For some the scriptures cease being their highest authority when they must choose to obey it or their idol of history and human tradition.

 To read a .pdf of this essay this click this sentence. 

      This essay will be centered on a conversation I had with some people concerning the Spiritual Gifts, and if the scriptures tell us they are still for today.  I know many of my readers are from a confessional reformed background and might wish to stop reading right now, but even if I am unable to persuade you, I believe I will still be a means of grace to you in helping you to learn how to make purely Biblical deductions and conclusions, and furthermore, to grow in the loving the Person and work of Jesus Christ.  This is the main goal of my essay, although it hinges around this issue of Spiritual gifts.

      My responses will be in larger fonts and I will indicate my commentary in of this conversation in brackets.  Some light editing was done to make this more readable and followable.   Out of respect, the identity of the people involved are being kept back, and so I will make fictitious names for them.

       If any have read my book: The First Importance of the Gospel and Redefining Calvinism, you will know how I stress the importance to be consistent to your claims.  If you say the Bible says God is Sovereign in all things then do not deny it in application.  If you say the Bible says God did everything in order to save us, then do not deny it in application.  This I argue is one of the hallmarks of Calvinism, being consistent to the Biblical gospel premise.  Therefore, if you say "sola scriptura" then be consistent and do not deny it in application.

       What you will see with one person below is how (we will call them: Jack) says sola scirptura, but in the application of our conversation never actually quoted, used, stood upon or relied on the scripture for one single point; sola scripture is lip service for him.  Jack is from the confessional reformed background.  Jack is a fringe, for I have attended confessional reformed churches and seen and love my brothers there very much, and so I do not intend for Jack to be taken as good representative of this group, for he is not.  Yet, Jack is a good example of a person who has an idol over the scriptures, and more revealing so over the Person and work of Jesus Christ.  Now, I have also seen Charismatic's in application give more weight, time and authority to historic revivals than to the scripture.  I have seen Baptist in application give more weight to schools, eldership and to yearly assemblies than to the scripture.  Idols come in many forms.  Our sinful nature, given half a chance, will make an idol out of anything no matter how awful and vain it is or how close to God it is.

        The other two in this conversation-also confessionally reformed-although they failed to make a biblical argument for their position, did at least try to engage the scriptures.  This is important to understand.  Remember Jesus Christ, and how He seemed so nice to some and then in the next chapter we see Him calling people fools and morons?  This distinction I just made is one of those lines for which Jesus went a thousand miles with you or called you a moron.   No matter how ignorant and mentally slow one was, as long as they were at least trying to understand Jesus went a thousand miles with them, but of those who "willfully resisted" the gospel and scriptures He called them fools, sons of the devil and morons.

       Dear friends, do not resist the scriptures.  If Jesus was here today and saw you resisting the scriptures do you honestly think He would treat you any different than the examples we find in the gospels?  Do not lie and deceive yourself!

       I believe the Reformation historian, J. H. Merle d' Aubigne, said is well when he commented from where the "reformation" of the reformation came from: "The only true reformation is that which emanates from the Word of God."   And so may the Reformation continue today by the same standard, as we constantly grow closer into the image of Christ.

        Now, before we head to the conversation I would like to bring my readers briefly into the gospel landscape and make connection of it to our topic.

        See, this religious, self-righteous idolatry is simply: its sin!  It is not as though Jesus died for lairs and fornicators and murderers and left self-righteousness idolatry in another corner to be remedied another way.  Jesus died for all sins and all lawlessness, which included the sin of making idols of good religious things.  

       We like the children of Israel take the very gold (or good religious things) God gives us to be used for His temple, and instead we take it to make a gold calf and worship it as an idol.  And if God was displeased enough to kill many Israelites over this sin, how much more does God's wrath burn against those who do the same today, when the things we have today so much more clearly tell us of Christ compared to the Israelites in their ignorance.

        The heart of the issue is simple.  As wonderful as church history and traditions in helping us understand the things of the scriptures and the gospel, yet, in comparison they are 10,000 x 10,000 times less powerful than the scriptures in forcing us to face up to "our" sins before God in lowly repentance.  Church history and creeds are the thumb tack, but the word of God is the Claymore that divides up the soul and exposes it for what it really is.

