Some good reasons to reject Arminianism

[fastfredy0]

Some good reasons to reject Arminianism​

Short list

1. John 1:12 But to as many as did receive and welcome Him, He gave the right [the authority, the privilege] to become children of God, that is, to those who believe in (adhere to, trust in, and rely on) His name— 13 who were born, not of blood [natural conception], nor of the will of the flesh [physical impulse/free will], nor of the will of man [that of a natural father], but of God [that is, a divine and supernatural birth—they are born of God—spiritually transformed, renewed, sanctified]. Not only do the verses state we are “born again” by the will of God, but to put aside all doubt it doubles down and says man is NOT saved by man’s will.
2. If God knows, that by creating you, you will end up in hell, how is he not determined you to end up in hell by creating you?
3. If freewill is true why has there never been a sinless human?
4. Why do “freewill” proponents say “Lord willing"? James 4:15
5. If freewill is true why "pray" for the salvation of another?
6. If freewill is true why do people so strongly tend to have the religious or non-religious views of their parents?
7. How is it “fair” that God chooses when, where, and how to make you?
8. How is God being in control of all things a “lesser view”?
9. Free Will’s difficulty with evil: How does God giving free will absolve some responsibility? Let's just say there's no causal relationship between God, his creation of you and on your commission of a particular evil act. You have free will that God gave you and let's just pretend it's all true. That’s the general claim, God gave us Free Will and then we misused it. Well he knew that would happen and so by giving you free will He knows that you were going to misuse it. How does that remove his responsibility? If I were to give my friend a tool too on commit a crime using the tool how am I not complicit in his crime because I knew what he was going to do with it when I gave it to him and I gave it to him anyways … so God knows if he gives you free will you're going to sin and he gives it to you anyways I want you to explain to me how that removes responsibility from God.
10. Suppose I was murdered. Perhaps I would have gone on to be saved later but the Free Will of another person can come along and determined my eternal Destiny by murdering me. So you have a problem with God the Creator determining your Eternal Destiny but you're fine with your eternal Destiny being determined by the freewill of another as in this example. You have a problem with God the Creator determining Eternal Destinies of men because that's just morally unbelievably insane and reprehensible but you're perfectly okay with other people's Free Will determining another people's destiny. God just stands by and lets it happen. This is supposed to be of a more acceptable view? Does not God’s allowing me to be murdered compromise my freewill to the point that it is not free to choose due to my death prior to my free will conversion?
11. If you think that you have this freedom from God, this autonomous free will, then you would not need to play by God's laws in the first place. It's ironic, responsibility violates the idea of free will.
12. “Free will cannot will good and of necessity it serves sin.”
13. the Arminian also recognizes (1) that God foreknows the future exhaustively, and (2) that He has created the world knowing what the future will bring. For example, before the foundation of the world, God knew that Joe would make a free decision to become a Christian. Somehow, then, before Joe was born, God knew of his free decision. So even at that time, Joe's free decision must have been inevitable. Why was it inevitable? Not because of Joe's free will, for Joe was not yet born. Not because of God's predestination, because the Arminian denies that possibility from the outset. It would seem that the inevitability in question had some source other than either Joe or God.
14. How is God glorified by events that are determined by man as the initial cause?
15. For those who believe in ‘eternal security’ and ‘free will’; does ‘eternal security’ nullify ‘free will’ since I not change my mind as to believe/not believe?

 

[Carbon]

Some good reasons to reject Arminianism​

Short list

1. John 1:12 But to as many as did receive and welcome Him, He gave the right [the authority, the privilege] to become children of God, that is, to those who believe in (adhere to, trust in, and rely on) His name— 13 who were born, not of blood [natural conception], nor of the will of the flesh [physical impulse/free will], nor of the will of man [that of a natural father], but of God [that is, a divine and supernatural birth—they are born of God—spiritually transformed, renewed, sanctified]. Not only do the verses state we are “born again” by the will of God, but to put aside all doubt it doubles down and says man is NOT saved by man’s will.

1. If God knows, that by creating you, you will end up in hell, how is he not determined you to end up in hell by creating you?

Huh?

1. If freewill is true why has there never been a sinless human?

because it's free will that had a part in messing everything up.

1. Why do “freewill” proponents say “Lord willing"? James 4:15

Nice. But since God works with sinners (prevenient grace ) They just want to, make sure God is in agreement and ready.

1. If freewill is true why "pray" for the salvation of another?

This is why no Arminian prays according to Arminianism. They cannot stay consistent with their system when it comes to prayer.


Could you imagine the heresy?

 

[fastfredy0]

Re:

1. If God knows, that by creating you, you will end up in hell, how is he not determined you to end up in hell by creating you?

Huh?

