Please note: For sake of space I have abbreviated Link’s statements.

Quote
Link states,

1. That prophecy today, it should be added to scripture.

--Counter-argument. The first post of this thread shows that there were genuine prophecies not included in the text of scripture. If these were not included, why would all other prophecies have to be included. New Testament books had to meet the criteria of being from apostolic circles, not merely be prophetic or revelatory in nature. God gave many revelations to prophets in the first century whose writings are not included in scripture.
There is no new revelation, however, the Holy Spirit speaks to us everyday (Heb 12:25). God does not speak outside of that which the Holy Spirit has already spoken (2 Pet 1:19f). The Scripture is complete and already sufficient to accomplish that which God has chosen (2 Tim 3:16f). The canon is closed. As R. Fowler White states,

Quote
Now that God has accomplished salvation once-for-all, in Christ, He has also spoken His word, once-for-all, in Christ and in those whom Christ authorized and empowered by His Spirit (Heb. 1:1-2; 2:3, 4; Matt. 16:15-19; John 14:26; Eph. 2:19, 20). With the completion of salvation in Christ comes the cessation of revelation. Consequently, the church now lives by a "Scripture only" principle of authority. To tamper with this principle invites a host of theological and pastoral problems. The proof of this observation can be seen in the effect of these "prophecies" upon many who are being led far afield from the sufficiency of the gospel itself. Its finality and complete sufficiency is, in reality, subtly assaulted by these claims to modern prophecies.

Finally, the Bible gives us no reason to expect that God will speak to His children today apart from the Scriptures. Those who teach otherwise need to explain to God’s children how these words "freshly spoken from heaven" can be so necessary and strategic to God’s highest purposes for their lives when their Father does nothing to ensure that they will ever actually hear those words. Indeed, they must explain why this is not quenching the Spirit.

Quote
Link states,

2. Hebrews 1 teaches that God spoke in times past by prophets, but now he has spoken by his Son. Some argue based on this, that there were no more prophets.

--Counterargument. This line of reasoning contradicts New Testament teaching that there were prophets after the ascension.
No one here denies that there were prophets after the ascension (i.e. Agabus, Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11). We just deny any further need for them as their so called “new” revelations can no longer be validated by an apostle. God has already spoken to us by His Son (meaning Christ as the Head of His Church, his apostles, et. al. (Eph 4:11-16; 5:23; Col 1:18)).

Quote
Link states,

3. Hebrews 2 teaches that God bore witness to the eye-witnesses of the resurrection's preaching of salvation with signs, wonders, and gifts. Therefore, the gifts ceased.

-Counterargument. This is poor logic.

If I say, "When I first came to work at my company, I used to eat at McDonald's, which is next door, quite often" does that mean I do not eat at McDonald's anymore? I might eat at McDonald's, and I might not.
This is not poor logic, but proper interpretation of the Greek text. Miracles came in each age of the Bible for specific periods of time and then they vanished (the revealing of the law to Moses; the lives of Elijah and Elisha, and the age of the early Church in Christ). To use your illustration, the McDonald’s next door has changed significantly since it first opened. Many things McDonald’s had when they first opened are no longer even on the menu. Though the foundation of McDonald’s is still there, what they serve is different. Their meat is not even real meat any more—it is processed and that is what is coming through the doors of the Charismatic Church—processed miracles—imitations. So much for CRMT (Charismatic Ronald McDonald Theology). [Linked Image]

Quote
Link states,

4. That supernatural gifts were given exclusively as signs to verify the apostles and/or the scriptures.

Counter-argument- God bore witness to the apostle's preaching by signs and wonders, yes. But scripture does not teach that this is the only purpose for supernatural gifts. -The debated end of Mark says that certain signs will follow 'them that believe'

-I Corinthians 12 shows us that these gifts were given to edify the body of Christ, which still exists today. Therefore, confirming the word is not the only reason for such things.
First, no one said that miracles were ONLY a sign to authenticate the apostle’s teaching. One wonders why you have to continue to use deception to make your points. One of the reasons for miracles was to confirm the teaching of Scripture. Miracles helped the Jewish people recognize that the Messiah had come as prophet, priest, and King. Miracles are the fulfillment of Scripture, etc. Second, miracles and such did follow them that believe, however, the Mark 16 promise “in context” was only to the Eleven (Mark 16:14, 17)…. Third, as Jesus says, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign (miracle)” (Matt 12:39). Apparently they still do!

Quote
Link states,

5. That belief in the continuance of spiritual gifts violates a certain section of a particular creed.

-Actually the creed quoted does not necessarily contradict the continuance of the gifts, depending on how it is interpreted. However, this is irrelevant. If the Bible does not teach that the gifts ceased, then to base such a doctrine on the wording of a creed is similar to the way Roman Catholics treat papal decrees and other 'sacred tradition.'
Creeds and confessions are interpretations of Scripture that have been established by the Church as true. As with anything else they have matured with time and study. They help guard the church against, “seducing spirits and doctrines of devils,” as you are presenting. As has already been shown to you in Hebrews 1, 2 and 1 Cor 13, etc. the sign gifts have ceased. You have yet to document otherwise.

Quote
Link states,

6. That 'the perfect' in I Corinthians 13 refers to the closing of cannon of scripture.

-I do not recall anyone here directly stating it. However, I was refered to a website that argued this idea.
Do you have the gift of self interpretation? Above you argued that it did not matter if the canon was closed and here you are arguing that it does matter. Let us know when you can properly interpret yourself.

Quote
Link states,

7. That the quote from Isaiah 28 in I Corinthians 14 refers to the destruction of Jerusalem.

-This really has no bearing on the cessation of the gifts for two reasons

- Paul's makes his point in quoting the verse, that tongues is a sign to 'unbelievers', as he writes, and not Jews per se. He says nothing about the destruction of the temple, Jerusalem, etc. in this passage. Paul does not argue that tongues is a sign to the Jews in particular here.
- Tongues has a purpose other than as a sign to unbelievers. With the gift of interpretation, it edifies the church. Without, it edifies the individual who uses it.
Was/Is there not such a thing as an unbelieving Jew? Were there not unbelieving Gentiles that were familiar with what the Jews taught? Just because one is an unbeliever does not mean they are not familiar with what a religion teaches!

And so what if tongues and their interpretation if done rightly edified the Church—this does not prove that the Church continued to require this edification. We are edified by the Word, by prayer, by the sacraments, etc. Jesus and His apostles laid a “foundation” (Eph 2:19-22). The foundation is not made completely of the same elements used to build upon it.

Quote
Link states,

8. If there are true prophecies, they would be authoratative, and they would be hard to judge.

-This is not an argument against the continuance of prophecy. Scripture commands the church to despise not prophesyings and to prove all things. If believing the gifts continue makes church life seem more difficult, that is not evidence that they have ceased. If God would require the early church to discern what was true in their day, is it so hard to believe He might require us to do the same?
There are no “new” prophecies therefore they are all easy to judge as false!

Quote
Link states,


I have not seen a strong argument against the use of the gifts, certainly not one based on scritpure. If one cannot show scripture to show that the gifts ceased, why should he believe they have?
Actually, we have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the sign gifts have been discontinued both from Scripture and church history. Our job is not to convince you of the truth, but to lay out the truth before you. You came here on what you thought was a mission from God to convince us that you were right; however, this did not happen. It may be wise for you to consider why God has really sent you here; that you are wrong and needed the truth. You need only ask way the Holy Spirit has not yet shown you the reality of the truth? As was stated previously, we pray that, “God may give you repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.”

[Linked Image]


Reformed and Always Reforming,