trapQ:
Lmao.... Funny you!!! You really are a hypocrite. I knew you'd mention john the baptist. You're too used to mediocrity. No doubt if peter, elisha, elijah, moses etc were all present today and did signs and wonders, you'll discredit them as well.

I'll just pretend I didn't see the last part of your post. Good day!!!

Was John the Baptist a prophet?

vooks:
Every believer should read this book cover to cover at least thrice.
http://www.reveal.org/development/Churches_that_Abuse.pdf

Cc: Winsomex,Joagbaje,Gombs,MutleyLaff,Ayoku777,Esere826,MrPresident1,Goshen360,Shdemidemi,Scholar8200,an2elect

thanks.
the case studies contained in this book are interesting

esere826:


thanks.
the case studies contained in this book are interesting

Please bear in mind that the Book was penned in 1992.

Here is a follow-up on one of the individuals mentioned there

http://m.styleweekly.com/richmond/geronimo-aguilars-story-sounds-like-something-ripped-from-a-christian-bestseller-is-he-the-next-great-hope-for-richmonds-inner-city/Content?oid=1376375

http://wtvr.com/2015/06/24/geronimo-aguilar-former-mega-church-pastor-found-guilty-on-all-counts-of-sexual-assault/

That aside, I was intrigued by the ease with which he passes on the message . Believers better be on look out

WinsomeX:
Candour, trustman and Petres007, you guys must see this book.

Thanks....I'll check it out

vooks,

My attitude to reading this book is to look out for how it ministers to me both as a leader of a fellowship and head of my home. Abuse in church is very easy to laps into.

But my brother all the three cases I've read so far has to do with Pentecostal/WoF folks. Would you agree with me that this book makes a case for Cessationism?

Candour:
Thanks....I'll check it out

Great. Hope you find time to share your thoughts on it here.

[quote author=WinsomeX post=39342634]vooks,

My attitude to reading this book is to look out for how it ministers to me both as a leader of a fellowship and head of my home. Abuse in church is very easy to laps into.

That is what impressed me the most. Abuse is not for those crazies down the road but ANY ministry has this potential

But my brother all the three cases I've read so far has to do with Pentecostal/WoF folks. Would you agree with me that this book makes a case for Cessationism?

It makes as much a case for cessationism as for atheism.

vooks:
cooks

I agree with you vooks that even an atheist can stand on these phenomenons and use it to justify his beliefs but you should understand that at least between you and me there is no atheist here. But the claims of the cessarionists are plainly justified here.

I sense your resort to sarcasm is a tacit agreement to my point.

WinsomeX:


I agree with you vooks that even an atheist can stand on these phenomenons and use it to justify his beliefs but you should understand that at least between you and me there is no atheist here. But the claims of the cessarionists are plainly justified here.

I sense your resort to sarcasm is a tacit agreement to my point.

What I said in as many words is this is an extremely lame excuse for dismissing spiritual gifts.

Supposing there was no contention (there is zero scriptural basis for cessationism), supposing everybody took spiritual gifts as a given the same way we believe Jesus resurrected. Would you countenance rejecting this truth simply because they are abused?

Do we use subjective experiences in weighing objective truths?

This is why I said an atheist is the best immune from the shenanigans. If he rejects Christ, no Christian can abuse him. Now substitute atheist with a cessationist and Christ with spiritual gifts. This is no sarcasm my dearest Broda

vooks:


What I said in as many words is this is an extremely lame excuse for dismissing spiritual gifts.

Supposing there was no contention (there is zero scriptural basis for cessationism), supposing everybody took spiritual gifts as a given the same way we believe Jesus resurrected. Would you countenance rejecting this truth simply because they are abused?

Do we use subjective experiences in weighing objective truths?

This is why I said an atheist is the best immune from the shenanigans. If he rejects Christ, no Christian can abuse him. Now substitute atheist with a cessationist and Christ with spiritual gifts. This is no sarcasm my dearest Broda

1. You obviously do not understand the Cessationists position. I will repost a much disputed article of mine below to lend credence to my point that this book supports the Cessationists position. Cessationism does not reject spiritual gifts. It states that REVELATORY gifts are ceased.

2. Of course you will say there is zero scriptural position for cessationism. Same thing will apply to your rejection of Calvinism. Nonetheless scriptures are clear on these matters.