Agreed, that is not clear.
Premise 1: You can't end up in hell if you were not created
Premise 2: God determines who is created
Premise 3: God know you will end up in hell
Conclusion: God determines that you go to hell (or heaven) and therefore free will did not determine your final destiny.

Hmm, still too wordy ... skip that one ... SMILE

 

[Carbon]

Re:



Agreed, that is not clear.
Premise 1: You can't end up in hell if you were not created
Premise 2: God determines who is created
Premise 3: God know you will end up in hell
Conclusion: God determines that you go to hell (or heaven) and therefore free will did not determine your final destiny.

Actually, some things belong to God's secret council. So, I believe people will go to hell because they freely reject Christ. God does not force anyone to not believe. He may passover regenerating them, but that does not make them any less obligated to believe. It's their choice not to believe.

 

[fastfredy0]

God does not force anyone to not believe.

I believe I take a minority view point on this one although I agree that God does not "FORCE" anyone to not believe; rather, God causes them to "freely" not believe.

Premise 1: God gives everyone a depraved mind (ignore Adam, Eve and Christ)
Premise 2: unless God intervenes, everyone freely does what they desire most which is to reject the means of salvation assuming they ever hear it in the first place
Conclusion: God CAUSED all those in hell to be there

Aside: My spelling sucks more and more as I get older ...thank goodness for spell check

some things belong to God's secret council.

Seeing He is all-knowing and we are stupid ... I imagine 99.9999% of knowledge belongs to God's secret council (Deut 29:29)

 

[Marilyn C]

I believe I take a minority view point on this one although I agree that God does not "FORCE" anyone to not believe; rather, God causes them to "freely" not believe.

Premise 1: God gives everyone a depraved mind (ignore Adam, Eve and Christ)
Premise 2: unless God intervenes, everyone freely does what they desire most which is to reject the means of salvation assuming they ever hear it in the first place
Conclusion: God CAUSED all those in hell to be there

Aside: My spelling sucks more and more as I get older ...thank goodness for spell check


Seeing He is all-knowing and we are stupid ... I imagine 99.9999% of knowledge belongs to God's secret council (Deut 29:29)

I see from God`s word that all are given a God-conscience (Rom. 1: 19 - 21) and thus they are without excuse. As many do not hear of the Lord`s sacrifice then it is their conscience leading to behaviour, (works) that will be judged. (Rev. 20: 13)

 

[civic]

Thank you army, for that explanation.

There is no scriptural proof for that view however.

The gift of miracles , signs and wonders ceased with the death of the Apostles. Here was the purpose for them in scripture. Miracles are a rarity in Scripture not a normality. Moses declared the Law, Elijah and Elisha the Prophets. Daniel with Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in the furnace and also Jonah and Joshua in Jericho. Then we see nothing till Jesus 3year period of ministry with the New Covenant. The purpose of signs, wonders, and miracles was to authenticate the messenger and the message was from God. This was necessary because God's written revelation was yet incomplete. Christ performed many miracles and signs which the Apostle John describes with these words: Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (John 20:30-31). Notice, the miracles of Jesus gave authenticated His message and claims to His Deity. Miracles, signs and wonders ceased with the Apostles and so did the individual gift of miracles. 2 Corinthians 12:12- The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles.

 

[David1701]

Overall, I find that Arminianism is just false teaching (Charles Finney), or immature believers who need to grow in their understanding of God. You have to go to college to gain knowledge, you aren't born with it. You have to grow in scripture, and in the Spirit, to understand all that God has given us in His word.

C. G. Finney was not an Arminian. He was an out-and-out legalist, who had an RC priest who travelled with him, as his "intercessor".

 

[David1701]

The gift of miracles , signs and wonders ceased with the death of the Apostles. Here was the purpose for them in scripture. Miracles are a rarity in Scripture not a normality. Moses declared the Law, Elijah and Elisha the Prophets. Daniel with Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in the furnace and also Jonah and Joshua in Jericho. Then we see nothing till Jesus 3year period of ministry with the New Covenant. The purpose of signs, wonders, and miracles was to authenticate the messenger and the message was from God. This was necessary because God's written revelation was yet incomplete. Christ performed many miracles and signs which the Apostle John describes with these words: Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (John 20:30-31). Notice, the miracles of Jesus gave authenticated His message and claims to His Deity. Miracles, signs and wonders ceased with the Apostles and so did the individual gift of miracles. 2 Corinthians 12:12- The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles.

The miracles certainly DID NOT cease with the death of apostles! The New Covenant age is one that is supposed to be filled with the miraculous; but, many believers are in unbelief, in this area, which is the main reason why we see far less than we should.

Mark 16:14-18 (EMTV)
14 Afterwards He appeared to the eleven as they were reclining at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who saw Him after He had been raised.
15 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to all creation.
16 He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that does not believe shall be condemned.
17 And these signs shall accompany those who have believed: In My name they shall cast out demons; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 they shall pick up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it shall by no means hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall be well."

