Has the gift of speaking in tongues ceased? - Tim Conway
- Thread starter Marano
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
If you would like for me to attempt to rebutt something, present some evidence for your position first, and then I can rebutt it if I choose to.
I have often people appeal to 'common sense' is based on their preconceived ideas and they have no real evidence. Not just in this discussion with you, but elsewhere.
Is it common sense to think that the Greek word 'megaleios', translated as 'wonderful works' in the phrase 'wonderful works of God' in Acts 2:11 means to explain how a man is saved through faith in Jesus Christ? Do you have any evidence that this is specifically what that word means? My guess is they were praising God for His works, the type of thing we might see in the Psalms.
In fact, Psalm 71:19, the Greek of the Septuagint, which the diaspora Jews may have used in their synagogues, used 'megaleios' in the following verse, translated below as 'great things.'
Psalm 71:19
Thy righteousness also, O God, is very high, who hast done great things: O God, who is like unto thee!
It also shows up the following verse:
Deuteronomy 11:2
And know ye this day: for I speak not with your children which have not known, and which have not seen the chastisement of the Lord your God, his greatness, his mighty hand, and his stretched out arm,
Stephen and Paul both told of God's previous works in their sermons, leading up to the presentation of Jesus as the Messiah and salvation through faith in him.
Consider the other cases where speaking in tongues tongues shows up in scripture. In none of them do we see an example of individuals presenting salvation through faith in Jesus to the as yet unevangelized. In Acts 10, those who had just heard the message of Jesus spoke in tongues and magnified God. Why would we assume the new Gentile converts would try to evangelize Peter and win him? Why is it unlikely to think that the Acts 2 tongues were magnifying God? Peter compares what happened to the Gentiles to what happened to his and his listener's previous experience in Acts 11.
In Acts 19, there is no reason to think that he approximately 12 men who heard the message of Jesus from Paul, were baptized in water, and then experienced the Spirit coming upon them after Paul laid hands on them tried to preach to Paul and win him to Jesus when they spoke in tongues and prophesied.
In I Corinthians 14, Paul gives an example of an unbeliever or unlearned person who comes into the church assembly, all speak in tongues, and he says 'ye are mad.' Tongues are for a sign to them that believe not, but they fulfill "With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord."
We see this principle in Acts 2, when, instead of accusing the disciples of being mad, some heard speaking in tongues and accused the disciples of being drunk.
Name one scripture that I am contradicting.
In order to know, you have to believe something and it has to be true. The problem is, there is no reason for you to believe this particular idea is true. Why do you want to believe that the 'wonderful works of God' must refer to the disciples evangelizing 'in tongues'? Is it so that you can have an argument against Charismatics?
This reminds me of the conspiracy theorist who 'knows' that 911 was an inside job, or that the Illuminati are the heirs of the Knights Templar and that Hollywood actors and singers are members of it with a secret agenda to depopulate the planet and to corrupt the youth. They can point you to a video that serves as their proof, but the logical connections between the evidence in the video and the conclusions drawn isn't there.
I'll restate my position here, since you object to the word 'know.' It is not rational for you to believe that 'the wonderful works of God' must refer to explaining the plan of salvation through Jesus Christ in tongues to the audience unless you have reasons to believe so. Do you have any evidence or reasons to believe that this MUST have been the case. Examples of evidence or reasons to believe this would be:
1. Some information about Greek the rest of us do not have about the words in the text.
2. Eye witness accounts from those involved in the events.
3. Supernatural, extrabiblical revelation from God that the 'wonderful works of God' was explaining the message of salvation through Jesus.
Do you claim to have extrabiblical revelation? Do you have any actual evidence? 'Common sense' won't cut it because the rest of us have common sense and we don't all agree with you. I do not believe it is good common sense to read these ideas into the text.
Do you think there are cases in the world today where people preach the Gospel in tongues and multitudes stagger forward to accept the Gospel message? I think we'd both agree that not all of the events of Acts 2 have to be repeated on a regular basis for them to be true.
It is not my position that people got saved in Acts 2 because they heard speaking in tongues. That sounds more consistent with your position since you think they heard the Gospel in tongues. Paul wrote to the Romans about the mystery that 'by the scriptures of the prophets it is made known to all nations unto the obedience of the faith.' The Gospel is made known by the Old Testament scriptures, but individuals need to know more than that to be saved. The Old Testament is full of writings about the wonderful works of God. Paul and Stephen would tell about God's works toward the patriarchs and the nation of Israel before what we usually refer to as 'preaching the Gospel.' Before the Gentiles in Athens, Paul told of God's wonderful work of creating man and the good God did for man before getting to the part about Jesus.
In Acts 2, the disciples spoke in tongues and those who understood the languages heard them speaking of 'the wonderful works of God'-- whatever those were-- before Peter preached about salvation through Jesus. I believe people in Acts 2, probably including those who did not understand what was spoken in tongues, were saved after hearing and believing the preaching in the word, in a common tongue, be that Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic.
I am seeing a trend in your posts. It seems like you think the Holy Spirit is required to act in the very specific manner you have in your mind. You think He had to make the 'wonderful works of God' be evangelistic preaching in Acts 2. You think that's what it meant, so do you think the Holy Spirit in the first century was bound to conform to the thoughts and opinions you would have now in the 21st century? And would He also be bound to have to jump through your hoops and provide some good examples on iPhones to satisfy your criteria of proof? Jesus refused to do signs of those who demanded them of Him. Why does the Holy Spirit have to provide a specific type of sign for the iPhones of the world?
Be that as it may, there were certainly a number of accounts from the Azusa Street revival of cases where individuals heard their own languages 'in tongues' and there have been many accounts since. I have spoken or corresponded with individuals who have heard speaking in tongues in English in non-English speaking countries, and I have spoken with individuals who have experienced it where they spoke in tongues and others understood. If you some research and are willing to track individuals down and find cases of 'xenoglossic glossolalia', have at it. I am not motivated to do so, since I have other things on my plate and I already believe in I Corinthians 12 gifts, so documenting cases like this would not change my belief system.
My opinion is that the typical, normative use of tongues follows what Paul describes and prescribes in I Corinthians 14, where an individual saint in a church meeting speaks in tongues, no one present understands him, so the message in tongues must be interpreted through a gift of the Spirit for others to be edified.
Show me where I have contradicted the scriptures. The Psalms are full of praises of God for His wonderful works. Do you call reading the Psalms 'preaching the Gospel.' If so, you might think I contradicted the scritpures. But if you use 'evangelize' and 'preach the Gospel' the way I am using it, more narrowly to refer to proclaiming and explaining the message of salvation through Jesus Christ, then you do not have a case for your accusation.
Go back and read my last post, and even posts in our past discussions if you wish. That is not my position. I am not opposed to the idea that God might use tongues directly for evangelism-- actually preaching 'in tongues.' I just do not find any scripture for it. I wouldn't say it is not possible, but it does not exactly fit with what I see in the Bible. In Acts 2, tongues drew attention, but Peter still preached the Gospel before others were saved, just as miracles and healing along doesn't save without the preaching of the Gospel. In I Corinthians 14, tongues is a sign to them that believe not, illustrated by an example of someone saying 'ye are mad' when he hears all in a church assembly speak in tongues. Tongues is a fulfillment of 'and yet for all that ye will not hear Me.' I don't see a case there for preaching the Gospel in tongues. It seems to lean in the opposite direction, IMO. Paul encourages prophecy as superior to tongues by showing how prophecy works toward the unbeliever believing, while tongues seems to work against it. But I don't dig my heals in the sand and insist that God will never use tongues to evangelize. God is soveriegn over all things and I am not. Can you agree with that last statement in regards to yourself when it comes to this issue?
I have stated that I do not see 'preaching the Gospel' in tongues in scripture. I am not willing to redefine 'wonderful works of God' to mean specifically and exclusively 'evangelistic preaching' as you seem to be more than willing to do.
