God speaking directly to any one within the church), they interpret and teach what they hear from the Apostle. Now that the bible is here, it reains the sinle and infallible word of prophecy the church need.

The two gifts relevant today are evangelists and pastor/teacher.

I want to request that the rule of thumb for this thread be this scripture:

Philippians 3:14 ...I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. 3:15 Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. 3:16 Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing.

This means the following:

1. The aim of the thread is not to show off knowledge but readiness to share information and learn even when superior scriptural argument debunks long held views.

2. Readiness to be patient with supposed opponents. Trusting God to birth understanding in everyone at his own time and our own pace.

3. A commitment to pray for all discussants. Jesus remains the chief Teacher here and he will be pleased to speak through anyone; may we have ears to hear him.

4. No matter the disagreement, may we commend our doctrine by the manner of our words, laced with grace, that we use. We all can trust God for more grace here.

5. Next to Jesus, our other teachers are John Macarthur and his fellow ministers at the conference. We have every right to disagree with them but let's be civil even in our disagreement.

I want to thank everyone who has joined the discussion, those reading it still and those who will still join. It is meant to be a marathon.

vooks:
And am asking the bolded. Who/what informed you that the perfect, the coming of which these things cease is the New Testament?

If I ask you to define a bird, your definition should not include the very thing you are defining.

vooks:
Where do you get this spurious distinction between NT prophets and OT prophets? Scriptures please
Why would you force a disciple at least twenty years AFTER Pentecost to be an OT prophet?

Like the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, I know you would receive the below URL link with great eagerness and examine the contents & commentaries (i.e. do justice to it)
- the answer(s) to your query(ies) is/are in it
http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/13-12.htm

vooks:
Where do you get this spurious distinction between NT prophets and OT prophets? Scriptures please
Why would you force a disciple at least twenty years AFTER Pentecost to be an OT prophet?

You don't have to ask me questions, simply tell us what you think the right thing is so we can compare with scriptural guide. It is much easier to criticise, if you must criticise make a presentation as well so we know where you stand.

shdemidemi:
You don't have to ask me questions, simply tell us what you think the right thing is so we can compare with scriptural guide.
It is much easier to criticise, if you must criticise make a presentation as well so we know where you stand.

^^^
shdemidemi, using criticise is a strong word, as it's bound to alienate or make one confrontational, hostile or argumentative
- iron sharpeneth iron, we all in here to learn off each other, or build each other up. No competition.

BabaGnoni:

^^^
shdemidemi, using criticise is a strong word, as it's bound to alienate or make one confrontational, hostile or argumentative

I think 'spurious' is as well but all in all, I apologise (vooks) if you think I sounded harsh- not intended really. What I was trying to say to him was I also want to hear from him rather than have to be constantly queried by him.

shdemidemi:
I think 'spurious' is as well but all in all, I apologise (vooks) if you think I sounded harsh- not intended really.

Apologies WASN'T needed
By the way, I said using "strong" word, and not sounding or coming across "harsh".
I know you didnt intend to be harsh, but just suggesting to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves else people get on the defensive

I don't have to but I just did. Please respond to them. You are making some of the most careless and unscriptural statements here and am shocked nobody is bothered. Is this meant to be another Cessationists echo chamber?

1. There is NO distinction between NT and OT prophets
2. It takes copious amounts of fertile imagination to make the 'perfect' New Testament, and one has to look outside scriptures to even attempt propping that

shdemidemi:


You don't have to ask me questions, simply tell us what you think the right thing is so we can compare with scriptural guide. It is much easier to criticise, if you must criticise make a presentation as well so we know where you stand.

^^^

1)Bro, Who is a prophet?


2)I will like to see where I said 'perfect' is new testament.

vooks:
I don't have to but I just did. Please respond to them. You are making some of the most careless and unscriptural statements here and am shocked nobody is bothered. Is this meant to be another Cessationists echo chamber?

1. There is NO distinction between NT and OT prophets
2. It takes copious amounts of fertile imagination to make the 'perfect' New Testament, and one has to look outside scriptures to even attempt propping that

OK, then please explain 1 Corinthians 13:9-10

⁹For we know in part and we prophesy in part,
¹⁰but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears.

Have you gone through the link earlier provided yet?

Spurious means a line of reasoning that is apparently but not valid.
I think a major rule of this thread should be participants should cease and desist from making claims that are they can't substantiate.

In my short stint at NL, here is what I have observed; there are factions here and an unwritten rule is to NEVER attack anybody on your side of an argument. Pretty defeatist seeing there are enough targets on the other side. Not even 'friendly fire'.

shdemidemi:


I think 'spurious' is as well but all in all, I apologise (vooks) if you think I sounded harsh- not intended really. What I was trying to say to him was I also want to hear from him rather than have to be constantly queried by him.