1 Cor. 12:1-11
1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant.
2 You know that when you were pagans, how you were led astray, being carried away to these speechless idols.
3 Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.
4 Now there are varieties of spiritual gifts, but the same Spirit.
5 And there are varieties of ministries, but the same Lord.
6 And there are varieties of activities, but the same God works all in all.
7 But to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the profit of all.
8 For to one is given a word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another a word of knowledge according to the same Spirit,
9 and to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit,
10 to another the working of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another discerning of spirits, and to another different kinds of tongues, and to another interpretation of tongues.
11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.

John 14:12 "Most assuredly I say to you, he that believes in Me, the works which I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

Rom. 12:4-8
4 For just as we have many members in one body, but all the members do not have the same function,
5 so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another.
6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace having been given to us, let us use them: whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;
7 whether ministry, let us use it in our ministry; whether teaching; in the teaching;
8 whether exhorting, in the exhortation; whether sharing, with simplicity; whether leading, with diligence; whether showing mercy, with cheerfulness.

 

[David1701]

A cessationist believes that certain gifts (speaking in tongues, healing, interpretation) have ceased operation as gifts, because the purpose for these gifts was met. However, not all cessationists believe that God can't/won't move through someone to accomplish His will. However, it is not the same as a gift, which is exercised by the believer through the power of the Holy Spirit. (I hope that is clear enough.)

The purpose for some gifts (not all) was the establishment of the church. Once the church was established, the need for those gifts faded away.

This is unbelief, pure and simple; and, it's this kind of false teaching that harms the faith of some, leading them into the kind of powerless Christianity we see so often nowadays.

 

[civic]

The miracles certainly DID NOT cease with the death of apostles! The New Covenant age is one that is supposed to be filled with the miraculous; but, many believers are in unbelief, in this area, which is the main reason why we see far less than we should.

Mark 16:14-18 (EMTV)
14 Afterwards He appeared to the eleven as they were reclining at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who saw Him after He had been raised.
15 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to all creation.
16 He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that does not believe shall be condemned.
17 And these signs shall accompany those who have believed: In My name they shall cast out demons; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 they shall pick up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it shall by no means hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall be well."

1 Cor. 12:1-11
1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant.
2 You know that when you were pagans, how you were led astray, being carried away to these speechless idols.
3 Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.
4 Now there are varieties of spiritual gifts, but the same Spirit.
5 And there are varieties of ministries, but the same Lord.
6 And there are varieties of activities, but the same God works all in all.
7 But to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the profit of all.
8 For to one is given a word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another a word of knowledge according to the same Spirit,
9 and to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit,
10 to another the working of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another discerning of spirits, and to another different kinds of tongues, and to another interpretation of tongues.
11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.

John 14:12 "Most assuredly I say to you, he that believes in Me, the works which I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

Rom. 12:4-8
4 For just as we have many members in one body, but all the members do not have the same function,
5 so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another.
6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace having been given to us, let us use them: whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;
7 whether ministry, let us use it in our ministry; whether teaching; in the teaching;
8 whether exhorting, in the exhortation; whether sharing, with simplicity; whether leading, with diligence; whether showing mercy, with cheerfulness.

Romans 12 leaves out the supernatural gifts of miracles and others .

We need to understand that healings, even in the Bible, are very rare indeed. For the first 2,500 years of biblical history, there is no mention of any healings whatsoever. Then during the life of Abraham we have a possible healing, although it is only implied (Genesis 12:17–20). Then we have to wait until the life of Moses, who performs a number of signs to authenticate his authority as God’s leader. However, the only healing associated with Moses is Miriam’s cleansing from leprosy (Numbers 12:13–15).

In the covenant God gave to Israel, there were a number of provisions to regulate their lives, and there is an emphasis on physicality and material things in the Old Testament. In Deuteronomy 28, God promises to reward Israel’s faithfulness with freedom from disease. This is the clue to the meaning of miracles in the Bible. God promised Israel health, long life, children, flocks, corn, grapes, etc.—and victory over their enemies—if they stayed faithful to the Lord. At the same time, God threatened them with sickness, barrenness, disease, drought, famine, the loss of livestock, and enemy occupation if they forsook the Lord. This is the context of Israel’s relationship with sickness and healing. The promise to be kept “free from every disease” in Deuteronomy 7:15 was specifically part of the Mosaic Covenant with Israel under the theocracy; such a promise is not given to the church.