The passage indicates the listeners heard them speak of 'the wonderful works of God.' The 'evangelistic effort' part are your words.
Samuel23,
You are beating up a strawman. I spent over 20 years in the Pentecostal movement, and you are misrepresenting the beliefs of every group I know of that goes by the name 'Pentecostal.' What you describe here is not what Pentecostals believe at all. So you should not attack Pentecostals, accuse them of having a false spirit, etc. based on what they do NOT believe.
Pentecostals do not teach that a believer should seek a second baptism in the Spirit. You might find an individual Pentecostal who teaches this, but in my experience, a Pentecostal might say one baptism with the Spirit, but many subsequent fillings after that, or just emphasize being continually filled.
You also appear to be making the of confusing your own terminology and beliefs with Pentecostals and projecting them onto this other group, mixing your beliefs and terminology with theirs.
Pentecostals would not say that every believer who is 'saved' has been baptized with the Holy Spirit. I would assume that is what you believe, and you are projecting that onto Pentecostals. Now, if I recall correctly, an Assemblies of God position paper states that Christians have the 'seal of the Spirit' at the time they are saved, but also need to be baptized with the Holy Spirit, which could occur at salvation or after it. Derrick Prince, who was from a Pentecostal background, taught this idea as well.
There are a number of Pentecostal denominations from the southeastern United States that are associated with the Holiness movement, and I am not sure if any of them have a position on the seal of the Spirit in relation to the baptism with the Holy Spirit.
So you are mistaken to say that Pentecostals believe in two baptisms with the Holy Spirit. In Acts, terminology used like baptism with the Holy Spirit, receiving the Spirit the Spirit falling on people or coming upon people, and being filled with the Spirit seem to be used to refer to the same events.
Let us look at two cases. In Acts 8, Samaritans accepted the message Philip preached and were water baptized. But they received the Spirit, the Spirit fell on them, subsequent to their coming to faith. This occured after Peter and John arrived and laid hands on them. In Acts 19, Paul met some followers of John's teaching. Paul explained to them about Jesus and then water baptized them. But the Spirit came on them afterwards, after Paul laid hands on them. Notice there was a space of time (probably quite brief) between their believing and being baptized, and the Spirit coming on them. This happened subsequent to their coming to faith in both cases.
Paul in Ephesians tells his readers, who already had the seal of the Spirit, to be filled with the Spirit. It is not wrong for someone who is already a Christian to be filled with the Spirit, since the Bible teaches it. It is also not wrong for us to pray to be filled with the Spirit if the Bible commands us to be filled with the Spirit. If we pray according to God's will, we know that we have it.
You assert that if Pentecostals are baptized with the Holy Spirit a second time (misrepresenting Pentecostal beliefs on the subject) that they receive a false spirit. What do you base this on? These are some very relavent words from the Lord Jesus recorded in Luke 11:
11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?
Why would you think that Christians who ask to be filled with the Spirit would recieve a false spirit. What a terrible thinking you have on this issue. Do you make the mistake that many religious people think, assuming God has a malevolent attitude toward those with whom you disagree theologically?
Attack the pentecostals, everybody else does. Theres dozens of scriptures about tongues. No matter if an angelic or another human language..and uhm just another food for a thought
I dont get the concept of people thinging it stopped after the first generation.
It started really after the death of Jesus when the Holy Spirit came down for us all, not just to rest on the prophets and anointed, but us too.
So unless the Holy Spirit dies out, the gifts dont die out too and I have nothing in MY bible saying he will after the first new born Christians came.
hmm but who listens to us crazy charismatic folks
hmmm
I dont get the concept of people thinging it stopped after the first generation.
It started really after the death of Jesus when the Holy Spirit came down for us all, not just to rest on the prophets and anointed, but us too.
So unless the Holy Spirit dies out, the gifts dont die out too and I have nothing in MY bible saying he will after the first new born Christians came.
hmm but who listens to us crazy charismatic folks
hmmmYour first post directed toward me at this thread was rather antagonistic, "You huff and puff and heave and ho and strain and grunt." That sounds like someone straining on the toilet. I'm a pretty regular guy, and I'm not straining in this conversation. I believe my comment above is a fair comment. You haven't presented any evidence to rebut. Vague generalities aren't evidence. There were those present who heard the disciples speaking of the 'wonderful works of God.' Let's deal with the specifics in the passage.
If we are going to have a conversation, if you make antagonistic comments yourself, and then get upset when others do the same, then the conversation isn't going to go well. Please try not to get bent out of shape. I am not trying to offend you. I don't have to be in a conversation where we pamper each other and I can do that without getting hard feelings, but it breaks down if one person dishes and can't take it. I did not find your observation to be a fair or accurate one, so I pointed out that you hadn't put forth any evidence to rebutt. Assumptions are assumptions, not evidence.
From my perspective, common sense requires that we have evidence before committing so firmly to a position on an issue like this.
If you are absolutely convinced that the disciples were explaining how to get saved and that Jesus rose from the dead, completely and thoroughly preaching the Gospel, to me that is not rational and it defies common sense. Not that it isn't possible that they were doing so, or that some of them were, but simply because there is no evidence for it. You are insisting that what happened is the scenario you imagine in your mind. It would be just as irrational if I insisted that they were all quoting a particular Psalm in the language of the hearers. It's a possibility, but to insist that this is what they were saying, without evidence, defies common sense.
If what God wants us to take from the passage is that tongues are to be used for preaching in tongues, explaining the message of salvation in tongues, then we would expect that this information would be included in the passage. It is not. None of the other passages that mention speaking in tongues indicate that those who were speaking in tongues were preaching the Gospel and explaining 'how to get saved' in tongues.
Last edited:
M
Very odd and contradictory for you to be chiding folks who require some evidence for these claims of miracles and healing. That was the leading purpose for these miracles in the first place...to provide confirming evidence. But when folks come forward with complaints about a lack of evidence...you chide. How very odd and contradictory.
Notice there were no such controversies back in the days when these miracles and healings were actually going on.
In earlier exchanges, I invited you to 'cherry pick' from among your choice of hundreds of millions of YouTubes...of any evidence of a Jesus-style or 'apostle-style' miracle. What you produced was absolutely pathetic. Not even within a million miles of a 'real deal' Jesus-style miracle...where someone is ZAPPED into instantaneous 100% healing.
In fact, the very fact that you would put forward such nonsense speaks volumes as to the state of denial you're living in, sorry to say. That, combined with your claim about your wife resurrecting a guy from the dead who had been hit by a bus. Such claims would be hilarious if they weren't so sad. The Charismatic/Pentecostal world is nothing but a huge and horrible "snipe hunting" fiasco.
And it is going to have eternally tragic consequences when the Antichrist springs onto the scene accompanied by a platoon of false "Christian leaders" who will be able to perform spectacular "signs and wonders" (Matt. 24:24)...a biblical fact which you are mocking in your post...and thus, a large majority of Charismatics and Pentecostals will gobble up all the deceptions like candy...and will be deceived and thus be drawn to their doom.
And just think - the role you will have played in influencing people to continue to believe in this nonsense...when (I'm pretty sure) you know better.
Silly and insincere straw men. I'm merely saying there is no evidence.
Another straw man. I'm not "demanding" anything. There simply is no evidence. Why would someone believe in something for which there is no evidence?
And "Azusa Street"? You can't be serious. Do you know how many discrediting testimonies there are about that fiasco? It has to be one of the creepiest episodes in US history.
Right. And millions of people 'believe' in professional wrestling. Millions more believe in the religion of Islam. There IS such a thing as valid "common sense". And to dispute the biblically-based and biblically-authorized common sense...that the occasion of the Acts 2 meeting was evangelistic and that those who spoke were given utterance which was evangelistic...is to dispute biblically-based and biblically-authorized common sense.
