Paul James

So if someone had cut the whole of 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 out of your Bible before you first read it, you wouldn't even know that there are any of the spiritual gifts given to the church. You wouldn't even know that Paul actually believed in the gift of tongues, much less spoke it more than all the Corinthian believers together!

It is interesting that Calvin and Richard Sibbes say that a person cannot pray to God except they have the indwelling Holy Spirit. According to Jesus, if I ask for bread, God won't give me a stone, and if I ask for fish, God won't give me a snake, so if unbelievers know how to give good gifts to their children, how much more does our heavenly Father know how to give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him? Therefore, I made my request known to God according to Philippians 4:6-7 and He gave me the gift I asked for. Then He directed me to 1 Corinthians 14:2 to show me exactly the gift I received. Therefore, my faith in my gift is securely based in clear statements in God's Word. So, which Scriptures support your unbelief in the modern use of the gift of tongues?

You will notice that I did not say, "the 'we' includes ALL those who read into 1 Corinthians 14". So, my statement does not include everyone, but is limited to those who do not have the level of faith that includes the personal use of tongues in prayer, or the ministry use of tongues in the church. Therefore the use of 'we' could refer to one's particular faith group, which could or could not include the use of the gift of tongues. So, your 'you' comment is making an assumption that may not be true.

The Scripture says that it is according to our faith that the gifts are manifested. Therefore if a person doesn't believe that the gifts are to be manifested today, then they won't be manifested in him or in his area of influence. Therefore, because you have demonstrated that you don't believe in the modern use of the gift of tongues, it won't happen to you. So don't sweat it concerning a gift that you have no faith in and therefore doesn't apply to you. It is interesting that I read in Calvin's commentary to 1 Corinthians 7 that because a principle does or doesn't apply to one individual, it doesn't mean that it does or doesn't apply to all. Therefore, concerning the gift of tongues, just because you don't believe in it, that doesn't mean that others are required to believe the same as you do. So because my faith is different to yours, I don't have to answer your question, because your level of faith wouldn't be suitable to receive any such answer from me.

"He who speaks in tongues speaks to God [communication], hence no man understands him [not in an language naturally understood by anyone in the room]; he utters mysteries in the Spirit. There is no mention of emotions/feelings anywhere in 1 Corinthians 14. Paul says that the speaking in tongues is under the total control of the speaker, while emotions/feelings are not under the direct control of the person. If tongues was dependent on emotions, then the person speaking would have no control over the utterance. If he didn't have any emotion or feeling (like goosebumps up the spine) he wouldn't be able to speak in tongues; but according to Paul tongues-speakers do have total control whether they feel emotion or not. In actual fact, the sense of a release in the Spirit comes as the result of speaking with tongues, rather than the cause of it. If the sole means of communication anyone has comes just through the mind, then they are limited to that. They can pray only with the understanding. They can't pray with the Spirit because the Spirit prays through a person using tongues. You might say that you are guided by the Spirit when you are praying in your normal language, but the prayer is still coming through your mind and therefore limited by it. Paul uses the word "understanding" where we would use "the mind", which means exactly the same. So Paul says that he prays with his mind, and also with the Spirit, making a distinction between his mind and the Spirit. And the context for him saying this, is in relation to tongues, because that is what the chapter is all about. So Paul is quite clear that when he refers to praying with his spirit (or in the Spirit) he clearly means with tongues. This is where those who pray in tongues have an enhanced communication with God in the Spirit, over and above those who are limited to pray just through the limitations of their mind. When those who are limited by their mind run out of words to say, their prayer stops because they no longer have anything to say to God. But the person who prays in tongues continues to communicate with God when he runs out of words through his mind. He continues to pray without ceasing in the Spirit as the Holy Spirit inspires the words.

Rubbish. Emotions/feelings don't come into it. Praying in tongues is deliberately, by faith, speaking to God in an unlearned language, the words being inspired by the Holy Spirit. I have been praying in tongues, without any trace of emotion or feelings for the last 53 years, and most sound Pentecostals will say the same. Just because some uninformed theologian has stated that tongues is an "ecstatic" language, doesn't mean that he is right, or what he says is true about tongues. The reality is that tongues is communication with God in the Spirit. Take some time to read 1 Corinthians 14:2 to see what tongues actually is. The "we" would include those who read into 1 Corinthians 14, and ignore the parts that don't go along with their pet views of what they think tongues is, which is usually based on uninformed nonsense.

