Exactly what I was thinking....Such gobbledygook.
Exactly what I was thinking....Such gobbledygook.
While that is true, one must consider the message and the fruit, rather than assuming the source.Again, it has to be stressed, JUST BECAUSE IT IS SUPERNATURAL, ITS DOES NOT FOLLOW THAT IT IS GOD.
There was fornication among those in the church in Corinth, mentioned in both epistles we have. Yet there were genuine spiritual gifts also, mentioned in I Corinthians.For your information, I was an Assemblies of God pastor. I spent 20 years in the Pentecostal Movement. I was a 'tongues' speaker. I HAD THE SAME EXPERIENCE. I also experienced the spiritual abuse from leadership. The sexual miss conduct of 'Spirit filled Christians. Need I go on.
I came to a point where I asked the question, 'Is this really of God? 'Is this really what the Bible teaches'?
So I searched the Scriptures afresh and began to see the falsity and sham and I came to see the errors in Pentecostal theology.
So don't get on your 'high horse' and tell me about doubt and unbelief. You have idea.
You do not have to see airplanes fly for claims of flight to be true. If you want to find out, go research for yourself. If you are in a remote Area where airplanes do not fly you might want to believe 2 or 3 witnesses.The claims of ongoing physical supernatural manifestations do not need your experiences to be assured.
This is the fundamental flaw in the Pentecostal Movement.
Example:
The claims of heavier than air flight do not need to be proven by personal experiences or physics textbooks. The claim is proven by prima facie. Just look up and see the planes.
We do not need to read about the experiences of the Wright Brothers.
While that is true, one must consider the message and the fruit, rather than assuming the source.
That is generalized anecdotal evidence. Fruit and messages should be judged specifically.The fruit is not that good. Considering that in the days of mental institutions a very high percentage of patients had come out of the likes of the Pentecostal churches.
I have relatives who are "charismatic" and Christians in the family think they are mentally ill.
What is your source?The fruit is not that good. Considering that in the days of mental institutions a very high percentage of patients had come out of the likes of the Pentecostal churches.
I have relatives who are "charismatic" and Christians in the family think they are mentally ill.
You read claims that Jesus, Peter, and Paul healed people. You read them in the Bible. Have you seen any of these healings with your own eyes?I believe the key word in the sentence you are quoting is "continuing". There is little in scripture to support the existence of the miraculous continuing without the prima facie that was shown in the New Testament.
IOW, Jesus, Peter and Paul presented physical supernatural phenomena, Pentecostals present claims.
I do not see any basis for differentiating between miraculous healings which comes in answer to PRAYER and that which comes from a special endowment called "the gift of healing" The assumption seems to be that the GIFT OF HEALING is when God delegates to certain individuals the supernatural ability to heal anyone anytime they wished.As to healing, the Cessationalist position is that God still heals today in answer to prayer. But the 'gift of healing', is past.
So your default proposition is that God no longer heals anyone (supernaturally). This reminds me of Thomas who said he would not believe in the Resurrection unless he saw Christ and touched his wounds. Yet true believers since the beginning have put their faith in the resurrection. God is not inclined to perform miracles to prove Himself to skeptics. Yes I have experienced healing for which the supernatural working of God is the only explanation.You read claims that Jesus, Peter, and Paul healed people. You read them in the Bible. Have you seen any of these healings with your own eyes?
So your default proposition is that God no longer heals anyone (supernaturally). This reminds me of Thomas who said he would not believe in the Resurrection unless he saw Christ and touched his wounds. Yet true believers since the beginning have put their faith in the resurrection. God is not inclined to perform miracles to prove Himself to skeptics. Yes I have experienced healing for which the supernatural working of God is the only explanation.
Absolutely false. We accept the testimony of the New Testament without seeing. Insisting that you'll be able to see every miracle before you believed it happened isn't reasonable for a Christian. You obviously haven't been reading my posts.So your default proposition is that God no longer heals anyone (supernaturally). This reminds me of Thomas who said he would not believe in the Resurrection unless he saw Christ and touched his wounds. Yet true believers since the beginning have put their faith in the resurrection. God is not inclined to perform miracles to prove Himself to skeptics. Yes I have experienced healing for which the supernatural working of God is the only explanation.
Also, it has to be stressed, JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS CLAIMED TO BE SUPERNATURAL, IT DOES NOT FOLLOW THAT IT IS SUPERNATURAL.Again, it has to be stressed, JUST BECAUSE IT IS SUPERNATURAL, ITS DOES NOT FOLLOW THAT IT IS GOD.
If God intended Chapter and Verse when He saw Matthew and John take notes He would have mentioned it.Such gobbledygook.
Forget the "message and the fruit", first see if it is even supernatural.While that is true, one must consider the message and the fruit, rather than assuming the source.
The proposition of this discussion is claims of ongoing PHYSICAL SUPERNATURAL MANIFESTATIONS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.So your default proposition is that God no longer heals anyone (supernaturally). This reminds me of Thomas who said he would not believe in the Resurrection unless he saw Christ and touched his wounds. Yet true believers since the beginning have put their faith in the resurrection. God is not inclined to perform miracles to prove Himself to skeptics. Yes I have experienced healing for which the supernatural working of God is the only explanation.
Message and fruit are easier to determine.Forget the "message and the fruit", first see if it is even supernatural.
The problem is he has misunderstood the argument in the first instance. No-one I learned from has argued the middle voice teaches "when" but indeed it is the very teaching of "how" tongues ends which sets it aside from how prophecy and knowledge end that gives rise to looking at more scripture as to what Paul is talking about. If those three gifts were to end at the return of Christ then they should all end the same way, they don't. The Greek teaches how they end are different.You want me to write a book?
It was a bombardment of facts.
The problem is he has misunderstood the argument in the first instance. No-one I learned from has argued the middle voice teaches "when" but indeed it is the very teaching of "how" tongues ends which sets it aside from how prophecy and knowledge end that gives rise to looking at more scripture as to what Paul is talking about. If those three gifts were to end at the return of Christ then they should all end the same way, they don't. The Greek teaches how they end are different.
Psychiatrists who reported this information to my pastor who taught on university campuses by invite.What is your source?