Notice there were no such controversies back in the days when these miracles and healings were actually going on.
In earlier exchanges, I invited you to 'cherry pick' from among your choice of hundreds of millions of YouTubes...of any evidence of a Jesus-style or 'apostle-style' miracle. What you produced was absolutely pathetic. Not even within a million miles of a 'real deal' Jesus-style miracle...where someone is ZAPPED into instantaneous 100% healing.
In fact, the very fact that you would put forward such nonsense speaks volumes as to the state of denial you're living in, sorry to say. That, combined with your claim about your wife resurrecting a guy from the dead who had been hit by a bus. Such claims would be hilarious if they weren't so sad. The Charismatic/Pentecostal world is nothing but a huge and horrible "snipe hunting" fiasco.
And it is going to have eternally tragic consequences when the Antichrist springs onto the scene accompanied by a platoon of false "Christian leaders" who will be able to perform spectacular "signs and wonders" (Matt. 24:24)...a biblical fact which you are mocking in your post...and thus, a large majority of Charismatics and Pentecostals will gobble up all the deceptions like candy...and will be deceived and thus be drawn to their doom.
And just think - the role you will have played in influencing people to continue to believe in this nonsense...when (I'm pretty sure) you know better.
Silly and insincere straw men. I'm merely saying there is no evidence.
Another straw man. I'm not "demanding" anything. There simply is no evidence. Why would someone believe in something for which there is no evidence?
And "Azusa Street"? You can't be serious. Do you know how many discrediting testimonies there are about that fiasco? It has to be one of the creepiest episodes in US history.
Right. And millions of people 'believe' in professional wrestling. Millions more believe in the religion of Islam. There IS such a thing as valid "common sense". And to dispute the biblically-based and biblically-authorized common sense...that the occasion of the Acts 2 meeting was evangelistic and that those who spoke were given utterance which was evangelistic...is to dispute biblically-based and biblically-authorized common sense.
Refusing to believe who Jesus is and what He taught without seeing a sign is a bad thing. Jesus refused to give a sign to those who demanded one of Him. He was merciful to one of His own disciples who refused to believe the resurrection without seeing it first.
I can't find where the Bible teaches that the purpose of signs is to convince professing Christians that the teachings of the apostle Paul about the Spirit giving certain spiritual gifts to the saints is true, or that it is still true today. I don't claim to be a miracle worker. If you want to research miracles, go do so. I have seen plenty of I Corinthians 12 type gifts in operation. If you follow past trends and the trend of the post I am responding to, you are likely just to reject or mock without considering evidence. So why should I bother. Go do your own research if you want to.
Biblically, there is no reason for you to think that the Spirit might not gift someone to do miracles or heal, for example. The Bible teaches that He does. If it happened every day, or once every 100 years, there is no reason to believe that He may not or does not do so. No reason except a heart that is inclined toward not believing the teaching of scripture. We should at least be in agreement that it is up to the Spirit of God to gift individuals to do such things. We could leave it at that. If you can't believe that, you should examine what is in your own heart. If you can believe that, then you should just refrain rejecting cases you know nothing about.
There were all kinds of controversies back when these things were going on. According to the Talmud, Jesus was prosecuted for sorcery. According to that, they did not believe Jesus was doing miracles from GOd.
I don't remember all the details of our previous conversations, but I seem to recall I told you to go do your own research. If I pick a video off of YouTube, chances are I wasn't there. I may have pointed you to a few videos to research if you were interested. But you seem more interested in something to mock and reject than in examining a matter. This comes off to me as disingenous. Why ask for examples if you aren't open to examining them? Any unbeliever can reject the claim of a miracle, just like they reject the claims of the New Testament. Why should professing Christians have the same attitude?
[quote[
In fact, the very fact that you would put forward such nonsense speaks volumes as to the state of denial you're living in, sorry to say. That, combined with your claim about your wife resurrecting a guy from the dead who had been hit by a bus. Such claims would be hilarious if they weren't so sad.[/quote]
This nasty comment here illustrates what is in your heart. You can't show one scripture that indicates that what I Corinthians 12 says about the Spirit gifting individuals to heal or do miracles is no longer valid. You can't show me where the Bible has shifted the authority of the Spirit to decide who operates in what gift to you. You just don't have the divine authority to cancel gifts of the Spirit or to declare them false without even examining them. You did not fly to Indonesia and try to interview my wife or anyone else involved, did you? Admittedly, my testimony was second hand since this happened before I met her. She told what happened. She was on the bus with a friend. The bus hit someone. She went out, prayed for the man, who did not appear to be breathing. Then she commanded his spirit to come back into his body in the name of Jesus and saw him exhale. She told the people present to get a taxi and take him to the hospital. The story is the same when my wife tells it, not something she adds to or makes up as she goes along. Based on my experience with my wife and what I know about my wife I do not believe she is lying. She is not online.
If you claim to believe the Bible, you have absolutely no basis for dismissing that account out of hand. The Bible teaches that some individuals are gifted with gifts that fit the type of event I described.
I actually believe that passage of scripture AND the other scriptures on the topic of miracles. Jesus warned against false prophets in Matthew 7, but then He said that He would send prophets in Matthew 23, and then he warned about false prophets in Matthew 24. He also spoke of recieving a prophet and receiving a prophet's reward. The long ending of Mark shows us that them that believe will perform a variety of signs. And then we read Acts and we see that the apostles healed and did miracles. Then a couple of the Seven did. By I Corinthians 12, we learn that members of the body of Christ may be gifted to do such things.
So I believe all that, not only Matthew 24. Will some people who now call themselves Pentecostals and Charismatics be involved in this Matthew 24 scenario? Possibly. I don't believe everyone who calls himself a Pentecostal or Charismatic (or Baptist or Nazarene or Methodist) is going to inherit enteral life. I can also see the advantages for false prophets of trying to take advantage of people who believe there are prophets as opposed to those who reject the supernatural outright.
We need to have a proper balanced view. On the one hand, accepting everything supernatural or everything that claims to be a gift or miracle from God is an unbalanced extreme. On the other hand, rejecting all miracles, including those in the Bible is out of balance. It is also an extreme to only accept the warning about false prophets and lying signs and wonders, but to reject the teaching of the scriptures on genuine miracles and gifts of the Spirit.
The scriptures you do not care to include in your believe system are not nonsense.
I have read some quotes (many racially motivated against the integrated aspect of the revival) from the newspapers, and some nasty things written or said by church leaders, but I suspect I am not familiar with the 'discrediting testimonies.' I am not sure if you have something specific in mind. I know the revival had some problems with spiritists trying to come in and various other problems like that, and a bit of conflict with Parham as well.
One of the problems with discussing this with you is that you don't stick to the topic. Again speaking of the 'wonderful works of God' doesn't require that one present an evangelistic message about the Gospel. The Psalm praise God, but a Jew who sang them probably wouldn't understand the Gospel just from hearing them. More explanation is required. God has chosen the 'foolishness of preaching' to save them that believe. In Acts 2, people were saved after they heard Peter preach.
If you want to prsent some evidence that what was spoken in tongues was 'evangelistic', then please do so. Insisting that you are right is not evidence to support your claim.
I can't find where the Bible teaches that the purpose of signs is to convince professing Christians that the teachings of the apostle Paul about the Spirit giving certain spiritual gifts to the saints is true, or that it is still true today. I don't claim to be a miracle worker. If you want to research miracles, go do so. I have seen plenty of I Corinthians 12 type gifts in operation. If you follow past trends and the trend of the post I am responding to, you are likely just to reject or mock without considering evidence. So why should I bother. Go do your own research if you want to.
