Yes God is still dealing with Israel . Jews still seek after a sign at corinth . God is still working through these signs given to these at corinth for Jews. The ones listed in Mark 16 . Yes even a gentile speaking tongues ( There's neither Jew nor gentile ' in Christ) and ' healing is a sign to Jews . Jews seek after a sign , gentiles wisdom.
Signs that follow them that believeth.
- Thread starter Yahcubs777
- 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.
You are correct there, but you must put yourself in the shoes of a Jewish believers during the early period of Acts.
We now accept Paul as an apostle from Christ and accept Romans to Philemon as canon scripture is because we were born years after that, when everything was established according to what Paul stated.
As I said, if you put yourself in the shoes of a Jewish believer in Acts 15 time period, all that Paul stated in his letters were strictly one-sided claims.
That is why I am saying those signs and wonders that Paul was displaying among the gentiles, were critical in establishing his credibility to those Jewish believers, during that time, when Paul's letters were just being written, and everyone then only had the OT scripture.
We now accept Paul as an apostle from Christ and accept Romans to Philemon as canon scripture is because we were born years after that, when everything was established according to what Paul stated.
As I said, if you put yourself in the shoes of a Jewish believer in Acts 15 time period, all that Paul stated in his letters were strictly one-sided claims.
That is why I am saying those signs and wonders that Paul was displaying among the gentiles, were critical in establishing his credibility to those Jewish believers, during that time, when Paul's letters were just being written, and everyone then only had the OT scripture.
-
1
- Show all
Greetings Yahcubs777!
The will of the Father is that we believe in His Son. Those who will not be able to enter into the kingdom of God, will have been trusting in the works that they mention instead of trusting in the shed blood of Christ. They think that they should be able to enter the kingdom of God because they prophesied in His name, cast out demons and and performed miracles. Those are works. We are not saved by works, but are saved by having faith in Christ who paid the penalty for our sins. The fact that they reference their own works by saying 'did we not' as the reason why they should be able to enter into the kingdom of God, reveals what they were trusting in and why they won't be able to enter.
This is just an example of works that Jesus gives. I'm sure that people will also say "Lord, Lord! Did we not keep the Sabbath on Saturday? And did we not abstain from certain foods? Etc.
It is important to check ourselves so that we are not trusting in our works for salvation, but trusting in Christ as the One who paid the penalty for our sins by the shedding of His blood. We do good works to glorified God. And by those works scripture says that we are also building up our treasures in heaven. But we are not saved by those works and should not be trusting in them for our salvation. As an example, the apostles prophesied in the Lord's name, cast out demons and performed many miracles, but their faith remained in Christ crucified, buried and resurrected and not in those works.
Hope this gives some clarification
The will of the Father is that we believe in His Son. Those who will not be able to enter into the kingdom of God, will have been trusting in the works that they mention instead of trusting in the shed blood of Christ. They think that they should be able to enter the kingdom of God because they prophesied in His name, cast out demons and and performed miracles. Those are works. We are not saved by works, but are saved by having faith in Christ who paid the penalty for our sins. The fact that they reference their own works by saying 'did we not' as the reason why they should be able to enter into the kingdom of God, reveals what they were trusting in and why they won't be able to enter.
This is just an example of works that Jesus gives. I'm sure that people will also say "Lord, Lord! Did we not keep the Sabbath on Saturday? And did we not abstain from certain foods? Etc.
It is important to check ourselves so that we are not trusting in our works for salvation, but trusting in Christ as the One who paid the penalty for our sins by the shedding of His blood. We do good works to glorified God. And by those works scripture says that we are also building up our treasures in heaven. But we are not saved by those works and should not be trusting in them for our salvation. As an example, the apostles prophesied in the Lord's name, cast out demons and performed many miracles, but their faith remained in Christ crucified, buried and resurrected and not in those works.
Hope this gives some clarification
-
1
- Show all
This is a very good question.
Matt 7
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
When moses had gone to tell pharo to let the people of God go, in exodus 7 we see where moses did signs, and pharos magician were able to do the same.
Paul says in 2 Corinthians 11:12 And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. 13 For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.
Their end will be when Jesus tells them to depart, he never knew them.
So yes the unsaved do have signs.
Matt 7
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
When moses had gone to tell pharo to let the people of God go, in exodus 7 we see where moses did signs, and pharos magician were able to do the same.
Paul says in 2 Corinthians 11:12 And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. 13 For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.
Their end will be when Jesus tells them to depart, he never knew them.
So yes the unsaved do have signs.
-
1
- Show all
I agree that the miracles performed by Paul and Barnabas established their credibility with the Jerusalem Apostles.