With the coming of Christ, we have the fulfillment of the Mosaic Covenant (Matthew 5:17) and a reversal of the effects of Israel’s spiritual backslidings. Wherever Christ went, He healed the sick, but this was not just because of kindness on His part; His healings were always a sign from heaven of Christ’s authority as Messiah (John 7:31). He was giving Israel a taste of the kingdom of God (Luke 11:20). Those who refused His authority were often left sick (Matthew 13:58). At the pool of Bethsaida, for example, Jesus healed only one in a huge multitude (John 5).

The apostles were also given the specific power to heal the sick, and for thirty-seven years they went everywhere healing those who heard their message. Again, their miracles, including healing, were confirmation of the truth of the gospel the apostles proclaimed.

The twelve apostles did not heal everyone, either. Often, there were Christians left unwell in spite of the apostolic power. Paul says to Timothy, “Use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses” (1 Timothy 5:23). Why didn’t Paul just lay hands on Timothy and heal him? It wasn’t because Timothy didn’t have enough faith; it was because it was not God’s will to heal Timothy that way. The healing ministry was not for anyone’s personal convenience; rather, it was a sign from God—to the Jews of the Old Covenant primarily—of the validity of the apostles’ message.

We are not living in the apostolic days today. Of course, God can and does heal today when He wants to. The question we need to ask in any given situation is, what does God want? Does He desire to heal the individual in this life, or does He have another plan to show His glory through weakness? Someday, all sickness and death will be eradicated (see Revelation 21:4). Joni Eareckson Tada will walk again. Until then, there is a greater healing, the cleansing of sinful hearts, that God performs every day.got?

hope this helps !!

 

[civic]

continued :

The biblical record shows that miracles occurred during particular periods for the specific purpose of authenticating a new message from God. Moses was enabled to perform miracles to authenticate his ministry before Pharaoh (Exodus 4:1-8); Elijah was given miracles to authenticate his ministry before Ahab (1 Kings 17:1; 18:24); the apostles were given miracles to authenticate their ministry before Israel (Acts 4:10, 16).

Jesus’ ministry was also marked by miracles, which the Apostle John calls “signs” (John 2:11). John’s point is that the miracles were proofs of the authenticity of Jesus’ message.

After Jesus’ resurrection, as the Church was being established and the New Testament was being written, the apostles demonstrated “signs” such as tongues and the power to heal. “Tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not” (1 Corinthians 14:22, a verse that plainly says the gift was never intended to edify the church).

The Apostle Paul predicted that the gift of tongues would cease (1 Corinthians 13:8).

Here are 6 proofs that it has already ceased:

1) The apostles, through whom tongues came, were unique in the history of the church. Once their ministry was accomplished, the need for authenticating signs ceased to exist.

2) The miracle (or sign) gifts are only mentioned in the earliest Epistles, such as 1 Corinthians. Later books, such as Ephesians and Romans, contain detailed passages on the gifts of the Spirit, but the miracle gifts are not mentioned (although Romans does mention the gift of prophecy, the Greek word translated prophecy mean “speaking forth” and does not necessarily include prediction of the future).

3) The gift of tongues was a sign to unbelieving Israel that God’s salvation was now available to other nations. See 1 Corinthians 14:21-22 and Isaiah 28:11-12.

4) Tongues was an inferior gift to prophecy (preaching). Preaching the Word of God edifies believers, whereas tongues does not. Believers are told to seek prophesying over speaking in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:1-3).

5) History indicates that tongues did cease. Tongues are not mentioned at all by the Post-Apostolic Fathers. Other writers such as Justin Martyr, Origen, Chrysostom, and Augustine considered tongues something that happened only in the earliest days of the Church.

6) Current observation confirms that the miracle of tongues has ceased. If the gift were still available today, there would be no need for missionaries to attend language school. Missionaries would be able to travel to any country and speak any language fluently, just as the apostles were able to speak in Acts 2.As for the miracle gift of healing, we see in Scripture that healing was associated with the ministry of Jesus and the apostles (Luke 9:1-2). And we see that as the era of the apostles drew to a close, healing, like tongues, became less frequent. The Apostle Paul, who raised Eutychus from the dead (Acts 20:9-12), did not heal Epaphroditus (Philippians 2:25-27), Trophimus (2 Timothy 4:20), Timothy (1 Timothy 5:23), or even himself (2 Corinthians 12:7-9).

The reasons for Paul’s “failures to heal” are

1) the gift was never intended to make every Christian well, but to authenticate apostleship; and
2) the authority of the apostles had been sufficiently proved, making further miracles unnecessary.

The reasons stated above are evidence that the sign gifts have ceased. According to 1 Corinthians 13:13-14:1, we would do well to “pursue love,” the greatest gift of all. If we are to desire gifts, we should desire to speak forth the Word of God, that all may be edified.got?

hope this helps !!!

 

[David1701]

Romans 12 leaves out the supernatural gifts of miracles and others .