Biblically, there is no reason for you to think that the Spirit might not gift someone to do miracles or heal, for example. The Bible teaches that He does. If it happened every day, or once every 100 years, there is no reason to believe that He may not or does not do so. No reason except a heart that is inclined toward not believing the teaching of scripture. We should at least be in agreement that it is up to the Spirit of God to gift individuals to do such things. We could leave it at that. If you can't believe that, you should examine what is in your own heart. If you can believe that, then you should just refrain rejecting cases you know nothing about.
There were all kinds of controversies back when these things were going on. According to the Talmud, Jesus was prosecuted for sorcery. According to that, they did not believe Jesus was doing miracles from GOd.
I don't remember all the details of our previous conversations, but I seem to recall I told you to go do your own research. If I pick a video off of YouTube, chances are I wasn't there. I may have pointed you to a few videos to research if you were interested. But you seem more interested in something to mock and reject than in examining a matter. This comes off to me as disingenous. Why ask for examples if you aren't open to examining them? Any unbeliever can reject the claim of a miracle, just like they reject the claims of the New Testament. Why should professing Christians have the same attitude?
[quote[
In fact, the very fact that you would put forward such nonsense speaks volumes as to the state of denial you're living in, sorry to say. That, combined with your claim about your wife resurrecting a guy from the dead who had been hit by a bus. Such claims would be hilarious if they weren't so sad.[/quote]
This nasty comment here illustrates what is in your heart. You can't show one scripture that indicates that what I Corinthians 12 says about the Spirit gifting individuals to heal or do miracles is no longer valid. You can't show me where the Bible has shifted the authority of the Spirit to decide who operates in what gift to you. You just don't have the divine authority to cancel gifts of the Spirit or to declare them false without even examining them. You did not fly to Indonesia and try to interview my wife or anyone else involved, did you? Admittedly, my testimony was second hand since this happened before I met her. She told what happened. She was on the bus with a friend. The bus hit someone. She went out, prayed for the man, who did not appear to be breathing. Then she commanded his spirit to come back into his body in the name of Jesus and saw him exhale. She told the people present to get a taxi and take him to the hospital. The story is the same when my wife tells it, not something she adds to or makes up as she goes along. Based on my experience with my wife and what I know about my wife I do not believe she is lying. She is not online.
If you claim to believe the Bible, you have absolutely no basis for dismissing that account out of hand. The Bible teaches that some individuals are gifted with gifts that fit the type of event I described.
I actually believe that passage of scripture AND the other scriptures on the topic of miracles. Jesus warned against false prophets in Matthew 7, but then He said that He would send prophets in Matthew 23, and then he warned about false prophets in Matthew 24. He also spoke of recieving a prophet and receiving a prophet's reward. The long ending of Mark shows us that them that believe will perform a variety of signs. And then we read Acts and we see that the apostles healed and did miracles. Then a couple of the Seven did. By I Corinthians 12, we learn that members of the body of Christ may be gifted to do such things.
So I believe all that, not only Matthew 24. Will some people who now call themselves Pentecostals and Charismatics be involved in this Matthew 24 scenario? Possibly. I don't believe everyone who calls himself a Pentecostal or Charismatic (or Baptist or Nazarene or Methodist) is going to inherit enteral life. I can also see the advantages for false prophets of trying to take advantage of people who believe there are prophets as opposed to those who reject the supernatural outright.
We need to have a proper balanced view. On the one hand, accepting everything supernatural or everything that claims to be a gift or miracle from God is an unbalanced extreme. On the other hand, rejecting all miracles, including those in the Bible is out of balance. It is also an extreme to only accept the warning about false prophets and lying signs and wonders, but to reject the teaching of the scriptures on genuine miracles and gifts of the Spirit.
The scriptures you do not care to include in your believe system are not nonsense.
I have read some quotes (many racially motivated against the integrated aspect of the revival) from the newspapers, and some nasty things written or said by church leaders, but I suspect I am not familiar with the 'discrediting testimonies.' I am not sure if you have something specific in mind. I know the revival had some problems with spiritists trying to come in and various other problems like that, and a bit of conflict with Parham as well.
One of the problems with discussing this with you is that you don't stick to the topic. Again speaking of the 'wonderful works of God' doesn't require that one present an evangelistic message about the Gospel. The Psalm praise God, but a Jew who sang them probably wouldn't understand the Gospel just from hearing them. More explanation is required. God has chosen the 'foolishness of preaching' to save them that believe. In Acts 2, people were saved after they heard Peter preach.
If you want to prsent some evidence that what was spoken in tongues was 'evangelistic', then please do so. Insisting that you are right is not evidence to support your claim.
I've resigned myself to the reality that those who want to believe in ecstatic utterances as a heavenly language aren't willing to consider that they could be wrong (and are). Too much at stake to have to deal with. Much easier to later say ... but we thought we were honoring You Lord. The sad irony is that many already know in their hearts that this practice does nothing to glorify God nor serve a positive function in leading the lost to Christ. It is what it is.
1 Corinthians 14:2 (NASB)
[SUP]2 [/SUP] For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands,but in his spirit he speaks mysteries.
1 Corinthians 14:14-20 (NASB)
[SUP]14 [/SUP] For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
[SUP]15 [/SUP] What is the outcome then? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also.
[SUP]16 [/SUP] Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the "Amen" at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying?
[SUP]17 [/SUP] For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified.
[SUP]18 [/SUP] I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all;
[SUP]19 [/SUP] however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue.
[SUP]20 [/SUP] Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.
[SUP]2 [/SUP] For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands,but in his spirit he speaks mysteries.
1 Corinthians 14:14-20 (NASB)
[SUP]14 [/SUP] For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
[SUP]15 [/SUP] What is the outcome then? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also.
[SUP]16 [/SUP] Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the "Amen" at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying?
[SUP]17 [/SUP] For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified.
[SUP]18 [/SUP] I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all;
[SUP]19 [/SUP] however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue.
[SUP]20 [/SUP] Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.
I've read the Bible, including Paul's letters, and I've never found a statement like that. Paul does say we are baptized by one Spirit into one body. That's different from what you are saying.
If you were in Pentecostalism for 30 years, can you point me to one Pentecostal denomination that teaches two baptisms with the Spirit as part of its doctrine?
If you were in Pentecostalism for 30 years, can you point me to one Pentecostal denomination that teaches two baptisms with the Spirit as part of its doctrine?
I don't think you have a valid point. Look at the verses you quoted. The passage continues on to say that he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues, except he interpret, that he may edify the church. So in this passage, tongues with interpretation are the same thing as tongues without interpretation...except there is interpretation. Verse 28 shows us that it's the same thing as well. Uninterpreted tongues are tongues when no interpretation is given. Paul doesn't introduce two distinct gifts. The verses that support the idea of tongues being used for prayer are about the same type of tongues that can be interpreted.
So when we look at it from that perspective, 'Not all speak in tongues, do they?' includes private prayer as well. Not everyone speaks in tongues. Some do. Others don't. Not everyone has the gift of discernment of spirits, or prophesying, etc. Not everyone is an apostle, or prophet, or teacher. We have different gifts.
So when we look at it from that perspective, 'Not all speak in tongues, do they?' includes private prayer as well. Not everyone speaks in tongues. Some do. Others don't. Not everyone has the gift of discernment of spirits, or prophesying, etc. Not everyone is an apostle, or prophet, or teacher. We have different gifts.
M
Once again, you have yet to rebut the scriptural evidence. I have given you two scriptural facts which, when combined, create a third scriptural fact. You haven't touched it with a ten foot pole:
Bible fact #1 -- The occasion of the Acts 2 meeting was evangelism.
Bible fact #2 -- the Holy Spirit gave the tongues-speakers utterances which were appropriate to the occasion...and thus...
Bible fact #3 -- the tongues-speakers spoke utterances which were evangelistic.
You mumble something about the "mighty works of God". That's not a rebuttal to the above Bible facts. (And, by the way, there IS no rebuttal to the Bible.)
In fact, the pagans' descriptions about hearing of the "mighty works of God" only deepens your problem.