        See, persons who hide behind religious idols such as church history are actually the cowards coward who do not wish to look the scriptures in the eye and realize that they are the evil murderer, they are the vile fornicator, they are the to-faced liar, they are the intellectual failure, that they are the scumbag of spiritual filthiness: they do not want to hear the scriptures say, "David you are the man!"  And so they become expects in good church history, like the reformation, and so when they are asked questions about their personal faith and growth in sanctification in the spirit they spout off good church creeds, and a few bible verses, and will say: I am working on some theological issues: but they do this as cowards to actually avoid from having to say: I am the man, I am filthy in my sins, and I need help resting in the free mercy of Jesus Christ yet again.

        The scriptures tell us that we are filled with the Spirit by the "word of God" not church history or creeds.  Creeds are to be a aid in helping point us to the scriptures, for only the Scriptures are the words of life, are life giving water, are very Words of God and truth.  See, the Holy Spirit will use all sort of experiences to help us and teach us, but He does so by connecting these life experiences and church ministry to the scripture itself.  For as 2 Corinthians 3:18-4:6 we learn the Spirit engraves in supernatural power the "knowledge of Christ," from the scriptures in the most inner chambers of our souls.

        This is important because from this we see why the "scriptures" are so powerful in causing us to face up to "our" sins.  In this Divine act, the Spirit of Christ, if you would, peels back the walls to our inner soul, where all "our" sin, filth, vile and idols lay, and looks at our soul eyeball to eyeball and says: "David you are that man!, but do not fear for I am lowly of heart and full of mercy; I am willing to save and cleans you!" 

       Yet, for many because of unbelief, this is the worst nightmare of all time; the nightmare of their soul be seen in all the filth that it is, and so they will hide and coward behind self-righteousness and religious idols of memorized theology and good church history, in order to keep Jesus' eyes and anyone else from seeing the vileness of their soul.

       Dear readers, realize the scripture is the Sword of God that cuts even to the marrow of our souls in exposing who "we really are" in all our sinful horrors.  And so today is for fighting and a proper time for great faith, therefore, press hard into the Kingdom of God!  Some might say, but why would I want to subject myself to that?  The answer is that only the humble are saved, only they are repentant are lifted up by the Hands of mercy.  Let the scriptures expose who you really are so that you will be properly humbled and broken as a filthy sinner should be under the mighty hand of God.  See, it is here that we are safe, it is here-being bowed in the dust-that we cannot fall and it is here bowed at the foot of the cross a sinner finds a ocean of grace; it is here a sinner find's heaven's eye looking directly at them with love beaming forth as a Sun of hope in the mist of "their" wintery sin.

       "All sins of men will be forgiven them!"  So stop your doubting and believe.  Realize that even the sin of doubting will be forgiven!  Understand that because the suffering for sin was an act that has already happened by Jesus Christ that the effects of this will surely find you oh Christian!  The sure mercies of David in the power of the Spirit has already found you and has its arms wrapped around you; indeed, it has already found you tomorrow.  The gospel being accomplished by Jesus-in the Spirit-finds us, cleanses us, pursues us, recreates us, reanimates us and leads us faithfully to heaven.  Indeed, before you awoke this morning, the effects of Christ's accomplishments have reached through and have already wrapped themselves round you!  They have already found you tomorrow and they have already found you in every place and time; the reason they have is that they are already accomplished and so reality for you, if indeed your faith and election is true.

        Pray the Spirit will strengthen you to trust.  Indeed, for those who believe there is an ocean of forgiveness awaiting such a one.  There is an endless stream of cleansing water ready to wash all who believe!  There is a depthless pool of redemption, stirred by the finger of Christ Himself that will redeem the most hideous parts of our lives from withered to normal, from leprosy to clean, from blind to seeing, from grounded to walking while holding your mat as a sign to His praise!  Get up and walk!  Believe, you double minded!  Believe!

        Let nothing hinder you; do not let religious idols, do not let fear of your vile soul being exposed under the cross stop you from believing in His free mercy and Christ's imputed righteousness apart from your works!  Overcome all hindrances and besetting doubt, wrestle all angles and demons, wait 14 long years, wash in the muddy Jordan, and if at first you fear your peers then meet with Jesus in private and ask Him about being born-again so that at the end you find the courage to buy the spices for His burial; endure all hardships and suffering, forsake all family and friends if you must, but let nothing stop you from laying your head down to sleep every night knowing you have abandoned all self-reliance, all religious idols, and abounded all self-righteousness, and all worldly hope, having fully judged Jesus Christ as securing everything to save you and bring you to Himself in His suffering!  Judge Him faithful who was faithful even unto the death of a cross for sinners like you and I.