But the pagan Gentiles did not have any interest in the OT Scriptures and did not have access to them seeing that they were kept in the Jewish Synagogues where Gentiles could not go. It is interesting that Paul does not quote any OT Scriptures in his letter to the Galatians, because those Scriptures would mean nothing to them. The same with Paul's sermon on Mars Hill. He quoted their own poets to reinforce his message.
It is obvious that the Apostle to the Hebrews wrote to Jewish believers because his letter is chock full of OT quotes.
But the pagan Gentiles did not have any interest in the OT Scriptures and did not have access to them seeing that they were kept in the Jewish Synagogues where Gentiles could not go. It is interesting that Paul does not quote any OT Scriptures in his letter to the Galatians, because those Scriptures would mean nothing to them. The same with Paul's sermon on Mars Hill. He quoted their own poets to reinforce his message.
It is obvious that the Apostle to the Hebrews wrote to Jewish believers because his letter is chock full of OT quotes.
-
1
- Show all
There are “new tongues” (Mark 16:17); i.e., languages that are new to the speaker which he has never learned before. There are “other tongues” (Acts 2:4; 1 Cor. 14:21); those are languages not native to the speaker, which he may (1 Cor. 14:18) or may not (Acts 2:4) have learned, but which are understood by the hearers (Acts 2:8). Here in 1 Corinthians 14, Paul speaks of “unknown tongues.” These are languages that are unknown to everyone in the congregation and, therefore, need an interpreter, whether it be the speaker (vs. 13) or someone else (vs. 27). The Corinthians were talking in languages which nobody in the congregation knew. If someone is doing that then they “speaketh not unto men, but unto God.” The only one who understands the language is God. And have no doubt about it, what Paul is talking about here is a language (13:1), Now, if you are speaking in an unknown language, then you are speaking “mysteries” (vs. 2). These are not mysteries as in 1 Corinthians 4:1; these are mysteries insomuch as no one understands what you are saying. Look at verse 16, “Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he UNDERSTANDETH not what thou sayest?” Notice the second thing about this. “Howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” In the what? Well, that isn’t the Holy Spirit.
The tension is between "many" and "you ... ye"
Many will say are plural. many will say did not we Baptists or we Methodists or we Pentecostals, they belonged to those denominations which were at different times noted for doing the works of God but they were never personally saved in fact they were workers of iniquity. Jesus addressed them in the singular "I never knew you"
Many will say are plural. many will say did not we Baptists or we Methodists or we Pentecostals, they belonged to those denominations which were at different times noted for doing the works of God but they were never personally saved in fact they were workers of iniquity. Jesus addressed them in the singular "I never knew you"
That's a reasonable interpretation of the verse.
What this shows that the tongues spoken on the Day of Pentecost was certainly a sign to the Jews that Jesus was truly risen from the dead, and the Holy Spirit was now present in the world. Peter confirmed this by quoting Joel's prophecy and linked the speaking with tongues with it, and then preached that the same Jesus they crucified has now become Lord and Christ. The result was that the crowd were cut to the heart with conviction of sin and 3000 of them turned to Christ.
What Peter witnessed when the Holy Spirit fell on the household of Cornelius convinced him that it was the same Holy Spirit who fell on the 120 disciples on the Day of Pentecost. This was one of the points he brought up to the other Apostles that Gentiles were receiving the same salvation and Holy Spirit as the Jews. There is no mention that the languages spoken in Cornelius' household were understood by anyone in the same way that the crowd understood the languages on the Day of Pentecost. But, I accept that the Holy Spirit falling on the Gentile household was a sign, not to the Jews in general, but to the Apostles that Gentiles were now included in the preaching of the gospel.
We don't have any information how the initial baptism with the Spirit and speaking in tongues that happened at conversion (further example is the 12 Ephesian disciples), progressed to people receiving the ongoing facility to pray in tongues and the gift of tongues used in public church services. It would be in the realm of guesswork and speculation to say that the tongues mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 are exactly the same as the tongues spoken on the Day of Pentecost. There is no evidence that the tongues spoken in the Corinthian church, or any other church for that matter, consisted in understandable languages. The only clue we get that the later tongues were "unknown" and "no man understands" in 1 Corinthians 14:2. The tongues of Pentecost were not "unknown" in the same sense, because the crowd from all the different regions around heard their own dialects spoken and the 120 were praising God in tongues.
What this shows that the tongues spoken on the Day of Pentecost was certainly a sign to the Jews that Jesus was truly risen from the dead, and the Holy Spirit was now present in the world. Peter confirmed this by quoting Joel's prophecy and linked the speaking with tongues with it, and then preached that the same Jesus they crucified has now become Lord and Christ. The result was that the crowd were cut to the heart with conviction of sin and 3000 of them turned to Christ.
What Peter witnessed when the Holy Spirit fell on the household of Cornelius convinced him that it was the same Holy Spirit who fell on the 120 disciples on the Day of Pentecost. This was one of the points he brought up to the other Apostles that Gentiles were receiving the same salvation and Holy Spirit as the Jews. There is no mention that the languages spoken in Cornelius' household were understood by anyone in the same way that the crowd understood the languages on the Day of Pentecost. But, I accept that the Holy Spirit falling on the Gentile household was a sign, not to the Jews in general, but to the Apostles that Gentiles were now included in the preaching of the gospel.
We don't have any information how the initial baptism with the Spirit and speaking in tongues that happened at conversion (further example is the 12 Ephesian disciples), progressed to people receiving the ongoing facility to pray in tongues and the gift of tongues used in public church services. It would be in the realm of guesswork and speculation to say that the tongues mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 are exactly the same as the tongues spoken on the Day of Pentecost. There is no evidence that the tongues spoken in the Corinthian church, or any other church for that matter, consisted in understandable languages. The only clue we get that the later tongues were "unknown" and "no man understands" in 1 Corinthians 14:2. The tongues of Pentecost were not "unknown" in the same sense, because the crowd from all the different regions around heard their own dialects spoken and the 120 were praising God in tongues.
I think if we go by what we see out there we could be convinced of all the ideas about tongues . From the scriptures I only see languages and that its a sign to unbelievers. And the Sign is to Jews . So even if an angel shows up telling me all this ' tongues ' stuff we see in churches all over the place is a private prayer language ect , I'm going with scripture every time .
Here is a very informative article on tongues - worth a read.
http://www.spiritandtruth.org/questions/125.htm?x=x
Only one little bit in the article I don't go along with - it is the description of tongues being "ecstatic". Genuine tongues is nothing of the sort. It is the deliberate speaking in faith of a unlearned language, believing that God understands it even if no one else does. There have been many testimonies of someone speaking in modern Pentecostal type tongues in a meeting, and a native speaker of the language has understood and encouraged by it. That happened to a close friend of mine, and to me in the Charismatic church I went to in the 1970s. There are other testimonies, such as the English man speaking in Cantonese which he had never learned, but a young Chinese lady heard him say in Cantonese, "Go forward and receive Christ as your Saviour", which she did. Another person heard a woman speaking pure Welsh without an accent, which is impossible unless Welsh was the person's first language. The person speaking the language had no idea he was speaking Welsh. All he knew that he was praising God in tongues.
But those who think that tongues is some sort of ecstatic utterance have based their opinion on immature novices working themselves up into a hyped up state and then speaking in tongues while in that state. An experienced person in the Spirit would instantly recognise that as being in the flesh and not the Spirit.
http://www.spiritandtruth.org/questions/125.htm?x=x
Only one little bit in the article I don't go along with - it is the description of tongues being "ecstatic". Genuine tongues is nothing of the sort. It is the deliberate speaking in faith of a unlearned language, believing that God understands it even if no one else does. There have been many testimonies of someone speaking in modern Pentecostal type tongues in a meeting, and a native speaker of the language has understood and encouraged by it. That happened to a close friend of mine, and to me in the Charismatic church I went to in the 1970s. There are other testimonies, such as the English man speaking in Cantonese which he had never learned, but a young Chinese lady heard him say in Cantonese, "Go forward and receive Christ as your Saviour", which she did. Another person heard a woman speaking pure Welsh without an accent, which is impossible unless Welsh was the person's first language. The person speaking the language had no idea he was speaking Welsh. All he knew that he was praising God in tongues.
But those who think that tongues is some sort of ecstatic utterance have based their opinion on immature novices working themselves up into a hyped up state and then speaking in tongues while in that state. An experienced person in the Spirit would instantly recognise that as being in the flesh and not the Spirit.
Absolutely you are correct. Because I came from very strong Hindu family and had hard time with witchcraft and demons possessed
and consulted many witch doctors etc but nothing worked out to get rid off but the Lord Jesus set me free and given second life and found eternal life from and by JESUS ONLY .None of the gods and goddesses could die and given life for sinner like me and forgiven all my sins and healed my untold pain on my stomach etc.
and consulted many witch doctors etc but nothing worked out to get rid off but the Lord Jesus set me free and given second life and found eternal life from and by JESUS ONLY .None of the gods and goddesses could die and given life for sinner like me and forgiven all my sins and healed my untold pain on my stomach etc.