Let me explain something about the Bible which, sadly, you apparently do not understand:
Anytime (repeat ANYTIME) the Word of God is being presented to unbelievers...THAT is "evangelism". You don't get it.
What is the Bible evidence for this claim? I have previously already explained this and cited the scripture...but you sort of quietly back away then eventually circle back around and reintroduce your false notions, false beliefs and false doctrines, which is what you're doing now.
1 Timothy 3:16 --"All scripture...is profitable...for instruction in righteousness".
How does one become "righteous" before the Lord? Well..."all scripture" is pointing the way. ALL scripture is "evangelistic" in regards to unbelievers. There's your evidence.
When the tongues-speakers were declaring the "mighty works of God"...it was evangelism...as is ALWAYS the case ANYTIME the scriptures are being presented to those who are uninformed and unaware of the way to "righteousness".
Declaring and describing the "mighty works of God" IS evangelism...not to mention my previously presented evidences about the Holy Spirit obviously providing appropriate utterances.
It eventually reaches a point of obnoxiousness for you to deny the tongues-speakers were part of the evangelism effort that day. It's just ridiculous. I strongly theorize you don't even believe that yourself.
Tongues-speaking was used for evangelism in those days...but there is no such thing going on today...because there is no such thing as "tongues-speaking" in the modern day. There is plenty of this "prayer language" nonsense but there are no missionaries (nor anyone) producing any verifiable evidence of tongues-speaking in the preaching and presenting of the "mighty works of God" in the modern day.
Bible fact #1 -- The occasion of the Acts 2 meeting was evangelism.
Bible fact #2 -- the Holy Spirit gave the tongues-speakers utterances which were appropriate to the occasion...and thus...
Bible fact #3 -- the tongues-speakers spoke utterances which were evangelistic.
You mumble something about the "mighty works of God". That's not a rebuttal to the above Bible facts. (And, by the way, there IS no rebuttal to the Bible.)
In fact, the pagans' descriptions about hearing of the "mighty works of God" only deepens your problem.
Let me explain something about the Bible which, sadly, you apparently do not understand:
Anytime (repeat ANYTIME) the Word of God is being presented to unbelievers...THAT is "evangelism". You don't get it.
What is the Bible evidence for this claim? I have previously already explained this and cited the scripture...but you sort of quietly back away then eventually circle back around and reintroduce your false notions, false beliefs and false doctrines, which is what you're doing now.
1 Timothy 3:16 --"All scripture...is profitable...for instruction in righteousness".
How does one become "righteous" before the Lord? Well..."all scripture" is pointing the way. ALL scripture is "evangelistic" in regards to unbelievers. There's your evidence.
When the tongues-speakers were declaring the "mighty works of God"...it was evangelism...as is ALWAYS the case ANYTIME the scriptures are being presented to those who are uninformed and unaware of the way to "righteousness".
Declaring and describing the "mighty works of God" IS evangelism...not to mention my previously presented evidences about the Holy Spirit obviously providing appropriate utterances.
It eventually reaches a point of obnoxiousness for you to deny the tongues-speakers were part of the evangelism effort that day. It's just ridiculous. I strongly theorize you don't even believe that yourself.
Tongues-speaking was used for evangelism in those days...but there is no such thing going on today...because there is no such thing as "tongues-speaking" in the modern day. There is plenty of this "prayer language" nonsense but there are no missionaries (nor anyone) producing any verifiable evidence of tongues-speaking in the preaching and presenting of the "mighty works of God" in the modern day.
M
That's a really dumb 'straw man'. Wow. I do not "refuse to believe who Jesus is". You're pretty desperate. I'm simply saying I see none of these miracles and wonders going on...and I now have, in the "Information Age", hundreds of millions of eyeballs scattered all across the globe...none of which has detected the slightest sliver of evidence for such things. I reasonably (and yes, tentatively) conclude these things do not exist any longer.
And you have it exactly wrong with your straw men above: I DO believe Jesus and I DO believe what He taught without any sign whatsoever. It is the Pentecostals and the Charismatics who want the signs...and claim they see the signs. The level of baloney in those circles is absolutely sky high, to say the least. The fact that you don't acknowledge that, speaks for itself. You're a huge 'baloney endorser', sad to say.
Whoops -- you contradicted yourself in the space of two sentences.
And yet another twisted falsehood from you. Another straw man. I do not "demand" anything. I am simply making the innocent and honest and sincere observation...that these things are not going on anywhere. It is nowhere to be seen. It is a simple observation on my part. Before the age of a hundred million iPhones and YouTubes and the billions who have access to the Internet and could offer documentation and evidence (if there were such a thing)...
...before that time, you might have had a slim hope of making an argument...that just one lone individual can't reasonably declare he has been able to scour the planet for evidences. No, any individual CAN now scour the planet. One can reach reasonable conclusions: There are no Unicorns and there are no Jesus-style "ZAP miracles" of profoundly paralyzed and/or blinded individuals.
Bro, I'm not talking about unbelievers. I'm saying there was zero controversy among believers in those days. But here in the modern-day there is massive controversy and massive resignation specifically among Charismatics/Pentecostals...who regularly bemoan the fact they see no miracles and signs. Just look at this board - LOL.
The only answer Pentecostals (et al) have and in which people such as yourself go around saddling God's people with heart-breaking false burdens...is...self-loathing and self-disqualifying defeatism: "Well, I guess we modern-day Christians don't have the faith. God is not sufficiently pleased with us. He is unhappy with us" and so on.
It's even worse for us hapless non-Pentecostals if one of you guys get your claws into one of us" "You don't accept Jesus. You don't accept His teaching. In other words, you're going to Hell" just as you said to me in your post, in so many words (I'm actually almost quoting you).
Good grief. What was "nasty" about it? I'm simply making the observation of how something hugely critical is missing in your reasoning process if you think your bus accident story is supposed to be evidence. You don't get...nor do you honor...the scriptural mandate...that we are obligated to present reasoning and evidence for the beliefs we hold to ("be ready to give a reason...").
In the highly dysfunctional Charismatic/Pentecostal culture, one is EXPECTED and OBLIGATED to accept these cockamamie "testimonies" on the spot..or else expect to be shamed...just as you are feebly attempting to do with me right now....by inexplicably describing me as "nasty". Classic Pentecostalism.
I express (admittedly) HUGE skepticism about your story pulled out of thin air and am critical of your apparent belief that I am now obligated to grapple with this "testimony"...and if I object, I deserve to be shamed.
And the Bible has stated these gifts would "cease". And indeed, that seems to be the case: There is ZERO evidence of these Jesus-style miracles going on. And your cherry-picked YouTube example (regarding which you are, imo, dishonestly feigning memory loss) is a classic case in point:
You seem to view yourself a kind of 'champion' apologist for these doctrines here at CC...and so I gave you the run of YouTube worldwide...to show me just one Jesus-style ZAP miracle. The ridiculous YouTube you produced (about this woman who barely scraped herself out of a wheelchair and hobbled horrifically for a few steps) is proof-positive you live in a world of denial and, more disturbingly, sheer fantasy. Not to mention, the sheer con-artistry of the 'healer' guy in the video. Bro, where is your discernment? These are the kinds of shady, creepy, slimy characters you hang out with on a given Sunday? Lord, deliver us.
Another interesting twist of yours. Twist, twist, twist. It's a straw man, yet again. I don't "reject" miracles. I simply observe there are no miracles occurring. If you can zap-heal someone who has been paralyzed for life, into instantaneous 110% healing and health, or know someone who can...give me a call. Or if he can heal someone from life-long blindness into instantaneous 20/20 vision...again, contact me. My email address is at the link at the bottom of all my posts.
What ARE you talking about, fella? I have had the same exact mantra for the entirety of this recent exchange of comments:
The Holy Spirit obviously gave utterance which was evangelistic...because that was the purpose of the Acts 2 meeting.