Conversation:

        "Since sermons are not just the reading of a passage of Scripture, but an exposition of a verse or chapter, the minister must if he will be Scriptural - DEDUCE conclusions based on several verses used as premises. If these deductions are not syllogistic [i.e. not a valid inference or not in the formal logic of deduction], the sermon cannot be Biblical unless" - Gordon Clark (LOG04 p54)

        "The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be DEDUCED from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men" (WCF 1:6).

        I have asked this before: Can anyone "deduce" and show in syllogistic form a valid inference from Scripture that the gifts has ceased?  Write it out; let us examine it together?  But I would suggest I have never seen anyone attempted to do this without reverting to "induction," and thus, show they cannot "deduce" from scripture that the gifts have ceased.  It cannot be done, I would argue.

[ To have a working definition of deduction and induction I would point readers to my apologetic book, The Undefeatable Worldview, pages 8-11.  The .pdf is free at my site. A short excerpt is below:

      Formal logic is concerned with a logical form or structure that is usually seen in syllogistic form.[6]  Formal logic with the use of forms shows true inferences from a premise(s) to a conclusion.  Induction is a formal fallacy because when following its form this logical structure can never insure the conclusion is a necessary inference of its premise(s).  Induction might give an ok educated guess, but it can never guarantee its conclusion must be true.

      For Christians deduction is easy to recognize in our weekly hearing of the preaching of Christ's gospel in our churches.  Romans 3:23 says, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory God.  In syllogistic deductive form it could look like this.

 

         X - True Premise: Every man and woman has  sinned against God

         Y - Minor Premise: I am a man

         Conclusion: I have sinned

 

          Thus, even Christians who have never given much thought to logic it is easy for them to see the validity of deduction as a logical system, which is able to produce true conclusions.  The statement, I have sinned, is not new manufactured information nor is it a best sum estimate of the premise(s).  Instead, it is information already contained in the original premise, Everyman and woman has sinned against God.  The conclusion is necessarily inferred from the premise.  It merely points out and makes explicit information already contain in the premise(s).

        Some might not know this, but the definition of being rational means to use deductive reasoning as opposed to inductive reasoning.

        Now the question is what does being irrational look like?  Being irrational means, by definition (not cultural usage), to reason by induction in an attempt to arrive at a true conclusion.  Induction takes observation and makes a generalization(s) about something.  In other words the conclusion of induction is not a necessary inference of its premise(s); rather, it is an estimate or probability.  Its conclusion is not directly contained in its original premise(s).  An example of this is found in Psalm 50:21 where God says "You thought that I was altogether like you; But I will rebuke you."[7]  The people in this Psalm were taking on the pagan ideas of their neighbors.  Their neighbors sacrificed bulls and other animals, but would offer the blood and flesh to their gods as though these gods needed the blood and flesh to eat.  The Israelites in this passage thought the same about their God, the Infinite Being!  Our verse tells us that these people thought God was like them.  They made a generalization about God from observing themselves.  This tells us that they thought God needed drink and food to live, because they needed drink and food to survive.  In syllogistic form this is how these people used inductive logic.

 

         X - We Israelites need food and drink

         Y - We are God's children, we are his chosen people (etc)

         Therefore, God needs food and drink

 

          See, the conclusion, God needs food and drink, is not contained in their original premise, We Israelites need food and drink.  The conclusion cannot be necessarily inferred from the premise.  The conclusion of induction can never say this "must" be true. ]

       From deduction only, the "Scriptures" show the gifts continuing in its history, and shown in places as Corin. 13 that until Jesus returns a second time that prophecy will be in place to help and encourage the church. From these two premises I can deduce the gifts are still for today. I will put it in syllogistic form, although the 4^th premise is not needed to prove my conclusion I will put it in for good measure anyway.

X - The Gifts never ceased in scripture (all scripture)

X - The scriptures never say the gifts will cease. (all scripture)

X - The Scriptures command the Church to seek (present-future active tense) all spiritual gifts, ranging from Pastors to healers. (Corin.12-14 and other places)

X - The scriptures show that prophecy will continue until we see Jesus face to face. ( 1Corin.13:12 compare to 1 John 3:2)[1]

Conclusion -- The gifts are to be used by the church today.