You need to read the passage clearly. It actually says that the disciples were speaking of the wonderful works of God when they were speaking in tongues on the Day of Pentecost, definitely not preaching the Gospel. It was in response to the reaction of the hearers hearing the wonderful works of God being spoken in their own regional dialects, that Peter got up and preached the Gospel to them, and he did not preach it in tongues, but in clear Aramaic, the common language of the time. The notion that the Gospel was preached in tongues comes from some silly amateur theologian who lacked the skill of comprehension to read the Bible correctly.

This shows that God is sovereign and not a push-button vending machine for people who expect Him to do what they think He should do.

Maybe for the same reason why He doesn't heal you when you get sick. Show me a person who doesn't go to the doctor for medical help when he gets sick. Actually, God can heal through doctors and medicine if the sickness is curable. Many have died needlessly because of the false teaching that going to the doctor is a lack of faith and therefore sinful.

If Illness is a blessing, why do we do all we can to get well, including going to the doctor and taking prescribed medicine? Reminds me of the two types of cows in the paddock. The religious cows choose to eat the tufts of grass with cowpats on them because suffering brings blessing, while the ordinary common-sense cows eat the good tufts of grass without the cow pats on them.

I forgot I was the OP to be able to make that decision! Might as well leave it where it is. The original topic has run its course anyway. If no one else is going to respond to the original topic. It might be good to close the thread for replies and comments.

Off topic?

There is no such ministry as a faith healer. Faith healers who try to use faith to heal people are involved in New Age spiritualism. Faith is not a force in itself. Trying to use faith as some kind of force to achieve an outcome is sorcery. True Gospel faith is simply believing the promises of God and acting on them. It is "doing" the Bible. The Scriptural definition of faith is, "The evidence of things not seen and the assurance of things hoped for." If I lightly hold a person's wrist and say, "Jesus heals you". I am exercising faith in the belief that if I point the person to Jesus, who is the real Healer, then they are in His sovereign hands to decide whether to heal the person or not. The reality is that none of us can heal even a flea with a headache, but we can pray the prayer of faith and put the matter into God's hands. But the trouble with Cessationism which adopts the attitude that God doesn't heal through specific prayer today, is that there is not enough faith to even be able to pray the prayer. It is a type of double-mindedness - that God can heal the sick when He sovereignly decides to, but not as the result of us asking Him to. James says that a double-minded person cannot expect to receive anything from the Lord. So, in summary, it is not my faith, or even my prayer that heals a sick person. Jesus is the healer, but He is not a push-button vending machine.

Most genuine healing is not spectacular and don't get to Youtube. Most healing happens in normal church services, and people's homes, and never get into the public domain. There is a great difference between a compassionate pastor/elder, and a "healing evangelist" having mass meetings in order to advertise himself. Jesus doesn't share His glory with others.

I made that comment a year ago. Since then, I have read a book by a very mature, experienced Bible teacher who has shown me that the Holy Spirit does speak to us today, without what is being said having to be added to the New Testament. When you think of the thousands of prophecies spoken in the New Testament early churches, only two by Agabus got into the Scriptural record. So, if all those prophecies and revelations that believers received, other than what the Apostles received and recorded as the New Testament, then those prophecies and revelations did not have the direct inspiration than what was recorded as Scripture. So, the Holy Spirit does speak to us, but what He does say is not the type of information that needs to be added to the New Testament, although what He does say is in harmony with the Scriptures. He will never say anything that is non-Biblical, although He is quite free to say things that are extra-Biblical. He can say, "I see that you desire to move from your present city and move to be closer to family members in [such in such] a city. I have no problem with that, and I will be there to meet you when you get there." He can also say to a man about a relationship: "This is not the woman for you" because He can see things that would cause problems and future heartbreak that we cannot see. But for another relationship He could assure a male believer by saying, "This is the woman for you". And vice versa for women believers. But He would never say to a man, "I will allow you to commit yourself to a civil union that that man" because it is clearly non-Bibical. He will never say, "You can take ownership of your neighbour's car because he doesn't need it any more" because it is a breach of one of the Commandments. When we know the principles that God has communicated in the written Scriptures, we can immediately know the difference between when what is coming to us is the voice of the Holy Spirit, and a voice from another spirit; even though the voices may sound exactly the same. We can only know the voice of Jesus in the Person of the Holy Spirit when we fully know the Jesus of the Gospels. The problem is that the voice of the Holy Spirit, and of a lying spirit, and our own thoughts, appear exactly the same. The only way to distinguish between them is to be experienced and mature in the Scriptures, and as the Apostle to the Hebrews says: "But solid food is for full-grown men, for those whose senses and mental faculties are trained by practice to discriminate and distinguish between what is morally good and noble and what is evil and contrary either to divine or human law" (Hebrews 5:14). If people don't read and study the Bible, then they have no way of knowing what spirit the voice is coming from. A lying spirit is an expert at mimicking the voice of the Holy Spirit. This is why we have to test all things and hold fast that which is good.