And I would add to that..."all scripture" according to God's Word...is evangelistic and instructing and pointing people to "righteousness".
Therefore, at least one of the purposes for tongues-speaking in the early Christian era...was for evangelism. No such thing is happening today.
And you have it exactly wrong with your straw men above: I DO believe Jesus and I DO believe what He taught without any sign whatsoever. It is the Pentecostals and the Charismatics who want the signs...and claim they see the signs. The level of baloney in those circles is absolutely sky high, to say the least. The fact that you don't acknowledge that, speaks for itself. You're a huge 'baloney endorser', sad to say.
Whoops -- you contradicted yourself in the space of two sentences.
And yet another twisted falsehood from you. Another straw man. I do not "demand" anything. I am simply making the innocent and honest and sincere observation...that these things are not going on anywhere. It is nowhere to be seen. It is a simple observation on my part. Before the age of a hundred million iPhones and YouTubes and the billions who have access to the Internet and could offer documentation and evidence (if there were such a thing)...
...before that time, you might have had a slim hope of making an argument...that just one lone individual can't reasonably declare he has been able to scour the planet for evidences. No, any individual CAN now scour the planet. One can reach reasonable conclusions: There are no Unicorns and there are no Jesus-style "ZAP miracles" of profoundly paralyzed and/or blinded individuals.
Bro, I'm not talking about unbelievers. I'm saying there was zero controversy among believers in those days. But here in the modern-day there is massive controversy and massive resignation specifically among Charismatics/Pentecostals...who regularly bemoan the fact they see no miracles and signs. Just look at this board - LOL.
The only answer Pentecostals (et al) have and in which people such as yourself go around saddling God's people with heart-breaking false burdens...is...self-loathing and self-disqualifying defeatism: "Well, I guess we modern-day Christians don't have the faith. God is not sufficiently pleased with us. He is unhappy with us" and so on.
It's even worse for us hapless non-Pentecostals if one of you guys get your claws into one of us" "You don't accept Jesus. You don't accept His teaching. In other words, you're going to Hell" just as you said to me in your post, in so many words (I'm actually almost quoting you).
Good grief. What was "nasty" about it? I'm simply making the observation of how something hugely critical is missing in your reasoning process if you think your bus accident story is supposed to be evidence. You don't get...nor do you honor...the scriptural mandate...that we are obligated to present reasoning and evidence for the beliefs we hold to ("be ready to give a reason...").
In the highly dysfunctional Charismatic/Pentecostal culture, one is EXPECTED and OBLIGATED to accept these cockamamie "testimonies" on the spot..or else expect to be shamed...just as you are feebly attempting to do with me right now....by inexplicably describing me as "nasty". Classic Pentecostalism.
I express (admittedly) HUGE skepticism about your story pulled out of thin air and am critical of your apparent belief that I am now obligated to grapple with this "testimony"...and if I object, I deserve to be shamed.
And the Bible has stated these gifts would "cease". And indeed, that seems to be the case: There is ZERO evidence of these Jesus-style miracles going on. And your cherry-picked YouTube example (regarding which you are, imo, dishonestly feigning memory loss) is a classic case in point:
You seem to view yourself a kind of 'champion' apologist for these doctrines here at CC...and so I gave you the run of YouTube worldwide...to show me just one Jesus-style ZAP miracle. The ridiculous YouTube you produced (about this woman who barely scraped herself out of a wheelchair and hobbled horrifically for a few steps) is proof-positive you live in a world of denial and, more disturbingly, sheer fantasy. Not to mention, the sheer con-artistry of the 'healer' guy in the video. Bro, where is your discernment? These are the kinds of shady, creepy, slimy characters you hang out with on a given Sunday? Lord, deliver us.
Another interesting twist of yours. Twist, twist, twist. It's a straw man, yet again. I don't "reject" miracles. I simply observe there are no miracles occurring. If you can zap-heal someone who has been paralyzed for life, into instantaneous 110% healing and health, or know someone who can...give me a call. Or if he can heal someone from life-long blindness into instantaneous 20/20 vision...again, contact me. My email address is at the link at the bottom of all my posts.
What ARE you talking about, fella? I have had the same exact mantra for the entirety of this recent exchange of comments:
The Holy Spirit obviously gave utterance which was evangelistic...because that was the purpose of the Acts 2 meeting.
And I would add to that..."all scripture" according to God's Word...is evangelistic and instructing and pointing people to "righteousness".
Therefore, at least one of the purposes for tongues-speaking in the early Christian era...was for evangelism. No such thing is happening today.
Show me number 3 in the Bible. You don't come off as someone who cares about what the Bible actually says. You read a bit, get some general details, get some ideas in your mind, and treat that as doctrine. You do the same thing with miracles, saying that the Bible teaches these things will cease. The Bible nowhere says that the gift of miracles or the working of miracles will cease. Show me evidence of one Christian who believed that in the first 1000 years of Christianity. It is not a historic belief.
Numbers 1 and 2 that you provided above are vague generalizations that don't deal with the specifics of the passage. Number 3 is not a fact. The 'mighty works of God' is not something to mumble. The 'Bible fact' is that this is what the passage says the hearers who understood the languages heard the disciples speaking about in their own language.
You treat the idea you have in your head as you read the passage as a 'Bible fact', but the actual quote from the passage you treat as something to be mumbled. What does that tell you about your approach to the Bible. Where is your respect for what it says?
If you want to discuss the Bible, that's fine. If you just want to insist that your own opinions are true without considering what the Bible teaches, and I were to continue with you, this conversation will go round and round until you get all worked up emotionally again. The approach you offered in this post is pointless.
You know, I brought this up a few posts ago, that we needed to define terms. You could have approached the topic in a nice civil way, instead of in this condescending manner. I pointed out that I wasn't using 'evangelism' to refer to all and any use of scripture. The Old Testament points to Christ, but unbelievers need an explanation like the Ethiopian eunuch did with Isaiah 53. Paul wrote of "the revelation of the mystery revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith".
When I say there is no evidence that they were evangelizing, I am talking about explaining the plan of salvation that Jesus rose from the dead. I don't mean all and every type of revelation from God or commentary on it. It seems to me that you may just want to redefine terms to make your position right.
If you are going to be very, very broad about what you consider Gospel, then you should include a lot of Pentecostal and Charismatic interpretations of tongues as Gospel as well, especially the ones that consist of quotes and paraphrases from scripture that apply to the situation at hand.
That's not evidence. You are doing the same thing. You take a scripture that is only vaguely related to the topic reinterpreting it, and using your reinterpretation to back up your claim. 'Instruction in righteousness' doesn't mean 'evangelism.'
If you want to redefine 'evangelistic' to include any and all revelation from God, any commentary on it, and any properly made prayer, for example. (I am not sure if you are going that broad), then a Pentecostal or Charismatic who accepted that definition would consider speaking in tongues to be 'evangelistic' as well. You haven't proven your case. You have just redefined terms. It seems like you may be more intent on winning an argument by redefining terms than coming to a common understanding or learning through this discussion.
That is not my position. That is not what I argued. You can go back and read my previous posts in this very thread. I am not using 'evangelism' to refer to all Christian instruction, all prayer, all Christian speech that instructs more about God. Jesus and the apostles brought the proclamation of 'good news', the Gospel, to people who already had revelation from God. Generally, IMO, that seems to be how the term is used in scripture. You may be able to make a case for a broader usage, but I defined my terms earlier.
Were tongues a part of the 'evangelistic process' in Acts 2. I would say 'yes', since they drew the attention of the crowd who heard Peter preach the Gospel. Many believed and were baptized. I compared it to miracles that drew a crowd's attention in a previous post.