3. The main argument of the Cessationists is that you cannot use subjective experiences as bases for objective truths. Your question is simply reiterating our position and showing the source of all the errors in that book.

4. The aim of theological discourse is not abuses. Such infantile aims is the bases for weak discussions. I never fear insults for stating my positions. I don't know for atheists. However I see sarcasm in that statement all the same.

"Cessationism, Apostleship and Revelation.

Colossians 1:26 That is the mystery which had been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to his saints (NASB).

My recent discussions on the Open Congregation Christian Facebook forum on the subject of Cessationism demands that I spend sometimes elaborating on this subject on this post. At the close of discussions on that forum, the widely held assumption is that I am teaching a strange doctrine by insisting that scriptures teaches Cessationism in the sense that there are no more apostles today, neither are there individuals working apostolic miracles. The brethren reject outrightly that the scriptures are a closed canon but believe that revelations continue, with God still giving people "prophetic words". If such a view can be held on a forum like Open Congregation, which I consider to be highly cerebral, then it is not surprising to find falsehood abounding in today's Church. This post is another attempt to examine the Cessation question from another perspective.

Colossians 1:26 gives us one of the leading credentials of an apostle: the fact that they are God's means of bringing revelation to the church. Paul here discusses a revelation hidden in time past but made manifest to the church today. This revelation is about God's new plan to bring the Gentile nations to salvation through Christ. Incidentally, Paul was not the first apostle to get wind of the revelation. Peter had been hinted of it in Acts 10 through the incident of Cornelius. Subsequently, when Paul came to Christ, Jesus gave him a ministry to the Gentiles. What, however, must be understood is that the revelation of Gentiles coming to faith in Christ is far reaching because it will include the end of the old covenant, the beginning of faith in Christ and the call to walk by a new standard of love and not law. This was the matter Paul was attending to in his Epistles to the Galatians. However, note that Paul puts a caveat to it. In the same context of showing that he was an apostle with a revelation from Christ, he also states that there will be no other revelation after his. In other words, revelations of these magnitude will cease and anyone that adds to revealed scriptures (or revelations) is cursed:

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

In the light of Colossians 1:26 that a revelation has been given to the church and in the clear testimony of Galatians 1:8-9, Revelations 22:18-19 and Jude 3 that speaks of an end to these revelations, it is clear where the root of all falsehood in the church arises: Christians inability to accept the fact that revelation is closed, apostles have ceased and God is no longer giving fresh prophecies beyond the prophecies of scriptures (Hebrew 1:1-2).

The hallmark of all false prophets and the false religious movements they lead is the fact that these men regard themselves as new apostles to the church who are bringing new revelations to us. From the Roman Catholic church tradition of considering the Pope as an apostolic successor to Peter, to Mohammed's revelation of Islam, to Joseph Smith's revelation of Mormonism, to Jehovah Witnessing, to Mary Eddy Baker revelation of Christian Science, to William Branham revelation of Serpent Seed, and to the very pervasive but widely accepted doctrine of the Word of faith and Prosperity Gospel by E. W. Kenyon and Kenneth Hagin, every one of these false teaching have the same credentials with the Apostle Paul: they all claim apostleship from God with a new revelation different from revealed truths of scriptures. The only difference being that Paul remains a true prophet approved in scripture, while these individuals are false prophets, whose only credentials are their own words, subjective experiences and supposed miracles, in some cases. If those who have been deceived by these doctrines had simply heeded the clear warning of scriptures on the cessation of the apostolic office and revelations, they would not have fallen away from the Christian faith.

Therefore, within scriptures, especially the Epistles, are the revelatory truths of God's words given to the church. This statement is not an attempt to belittle the Old Testament or the books of Matthew to John recording the teachings of Jesus, but to challenge the church to study and understand the revealed truths of God's word that came to the church only AFTER Christ's death and resurrection. These truths are what the apostles taught in the Epistles, confirming Christ's words that further truths will come to the church through the apostles (John 14:26) and after the apostles had given these revelations, they will cease (Revelation 22:18-19).

If however we open ourselves up to new revelation from new apostles, the church will continue to be led on a path of error with myriads of so called Christians heading to an accursed eternity in hell."

