J
since they dont seem to want to obey and submit to testing (which Paul didnt have a problem with), too bad.
Acts 2:17
16but this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel: "'In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams.
this happened, according to the promise; given to israel; at Pentecost. peter confirmed it.
you deny that.
I would not say that 'perfection' or the completion here means exactly 'complete knowledge.' That's part of it. But the completion to come also replaces prophesying 'in part.'
It is not, grammatically, referring to Jesus. I believe that the completeness will come either when Jesus comes back or some time later (perhaps when Christ delivers up the kingdom to God.)
The problem with your viewpoint is Paul's statement that when he was a child, he spoke as a child, he thought as a child, and he understood as a child. But when he became a man, he put away childish things. He is comparing what his knowledge will be like before completion comes to what it will be like after.
1. He is comparing HIS OWN KNOWLEDGE. Paul was asleep in Christ when John stopped writing. And supposing you want to interpret loosely and take Paul out of the equation.
2. Having the Bible does not make your knowledge superior to Paul's.
3. Having the Bible does not make your knowledge so superior to Paul's that he is like a child compared to you.
Why do you attempt to confuse apostolic gifts with the charismatic gifts? Shame on you.
The conversion of 3000 on the day of Pentecost is not attributed to the evidence of tongues but to the preaching of Gods word by Peter. How is it that you overlook the heart of the matter? Men are converted by the hearing of Gods word. Rom 10:17
You need to read the rest of the passage.
Acts 2:39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off--for all whom the Lord our God will call."
If one thousand trillion "christians" down through history didn't believe in the gifts or show fruit of it, & if one thousand trillion "christians" abuse them or turn it into a circus, GOD'S WORD IS STILL TRUE & CHANGES NOT.
Romans 3:3-4 (KJV) 3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? 4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
What is it about the book of Revelation that makes Paul's doctrines seem childish by comparison?
Why don't we turn the focus back on the passage of scripture? How would Paul's immediate audience know and do these things? The speakers in tongues spoke mysteries that others could not understand. Yet Paul's instructions allowed for him to speak and for one to interpret. If all those concerns you raised are supposed to stop the gifts from functioning, how was the church supposed to deal with these issues? If these concerns are supposed to cripple people and keep them from obeying the passage, why doesn't Paul raise these concerns?
The Bible says to 'let all things be done unto edifying.' If you don't know the tongue, you can't say 'amen' to it. But that doesn't mean you don't allow it, because it is written 'forbid not to speak with tongues.' The church may be able to tell if the interpretation is edifying.
Maybe, but what do you base this one?
Show me where you have authority to demand people to go search prophecies for you so you can test them. If you despise prophesyings from the get go, how are you going to test them?
you already endorse the fake repeatedly. so i can't trust your discernment.
What is it about the book of Revelation that makes Paul's doctrines seem childish by comparison?okay. you're deliberately being obtuse.
moving on. do what you like.
No I am not, but whether your being obtuse is deliberate or not I am not sure.
This is the clear conclusion to be drawn by your interpretation.
Do you skip over verse 11 when you read the passage?
[SUP]11 [/SUP]When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
UMMM Do you understand that 1 Corinthians is one very long rebuke?
Why should First Corinthians contain more teaching on tongues than any other book of the Bible? The answer is simple: The Church of Corinth was a very confused church. This Church 1) had divisions among themselves based on personalities (I Corinthians 1:10-13, 3:1-11), 2) they were mixed up on, of all things, the resurrection (I Corinthians 15), 3) they were taking each other to court (I Corinthians 6:1-8), 4) they tolerated immorality (I Corinthians 5:1-13, 6:15-20), 5) they were confused about marriage and divorce (I Corinthians 5:1-13, 6:15-20), 6) they were mixed up about Christian liberty (I Corinthians 8), 7) they did not understand their responsibilities concerning the Great Commission (I Corinthians 9:1-14), 8) they had idolatry (I Corinthians 10:7, 14-22), 9) they had insubordinate man and women (I Corinthians 11:3-15, 14:34-35), 10) they were sinning at the Lord’s Supper (I Corinthians 11:20-34), and 11) they were confused concerning spiritual gifts in general (I Corinthians 12), and tongues in particular (I Corinthians 14). The Church of Corinth was really messed up, and almost all of Paul’s first letter to them was rebuking them for their various errors. They were in so much error on spiritual gifts that Paul wrote three whole chapters to try to straighten them out especially on tongues (I Corinthians 12-14).
New Testament Tongues Versus The Modern Tongues Movement
I don't think I've endorsed a single person the whole time I've been on this forum. Maybe you have your posters mixed up.
It is sad, though, that the Corinthians were so immature, yet they knew of and experienced spiritual things many churches today have little knowledge or experience of.