We need to understand that healings, even in the Bible, are very rare indeed. For the first 2,500 years of biblical history, there is no mention of any healings whatsoever. Then during the life of Abraham we have a possible healing, although it is only implied (Genesis 12:17–20). Then we have to wait until the life of Moses, who performs a number of signs to authenticate his authority as God’s leader. However, the only healing associated with Moses is Miriam’s cleansing from leprosy (Numbers 12:13–15).

In the covenant God gave to Israel, there were a number of provisions to regulate their lives, and there is an emphasis on physicality and material things in the Old Testament. In Deuteronomy 28, God promises to reward Israel’s faithfulness with freedom from disease. This is the clue to the meaning of miracles in the Bible. God promised Israel health, long life, children, flocks, corn, grapes, etc.—and victory over their enemies—if they stayed faithful to the Lord. At the same time, God threatened them with sickness, barrenness, disease, drought, famine, the loss of livestock, and enemy occupation if they forsook the Lord. This is the context of Israel’s relationship with sickness and healing. The promise to be kept “free from every disease” in Deuteronomy 7:15 was specifically part of the Mosaic Covenant with Israel under the theocracy; such a promise is not given to the church.

With the coming of Christ, we have the fulfillment of the Mosaic Covenant (Matthew 5:17) and a reversal of the effects of Israel’s spiritual backslidings. Wherever Christ went, He healed the sick, but this was not just because of kindness on His part; His healings were always a sign from heaven of Christ’s authority as Messiah (John 7:31). He was giving Israel a taste of the kingdom of God (Luke 11:20). Those who refused His authority were often left sick (Matthew 13:58). At the pool of Bethsaida, for example, Jesus healed only one in a huge multitude (John 5).

The apostles were also given the specific power to heal the sick, and for thirty-seven years they went everywhere healing those who heard their message. Again, their miracles, including healing, were confirmation of the truth of the gospel the apostles proclaimed.

The twelve apostles did not heal everyone, either. Often, there were Christians left unwell in spite of the apostolic power. Paul says to Timothy, “Use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses” (1 Timothy 5:23). Why didn’t Paul just lay hands on Timothy and heal him? It wasn’t because Timothy didn’t have enough faith; it was because it was not God’s will to heal Timothy that way. The healing ministry was not for anyone’s personal convenience; rather, it was a sign from God—to the Jews of the Old Covenant primarily—of the validity of the apostles’ message.

We are not living in the apostolic days today. Of course, God can and does heal today when He wants to. The question we need to ask in any given situation is, what does God want? Does He desire to heal the individual in this life, or does He have another plan to show His glory through weakness? Someday, all sickness and death will be eradicated (see Revelation 21:4). Joni Eareckson Tada will walk again. Until then, there is a greater healing, the cleansing of sinful hearts, that God performs every day.got?

hope this helps !!

None of this demonstrates cessationism to be true, nor does it invalidate the scriptures I quoted.

The gospel is still supposed to be accompanied by "signs following", attesting to the power of God, the truthfulness of the message and genuineness of the preachers. Remember that Jesus himself said that those who believe in him will not only do the works that he did, but greater works than these, because Jesus has left and sent the Holy Spirit permanently to indwell all his people.

 

[civic]

None of this demonstrates cessationism to be true, nor does it invalidate the scriptures I quoted.

The gospel is still supposed to be accompanied by "signs following", attesting to the power of God, the truthfulness of the message and genuineness of the preachers. Remember that Jesus himself said that those who believe in him will not only do the works that he did, but greater works than these, because Jesus has left and sent the Holy Spirit permanently to indwell all his people.

Well your view and mine depends upon who those signs were promised to- for everyone or the disciples/Apostles.

 

[David1701]

Well your view and mine depends upon who those signs were promised to- for everyone or the disciples/Apostles.

Thanks - you just made my case!

John 14:12 (EMTV) "Most assuredly I say to you, he that believes in Me, the works which I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

Not only apostles (and, incidentally, it was not only apostles who showed miracles, in the NT), but he who believes in Jesus. In other words, every Christian is supposed to have the miraculous in his life, God distributing different gifts to different people, as he sees fit.

Mark 16:15-18
15 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to all creation.
16 He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that does not believe shall be condemned.
17 And these signs shall accompany those who have believed: In My name they shall cast out demons; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 they shall pick up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it shall by no means hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall be well."

The signs are to accompany "those who have believed" the gospel (i.e. not only the apostles, but Christians in general).

1 Cor. 12: 3-11
3 Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.
4 Now there are varieties of spiritual gifts, but the same Spirit.
5 And there are varieties of ministries, but the same Lord.
6 And there are varieties of activities, but the same God works all in all.
7 But to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the profit of all.
8 For to one is given a word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another a word of knowledge according to the same Spirit,
9 and to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit,
10 to another the working of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another discerning of spirits, and to another different kinds of tongues, and to another interpretation of tongues.
11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.