Compare this with a quote from that book:

"The story of Shiloh is not unlike other nineteenth century American religious experiments that emerged around a single authoritarian leader. One way to achieve an understanding of current abusive movements is to step back and take a broader, historical perspective. An examination of Sandford's Shiloh reveals amazing parallels to the spiritually abusive groups of today. The lesson we learn from Frank Sandford is that there is indeed nothing new about "new" Christian movements. Now, as in the past, the spiritual power holders exert strong controloriented leadership and exercise immense influence in the day-to-day lives of adherents. In the present, like the past, Christian groups claim new divine revelation through inspired prophets or preachers who "receive a word from the Lord" regularly. Like Sandford and his predecessors, today's movements express the conviction they alone are the repository of "truth," or that they have been chosen by God to restore a lost or dormant spiritual vitality. Both groupings share a strong consciousness of persecution; both illustrate attitudes of negativity toward established churches; both view their "spiritual family" as superior to the biological family; and both have exhibited concern about the role and fate of ex-members. In short, the narrative of churches that abuse has important beginnings in our past. "

Do you see similarities. See the bold.

WinsomeX:


1. You obviously do not understand the Cessationists position. I will repost a much disputed article of mine below to lend credence to my point that this book supports the Cessationists position. Cessationism does not reject spiritual gifts. It states that REVELATORY gifts are ceased.
2. Of course you will say there is zero scriptural position for cessationism. Same thing will apply to your rejection of Calvinism. Nonetheless scriptures are clear on these matters.

3. The main argument of the Cessationists is that you cannot use subjective experiences as bases for objective truths. Your question is simply reiterating our position and showing the source of all the errors in that book.

4. The aim of theological discourse is not abuses. Such infantile aims is the bases for weak discussions. I never fear insults for stating my positions. I don't know for atheists. However I see sarcasm in that statement all the same.

We have been down this road before. No need redefining cessationism. Of course I understand your dilemma; identifying which strand of cessationism to subscribe to. It simply says there are ZERO spiritual gifts post apostles which necessarily implies any such manifestation is either an elaborate fraud/fakery or even worse, demonic. No need to sugar coat it. An addendum to this thinking is that spiritual gifts filled a canon void and once the NT was penned,the gifts became redundant.


There is ZERO scriptural basis for this, and there are tons of scriptures AGAINST it.

My point is, we can't discard a truth because it is fraught with abuse. Christianity in itself is a truth. Christianity has been abused and used as a tool for dominating and fleecing men. If you countenance discarding Christianity because of this, then I will countenance discarding continuationism because spiritual gifts are abused.

What you need to do is invest in good excuses for cessationism (of course there are none), and am actually helping you by pointing out to how some of your excuses are ludicrous

PS
1. What is REVELATORY gift? Sounds like another vocabulary invented to accommodate some uncomfortable and illogical conclusions of cessationism. Correct m if am wrong
2. Is healing one of the REVELATORY gift?
3. The book lists a persecution complex as a trait of abusive churches. They don't brook no criticism and they see it as vindicating their stance however ridiculous it be. So these tales of insults for your position is petty victimhood. MacArthur the Cessationism posterboy has the crudest insults reserved for continuationism including charging them with being unbelievers

WinsomeX:
"Cessationism, Apostleship and Revelation.

Colossians 1:26 That is the mystery which had been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to his saints (NASB).

My recent discussions on the Open Congregation Christian Facebook forum on the subject of Cessationism demands that I spend sometimes elaborating on this subject on this post. At the close of discussions on that forum, the widely held assumption is that I am teaching a strange doctrine by insisting that scriptures teaches Cessationism in the sense that there are no more apostles today, neither are there individuals working apostolic miracles. The brethren reject outrightly that the scriptures are a closed canon but believe that revelations continue, with God still giving people "prophetic words". If such a view can be held on a forum like Open Congregation, which I consider to be highly cerebral, then it is not surprising to find falsehood abounding in today's Church. This post is another attempt to examine the Cessation question from another perspective.