        This is a valid deduced inference.  It is not induction: that is, it is not an estimate.  It is not new manufactured information, which is not already contained in the original premises. My conclusion is information that the premises already contain in them and for which all I do is simply point out specific information in these premise and make them explicit in the conclusion; and thus, my conclusion is what Scripture asserts.  Because this is what Scripture asserts it is lawlessness not to obey it. 

Bob:

Oshea, let's be specific shall we? What gifts do you say never ceased in Scripture? Do you refer to the mark of the Apostles in healing instantaneously.....As I stated above there is a distinct difference between the miraculous happenings in Acts and those which were "taking place" in Corinth.

Anyone trying to make an argument that the WCF in any way shape or form advocates or leaves the door open for the "Continuism" of Apostolic era, signs, wonders and miracles such as tongues, healings, raising of the dead or new Revelation prophecy - are NOT Reformed and therefore NOT Christians!

        Do the "Scriptures" say the Acts Spiritual gifts stopped?  If not, then how can you "Deduce from scripture" they have stopped?  If you cannot, then why should anyone listen to you?  The same may be applied for all the giftings mentioned in 1Corin.12.  If you cannot make a valid inference from the scripture through deduction: where the inference only points out and makes explicit information that is already contained in the Biblical premise(s), then why should any submit themselves to any conclusion you make?  Why should anyone take such an argument with any more seriousness than they do when watching a dog walk on its hind legs?

         Many how loud boasts of being "Sola Scriptura" and only standing on truth "deduced" from this, but when pressed to prove it, even many good Calvinist and reformed students cannot stand the test; many students cannot apply their learning in application when pressed.  Many are trained at deducing what will happen in their favorite T.V. show; however, they have lost the ability to show valid inference from the scriptures alone.  This is a sad thing indeed!

       Again can any show a valid deduction from Sola Scriptura that the gifts have ceased?  Hello, anyone out there?

          Jack:

And who do you think you are to question century's of doctrine?  Who do you think you are that others should have to prove anything to?  Do you think this question of Continuism vs. Cessationism is a modern day question?  Do you think that you are somehow enlightened by questioning an issue that was resolved long, long before you were even a glimmer in someone's eye?  Or are you just plain ignorant that Christianity existed before you came around?  Oh Please!

 [ As you can see, Jack is trying to bully me by asking irrelevant questions that have nothing to do with making a Biblical conclusion.  This is a typical maneuver of people who do not rely on scripture for truth.  See, even if I did not have one ounce of historical understanding of this issue, yet, what relevance does this have in my ability to read the scriptures and see an unbiased conclusion what God's word says?  I do not need history to make a valid Biblical deduction.  History can be helpful, but to make a valid inference of "Scripture" one does not need it necessarily. ]

        Who did the reformers think they were when they questioned centuries of doctrine: grace + works!  Did the reformers think themselves enlightened by questioning long held church doctrines!  Your own standard to which you hold to me would disqualify the reformers of whom you trust in: you are irrational and confused.

        See, both the reformers or any other born-again Christian has been given two things: (1) the "Scriptures" and (2) the "mind of Christ, (2 Corin.2:16)."  With this anyone Christian (whether they be 7 years old or 120) may question the Pope, centuries of held beliefs and doctrines, their friend, church, groups of persons, or even angels themselves, if what they say is not scriptural: that is, cannot be proven by scripture "alone."

       By the mind of Christ we are able to think rationally and correctly about the scriptures.  Jesus adheres to the law-of-noncontradictions in Mark 12:37 and shows that by logic alone one may dispel all other irrational interpretations as false and point out the truth (Luke 11:16-19); and such places as Hebrews 4:1-10 & Romans 3 show how to take several Biblical premises and deduce from it truth that all must confess and obey.

[ Romans 3:9-18, 23.  Here, what Paul does is take several O.T. passages to make a valid Biblical conclusion through deduction and thus, this conclusion must be believed and obeyed.  See, "refusing to make or accept a deductive inference from what Scripture asserts is the equivalent of refusing what Scripture asserts, since the conclusion of such a deduction is what Scripture asserts."[2]

       Paul goes over such O.T. passages that say: none is righteous, none understand, none who seeks God, none who does good.  Now in context these passages are referring to particular groups of people, so what Paul does is gather many passages that show that whoever the groups of people are that God through scripture charges them with sin and unbelief.  Paul looks at all these seemingly separate biblical premises as relating to the same subject and so may be deduced from, and thus, all conclusions from this proper deduction are to be affirmed by Christians, loved and obeyed. 