This is Paul, writing to the Christians in Corinth (they were not apostles but just normal Christians).

 

[civic]

Thanks - you just made my case!

John 14:12 (EMTV) "Most assuredly I say to you, he that believes in Me, the works which I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

Not only apostles (and, incidentally, it was not only apostles who showed miracles, in the NT), but he who believes in Jesus. In other words, every Christian is supposed to have the miraculous in his life, God distributing different gifts to different people, as he sees fit.

Mark 16:15-18
15 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to all creation.
16 He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that does not believe shall be condemned.
17 And these signs shall accompany those who have believed: In My name they shall cast out demons; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 they shall pick up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it shall by no means hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall be well."

The signs are to accompany "those who have believed" the gospel (i.e. not only the apostles, but Christians in general).

1 Cor. 12: 3-11
3 Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.
4 Now there are varieties of spiritual gifts, but the same Spirit.
5 And there are varieties of ministries, but the same Lord.
6 And there are varieties of activities, but the same God works all in all.
7 But to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the profit of all.
8 For to one is given a word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another a word of knowledge according to the same Spirit,
9 and to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit,
10 to another the working of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another discerning of spirits, and to another different kinds of tongues, and to another interpretation of tongues.
11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.

This is Paul, writing to the Christians in Corinth (they were not apostles but just normal Christians).

John 14 was to the 12. And Mark 16 is controversial if its even Scripture which is why every single translation has it in parenthesis. I beleive as do most Greek Scholars it was added to Mark by scribes later.

 

[David1701]

John 14 was to the 12. And Mark 16 is controversial if its even Scripture which is why every single translation has it in parenthesis. I beleive as do most Greek Scholars it was added to Mark by scribes later.

So what if Jesus was addressing the twelve (in John 14:12)? He told them that he who believes in him will do greater works than he did. He did not even hint that this was limited to the twelve (they already believed anyway!).

Mark 16:9-20 should not be controversial to any Christian. It is contained in several hundreds (!) of extant Greek manuscripts (with slight variations) and is only omitted in three (not three hundred, but three), one of which is very minor. The main two that contain Mark 16, but omit verses 9-20, disagree with each other more than 3,000 times, in the gospels alone, so are hardly trustworthy witnesses.

There's more: try reading Mark 16 and ending at verse 8. Is this remotely a good place to end a gospel? No, of course it isn't!

Also, you are wrong that "every single translation has it in parenthesis (sic)". There are many translations that do not cast doubt on themselves by putting this passage in parentheses. Here are just some of those.

Matthews Bible
Geneva Bible
Authorised Version
Webster Bible
Darby Bible
Young's Literal Translation
New King James Version
KJ3
Modern English Version
World English Bible
Evangelical Heritage Version
English Majority Text Version (NT only)
Analytical Literal Translation (NT only)
etc.

Here is the footnote from the Evangelical Heritage Version:

1. Mark 16:20 This translation includes verses 9-20 because they are included in the vast majority of Greek manuscripts that have been handed down to us. Evidence for the existence of this long ending extends back to the 2nd century. In the early centuries of the church, these verses were read in worship services on Easter and Ascension Day. However, a few early manuscripts and early translations omit verses 9-20, and a few manuscripts have a different ending.

And here is the footnote from the New King James Version:

• Mark 16:9 Vv. 9–20 are bracketed in NU as not in the original text. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other mss. of Mark contain them.

 

[Carbon]

So what if Jesus was addressing the twelve (in John 14:12)? He told them that he who believes in him will do greater works than he did. He did not even hint that this was limited to the twelve (they already believed anyway!).

I’m with civic on this. Doing greater works than these does not mean tongues and other gifts, but prayer in the context and according to the Fathers will. Being a part or a means to an end will witness mighty things if we are willing to see.

 

[civic]

So what if Jesus was addressing the twelve (in John 14:12)? He told them that he who believes in him will do greater works than he did. He did not even hint that this was limited to the twelve (they already believed anyway!).

Mark 16:9-20 should not be controversial to any Christian. It is contained in several hundreds (!) of extant Greek manuscripts (with slight variations) and is only omitted in three (not three hundred, but three), one of which is very minor. The main two that contain Mark 16, but omit verses 9-20, disagree with each other more than 3,000 times, in the gospels alone, so are hardly trustworthy witnesses.

There's more: try reading Mark 16 and ending at verse 8. Is this remotely a good place to end a gospel? No, of course it isn't!

Also, you are wrong that "every single translation has it in parenthesis (sic)". There are many translations that do not cast doubt on themselves by putting this passage in parentheses. Here are just some of those.