Colossians 1:26 gives us one of the leading credentials of an apostle: the fact that they are God's means of bringing revelation to the church. Paul here discusses a revelation hidden in time past but made manifest to the church today. This revelation is about God's new plan to bring the Gentile nations to salvation through Christ. Incidentally, Paul was not the first apostle to get wind of the revelation. Peter had been hinted of it in Acts 10 through the incident of Cornelius. Subsequently, when Paul came to Christ, Jesus gave him a ministry to the Gentiles. What, however, must be understood is that the revelation of Gentiles coming to faith in Christ is far reaching because it will include the end of the old covenant, the beginning of faith in Christ and the call to walk by a new standard of love and not law. This was the matter Paul was attending to in his Epistles to the Galatians. However, note that Paul puts a caveat to it. In the same context of showing that he was an apostle with a revelation from Christ, he also states that there will be no other revelation after his. In other words, revelations of these magnitude will cease and anyone that adds to revealed scriptures (or revelations) is cursed:

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

In the light of Colossians 1:26 that a revelation has been given to the church and in the clear testimony of Galatians 1:8-9, Revelations 22:18-19 and Jude 3 that speaks of an end to these revelations, it is clear where the root of all falsehood in the church arises: Christians inability to accept the fact that revelation is closed, apostles have ceased and God is no longer giving fresh prophecies beyond the prophecies of scriptures (Hebrew 1:1-2).

The hallmark of all false prophets and the false religious movements they lead is the fact that these men regard themselves as new apostles to the church who are bringing new revelations to us. From the Roman Catholic church tradition of considering the Pope as an apostolic successor to Peter, to Mohammed's revelation of Islam, to Joseph Smith's revelation of Mormonism, to Jehovah Witnessing, to Mary Eddy Baker revelation of Christian Science, to William Branham revelation of Serpent Seed, and to the very pervasive but widely accepted doctrine of the Word of faith and Prosperity Gospel by E. W. Kenyon and Kenneth Hagin, every one of these false teaching have the same credentials with the Apostle Paul: they all claim apostleship from God with a new revelation different from revealed truths of scriptures. The only difference being that Paul remains a true prophet approved in scripture, while these individuals are false prophets, whose only credentials are their own words, subjective experiences and supposed miracles, in some cases. If those who have been deceived by these doctrines had simply heeded the clear warning of scriptures on the cessation of the apostolic office and revelations, they would not have fallen away from the Christian faith.

Therefore, within scriptures, especially the Epistles, are the revelatory truths of God's words given to the church. This statement is not an attempt to belittle the Old Testament or the books of Matthew to John recording the teachings of Jesus, but to challenge the church to study and understand the revealed truths of God's word that came to the church only AFTER Christ's death and resurrection. These truths are what the apostles taught in the Epistles, confirming Christ's words that further truths will come to the church through the apostles (John 14:26) and after the apostles had given these revelations, they will cease (Revelation 22:18-19).

If however we open ourselves up to new revelation from new apostles, the church will continue to be led on a path of error with myriads of so called Christians heading to an accursed eternity in hell."

Compare this with a quote from that book:

"The story of Shiloh is not unlike other nineteenth century American religious experiments that emerged around a single authoritarian leader. One way to achieve an understanding of current abusive movements is to step back and take a broader, historical perspective. An examination of Sandford's Shiloh reveals amazing parallels to the spiritually abusive groups of today. The lesson we learn from Frank Sandford is that there is indeed nothing new about "new" Christian movements. Now, as in the past, the spiritual power holders exert strong controloriented leadership and exercise immense influence in the day-to-day lives of adherents. In the present, like the past, Christian groups claim new divine revelation through inspired prophets or preachers who "receive a word from the Lord" regularly. Like Sandford and his predecessors, today's movements express the conviction they alone are the repository of "truth," or that they have been chosen by God to restore a lost or dormant spiritual vitality. Both groupings share a strong consciousness of persecution; both illustrate attitudes of negativity toward established churches; both view their "spiritual family" as superior to the biological family; and both have exhibited concern about the role and fate of ex-members. In short, the narrative of churches that abuse has important beginnings in our past. "

Do you see similarities. See the bold.

I really don't understand what got you excited here.

A few facts for you
1. Nobody not Jesus nor the apostles taught cessationism, it is a tradition of men. Cessationism is extrabiblical as much as Assumption of Mary is. It is another gospel.

2. Revelation is a warning against adding to the words of THAT book. There was no book called NT when John received the word. NT canon was compiled 300 years later. So while it is true nobody should add to the NT, this verse has nothing to do with it. And it may come as a surprise but I agree with you; a prophecy should not elevate one above others. Where I differ with you is the claim that prophecies ADD to scriptures. If they do, give me Agabus epistles or Philip's daughters. Nobody but yourself can see how prophecy or speaking in tongues is ADDING to scriptures. This is a red herring

3. During the apostolic times, th believers still searched the existing scriptures to validate the apostolic teachings. This is a precedent for all ages; testing every word and not just prophecies against scriptures. Cessationism claims themselves MUST be subjected to scriptures. They fail woefully. Let's b clear that Cessationism is not synonymous with testing doctrine against scripture. Cessationism itself is a belief system.

4. The solution to abuse of truths is not marrying heresies and lies but proper use. Paul exemplified this in 1 Cor. He gave guidelines for exercising spiritual gifts and not summary ban of the same. Scriptural instructions on marriage as well is an excellent example of this.

5. Heresies are aberration of the truth and they don't need spiritual gifts to thrive. Calvinism is rank heresy. Calvin developed another gospel independent of spiritual gifts. Consider his claims;
(a) Jesus died for a few and not all so the merits of the cross are inaccessible to some
(b) God is the author of sin
What about dispensationalism? Another confusion that has nothing to do with spiritual gifts. I could go on and on but the point is Cessationism which is heartily prescribed has 'blessed' us with innumerable heresies. So it is a tad hypocritical for cessationists to chide continuationism for doctrinal errors. Remove the log in your eye first.

Note, it's not that I deny the madness exercised in the name of Holy Spirit, just that solution to abUSE is proper USE, and in the same way you don't discard cessationism despite heresies coming from your camp but you still cling on to the good, is the same way I view gifts fakery and abuse.

In conclusion, my advice is simple; get decent and reasonable excuses for your position and let go the ludicrous ones

OK vooks, let me take the discuss from another end. Though I'm yet to conclude the book but point out for me in that book:

1. One group, sect or person who espouses Calvinism and was mentioned as being led astray in a cult or abused group.

2. One group, sect or person who espoused Cessationism and was mentioned as being led astray in a cult or abused group in that book .

At least one.

While you're at it, note that 95% of all those mentioned as suffering in abused groups in that book came from Charismatic or Pentecostal churches. The remaining 5% do not have their religious stance clearly defined. Does this not still point to the fact that there is something fundamentally flawed with Charismatism and Pentecostalism?

Lest I'm reminded that Jehovah Witnesses also espouse cessationism, I should point out to you at the same rate that the foundation of Jehovah Witnesses and their beliefs are other subjective experiences. You may wish to enumerate John Calvin or Luther's encounters with angels.

WinsomeX:
OK vooks, let me take the discuss from another end. Though I'm yet to conclude the book but point out for me in that book:

1. One group, sect or person who espouses Calvinism and was mentioned as being led astray in a cult or abused group.

2. One group, sect or person who espoused Cessationism and was mentioned as being led astray in a cult or abused group in that book .

At least one.

While you're at it, note that 95% of all those mentioned as suffering in abused groups in that book came from Charismatic or Pentecostal churches. The remaining 5% do not have their religious stance clearly defined. Does this not still point to the fact that there is something fundamentally flawed with Charismatism and Pentecostalism?

Lest I'm reminded that Jehovah Witnesses also espouse cessationism, I should point out to you at the same rate that the foundation of Jehovah Witnesses and their beliefs are other subjective experiences. You may wish to enumerate John Calvin or Luther's encounters with angels.

Winsomex,
I don't have full beliefs of the group but let's just say for the sake of argument that ALL the abusive groups are Pentecostals.
ALL the groups mentioned are also Trinitarian. Does this mean there is something fundamentally flawed with Trinitarianism?

There is an assignment I once gave you on OC and you have never done; enumerating heresies emerging from Cessationism and Calvinism. If you think there are none, just say so. Let me start you off;
1. Baptismal Regeneration
2. Soul sleep
3. Annihilationism
4. Universalism

If you are honest enough, you'd admit that doctrinal errors cut across the various beliefs on spiritual gifts. Why are you and MacArthur fixated on continuationism? My guess is it diverts attention from your faults. The knowledge that your 'enemies' are wrong thrills you endlessly. But what about yourself?

