Recent content by randyk

  1. randyk

    Concerning the gift of tongues

    The Scriptural account did not establish a *doctrine* that all should speak in tongues, even though at the initial outpouring of the Spirit all did indeed speak in tongues in the Upper Room or outside it. So this Scriptural account has a specific context, which does not set a precefdent for...
  2. randyk

    Concerning the gift of tongues

    I agree. But actually I do see a certain degree of hostility towards "prophets," viewing them as fakes, or no better than astrologers. And they are critiqued for every "false prophecy" or perceived false prophecy. But yes--I think tongues are even more criticized as the equivalent of African...
  3. randyk

    Concerning the gift of tongues

    What the Scriptures say is that to pray with understanding is superior to praying in tongues, to speak and communicate with others is superior to speaking in a language nobody else understands--unless there is an interpretation. If we don't see spiritual gifts manifested I think it is wrong to...
  4. randyk

    Concerning the gift of tongues

    Not all Pentecostal groups believe that--I don't know how many do? But even treating fellow Christians as "2nd class citizens" for not speaking in tongues is an "evil" of sorts. Of course, there are those dispensationalists who dismiss all spiritual gifts and relegate them to the age of the...
  5. randyk

    Concerning the gift of tongues

    Yes, far be it from me to say that tongues is not a gift of the Spirit. The bible expressly says so. On the other hand, what Pentecostals teach today goes far beyond the Gift of Tongues, making it into a Prayer Language that is supposedly available to anybody who choose to move their mouths...
  6. randyk

    Commonality of Schizophasia

    Yes, the shift, in Christian society, from "God wants* to *what I want* is subtle...that is, until we see that selfishness expressing itself in violence and blatant dishonesty. Eventually, truth can be sacrificed on the altar of "what I think is right.* That's why God called it a "sin" to...
  7. randyk

    If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution As of 2014, nearly all (around 98%) of the scientific community accepts evolution as the dominant scientific theory of biological diversity[1] with, as of 2009, some 87% accepting that evolution occurs due to natural processes, such as...
  8. randyk

    If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

    I quoted what you said. You said two incompatible things, from my perspective. You said... 1) You accept the scientific community which has a large group believing in the 6 day Creation, and 2) You reject any notion of a majority at all, since biblical truth does not require a majority. I...
  9. randyk

    If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

    You most certainly are not. I said the scientific consensus may be both Christian or not, 6 day Creation or not. And you indicated that since a high number of scientists are Christian and believe in a 6 day Creation that you are not against the scientific consensus. And I'm saying that the...
  10. randyk

    If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

    Then you're refuting your own position, because you said, "Actually. a large part of the scientific community are six day creationists ..." I was just challenging your sense that your statement is true when it is understood that even Christian scientists who believe in the 6 days of Creation...
  11. randyk

    If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

    Eccl 3.18 I also said to myself, “As for humans, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals. 19 Surely the fate of human beings is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath[c]; humans have no...
  12. randyk

    If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

    I don't believe most scientists by far believe in Creation in 6 *literal* days. Personally, I believe in the Genesis account of 6 days, but believe that the 6 days represent "creation days* which defy any sense of a literal "day." The 6 days may be, for example, 6 "eras." In Zechariah 14 we...
  13. randyk

    If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

    No, I would not have *human* death enter in before Man sinned. But yes, *animals* died before Adam sinned. Either that, or you believe all the animals that were created before mankind lived only only vegetables and never died and were producing fossils. Please note that human sin equals human...
  14. randyk

    If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

    Unless you utterly reject the scientific community, which I don't, animals ate animals well before Man appeared on this earth. I do question many things that scientists say in theory, without real supporting evidence. But some things seem pretty obvious to me. The animals were created with...
  15. randyk

    If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

    Okay, I see your pov. I happen to think animals were created with teeth that tear, and feed on other animals--not just plants. In fact, the evidence is that they were doing this as far back as the dinosaurs. But no matter....
See more