There are three passages in Acts that mention speaking in tongues. Only one mentions other people understanding it. In I Corinthians 14, we read about speaking in tongues in the church assembly. Paul says 'no man understandeth him.' No one there understood speaking in tongues. One had to interpret so that others could understand. Apparently, this was an ongoing thing. The Bible doesn't say that the Acts 2 events--where others understood the language, was an ongoing thing.
Speaking in tongues in church with interpretation following the 'commandments of the Lord' that Paul gave are a legitimate use of speaking in tongues.
And you don't watch all the videos, and then claim none exist.
I'm thinking of one of those types of videos about blinded eyes, but I'm not going to post the link for a couple of the reasons I mentioned above. You haven't done the research, then you claim these things don't exist.
I don't claim to see miracles on every street corner. I've seen a limited number of healings in my own lifetime. I've seen a lot more 'obviously supernatural' type stuff with other gifts like prophecy and the word of knowledge. The Spirit does give these gifts as He wills. He doesn't give them as you wills. That's your problem. You seem to think the Spirit has to be limited to the limitations you have in your mind. You think the Bible teaches that these things will cease-- without bothering to look up and believe the details about it. You can't quote any scripture that the Spirit will stop empowering individuals to work miracles.
If the Holy Spirit wanted to give one individual the working of miracles on one occasion in 100 years, that is up to God, that's not up to you. If miracles didn't happen for 100 years, that wouldn't change the Biblical doctrine that these gifts are given as the Spirit wills, and the Spirit has the right to give the gift to 500 million people for the next 100 years. The issue here is actually believing Biblical doctrine. If you believe it, then you will actually examine cases of miracles you come across, not reject them out of hand and instantly impugn the character of those involved.
You twist and read into my words. I think someone could struggle with doubt and unbelief about some of Jesus' teachings, but still believe that He died on the cross and rose from the dead and be saved. The apostles struggled with unbelief. But unbelief hinders any Christian that indulges in it. Doubt can seriously hinder one's prayers. 'For let not that man think that he shall receive anything of the Lord, James says.
I Psalm 1
1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
You need to examine yourself about that scornful (mocking in other translations) attitude.
If you told me your wife's cousin was the governor of Tennessee and I called the story ridiculous and implied negative things about your character or judgment, woudl that be fair? No, it wouldn't why? Because the governor of TN is a human being and may just have cousins. It's unusual to be his cousin, close enough to know it. But it isn't impossible.
And performing a healing or even raising the dead in Jesus' name shouldn't be considered impossible by anyone who believes the Bible, which gives accounts of people being raised from the dead and teaches that the Spirit gifts individuals in the body of Christ to heal and to work miracles.
If you hold to a Biblical world view, you don't dismiss such things out of hand. You may not accept everything you hear as fact, but you should have the good sense not to pass judgment if all you have is the testimony of one witness.
If you were a secular atheist who acted like this, I would understand. But it doesn't make sense for someone who claims to believe the Bible to have this attitude.
Pulled out of thin air. Do you go into an elevator with one other person, pass gas, and blame it on him? The two of us are having a conversation. I know I didn't pull my story 'out of thin air.' You don't. You pretend like you know something that you don't.
Why do you have to act so obnoxious, constantly, in any interaction on this foru? Feigning memory loss? Maybe you have a mind like a steal trap. Maybe you can recite the content of every post we've made to each other and tell me the post number. That's great if you can, but I can't. As I recall, you came in toward the end of a very long thread where many of us posters were talking about this issue. I don't know for sure what I posted that was directed toward you and other posters. There are other posters on the forum. As far as posters who like to insinuate the other party is dishonest, though, you come to mind. But I wouldn't have remembered your username a week ago, either.
Again, why be obnoxious? I just comment on the posts like everyone else. I hadn't really thought about being a 'champion' apologist on this forum. If you go fishing with a guy who catches a fish, do you say, "You see yourself as a champion fisherman." If you see someone working out in the gym, do you say, "You seem to view yourself as a champion weightlifter." That's rude and obnoxious behavior.
If you want to talk about the Bible, fine. Let's do so. Not the ideas that pop into your mind when you read it. Not insults directed at people trying to follow it. Not personal comments where you guess what other people think and feel. Not unsubstantiated claims or hints at dishonesty, but what the Bible says. Not you blowing off steam over your bitter attitude toward Pentecostals and Charismatics. I am not seeing a lot of openness to that from you so far.
Not everything I wrote was about you directly. I talked about all kinds of examples of unbelief. The apostles, also struggled with unbelief. It is a temptation for Christians as well as those who outright reject the Gospel.
Your problem is you do reject certain aspects of what Jesus and the apostles taught. Jesus said he would send prophets and He also warned about false prophets. You accept the part about false prophets. Look at the signs that would follow them that believe in Mark 16. Jesus talked about those who believe in Him doing the works he did. You have your own ideas and your own worldview. But you don't have a Biblical worldview, not on this particular issue at least. You dismiss things that don't fit into your worldview.
This illustrates the big problem right here. You don't know your Bible. You haven't searched it out on this issue. Again, the trend with you is to read a passage, and then argue based on that passage for something it doesn't really say, something from your own belief system that is related some way with the text. At least you have done that a few times.
I may get my posters mixed up, but I am pretty sure I challenged you to show me from the Bible where the gifts of the working of miracles or healing had ceased. I certain don't recall your trying to put forth a proof test.
I have read the Bible, and I have found no evidence at all that the working of miracles will cease. That which is in part will be done away when the perfect comes, and like Paul says in I Corinthians 1:7 'so that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' We are still in the last days when the sons and daughters are to prophesy.
Depending on your eschatology, you may believe the two witnesses are yet to come. They will prophesy and have power to shut up the heavens and call down fire from heaven. Aren't those miracles? If you hold to an eschatology that still waits for the two witnesses, it is inconsistent with your own beliefs to argue that prophecy or miracles have ceased. No matter what your eschatology, the two witnesses have to come after the end of the book of Revelation. If there are no miracles, then there is no casting out of demons, either.
No you aren't. You are saying more than that. You seem to think reality is limited to what you have witnessed.
Tell me the truth. How much time have you spent looking at accounts of healing on YouTube or other video websites? How many hours have you spent? Have you looked at all of them?
I am not sure how many videos I may have posted in that last thread. I recall posting a Delia Knox video, and apparently that is on the thread we were on because you mentioned it.
The reason I posted the Delia Knox video is because I was able, several years ago, to find clips of her singing in a wheelchair and a public interest type news clip on her life, how she was injured in an accident and unable to walk. She was the gospel singer in a wheelchair. I don't think she was very famous, but I don't follow Gospel music, but there is documentation of her injury.
God can heal in a number of ways. We should give glory to God for natural healing, paper cuts being healed over a week or so, for example. Then there are people who are prayed for who heal up better and faster than a control group that aren't. We should praise God for answering prayer. There are lepers who got healed while walking to the priest-- not instant, but after a brief period of time. The elders anoint the sick with oil. He could get healed right away, or I suppose it could be gradual, but the prayer of faith shall save the sick.
The reason I posted a video about Delia Knox was not because it was an instant healing, but because of the documentation before and after. I found the videos about her brain injury, her being crippled, and her reluctantly being prayed for and being healed. Then there was the local news story about her visiting her parents and walking up the steps to her parents where it seemed to me the newscaster could tell something real had happened to her.
This was your comment about it:
You should give thanks to God if a cold heals up normally. If it takes several weeks for a woman who was in a wheelchair for a couple of decades to be able to walk as well as most of us, shouldn't you still give glory to God? Why be so demeaning about it? Jesus minsitered to a blind man who could then see 'men as trees walking' and ministered to Him again. There were at least a couple of cases that weren't instant.
There are other instances and accounts of YouTube. Hundreds if not thousands. I don't know all the people involved. If I post a video, then somehow I'm held responsible for everything the individual in the video does in all his other videos. More importantly, if I post a video, you may also speak derisively of the work of the Spirit of God. I don't want you to be like the Pharisees in Matthew 12 who spoke against the Holy Spirit, and I don't want to encourage others to do the same.