The strongest argument against Cessationism is the ZERO exegetical basis for it. Having lost out at where it matters the most, cessationists must needs invent fallacies such as 'revelatory gifts ADD to the scripture', 'everything that is wrong with Christianity is due to continuationism' and so forth. I don't blame them; when you lack substance, you must excel in pettiness and outright lies to vindicate yourself

vooks:

Winsomex,
I don't have full beliefs of the group but let's just say for the sake of argument that ALL the abusive groups are Pentecostals.
ALL the groups mentioned are also Trinitarian. Does this mean there is something fundamentally flawed with Trinitarianism?

Vooks, I never intended this discussion to resort to the accusatory note that you obviously are turning it into. I simply requested that you look at the merit of the Cessationists argument in the light of the book you brought here and tagged me on. It is certainly not my aim to disparage pentecostalism but simply to show its fundamental flaw. Unfortunately it seem to me that this flaw is obvious to you too only that a sentimental attachment will not allow you reach the very clear and obvious conclusion.

Suggesting atheism or trinitarianism to underscore my point on this thread is surely what I hear people call a straw man effort. None of us is atheist here; neither are the people mentioned in the book, so this doesn't hold water. Also, the obvious root of all the errors explained in the book is connected with Charismatism not anti-trinity. And if it will help you, the second or third case study was a non believer in trinity but his errors where not traced to this. Rather ALL the errors where traced to extra biblical revelations and the upholding of one individual as an apostle with new revelations. This is a problem with Charismatics not anti-trinitarians. All the commentaries I've read on Arian, the first recorded anti trinity chap, never said he was a super apostle. He postulated a theory that deceived many but he never claimed some divine origin for it.

vooks:

There is an assignment I once gave you on OC and you have never done; enumerating heresies emerging from Cessationism and Calvinism. If you think there are none, just say so. Let me start you off;
1. Baptismal Regeneration
2. Soul sleep
3. Annihilationism
4. Universalism

This is not the assignment you gave me. You asked if I knew any flaw in Calvin. I told you his running Geneva as a theocracy. It never satisfied you. All these you have enumerated are debatable and I do not necessarily agree with them all. It's a theological point of view and not some spooky new revelations from angels.

vooks:
If you are honest enough, you'd admit that doctrinal errors cut across the various beliefs on spiritual gifts. Why are you and MacArthur fixated on continuationism? My guess is it diverts attention from your faults. The knowledge that your 'enemies' are wrong thrills you endlessly. But what about yourself?

Again there is no need for the combative reaction here. No one is covering any fault with anything. I could have simply ignored the thread but I asked if you see the merit of the Cessationists argument bc all the case study in the book where proving them right. I'm sorry you cannot see it.

vooks:
The strongest argument against Cessationism is the ZERO exegetical basis for it. Having lost out at where it matters the most, cessationists must needs invent fallacies such as 'revelatory gifts ADD to the scripture', 'everything that is wrong with Christianity is due to continuationism' and so forth. I don't blame them; when you lack substance, you must excel in pettiness and outright lies to vindicate yourself

The strongest argument FOR cessationism is that book you posted in the OP. It proves all their exegical efforts from scriptures right. I have not mentioned continuionists here, you did. But the book offers them enough to rethink their position.

Your resort to false labels and your usual insults is just your attempt to veil what is obvious to you. I thank you for the tag. I have since published the book on my Facebook wall for others to read too and beware. However, you may wish to reconsider tagging me on threads that lend credence to my debates with you. I will only be forced to open old wounds.

Again thank you for the tag.

#unfollows thread#

WinsomeX:


Vooks, I never intended this discussion to resort to the accusatory note that you obviously are turning it into. I simply requested that you look at the merit of the Cessationists argument in the light of the book you brought here and tagged me on. It is certainly not my aim to disparage pentecostalism but simply to show its fundamental flaw. Unfortunately it seem to me that this flaw is obvious to you too only that a sentimental attachment will not allow you reach the very clear and obvious conclusion.

If Pentecostalism has 'fundamental flaw' because there is abuse there, then Christianity has 'fundamental flaw' since there is abuse in Christianity.