What it shows is that those who claim to have a healing gift are being presumptuous because the results aren't there. Actually, I like what I do, in offering prayer for sick people, better than you not offering similar prayers.

Seeing that if the Holy Spirit gives some the gift of healing, it is obvious that it is the will of God for that person to be used on a regular basis to achieve healing miracles. Why would the Holy Spirit bestow a gift that would be hit and miss in its use? The reality is that the bestowal of the gift in our western churches is a rarity and that is why we don't see it being used. While there are some who claim to have the gift, they are merely pretending and their advertising is false. Yes, anyone can offer prayer for healing, and sometimes God heals and sometimes He doesn't.

The same question could be asked of Jesus - why didn't He go to Jewish hospitals and heal everyone there? Why did He heal just one lame man at the pool instead of all the sick people there? Actually, the outworking of the gift of healing is shown in James, that it is the role of the church elder who responds to sick persons' call for them to come and pray the prayer of faith over them. Notice that Jesus healed all who came to Him. He didn't go around advertising His healing ministry and soliciting it. Often when someone came to Him, He asked, "What can I do for you?" Also, if the majority of people in hospitals have curable sicknesses, then God would give the doctors wisdom to achieve the results. Also, the healing miracles in Acts were linked with the preaching of the Gospel, and not "healing crusades" for Christian believers. god is not a bush button vending machine to spit out healing on demand. He is sovereign, and decides who He will heal or not. The reality is that not all people get healed as the result of prayer, and the promises of self-appointed "healing" ministries.

There are too many who claim they have the gift of healing when they have nothing of the sort. If someone has the true gift of healing, healing will happen. For the rest of us, we obey the Lord by praying for sick people and then respect and trust in God's sovereignty to decide whether to heal the person or not. God hears the prayer right away, but there could be hindrances that stop the answer coming through.

Seeing that you are all for context, I can remind you that in this context Paul is writing about the importance of love and not whether people should have the gift of prophecy or not. And nothing is said about tongues in your quote, so I don't have to go there. The trouble is that most evangelical churches don't seek any of the gifts at all. They are content with the three hymns and a sermon. Since 1978, I have fellowshipped with non-Charismatic evangelical churches - Anglican, Baptist, and Presbyterian. I have seen none of the gifts practiced or even desired. The existence of the gifts was taught once by a minister in my last Presbyterian church, and the conclusion was that they were optional and we didn't really need them. So, in spite of Paul teaching to pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts, the majority of non-Charismatic churches ignore that teaching completely and do nothing to desire spiritual gifts. Yet, they will quote the importance of prophecy over tongues to Charismatics, but they never practice the gift of prophecy themselves. Sounds like a bit of hypocrisy to me, wouldn't it?

So was Paul incorrect when he told Timothy to pass on what he had learned from the Lord to faithful men who will teach others?

It can be frustration when we read or hear of testimonies of healing all around, but not in our particular church or region. I don't think that most of the healing that happens is spectacular and is rarely advertised in the media. There were times when Jesus healed someone and told them not to advertise it. There are those who think that everyone who is prayed for has to be healed, and if they aren't, then it is because they don't have enough faith. I don't go along with that. God is sovereign and He is the one who decides whether a person is healed or not. Also, it is unreasonable for a sick person to have faith, because they are too involved in trying to cope with their sickness. Also, there is a general environment of unbelief among our western churches that does not exist in the third world, hence there are more testimonies of healing miracles in the latter than are in the former. Other than that, we don't really know why some get healed and others don't. When I researched the healing ministry from the Scriptures, history, and current practice, I learned a lot about it, and I was challenged to offer prayer for everyone with a medical condition who came across my path, believer or non-believer. I found that not one unbeliever refused and were pleased that someone cared enough to offer prayer. But I don't know whether they got healed or not, because I never saw most of those people again. Although there was one young lady whom I prayed for after she dropped a heavy weight on her foot and had to walk on crutches. She believed that her foot healed faster after prayer and thanked me for the blessing! I prayed for a lady in one of our equipping meetings who had a medical condition that prevented her from having children. All I did was say, "Jesus heals you". Three months later her husband informed me that she conceived that very night. What I learned was that we are not responsible for the outcome of our prayer, but our duty is to be obedient to God's Word and offer prayer for healing. Also, you are right, sometimes we have to persevere in prayer. I told one lady in a church where I was a visiting preacher, who had emphysema, after praying for her, to go up for prayer every Sunday morning until something happened. I moved from the area, so I don't know what the outcome of that was. I think the important principle is that we put our trust in God's Word over and above what we see, feel, or observe. One preacher I heard said that it was easy to have faith in favourable and unfavourable circumstances, but it is much more difficult to have faith when there are no circumstances at all. I think that most difficulties in our efforts in prayer to get sick people healed are the lack of observed results. But then we have to trust the Scripture that says faith is the evidence of things not seen and the assurance of things hoped for.