Knowledge and prophecy are somewhat incomplete but at some point t, they will cease. Point t is identified by Completeness coming.

BabaGnoni:


OK, then please explain 1 Corinthians 13:9-10

⁹For we know in part and we prophesy in part,
¹⁰but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears.

Have you gone through the link earlier provided yet?

vooks:
Spurious means a line of reasoning that is apparently but not valid.
I think a major rule of this thread should be participants should cease and desist from making claims that are they can't substantiate.

In my short stint at NL, here is what I have observed; there are factions here and an unwritten rule is to NEVER attack anybody on your side of an argument. Pretty defeatist seeing there are enough targets on the other side. Not even 'friendly fire'.

Thanks for your definition but it can also mean fabrication.

You are making assumptions and they are the lowest form of information for garnering facts. I don't do clique not with the word of God. Baba G and myself have a go at each other now and again so you might just be wrong with those speculations.

vooks:
Spurious means a line of reasoning that is apparently but not valid.
I think a major rule of this thread should be participants should cease and desist from making claims that are they can't substantiate.

In my short stint at NL, here is what I have observed; there are factions here and an unwritten rule is to NEVER attack anybody on your side of an argument.
Pretty defeatist seeing there are enough targets on the other side. Not even 'friendly fire'.

I dont know about "factions"
I know of set of posters here that have similar viewpoints but it doesnt stop or hinder them challenging each others dissimilar viewpoint, standpoints etcetera
- Try and make an objective observation next time vooks

1. We don't have a definition of a prophet in the scriptures, but we do have people who are positively identified as prophets. They all have one thing in common; they act as God's messengers, speaking His Word

2.
Perfect in the context used here refer to the complete revelation of God's mind, will and ways in the completed scripture .

Now, could you please explain at how you arrived at NT prophets being different from OT prophets and how Agubus is an OT prophet, 'among the last'?

shdemidemi:
^^^

1)Bro, Who is a prophet?


2)I will like to see where I said 'perfect' is new testament.

shdemidemi:
Thanks for your definition but it can also mean fabrication.

You are making assumptions and they are the lowest form of information for garnering facts.
I don't do clique with the word of God.
Baba G and myself have a go at each other now and again so you might just be wrong with those speculations.

Blind loyalty is not healthy.
That is actually 110% correct, I and shdemidemi, and also others I respect, have had spats now and then

I think vooks you should make your point clear. You have asked demi a number of questions but you seem to be dissatisfied with them. He doesn't need to answer your questions the way you want it. And the natural thing is if you are asking questions, you should be ready to answer questions too.

There is nothing wrong with asking questions but you could also explain what you intend to achieve with the questions.

And, lastly, I think you could slow it down on the language you are using. They may not be insults but we can all use more graceful words in our interaction.

Just my suggestions...

vooks:
1. We don't have a definition of a prophet in the scriptures, but we do have people who are positively identified as prophets. They all have one thing in common; they act as God's messengers, speaking His Word

Every word used in scripture has a meaning if you trace the word back to the original language the people spoke.

Timothy spoke God's word but he was never a prophet. Silas wasn't either and no one in the church was. Its meaning in the septugian is slightly different from the greek meaning. I advise you look it up.

vooks:
2.
Perfect in the context used here refer to the complete revelation of God's mind, will and ways in the completed scripture .

Where in that statement did you find 'Perfect' is New Testament?

vooks:
Now, could you please explain at how you arrived at NT prophets being different from OT prophets and how Agubus is an OT prophet, 'among the last'?

What he did was unique after pentecost and it marked the end of 'thus says the Lord' within the church.

You are free to marry any definition of prophet or prophecy that you fancy. I am resisting meaningless arguments about words so as not to derail the thread. Any definition you take, I can work with it. Ok?

Now, I hope you understand that Greek language like English was not static and the Septuagint Greek is not necessarily NT Greek. Just saying.

You said perfect refers to complete revelation of God in 'completed' scripture. At the point of writing Corinthians, we never had NT. so it is obvious to everyone reading that that you are talking about NT. if you were not, please clarify what you meant by that statement and I will duly apologize

Please stop reading your fantasies into the text. Did John the Baptist ever say 'thus saith the Lord'? What about Nahum? Who said 'thus saith the Lord' is the mark of OT prophets?

shdemidemi:


Every word used in scripture has a meaning if you trace the word back to the original language the people spoke.

Timothy spoke God's word but he was never a prophet. Silas wasn't either and no one in the church was. Its meaning in the septugian is slightly different from the greek meaning. I advise you look it up.



Where in that statement did you find 'Perfect' is New Testament?



What he did was unique after pentecost and it marked the end of 'thus says the Lord' within the church.