What I see with you is that you don't believe all the Bible has to say on this issue. You have your own beliefs and opinions and try to read those into passages in the Bible. The Bible teaches that the Spirit gifts certain members of the body with 'the working of miracles.' It does not teach that this gift will cease. You believe it will cease. The issue is, you don't believe what the Bible says.
What do you believe about 'the shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover' or 'He that believeth in me, the works that I do shall He do also...'. Would you have to see evidence to believe those words are still true.
I am not talking about believing the specific claim to a miracle, but about believing Jesus teaching about them. That is the issue. If you believe Jesus' and the apostles' teaching on the issue, then you won't dismiss these things out of hand.
I haven't commented on this. There are certain Charismatics and Pentecostals who promote 'baloney.' I'll acknowledge that. There are also sincere ministers of the Gospel who believe Biblical teaching on spiritual gifts who rarely see it happen or who don't minister in the gifts they talk about and believe in.
The synchrestism with evangelical beliefs with Englightenment philosophy and/or modernism that is called cessationism is also baloney. Paul wrote of casting down imaginations and every high thought that exalts itself against the knowledge of God.
Whoops -- you contradicted yourself in the space of two sentences.[/quote]
In the first case, I'm talking about the sign of the prophet Jonah passage. In the second, I'm talking about Thomas. In my first sentence there, I didn't say Christ always rejected everyone who demanded a sign of him. Thomas did not walk up to Christ demanding a sign like those others did.
It's not worth combing through the other thread to see where you asked for evidence of miracles. But I notice you accuse other people of lying or insinuate it from time to time in your posts. You can just ask yourself if you like it when other people do that to you. It's a moral issue.
Evidence which you have not thoroughly examined, but still comment on it. Evidence which you reject out of hand because of a faulty world view that comes from not fully believing everything the scriptures teach on the issue. And I have also seen you take it a step further and demean the character of a person praying or otherwise ministering in healing. You can dig up your own videos if you want to have that kind of nasty attitude, or even if you don't. I've got other things to do.
I do not believe all claims to miracles are real. There are also healings that are not as spectacular as others.
Your problem is you do reject certain aspects of what Jesus and the apostles taught. Jesus said he would send prophets and He also warned about false prophets. You accept the part about false prophets. Look at the signs that would follow them that believe in Mark 16. Jesus talked about those who believe in Him doing the works he did. You have your own ideas and your own worldview. But you don't have a Biblical worldview, not on this particular issue at least. You dismiss things that don't fit into your worldview.
This illustrates the big problem right here. You don't know your Bible. You haven't searched it out on this issue. Again, the trend with you is to read a passage, and then argue based on that passage for something it doesn't really say, something from your own belief system that is related some way with the text. At least you have done that a few times.
I may get my posters mixed up, but I am pretty sure I challenged you to show me from the Bible where the gifts of the working of miracles or healing had ceased. I certain don't recall your trying to put forth a proof test.
I have read the Bible, and I have found no evidence at all that the working of miracles will cease. That which is in part will be done away when the perfect comes, and like Paul says in I Corinthians 1:7 'so that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' We are still in the last days when the sons and daughters are to prophesy.
Depending on your eschatology, you may believe the two witnesses are yet to come. They will prophesy and have power to shut up the heavens and call down fire from heaven. Aren't those miracles? If you hold to an eschatology that still waits for the two witnesses, it is inconsistent with your own beliefs to argue that prophecy or miracles have ceased. No matter what your eschatology, the two witnesses have to come after the end of the book of Revelation. If there are no miracles, then there is no casting out of demons, either.
No you aren't. You are saying more than that. You seem to think reality is limited to what you have witnessed.
Tell me the truth. How much time have you spent looking at accounts of healing on YouTube or other video websites? How many hours have you spent? Have you looked at all of them?
I am not sure how many videos I may have posted in that last thread. I recall posting a Delia Knox video, and apparently that is on the thread we were on because you mentioned it.
The reason I posted the Delia Knox video is because I was able, several years ago, to find clips of her singing in a wheelchair and a public interest type news clip on her life, how she was injured in an accident and unable to walk. She was the gospel singer in a wheelchair. I don't think she was very famous, but I don't follow Gospel music, but there is documentation of her injury.
God can heal in a number of ways. We should give glory to God for natural healing, paper cuts being healed over a week or so, for example. Then there are people who are prayed for who heal up better and faster than a control group that aren't. We should praise God for answering prayer. There are lepers who got healed while walking to the priest-- not instant, but after a brief period of time. The elders anoint the sick with oil. He could get healed right away, or I suppose it could be gradual, but the prayer of faith shall save the sick.
The reason I posted a video about Delia Knox was not because it was an instant healing, but because of the documentation before and after. I found the videos about her brain injury, her being crippled, and her reluctantly being prayed for and being healed. Then there was the local news story about her visiting her parents and walking up the steps to her parents where it seemed to me the newscaster could tell something real had happened to her.
This was your comment about it:
You should give thanks to God if a cold heals up normally. If it takes several weeks for a woman who was in a wheelchair for a couple of decades to be able to walk as well as most of us, shouldn't you still give glory to God? Why be so demeaning about it? Jesus minsitered to a blind man who could then see 'men as trees walking' and ministered to Him again. There were at least a couple of cases that weren't instant.
There are other instances and accounts of YouTube. Hundreds if not thousands. I don't know all the people involved. If I post a video, then somehow I'm held responsible for everything the individual in the video does in all his other videos. More importantly, if I post a video, you may also speak derisively of the work of the Spirit of God. I don't want you to be like the Pharisees in Matthew 12 who spoke against the Holy Spirit, and I don't want to encourage others to do the same.
What I see with you is that you don't believe all the Bible has to say on this issue. You have your own beliefs and opinions and try to read those into passages in the Bible. The Bible teaches that the Spirit gifts certain members of the body with 'the working of miracles.' It does not teach that this gift will cease. You believe it will cease. The issue is, you don't believe what the Bible says.
What do you believe about 'the shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover' or 'He that believeth in me, the works that I do shall He do also...'. Would you have to see evidence to believe those words are still true.
I am not talking about believing the specific claim to a miracle, but about believing Jesus teaching about them. That is the issue. If you believe Jesus' and the apostles' teaching on the issue, then you won't dismiss these things out of hand.
I haven't commented on this. There are certain Charismatics and Pentecostals who promote 'baloney.' I'll acknowledge that. There are also sincere ministers of the Gospel who believe Biblical teaching on spiritual gifts who rarely see it happen or who don't minister in the gifts they talk about and believe in.
The synchrestism with evangelical beliefs with Englightenment philosophy and/or modernism that is called cessationism is also baloney. Paul wrote of casting down imaginations and every high thought that exalts itself against the knowledge of God.
Whoops -- you contradicted yourself in the space of two sentences.[/quote]
In the first case, I'm talking about the sign of the prophet Jonah passage. In the second, I'm talking about Thomas. In my first sentence there, I didn't say Christ always rejected everyone who demanded a sign of him. Thomas did not walk up to Christ demanding a sign like those others did.
It's not worth combing through the other thread to see where you asked for evidence of miracles. But I notice you accuse other people of lying or insinuate it from time to time in your posts. You can just ask yourself if you like it when other people do that to you. It's a moral issue.
Evidence which you have not thoroughly examined, but still comment on it. Evidence which you reject out of hand because of a faulty world view that comes from not fully believing everything the scriptures teach on the issue. And I have also seen you take it a step further and demean the character of a person praying or otherwise ministering in healing. You can dig up your own videos if you want to have that kind of nasty attitude, or even if you don't. I've got other things to do.
I do not believe all claims to miracles are real. There are also healings that are not as spectacular as others.
Last edited: