Some truth about speaking in tongues, the Holy Ghost, spiritual gifts and 1 Corinthians 14

[notuptome]

See, this is the problem.
You speak baloney with authority,as if you could be right.

A babe in Christ knows what you are saying is false.

What part of Romans 3:11 do you consider to be baloney? Are you denying the word of God?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[7seasrekeyed]

See, this is the problem.
You speak baloney with authority,as if you could be right.

A babe in Christ knows what you are saying is false.

 

[CS1]

Almost right but not quite. They were waiting but they did not ask God to give them to power. They were simply open to receiving the promise that Jesus had given to them. The disciples did not endeavor to lead God but allowed God to lead them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

they did not have to ask they were obeying what the Lord told them to do. You are choking a gnat and missing the camel.
They did not even know what to ask for they were told BY Jesus to go and wait until you have received Power from on High.

You are wrong.

 

[CS1]

What part of Romans 3:11 do you consider to be baloney? Are you denying the word of God?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

what part of Rom 3:11 are you trying to use in context to the topic? or are you yet again allegorizing one verse to make it say what you want to? As you did with 1cor 13:8-10

 

[notuptome]

what part of Rom 3:11 are you trying to use in context to the topic? or are you yet again allegorizing one verse to make it say what you want to? As you did with 1cor 13:8-10

Thank you for you opinion. The word of God stands on its merits whether you believe or not. That includes 1 Cor 13:8-10.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

they did not have to ask they were obeying what the Lord told them to do. You are choking a gnat and missing the camel.
They did not even know what to ask for they were told BY Jesus to go and wait until you have received Power from on High.

You are wrong.

If you were doing as they did you would not ask but you would receive.

Again your opinion is noted. It is still in error but duly noted.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[CS1]

If you were doing as they did you would not ask but you would receive.

Again your opinion is noted. It is still in error but duly noted.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

don't be rude it's not about me, it's about the context of the topic. "If I was doing as they did"? you do not even know me so please your arrogance and personal attacks are most taxing. You just need to go.

 

[KelbyofGod]

1. It is noteworthy that Paul said that both tongues and prophesy would cease. So why focus on that which was to cease? There are a total of 23 gifts of the Spirit.

2. It is also noteworthy that out of all the epistles, there is only one which addresses PROBLEMS with the gift of tongues within the local church. If this was a critical doctrine, we would find it in almost every epistle, would we not?

In answer to your questions:
1a. All the gifts will cease... once we've grown up fully into the perfect man. Have you not considered this? What need will there be for preaching or teaching when we all "know as I am known" (which means perfectly). What need will there be for healings when we are all perfectly healthy? What need will there be for prophesying once all are perfectly edified, exhorted and comforted in the presence of the Lord?
1b. Are PROBLEMS with tongues all that you are able to see in 1 Corinthians 14?? If you believe you are reading with open and unbiased eyes, try seeing (and listing) the benefits of speaking/praying in tongues. For example, are you able to admit that it is a BENEFIT, not a problem, to be able to "edify" yourself? ( 1 Cor. 14:4.)
2. That is an assumption on your part. We might assume that if Jesus wanted people to know that he was the Christ, he would tell them when they asked him...but that's not how he did it (Luke 22:67,68) Just because God doesn't do things in the way that makes sense to man, that doesn't make God's way wrong. Besides this, How many other teachings & epistles(letters) simply aren't included in "the bible"? For example, where is the epistle to the Laodiceans? Was "the bible" wrong when giving the commandment to read the epistle from Laodicea?

God gives us enough to get started..but not so much as would allow us to avoid seeking God. If we really want to know perfectly, we seek God until we find him. And those who don't need/want God can simply hold up the pieces (that he's made available to all) and claim that they have full knowledge.

 

[KelbyofGod]

If you talk about me. My post was adessed to Kelby. Why you then give the answer?

Perhaps he assumed you actually wanted the answer, regardless of who brings it.

We need to be honest with ourselves. If we're posting in a forum rather than in a direct message to an individual, we actually WANT other people to see our posts.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[KelbyofGod]

Man does not seek the Holy Spirit. Never has and never will.

Ro 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

God does the seeking not man.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Luke 11:13 KJV
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?

 

[wolfwint]

All 4 examples you find in acts. Right?
These 4 "examples" you can also see as an onetime event for special groups ( samaritians,gentiles and followers of John the baptist) for to show the fourth group (jejewsthat the Gospel is also for the from the jews not acceptet groups.
And no one in NT, ore churchhistory tsught this. Even those who mentioned in churchhistory that there is tonguespeaking taught this ore claimed this teaching for himself.
This why you cant find this teaching not before 1900. My question is: Why you cant find this teaching before?

There is missing a NOT, between

maybe it's because of the false teaching of the ending of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. IF you know church History there was a dark period where man setup false doctrines and did not adhere to the Holy Spirits leading or was the Catholic church completely Biblical and the Reformation was the error? Or was it used to set up the great awaking? IF you knew church history the Catholic church went from conversion to membership removing the conversion experience which led to The Spirit of God departing from that church.

