Quote
Wes said:
On the contrary there is nothing in Hebrews 2:3-4 that supports the idea that ongoing miracles and revelations will remain the norm throughout church history nor that we are to expect ongoing revelations beyond the canon of Scripture. They are simply confirming the authority of the message and the messengers that is recorded here in Hebrews (the gospel and the prophet).
Notice that I am the one responding to the illogical conclusion that Hebrews 2:3-4 argues in favor of cessationism. When I consider all scripture as a whole see that miracles are not confined to apostles, or those they laid their hands on, or to the first century. I see in this passage and elsewhere a pattern that the Gospel is often introduced to a new group of people with signs and wonders.

But this verse does not specifically say that miracles continue on. And it says nothing about miracles ceasing either. It does say that when the Gospel was preached to the Hebrews, it was accompanied by signs and wonders. The verse does not say whether signs and wonders continued on, or whether they ceased. To use this verse to support cessationism is illogical. The only person who would agree is the person who already believes in cessationism.

Using this verse to support cessationism is akin to quoting ‘Jesus wept’ and arguing from it that no one should weep today.

In no way does the passage support the idea that there would be no revelations through the Spirit beyond the canon of scripture. This verse says nothing about the New Testament canon. (I use ‘revelation’ in a broad sense, as it seems to be used in scripture. I do not believe genuine prophecies add anything new to the faith once delivered to the saints.)

I asked:
There were 'New Testament prophets' who became prophets AFTER Christ ascended. Do you dispute this point?

Quote
Wes says:
The rest of the New Testament writings you are referring to that came after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ were from these “eye witnesses” who were His contemporaries and were given the ministry to write these things down for the establishment and instruction of the Christian Church. They were NOT adding to the finished work of Christ, they were under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit explaining the gospel and giving direction to the churches. Wes
Wes, you are arguing against a point I am not making. Genuine prophecies do not add to the finished work of Christ. Adding to the finished work of Christ is a different issue altogether.

And, actually, what I had in mind when I asked that question was not the writing of scripture per se, but the ministry of prophets who prophesied in the church. Maybe some readers of the forum are unfamiliar with the fact that there were prophets in the church. I will quote a few examples.

From Acts 11
27. And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.
28. And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.
29. Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea:

From Acts 13
1. Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
2. As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
3. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.

From Romans 12
6. Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;

I Corinthians 14
29. Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
30. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
31. For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
32. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

From I Timothy
1:18. This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare;

4: 14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.


Most of these prophets did not write scripture. They did not ‘add to the finished work’ of Christ. That is not even the issue here. The fact is that after Christ ascended, there were still prophets in the church. So using Hebrews 1 as an argument against the continuation of prophecy is not a valid argument. That is clearly not the author’s point.

Quote
Wes wrote:
Apostolic revelation did not extend beyond the apostolic generation, the 'foundational days' of the church. Thus Jude in his day could speak of 'the faith' - meaning the teaching content of the Christian faith - as now 'once for all delivered to the saints' (v. 3). About this verse, F.F. Bruce comments: 'Therefore, all claims to convey an additional revelation... are false claims... whether these claims are embodied in books which aim at superseding or supplementing the Bible, or take the form of extra-Biblical traditions which are promulgated as dogmas by ecclesiastical authority.” Wes
As I have explained earlier, the term ‘revelation’ is used broadly in scripture. I am not advocating prophets adding anything to the Gospel. There were plenty of prophecies in the first century that were not doctrinal in nature. Agabus prophesying with Paul’s belt was not a prophecy about doctrine, though we can learn about the doctrine of prophecy and various other issues by reading this example. If other prophecies of the time were of a similar nature, then many of these prophecies were not prophecies about doctrine.

The real issue is what the Bible teaches about the gift of prophecy and other gifts. If the Bible teaches they are given to the church, then these gifts should not be seen as a challenge to the Bible. Rejecting the true gifts would be disobedience to the scripture.

Quote
Wes says:
“The faith which has once for all been delivered to the saints” must be defined and circumscribed by God's revelation as it is found particularly in the written Word, from the law of Moses to apostolic deposit. [/b] Wes
You make a huge leap here, especially since it is extremely unlikely that this is what Jude had in mind. No doubt, in his time, the Gospel was largely in oral form. His book may have been a late one, but I do not recall reading any arguments that it was the last one finished. If that is the case, then other books of scripture had yet to be written.

It is one thing to argue that the scriptures contain or portray the ‘faith which has once for all been delivered to the saints’ and it is yet another to argue that Jude was specifically referring to the scriptures.

And again, genuine modern prophecy does not change ‘the faith which has once for all been delivered to the saints’ any more than the genuine extra-scriptural prophecies the scripture alludes to.

And that brings me back to my original point in this thread. The Bible refers to several genuine prophecies not recorded in scripture. Therefore, those who argue that extra-scriptural prophecy is a threat the canon have no legs to stand on. The canon shows us that there have been genuine extra-scriptural prophecies. The canon shows us that not all prophetic revelation is included in scripture. (And I use ‘revelation’ in a broad sense. I am not arguing that any doctrines that are an element of our faith are missing. The prophet Samuel told Saul prophetically how he would find his donkeys. If he helped someone else find a horse this way, and it is not recorded in scripture, then this does not mean we are missing anything from our faith.)