Is cessation an observation or theology?

  • 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.
I am curious, do you know of anyone else in the history of the church that thinks that 'their god is their belly' refers to serving emotion? You also haven't explained what you think constitutes having one's god as his belly, what the characteristics are, or your exegetical basis?

Simple...
Google this-

their god is their belly meaning emotions and feelings

I found it right away.


The ancients would use body parts quite often to mean emotions.
Look up "bowels" in a concordance.

In biblical concordances (specifically KJV), "bowels" refers to the intestines (literal) but more frequently symbolizes the seat of emotions, compassion, and deep tenderness (metaphorical). It translates Hebrew mēʿeh (seat of emotions/affection) or Greek splagchnon (inward parts/compassion), often denoting a "heart of mercy".
View attachment 288197King James Bible Dictionary +4
 
It seems the thought of people knowing God in a closer relationship with Him by the blessings of faith without sight scares you. You seem to be a Doubting Thomas with a need to see physical miracles in order to believe. You know that you cannot claim this blessing because of the many claims of physical supernatural manifestations that you have bought into.

We live in an age of faith without sight and you cannot stop anyone from attaining these blessing no matter how many baseless claims and parlor tricks you and your ilk label as movements of the Holy Spirit.

It is what it is and God is not mocked by your definition of what is a physical supernatural manifestation of the Holy Spirit and what are manmade slight of hands.

When the physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit return (and it will) you and those like you will be ashamed of the mundane events you called acts of God.

A blind person cannot explain or describe color and you cannot describe or understand how the Holy Spirit works when a gift is genuine.

If you have no sight, that would not be anything but your blindness being incompatible with how the Holy Spirit operates. Why would supernatural occurences return when that which is perfect welcomes those with the faith to believe what is written?

I don't think you understand salvation if you think those in Christ will be ashamed before Him. You have chosen what you will believe, but God is not at your command to force others to fall in your shadow
 
We live in an age of faith without sight and you cannot stop anyone from attaining these blessing no matter how many baseless claims and parlor tricks you and your ilk label as movements of the Holy Spirit.

Well you choose to live without sight. I have made no claims other than to deny your cessationist comments since scripture does not agree with you.

I don't know why you think it's your 'gift' to deny and mock; God knows but I do not.

If there is a parlor trick in evidence, it would be your parlor trick trying to convince those who know better that you, you with no scriptural basis for saying what is your subjective belief, trying to convince people they have not seen what they have seen, have not heard what they have heard and must believe they were hallucinating when God, through His Spirit, operated in their lives without your permission.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snackersmom
Simple...
Google this-

their god is their belly meaning emotions and feelings

I found it right away.


The ancients would use body parts quite often to mean emotions.
Look up "bowels" in a concordance.

In biblical concordances (specifically KJV), "bowels" refers to the intestines (literal) but more frequently symbolizes the seat of emotions, compassion, and deep tenderness (metaphorical). It translates Hebrew mēʿeh (seat of emotions/affection) or Greek splagchnon (inward parts/compassion), often denoting a "heart of mercy".
View attachment 288197King James Bible Dictionary +4
It's seat of emotions.... not emotions. But the belly is also where food goes. It is also associated with appetites. It can also refer to the womb.

Translators sometimes translate it 'appetite.' And Paul uses it here:

I Corinthians 6
13 Foods for the stomach and the stomach for foods, but God will destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.

Do you think you can pick whatever gloss out of a language dictionary that makes the text fit best with your opinions, and your choosing that makes the verse mean that?

You also haven't presented any argument based on scripture or reason for categorizing Pentecostals as all having their belly as their god--- millions of people confessing Jesus as Lord. Why would you make such a heinous accusation against large groups of people? Do you have no concern about sin, that you might be sinning against the Lord by slandering others if your tenous reasoning is faulty?
 
That is in regards to the word "bowels."
You are conflating 'bowels' with 'stomach' which are two Greek words. The Philippians 3 verse is about the stomach.
Verses that refer to σπλάγχνα translated literally “bowels”

Verses that use σπλάγχνον, which can literally be translated as 'bowels', some non-literal examples.
2 Corinthians 6:12
Greek: τοῖς σπλάγχνοις ὑμῶν
KJV: “ye are straitened in your own bowels.”

Philippians 1:8
Greek: ἐν σπλάγχνοις Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ
KJV: “in the bowels of Jesus Christ.”

Philippians 2:1
Greek: εἴ τις σπλάγχνα καὶ οἰκτιρμοί
KJV: “if any bowels and mercies.”

Colossians 3:12
Greek: σπλάγχνα οἰκτιρμοῦ
KJV: “bowels of mercies.”

Philemon 7
Greek: τὰ σπλάγχνα τῶν ἁγίων
KJV: “the bowels of the saints.”

Philemon 12
Greek: τὰ ἐμὰ σπλάγχνα
KJV: “mine own bowels.”

Philemon 20
Greek: τὰ σπλάγχνα μου
KJV: “refresh my bowels in the Lord.”

1 John 3:17
Greek: κλείσῃ τὰ σπλάγχνα αὐτοῦ
KJV: “shutteth up his bowels [of compassion].”

Verses that refer to κοιλία, literally translated “belly / stomach”, certain examples.
John 7:38
Greek: ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ
KJV: “out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.”

Romans 16:18
Greek: τῇ ἑαυτῶν κοιλίᾳ
KJV: “they… serve… their own belly.”

Philippians 3:19
Greek: ἡ κοιλία
KJV: “whose God is their belly.”

We have also have another similar scripture in the context of fornication.