I was converted to Christ in a suburban AOG church in Lower Hutt, New Zealand, in 1966. It was the noisest, most lit up church in town. It had a congregation of over 400 people. People sang the songs and hymns with all their hearts, spoke in tongues, prophesied, and I saw people being released from demon oppression. And it was common to see six or seven new decisions for Christ every Sunday night. The preaching was Christ-centred and soundly based in the Scriptures. There were no lunatic fringe manifestations in the services, no falling down, no rolling around the floor. People just loved being at church and totally enjoyed the singing and preaching. On Tuesday nights, I went to the prayer meeting. It was made up of mostly grandmas, and they prayed in English and tongues with all the hearts that God would continue working in the church services. One lady used to pray like a racing commentator and made sure that God heard every word she prayed. This prayer meeting was much more than just an eyebrow massaging session with boring monologues which seemed more like religious lectures to each other. These prayers came from people passionately reaching out to God for His power to save souls and bless the people. I realised that this prayer meeting was the powerhouse for that church. This was where the gift of tongues was being used to its most powerful effect - to bring the power and glory of God down into the church services on Sunday morning and evening. I went back and visited that church on a Sunday night in 1980. There were no more than 100 people there, and you wouldn't know you were in a Pentecostal service. It was more like a non-charismatic Baptist meeting - a few choruses, three hymns and a sermon. While in 1966, many people greeted me and spoke to me when I first visited the church, in 1980, no one spoke to me at all. I didn't go to their Tuesday night prayer meeting. They never announced that there was one. I guess all the grandmas that prayed the power down on the meetings of the church had passed on and the prayer meeting had wound up. So, without the powerhouse, the church service that I went to disappointingly lacked the life and power that I experienced in 1966.

The perfect canon of Scripture interpretation in 1 Corinthians 13:8 has largely been discredited by the most reliable Bible commentators. Even Calvin himself said it was to do with Judgment day. Because Paul and the other Apostles expected Christ to return in their lifetimes, they had no conception of a completed canon of Scripture, therefore it is totally illogical that Paul would have referred to a complete a perfect set of Scriptures in what he said in 1 Corinthians 13. There are plenty of Scripture references that fully support the continuation of the supernatural gifts of the Spirit for use in the body of Christ until the end of the Church Age; but there are absolutely none that support the notion that they passed away at the end of the Apostolic Age. That concept was dreamed up by a 19th Century theologian who put forward his own theory about why the gifts declined after the 4th Century. All the church fathers right through to Augustine confirmed that tongues, divine healing, and casting out of demons continued long after the last Apostle died. Augustine did a survey of his North African churches over one year and recorded 75 instances of miracles, including tongues, healing, and driving out of demons. This reality caused him to do a total backtrack on his previous cessationist position. He could not maintain the cessationist position when the very miracles he didn't believe in were actually happening in his churches. Many modern African and Asian Christian pastors would just hold their sides and laugh at cessationists in the light of the many miracles of healing and release from demons that are happening in their churches. I have a personal friend from South Africa who witnessed the healing of a severely disabled girl. As the result of prayer, he heard the sounds of her bones moving back to their normal positions in her body, and she was totally healed on the spot. He would dismiss cessationism as total garbage. The Jesus of the Gospels expressed His compassionate nature in healing the sick. If healing were a sign, then it was a sign that He was the Messiah, not just for the Jews but for us as well, and the reason why He healed people was not because He wanted to somehow prove Himself, but because of His deep compassion for sick people. The cessationist Jesus is not the Jesus of the Gospels, but another religious "jesus" who lacks basic compassion toward sick people. In actual fact, it is no jesus at all, just a figment of the imagination of cold, religious people who have no compassion for sick and suffering people. They are content to stand by and allow afflicted people to die, rather than give up their religious views.

It is interesting that cessationists accuse Charismatics of relying on experiences rather than Scripture. But as I read Scripture I see many references to the gifts of the Spirit being available to the church in these end times, and note that Charismatics tend to adopt Sola Scriptura as the foundation of their faith. But cessationists have absolutely no Scriptures at all to validate their cessationist view. So I have concluded that they are relying on the own experience in the absence of any Scriptural proof. It's a matter of the pot calling the kettle black.