-
1
- Show all
16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
There is an interesting documentary on YouTube about a church that literally tries to follow the verse about ' take up serpents ' . The pastor then gets bitten by a snake during the sermon and has to be carried out . We know there are many churches around the world who do similar things and have died. The realisation should be if Mark 16 .17 is for today ,why didn't they do "they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." ?
I see other churches picking and choosing which parts are for today and not others.
I believe the bible literally is saying those things actually happened. They had that ability given by God as signs to the Jews.
17And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
There is an interesting documentary on YouTube about a church that literally tries to follow the verse about ' take up serpents ' . The pastor then gets bitten by a snake during the sermon and has to be carried out . We know there are many churches around the world who do similar things and have died. The realisation should be if Mark 16 .17 is for today ,why didn't they do "they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." ?
I see other churches picking and choosing which parts are for today and not others.
I believe the bible literally is saying those things actually happened. They had that ability given by God as signs to the Jews.
Oh yes...I have come across that old chestnut before many times from people trying to deny that the gifts of the Spirit are for today's church. Of course there are doubts about the genuineness of that passage in Mark 16, and theologians have argued the toss about it for years. In another thread I described the process that a serious, competent Bible scholar would go through to establish whether a passage of Scripture is genuine, or consistent with the context, or that the general principle found in Scripture would support it.
Because we don't have any manuscripts previous to the 4th Century, we have no way of really knowing whether the passage in Mark 16 was deleted by a Cessationist editor, or was inserted by an editor who wanted to emphasis the signs and wonders following those who believe. What we have is that some manuscripts have it, and some don't. Church history also tells us that by the 4th Century, miraculous healing and other gifts of the Spirit had largely died out through the regional bishops taking over the authority of church programmes instead of believers being able to rely on the leading of the Holy Spirit. So, it is reasonable to think that a Cessationist editor removed the Mark 16 passage as he made his copy.
We see this kind of thing in church history, where the miraculous is either played down or cut out altogether by some historians. It is quite natural for a church historian to put his own theological bias on the history he writes. RCC historians treat every Christian movement that arose in the 1000 years before the Reformation as heretical, when these movements might have been more godly and closer to the Holy Spirit than the RCC itself.
Of course, if a person has Cessationism drummed into them during their formative years in the Christian life, then it would be almost impossible to convince them otherwise. This is why Cessationism is a part of their spiritual "DNA" and even if they did witness miracles of healing and understandable languages heard when people spoke in tongues, they would deny them. All we need is to see the reaction of the Jewish Pharisees when they witnessed the miracles of Jesus.
I see Cessationism as a type of demonic obsession. This has been proved to me through the absolute denial of plain Scripture and historical evident, and the multitude of testimonies of sick people being healed around the world. It is if there is an obsessive unbelief in the supernatural ministry of the Holy Spirit that convinces me that a lying spirit has got into the spiritual "DNA" of a Cessationsist.
Because we don't have any manuscripts previous to the 4th Century, we have no way of really knowing whether the passage in Mark 16 was deleted by a Cessationist editor, or was inserted by an editor who wanted to emphasis the signs and wonders following those who believe. What we have is that some manuscripts have it, and some don't. Church history also tells us that by the 4th Century, miraculous healing and other gifts of the Spirit had largely died out through the regional bishops taking over the authority of church programmes instead of believers being able to rely on the leading of the Holy Spirit. So, it is reasonable to think that a Cessationist editor removed the Mark 16 passage as he made his copy.
We see this kind of thing in church history, where the miraculous is either played down or cut out altogether by some historians. It is quite natural for a church historian to put his own theological bias on the history he writes. RCC historians treat every Christian movement that arose in the 1000 years before the Reformation as heretical, when these movements might have been more godly and closer to the Holy Spirit than the RCC itself.
Of course, if a person has Cessationism drummed into them during their formative years in the Christian life, then it would be almost impossible to convince them otherwise. This is why Cessationism is a part of their spiritual "DNA" and even if they did witness miracles of healing and understandable languages heard when people spoke in tongues, they would deny them. All we need is to see the reaction of the Jewish Pharisees when they witnessed the miracles of Jesus.
I see Cessationism as a type of demonic obsession. This has been proved to me through the absolute denial of plain Scripture and historical evident, and the multitude of testimonies of sick people being healed around the world. It is if there is an obsessive unbelief in the supernatural ministry of the Holy Spirit that convinces me that a lying spirit has got into the spiritual "DNA" of a Cessationsist.