        Since contained in these passages are a declaring of both gentiles and Israelites (i.e. the whole world) as sinful, it is to Paul, God's way of saying in a conclusion that all of mankind has sinned.  Since gentiles and Israel includes every human being then this is not induction or a best sum estimate, but a valid Biblical inference.  Therefore, by God calling all nations and peoples sinful, Paul constructs this valid inference: All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (v. 23).  From this biblical premise every man, woman and child is able to deduce a valid and truthful conclusion that "they" are sinful.  The deductive conclusion that "I" am sinful is not new information or a best estimate; rather, it is information already contained in the Biblical premise, and because it is deduced I and all who call themselves Christians must affirm this conclusion for themselves or else remain unbelievers.

         Jesus Christ gives us many examples how He embarrassed the Jewish  leaders when they did not use deduction, and thus, He showed that their interpretation of the O.T. was flat out wrong and unbiblical!  This is no light issue, for according to Jesus if you cannot deduce consistently and correctly then you will be "greatly mistaken" about what the Bible says.  For example; Jesus in Mark 12:24-27 "Jesus answered and said to them, "Are you not therefore mistaken, because you do not know the Scriptures nor the power of God?  "For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.  "But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'?  "He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. You are therefore greatly mistaken."

        See, the premise is this, "I am the God of Abraham...."  The Hebrew, "I AM", for Yahweh means, I Exist or I Be, in the present-future tense.  Therefore, contained in the premise, "I am the God of Abraham...," is the specific information that God is presently the God of Abraham.  That is to say "The Infinite Existence" is the God of Abraham.  Conclusion, if God is presently the Existence of Abraham, even after his physical death, then there is therefore, a resurrection; physical death is not the end.  Jesus rebukes these teachers and preachers of the O.T. for not using basic biblical hermeneutics of deduction.  The conclusion that Abraham is a live is not a best sum estimate or new information, but rather, information that is already contained in the Biblical premise, Matthew 12:24-27, which Jesus merely points out and makes explicit for us to understand, believe and obey.

        For teachers this was a great misunderstanding and embarrassment.  Basic deduction was one skill that as teachers they ought to have been professionals at.  I find this fault also with many teachers today.  They revert to induction and not deduction, yet, according to Jesus you will not understand His Bible unless you use deduction over induction and that you use it correctly.  Do not be deceived, for those who do not deduce properly, like our passages, you will not understand the Bible or gospel of Jesus Christ, at least very well.  ]

         I am trying to encourage my friends to be consistent in what you vow to.  If you vow to the supremacy of scripture as the sole and highest authority, then be consistent to it.  If you cannot show a valid inference (i.e. deduction) from Scripture alone that the gifts have ceased, then I ask: why is that?  How can you say "sola scriptura" and not show by "scripture alone" that the gifts have finished?  How is that not the height of hypocrisy and self-refuting?

         I have already shown in syllogistic form how the "scriptures alone" assert that all spiritual gifts are for today.  My conclusion is information that the premises already contain in them, and thus, it is what "scripture alone" asserts.

Jack:

You are NOT a Reformer and we are not living in the days of the Reformermation.  The Reformation was a God ordained event in prophetical church history to usher God's people out of the Dark Ages of a closed Bible brought in by the works of the scriptural Anti-Christ (Roman Catholi Pala system). Next you'll be telling us that your Martin Luther. That's the problem with our day - people have become falsely empowered to think they have authority!

 

        What does living in the days of the reformation have to do with me or anyone making a valid inference from "Scripture"?

         I do not believe I am Martin Luther, but lets say that I did, and so make myself look Looney, yet, no matter how Looney I or any would look, still if a valid inference of Scripture alone is made, then it is what scripture alone asserts: since it only makes explicit information that is already contained in the Biblical premise(s).  Such scriptural assertions must be obeyed, and therefore, confessed.

        See, you are not sola scriptura; nor are you the reformers, yet, the sola scriptura empowers me with authority to judge others (Matt. 7:1-6), to judge and rebuke other Christians ( 1 Corin.5-6:11) who teach anything that scripture does not, and it even empowers me to judge principalities and powers and angels as accursed (Galatians 1:8, 2:11-21) if they teach any other gospel from what scripture alone teaches.