Suggesting atheism or trinitarianism to underscore my point on this thread is surely what I hear people call a straw man effort. None of us is atheist here; neither are the people mentioned in the book, so this doesn't hold water. Also, the obvious root of all the errors explained in the book is connected with Charismatism not anti-trinity. And if it will help you, the second or third case study was a non believer in trinity but his errors where not traced to this. Rather ALL the errors where traced to extra biblical revelations and the upholding of one individual as an apostle with new revelations. This is a problem with Charismatics not anti-trinitarians. All the commentaries I've read on Arian, the first recorded anti trinity chap, never said he was a super apostle. He postulated a theory that deceived many but he never claimed some divine origin for it.

Am not sure the exact state of evolution your pneumatology is but let's assume you believe Holy Spirit is a person. You once called Him IT under another moniker. Holy Spirit in His divine And infinite Wisdom gave us Spiritual gifts with full (fore)knowledge of their abuse. It is not my prerogative to exercise more skepticism as far as the gifts are concerned than God.

This is not the assignment you gave me. You asked if I knew any flaw in Calvin. I told you his running Geneva as a theocracy. It never satisfied you. All these you have enumerated are debatable and I do not necessarily agree with them all. It's a theological point of view and not some spooky new revelations from angels.

I can't help with your memory am sorry.
'Theological point of view' if it is false is of as much value and danger as 'some spooky new revelations from Angels'. Heresies are heresies REGARDLESS of how they are conceived and articulated. LGBT affirming churches are 'theological point of view' as are pro-choice believers. Peter tells of those who WREST with Paul's writings to their damnation. This tells you 'theological point of view' can and indeed has sent millions to hell.

Errors cut across the Continuationism-Cessationism divide. Memorize this statement and meditate on it.

Again there is no need for the combative reaction here. No one is covering any fault with anything. I could have simply ignored the thread but I asked if you see the merit of the Cessationists argument bc all the case study in the book where proving them right. I'm sorry you cannot see it.

There is no reason playing the victim card.
The so called 'merits' of Cessationists are as valid as subscribing to Satanism because there is abuse in Christianity.

The strongest argument FOR cessationism is that book you posted in the OP. It proves all their exegical efforts from scriptures right. I have not mentioned continuionists here, you did. But the book offers them enough to rethink their position.

Cessationism has no 'strong' arguments; it has no arguments at all.
Cessationism is denying scriptures. The cessationist is a step away from the full blown atheist, and there is little wonder they never hesitate to come together to bash their archenemies the Pentecostals.

Your resort to false labels and your usual insults is just your attempt to veil what is obvious to you. I thank you for the tag. I have since published the book on my Facebook wall for others to read too and beware. However, you may wish to reconsider tagging me on threads that lend credence to my debates with you. I will only be forced to open old wounds.

Again thank you for the tag.

#unfollows thread#

It is childish telling all that you are leaving. What do you imagine this achieves? Make me sour because you have 'gone'? .I did not mention you because you are special but because your moniker I can recall off my mind. Feel free to 'open old wounds' . I will gladly play along and remind you of a boy who thinks Holy Spirit is an IT.


PS
I'd never do that, am slightly more civilized. Adios

@winsomx, longtime! @Vooks, kudos!

christemmbassey:
@winsomex, longtime! @Vooks, kudos!

Welcome back

vooks:

Welcome back

I believe, 'cessationism' is another gosgei, jjust like prosperity, Mary, and die die by fire, holy ghost fire,, assignents etc etc. @WINSOMEX, sorry, i've nt bn aftive on fb and Nl recently, and must av missed ur position on cessationism. Pls can u, in a very words let me in to ur mind as regards cessationists' perpective. Jesus is Lord!

christemmbassey:
I believe, 'cessationism' is another gosgei, jjust like prosperity, Mary, and die die by fire, holy ghost fire,, assignents etc etc. @WINSOMEX, sorry, i've nt bn aftive on fb and Nl recently, and must av missed ur position on cessationism. Pls can u, in a very words let me in to ur mind as regards cessationists' perpective. Jesus is Lord!

The thread is about spiritual abuse in churches. Please make time and study the book. Am very much interested in your views. Stay blessed

For those who missed the book

http://www.reveal.org/development/Churches_that_Abuse.pdf

Cc Millerz,trapQ,HCPaul