Matthews Bible
Geneva Bible
Authorised Version
Webster Bible
Darby Bible
Young's Literal Translation
New King James Version
KJ3
Modern English Version
World English Bible
Evangelical Heritage Version
English Majority Text Version (NT only)
Analytical Literal Translation (NT only)
etc.

Here is the footnote from the Evangelical Heritage Version:

1. Mark 16:20 This translation includes verses 9-20 because they are included in the vast majority of Greek manuscripts that have been handed down to us. Evidence for the existence of this long ending extends back to the 2nd century. In the early centuries of the church, these verses were read in worship services on Easter and Ascension Day. However, a few early manuscripts and early translations omit verses 9-20, and a few manuscripts have a different ending.

And here is the footnote from the New King James Version:

• Mark 16:9 Vv. 9–20 are bracketed in NU as not in the original text. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other mss. of Mark contain them.

Although the vast majority of later Greek manuscripts contain Mark 16:9-20, the Gospel of Mark ends at verse 8 in two of the oldest and most respected manuscripts, the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. As the oldest manuscripts are known to be the most accurate because there were fewer generations of copies from the original autographs (i.e., they are much closer in time to the originals), and the oldest manuscripts do not contain vv. 9-20, we can conclude that these verses were added later by scribes. The King James Version of the Bible, as well as the New King James, contains vv. 9-20 because the King James used medieval manuscripts as the basis of its translation. Since 1611, however, older and more accurate manuscripts have been discovered and they affirm that vv. 9-20 were not in the original Gospel of Mark.

In addition, the fourth-century church fathers Eusebius and Jerome noted that almost all Greek manuscripts available to them lacked vv. 9–20, although they doubtless knew those other endings existed. In the second century, Justin Martyr and Tatian knew about other endings. Irenaeus, also, in A.D. 150 to 200, must have known about this long ending because he quotes verse 19 from it. So, the early church fathers knew of the added verses, but even by the fourth century, Eusebius said the Greek manuscripts did not include these endings in the originals.

The internal evidence from this passage also casts doubt on Mark as the author. For one thing, the transition between verses 8 and 9 is abrupt and awkward. The Greek word translated “now” that begins v. 9 should link it to what follows, as the use of the word “now” does in the other synoptic Gospels. However, what follows doesn’t continue the story of the women referred to in v. 8, describing instead Jesus’ appearing to Mary Magdalene. There’s no transition there, but rather an abrupt and bizarre change, lacking the continuity typical of Mark’s narrative. The author should be continuing the story of the women based on the word “now,” not jumping to the appearance to Mary Magdalene. Further, for Mark to introduce Mary Magdalene here as though for the very first time (v. 9) is odd because she had already been introduced in Mark’s narrative (Mark 15:40, 47, 16:1), another evidence that this section was not written by Mark.

Furthermore, the vocabulary is not consistent with Mark’s Gospel. These last verses don’t read like Mark’s. There are eighteen words here that are never used anywhere by Mark, and the structure is very different from the familiar structure of his writing. The title “Lord Jesus,” used in verse 19, is never used anywhere else by Mark. Also, the reference to signs in vv. 17-18 doesn’t appear in any of the four Gospels. In no account, post-resurrection of Jesus, is there any discussion of signs like picking up serpents, speaking with tongues, casting out demons, drinking poison, or laying hands on the sick. So, both internally and externally, this is foreign to Mark.

While the added ending offers no new information, nor does it contradict previously revealed events and/or doctrine, both the external and internal evidence make it quite certain that Mark did not write it. In reality, ending his Gospel in verse 8 with the description of the amazement of the women at the tomb is entirely consistent with the rest of the narrative. Amazement at the Lord Jesus seems to be a theme with Mark. “They were amazed at his teaching” (Mark 1:22); “They were all amazed, so that they debated among themselves” (Mark 1:27); “He healed the paralytic, and they were all amazed and were glorifying God saying, ‘We’ve never seen anything like this’” (Mark 2:12). Astonishment at the work of Jesus is revealed throughout Mark’s narrative (Mark 4:41; 5:15, 33, 42; 6:51; 9:6, 15, 32; 10:24, 32; 11:18; 12:17; 16:5). Some, or even one, of the early scribes, however, apparently missed the thematic evidence and felt the need to add a more conventional ending.got?

hope this helps !!!

 

[David1701]

Although the vast majority of later Greek manuscripts contain Mark 16:9-20, the Gospel of Mark ends at verse 8 in two of the oldest and most respected manuscripts, the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. As the oldest manuscripts are known to be the most accurate because there were fewer generations of copies from the original autographs (i.e., they are much closer in time to the originals), and the oldest manuscripts do not contain vv. 9-20, we can conclude that these verses were added later by scribes. The King James Version of the Bible, as well as the New King James, contains vv. 9-20 because the King James used medieval manuscripts as the basis of its translation. Since 1611, however, older and more accurate manuscripts have been discovered and they affirm that vv. 9-20 were not in the original Gospel of Mark.