         If people today are not empowered with authority, then by what authority, if not scripture, do you say that the reformation was a "God ordained event in prophetical church history"?  You are self-refuting and irrational.  If the reformers claimed this, then by what authority do they claim to state that, if not from the scriptures?  But if from the scriptures then how do we not have the same authority today? If not, then by what non- sola scriptura epistemology and foundation is used that their authority is only for them and not us?  Does it take a millions church votes? What church? Who determines this if not scripture?

        You are covered in idolatry; you respect the reformers more than scripture; for in application you have shown this to be true to me in our dialog; and I warn you to repent of your idolatry and find grace and mercy in Jesus Christ.

Jack

The time for "inferences", "syllogism" and other debate techniques are over!  Secondly - Sola Scriptura does not empower you to run around pretending you have authority.

You think that just because you can crack open a Bible-copy/paste a few texts and apply any old interpretation-that somehow QUALIFIES you! And we wonder why there are multitudes of Cults in the name of Christ today! Get Real! A true Christian respects the God ordained offices of a Church: pastor, teacher, Deacon, Elder, etc. These are the folks who have authority. And we find these folks in a lawful Reformed Church that rests upon the historic creeds and confessions.

Everything is about you as an individual, your right to question, your right to debate, your right to interpret the bible anyway that makes sense to you, your feelings, your experiences...You, You, You!

And how do you end your little spat, encourage others to repent of course! After all, how better to reinforce a self delusion than to tell others to repent.  And find what grace and mercy? The grace and mercy earned by an Arminian inspired "Freewill decision"?

[ Before we get to my reply to this I want my reader to ask themselves if something seems to be strangely missing with all Jacks replies?  The Bible!  He tells me the Scripture does not give me authority, but a blind assertion on his part.  The frank matter, as I have shown is that in fact it does give me authority in great ways.  Jack never shows how the gifts have ceased from the scripture.  Also, Jack invalidates or negates the authority of the scripture by saying "authority" belongs to church leaders, while practically denying that the scriptures give to every Christian the authority to state what Scripture says.  Jack practically wants me to respect church leaders more than the Scriptures.

        Lastly, notice Jack's ending comment.  I cannot even say a basic biblical gospel statement without Jack getting lost in a murk of historical debates and history.  Did I say anything about Arminism?  The scriptures seem to be the furthest thing from Jack's mind.  This is sad to watch, I know.

         Based on this last comment it is apparent Jack isn't talking to me anymore, but some figment of his imagination-making up stuff about me and then arguing to this made up person-and so I decided after this last reply to leave Jack to have some quality time with his imaginary friend and not respond anymore to him.  ]

         You said that, "Sola Scriptura does not empower you to run around pretending you have authority."  Yet, I do not pretend, I know so: unless you want prove how the scriptures say otherwise?

          Your denial that the scriptures do not give me the authority to question you, history, angels or anyone is an outright denial of the scriptures and so the Biblical Worldview. 

        You accuse me of not being a Christian for believing in the gifts of the Spirit, because you deduced this from the WCF [he made this accusation in a comment not contained in this essay]; moreover you have accused me of all sorts, yet, you have only done so without Sola Scriptura, without the Scriptures!  But history is not your or my judge, God and His word is.  In practice you deny and reject sola scriptura.  You do not use scripture to correct me and so you self-refute yourself and the creeds which tell you to do so, moron. 

        You accuse me of wrong by questioning the one little aspect of history (reformers), yet, this is what they did in their own day and time: you self-refuting moron.

         You accuse me of wrong by asking you to use syllogistic form (i.e. Deduction) to show from scripture what the Bible alone says about the Gifts; yet, this is what WCF says to do: you self-refuting moron.

         Furthermore, I have already pointed out that scripture in Hebrews 4:10 and Paul in Romans 3 uses this syllogistic formal reasoning, or (i.e. deduction), and yet, you say the time of syllogistic is over: you moron!  Jesus Christ uses this form of logic in Mark 12:27!

        You accuse me of referring to myself to much, so that I am too man centered and not Scriptural centered, but you have not argued from the scripture at all but only man in history: you self-refuting moron!  

         Of course I told you to repent because I actually respect the scripture, for it commands me to tell people to repent, and so I warn you to do so and refresh yourself in the gospel of Christ.  See, I am consistent to my vow of scripture; however, you say you are but deny it in practice.

[ Seeing that Jack is off somewhere with his imaginary friends, which he likes to argue with and always win,  I will now turn my attention to Henry. ]

Henery

... "the perfect" in 1 Corinthians 13:10 is gender neuter, so unless Christ is gender neuter, it cannot refer to Christ.

          [ Readers, the "perfect" could as easily refer to Christ's kingdom coming in full, and so this objection does not have much weight with it.  So the gender of the Greek is unhelpful.  Yet, if he read 1 John 3:2 with 1 Corin. 13:10-13, he might have known this.  I have made the case of it being similar to 1 John 3:2, which none of these men bothered to look at it seems. ]

Henry:

        Is Jesus "just a propositional truth and syllogistic form"? No, He is the Messiah!  

       To say that the faith is just a bunch of propositional truths is a logical road to antinomianism, and incompatible with Lordship Salvation.  Not to mention the catastrophic implication to biblical theology of such an approach.

       Deduction does not equal syllogistic in the first place. Nonetheless, try this one: The purpose of the gifts has ceased. The people who had the gifts have ceased. Therefore, the exceptional gifts have ceased! Or The foundation is laid. Christ is the only foundation. Therefore the gifts have ceased.

       I Could type dozens of these, but I cannot stress the importance of what is needed here: An Understanding the Historical Purpose of the Spiritual Gifts in the Plan of God. Until this is understood, you will continue to do what the Judaists do with the sacrificial system: i.e. not recognize its historical purpose in God's plan."

Henry, my friend

        Understand I in no way support the actions of the crazies on TBN, even a child can set forth how their actions violates what Paul laid down.

        Now, to say Jesus is more than a proposition is a proposition: understand?  In fact, I "know" and believe that Jesus is more than a proposition "only" because a Biblical proposition tells me so, and also that this proposition is confirmed inwardly by the precious Spirit (Romans 8:16, John 14:15-17, 16:6-15, 2 Corin.3:18-4:6).  Everything you told me that is not a proposition, you told me in the form of a proposition, and to which I could not learn or know about apart from it being a proposition in my mind or yours for that matter. 

        Also, did I say Jesus is "only" or "just" a proposition or syllogistic? Where?  You said, "He is the Messiah," but again this is also a proposition.  I could go on with every sentence you wrote like this, but it would be redundant.  And a again I know and love the truth that Jesus is the Messiah, but I only learned this because a Biblical proposition informs me so and confirmed inwardly by the Spirit.   Furthermore, to learn of and believe in joy about the "Lordship Salvation" and "Biblical Theology" only comes to us in Biblical propositions and confirmed by the Spirit: unless you would like to demonstrate otherwise?

       I have defended faith many times in my books, but when have I said it was a bunch of propositions?   It is joyful-belief in the Biblical propositions and confirmed by the Spirit, which these Biblical propositions tell us about God, redemption and all of life.

        I will say this as nicely as I can, for this is basic philosophy 101.   Look, syllogistic reasoning is arguing in a "form" or structure that if used is able to yield a valid inference, or conclusion that is.  This is why in syllogism we use X, T, Z , Y, because it is about following the form or structure that works.  For this reason induction has always been historically known as a "formal fallacy" for when you follow this syllogistic "form" it cannot guarantee its inference must be true.  Furthermore, for this reason Deduction has historically been known as formal logic (i.e. syllogistic form), for when following this form of reasoning it gives a valid inference from the preemie(s).   Paul fallowed this syllogistic form of Deduction in Romans 3:9-23, and Hebrews 4:1-10, and Jesus in Mark 12:27.  Therefore, how can you accuse me of being anything but using Biblical logic and Christ honoring reasoning when I actually follow in application this syllogism learned from the Christ and His apostles?

X - The purpose of the gifts has ceased

X - The people who had the gifts have ceased

Conclusion - The gifts have ceased

         Premise one is only an assertion of history, not the scripture, and so cannot be proven as truth: this premise is to be dismissed then.   Also, this is not a valid inference; rather, this conclusion is only a guesstimate of the premises, but a guesstimate is not truth.  See, even if both of your premises are true, what is stopping the gifts from operating although their purpose has ceased, for they still operated in 1 Corin. 12-14 when they were greatly abused?  What's stopping new people from using them?  Your premises are past tense, and do not contain information about the future.   In other words, your conclusion has information your premises do not contain or justify.  Your premises are not defendable and your conclusion is an invalid deduction; you cannot guarantee your conclusion must be true

        This is the problem with history, it could change with more evidence, and so it is never truth.  Scripture does not change; it is divine revelation for all believers.  Your inference contains new information, which the premises do not contain: in other words, this inference has information which is nothing more than opinion; but opinions are not biblical truth. 