Concerning the rcc and the dark age I agree with you. When you read churchhistory it is full of discussions about the scripture.
But, why then dont find this particular teaching?
Why the great debaters dont talk ore discuss about this teaching:
Speaking in tongues as proof for to baptised with the Holy Spirit/ filled with the Holy Spirit?

 

[wolfwint]

that is a good question the problem with it is, just because there is not one to be found in your understanding, does that make the teaching unbiblical? or how did they come to that conclusion? They looked at Acts to get the understanding

Acts was written very late, later then 1.Cor. for example. Why this matter was not taught then to the believers through the letters? Romans did not even mention speaking in tongues as spirituel gift.
Maby because this was not so as we got it taught since 1900?

 

[KelbyofGod]

All 4 examples you find in acts. Right?
These 4 "examples" you can also see as an onetime event for special groups ( samaritians,gentiles and followers of John the baptist) for to show the fourth group (jejewsthat the Gospel is also for the from the jews not acceptet groups.
And no one in NT, ore churchhistory tsught this. Even those who mentioned in churchhistory that there is tonguespeaking taught this ore claimed this teaching for himself.
This why you cant find this teaching not before 1900. My question is: Why you cant find this teaching before?

From the beginning of my walk with God I've not relied on 'historical' accounts (which are selected by man). I read the bible and saw no reason not to trust the examples given within.

On the day of Pentecost, they began to speak with tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

So I repented, and was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and I ALSO received the Holy Ghost with speaking in tongues... just as was promised.

This experience (of course) matches the rest of the book of Acts accounts...as well as the later clarifications of what tongues (praying in the spirit) is for.

In all of this I had need only for God, his word, and those gifts he promised within. I had no need for dates... or church histories...or Azusa street. Only God.

That is one reason your argument is non-beneficial.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[notuptome]

Luke 11:13 KJV
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?

Our Heavenly Father knows what we need and has promised to fill our needs. Our Heavenly Father is not obliged to give us all that we want.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

don't be rude it's not about me, it's about the context of the topic. "If I was doing as they did"? you do not even know me so please your arrogance and personal attacks are most taxing. You just need to go.

Everything with you is a personal attack. You just will not accept any correction. I still pity you. May the goodness of God bring you to repentance.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[CS1]

There is missing a NOT, between

Concerning the rcc and the dark age I agree with you. When you read churchhistory it is full of discussions about the scripture.
But, why then dont find this particular teaching?
Why the great debaters dont talk ore discuss about this teaching:
Speaking in tongues as proof for to baptised with the Holy Spirit/ filled with the Holy Spirit?

to honest? I think it was normal as being Baptized in water. I do not need the teaching to be seen by others it is seen in the Book of Acts. everyone who was baptized in the Holy Spirit spoke in tongues or prophesied. the term initial evidence is not there as is not the word Trinity however, the record is.

 

[wolfwint]

Perhaps he assumed you actually wanted the answer, regardless of who brings it.

We need to be honest with ourselves. If we're posting in a forum rather than in a direct message to an individual, we actually WANT other people to see our posts.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

This is not the point. He told me that i response to things he did not have said. But my answer was to you and not Him.
So i asked him, why he is answering a post which was not to him.

 

[CS1]

Acts was written very late, later then 1.Cor. for example. Why this matter was not taught then to the believers through the letters? Romans did not even mention speaking in tongues as a spiritual gift.
Maby because this was not so as we got it taught since 1900?

come on sir, Acts was written very late you should know the chronological setting of the Books does not remove the narratives as the topic is addressed. it is fitting Acts follows the Gospels.

 

[CS1]

Everything with you is a personal attack. You just will not accept any correction. I still pity you. May the goodness of God bring you to repentance.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

LOL hahahahaha I won't accept correction. LOL. Yea if I have to repent because you say so know this it will not happen LOL.

 

[wolfwint]

From the beginning of my walk with God I've not relied on 'historical' accounts (which are selected by man). I read the bible and saw no reason not to trust the examples given within.

On the day of Pentecost, they began to speak with tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

So I repented, and was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and I ALSO received the Holy Ghost with speaking in tongues... just as was promised.

This experience (of course) matches the rest of the book of Acts accounts...as well as the later clarifications of what tongues (praying in the spirit) is for.

In all of this I had need only for God, his word, and those gifts he promised within. I had no need for dates... or church histories...or Azusa street. Only God.

That is one reason your argument is non-beneficial.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Everybody has his own expierience with God. Yes and we all should not rely on mans teaching. I agree with you.
Because of this we have to proof the spirit. And according what the word of God says.
But history and also the reality shows that believers read the bible different.
F.e. the passages in acts 2, 10, 8 and 19.
Who is right? Would we not find this important issue anywhere else written down?
Now we have to realize, that this teaching is not found. Till 1900.
This teaching came along with effects we know from pagan religions. This teaching divids the follower of Christ.
This teaching says, all who dont have it, are not full christians, they missing an important thing. Others go so far to say if you dont have ut you are not saved.
And again i have to believe man made doctrine. And this teaching i dont question, because i dont like it, I simply cant find it in the bible.