In addition, the fourth-century church fathers Eusebius and Jerome noted that almost all Greek manuscripts available to them lacked vv. 9–20, although they doubtless knew those other endings existed. In the second century, Justin Martyr and Tatian knew about other endings. Irenaeus, also, in A.D. 150 to 200, must have known about this long ending because he quotes verse 19 from it. So, the early church fathers knew of the added verses, but even by the fourth century, Eusebius said the Greek manuscripts did not include these endings in the originals.

The internal evidence from this passage also casts doubt on Mark as the author. For one thing, the transition between verses 8 and 9 is abrupt and awkward. The Greek word translated “now” that begins v. 9 should link it to what follows, as the use of the word “now” does in the other synoptic Gospels. However, what follows doesn’t continue the story of the women referred to in v. 8, describing instead Jesus’ appearing to Mary Magdalene. There’s no transition there, but rather an abrupt and bizarre change, lacking the continuity typical of Mark’s narrative. The author should be continuing the story of the women based on the word “now,” not jumping to the appearance to Mary Magdalene. Further, for Mark to introduce Mary Magdalene here as though for the very first time (v. 9) is odd because she had already been introduced in Mark’s narrative (Mark 15:40, 47, 16:1), another evidence that this section was not written by Mark.

Furthermore, the vocabulary is not consistent with Mark’s Gospel. These last verses don’t read like Mark’s. There are eighteen words here that are never used anywhere by Mark, and the structure is very different from the familiar structure of his writing. The title “Lord Jesus,” used in verse 19, is never used anywhere else by Mark. Also, the reference to signs in vv. 17-18 doesn’t appear in any of the four Gospels. In no account, post-resurrection of Jesus, is there any discussion of signs like picking up serpents, speaking with tongues, casting out demons, drinking poison, or laying hands on the sick. So, both internally and externally, this is foreign to Mark.

While the added ending offers no new information, nor does it contradict previously revealed events and/or doctrine, both the external and internal evidence make it quite certain that Mark did not write it. In reality, ending his Gospel in verse 8 with the description of the amazement of the women at the tomb is entirely consistent with the rest of the narrative. Amazement at the Lord Jesus seems to be a theme with Mark. “They were amazed at his teaching” (Mark 1:22); “They were all amazed, so that they debated among themselves” (Mark 1:27); “He healed the paralytic, and they were all amazed and were glorifying God saying, ‘We’ve never seen anything like this’” (Mark 2:12). Astonishment at the work of Jesus is revealed throughout Mark’s narrative (Mark 4:41; 5:15, 33, 42; 6:51; 9:6, 15, 32; 10:24, 32; 11:18; 12:17; 16:5). Some, or even one, of the early scribes, however, apparently missed the thematic evidence and felt the need to add a more conventional ending.got?

hope this helps !!!

It really doesn't help!

Vaticanus and Sinaiticus should not be respected by anyone! They are absolutely riddled with errors (some outrageous), disagree with each other thousands of times, contain apocryphal books, and are of highly dubious provenance. There is also doubt about their claimed age. Erasmus thought that Vaticanus was probably written some time after 1430, for example.

Regarding the "older means better" mantra: this is an extremely suspect stance. The best manuscripts would have been the most used and copied; they would have worn out, long, long ago. The very fact that Vaticanus and Sinaiticus have survived, in such good condition, for so long (if you accept their claimed ages...) is suspicious.

Given normal manuscript transmission (the best ones would be read and used, worn out, copied, etc.), you would expect the vast majority of extant manuscripts to be largely in agreement with each other and to be trustworthy. This is found to be the case. The "earliest", on the other hand, as I mentioned earlier, are riddled with errors of various kinds and disagree with each other far more than would be expected of trustworthy manuscripts. In fact, Sinaiticus, in particular, shows that a dozen or more different scribes, at different times, have tried to correct it, in numerous places.

Then there is the reason why the majority of manuscripts are more recent: in the 9th and 10th C. A.D., a very large number of Uncials (ancient manuscripts, written in capital letters) were copied to cursives (more recent writing, in small letters). It is these that constitute the majority of extant Greek manuscripts; in other words, they are mostly direct copies of far older Uncial manuscripts that no longer exist.

Here is Mark 16:8...

Mark 16:8 (EMTV) And going out, they fled from the tomb, but trembling and amazement held them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

It ends abruptly, in fear (the opposite from faith). There is no Great Commission. If anyone thinks that this is valid ending to a gospel, then I would not rush to trust his judgment on anything else.

Casting doubt on a passage that has been accepted as genuine, by the vast majority of the body of Christ, since the earliest times, is the devil's job, not ours.