        With my deduction from scripture I have shown that the command to "seek" the gifts in 1 Corin. 12-14 is a present-"future" tense in the Greek; this combined with the premise that the scriptures never say the gifts have stopped yield us a true inference that the gifts are for the "today."  See, my inference is only information found in the Bible and not added with my opinions or history; thus, the inference that I pointed out is what the "Bible" not I asserts, and so is to be affirmed and obeyed.

          Furthermore, Jesus Christ Himself argues that because He is the foundation of the church that He gave the spiritual gifts to witness, support and strengthen this very fact, for the health of the church and its members.  The gifts are to be used only as scripture tells us, for when done so they witness to the saints, remind and refreshes in their minds that Jesus died once for sins and that He is their redemption, righteousness, wisdom; and that He is ever present with them through His gospel.   Jesus, nor the scripture gave indication that the "Holy Spirit wills" to stop helping, reminding and supporting that the Foundation is Christ within the church by the Spirit's gifts.  The book of Acts show over and over the supernatural gifts always strengthened in the hearts of the elect: Christ as the foundation.  Unless you wish to prove otherwise?

X - The foundation is laid.

X - Christ is the only foundation.

Conclusion - Therefore the gifts have ceased.

         I agree your premises are biblical premises, and so we can go straight to the conclusion.  This inference is not valid.  It is completely new information that your premises do not contain or support.   The information of this conclusion comes out of thin air, least of all the Scriptures.

        Lastly, your point about the historical "purpose of God" and the Judaists is "scripturally" your weakest argument.  Jesus tells us that through interpretations of historical traditions (Mark 7:13) that the Jews "invalided" or negated the scriptures, also Matt. 23.  Now, to prevent this, does Jesus say we need to find the "historical purpose" to interpret the scriptures and find God's will and purpose?  No!, for this is precisely what Jesus meant by traditions: the traditions were thought by many Jews, to be in accord to the "historical purpose of God's plan."  Historical interpretations are not scripture, but are man's inductive conclusion of limited historical data.   Scripture contains history, but only Scripture is Divine Revelation and God breathed, and as Thomas Watson would say: the scripture interpret themselves.  So, the question now is how do they on this matter?

          Do you recall in the Gospel of Luke when the two disciples talked with Jesus on the road to Emmaus?  Did Jesus Christ say they missed understanding "God's purpose" because they forgot their "history?"  No.  Jesus said that not history, but the "Scriptures(v.27)" wrote about Him; He showed and "deduced" from Mosses, Psalms and Prophets how they talked of Him and His redemption.  Therefore, if I am to follow Jesus Christ's example, and know what "God's purpose" is for the Gifts of the Spirit, which is for purpose of supporting Christ's foundation, I must not use History or traditions, but the "Scriptures" and deduce from them. 

         I have shown how syllogism and deduction are taught from the Bible, and I have shown how finding God's purpose for the church, by establishing Christ, is deduced from scripture not history, as being taught by scripture.

The End:

     I went back a few days after this and sadly Jack still is as allergic to using scripture as I am to grass seed, and he is still making up pretend friends and arguing with them.  The other two men I have respect for and pray God will help them to stand on Christ alone, in His Person and gospel: which we learn as truth from Scripture alone. Amen.

       Also, do you see my readers how hiding behind history, traditions, and it seems even imaginary friends shields the coward from the penetrating glare of the Word of Christ that exposes us for who we really are: some as fakes and for others although saved and beloved by our Father, yet, disobedient children at times.

        Yet, the gospel is good news to both! For it offers free grace-apart from works, and so stop resisting the scriptures and its wonderful Redeemer, stop hiding oh' coward; rather, open your life fully to the Person and work of Jesus in sola scriptura, and in return may the grace of Jesus Christ be fully poured over you. 

       John 3:20-21, "Everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God."

[1]  Some of my Biblical hermeneutics revolves around the aspect that the scriptures often has parallels.  These two passages for me would be one such example.

[2] Vincent Cheung.  www.vincentcheung.com