I Corinthians 6
12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
13 Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.
14 And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.
15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

Tertullian of Carthage from the 2nd century commented on the Philippians passage:
" For it is emulation, not religion, which impels them. Sometimes it is that god- their belly. Not one of such women knows how to speak of the good of single-husband hood; for their "god "as the apostle says, "is their belly; "

A quote from Greek-speaker John Chrysostom from the early 400s:
"Your belly is given to you so that you may nourish it, not so that it may burst. Your body is given you that you may rule it, not so that you may have it as a mistress. It is given that it may serve you for the nourishment of the other members, not so that you may serve it. Do not exceed these bounds. The sea in flood does not so much harm to the boundaries as our belly does to our bodies and our souls. The flood overwhelms only part of the land. The god of the belly overwhelms the whole body. Set selfconstraint as a bound to it as God sets the sand to the sea."

Some commentators think Paul may have been referring to pleasure-seeking ideologies of Epicureans.
Athenaeus, Deipnosophists, XII p. 546F:
Epicurus says, "The principle and the root of all good is the pleasure of the stomach; even wisdom and culture must be referred to this."

This is from the classical era. While he may have used 'gaster', Paul's readers may have made the connection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JimiSurvivor
It seems the thought of people knowing God in a closer relationship with Him by the blessings of faith without sight scares you. You seem to be a Doubting Thomas with a need to see physical miracles in order to believe. You know that you cannot claim this blessing because of the many claims of physical supernatural manifestations that you have bought into.
Wait a minute here. Thomas was the one who wouldn't believe God did a miracle unless he saw it with his own eyes. Wasn't that a theme of your posts earlier in the thread?

There is also a big difference between only believing God if you see Him do a miracle and believing God does miracles.

Let's consider this 'Walk by faith, and not by sight' principle when it comes to Peter. When he believed Jesus, and the Lord told him to, he walked on water. But when he looked at the wind and the waves, he doubted, and he sank. When he walked by faith, he could do the miracle. But when he doubted, he could not.'

The church Paul wrote to about 'not by faith, not by sight' is the same church he wrote to about having manifestations of the Spirit like the working of miracles, healing, divers tongues, interpretation of tongues, prophecy, etc. God did miracles through Paul, so it makes absolutely no sense at all the hi-jack 'For we walk by faith, and not by sight' to be a cessationist verse, when it was written by a miracle-worker to Christians who operated in gifts of the Spirit.

It obviously does not mean that.

And if you tell people who believe God miracles they are like Thomas who wouldn't believe unless he saw miracles... it comes off as extremely confused.

We live in an age of faith without sight and you cannot stop anyone from attaining these blessing no matter how many baseless claims and parlor tricks you and your ilk label as movements of the Holy Spirit.

Don't twist scripture to mean something it absolutely cannot mean in the context. If it couldn't mean that to the one who wrote it or to the ones who immediately read it, why would you try to make the verse mean that at all?

When the physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit return (and it will) you and those like you will be ashamed of the mundane events you called acts of God.

So are you not in the camp that certain supernatural manifestations ceased and ceased forever? Where do you get this idea that supernatural manifestations of the Spirit cease, and where do you get the idea that they return from scripture. Can you show us where you get that idea?
 
You are conflating 'bowels' with 'stomach' which are two Greek words. The Philippians 3 verse is about the stomach.
Verses that refer to σπλάγχνα translated literally “bowels”

You are the Master of Missing the Point to make your point.

Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge,
but whoever hates correction is stupid.


Proverbs 12:1​


One must ask himself.
How does one correct Stupid?
When Stupid will only say something stupid about the correction?

I was simply giving an example of how body parts were used by the ancients to speak of the likes of the emotions.
And, what do you do?
You tried to impress others with a long word study cut and paste...
All while missing a very SIMPLE point.

You must like being stupid.
It seems to be a comfortable home for you.

In Christ, GeneZ
 
You are the Master of Missing the Point to make your point.

Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge,
but whoever hates correction is stupid.


Proverbs 12:1​


One must ask himself.
How does one correct Stupid?
When Stupid will only say something stupid about the correction?

I was simply giving an example of how body parts were used by the ancients to speak of the likes of the emotions.
And, what do you do?
You tried to impress others with a long word study cut and paste...
All while missing a very SIMPLE point.

You must like being stupid.
It seems to be a comfortable home for you.

In Christ, GeneZ
If you can't come up with a decent response or rebuttal, just call the other person stupid.... it's the old ad hominem strategy.

I didn't post that to impress anyone. It hadn't crossed my mind. But your MO seems to be to accuse others. If you will accuse millions of Christians of serving another god. What is it to you then to falsely accuse someone of having the wrong motives.

When you accuse someone falsely, and you are wrong, you lie. If you do that, aren't you a liar? If you are wrong about some or all Pentecostals having their belly as their god, aren't you a liar? If you are wrong about me writing the last post to impress others, aren't you a liar? What does the Bible say about liars?

I am addressing a moral issue, a sin issue in your posts, not just a difference of theological opinion. I urge you to repent.

I was also trying to show you how your interpretation did not even fit the passage you are talking about.

Btw, with your new point, as with your old point, I consider your own argument to be stupid, but posted scripture to try to persuade you instead of just calling your argument stupid. If you are right, can you find any other Christian, any who speak Greek from that era, or anyone sense, who read that verse and interpreted the way you do? Do you think you are the only one able to understand the passage? You seem more intent on making a strained point of arguing the scripture means something that fits with your view of things than actually learning from the scripture.

The wisdom that is from above is easy to be entreated.
 
If you can't come up with a decent response or rebuttal, just call the other person stupid.... it's the old ad hominem strategy.

I did not call you stupid.

God's word did.

Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge,
but whoever hates correction is stupid.


Proverbs 12:1

.
 
I did not call you stupid.

God's word did.

Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge,
but whoever hates correction is stupid.


Proverbs 12:1
You are the one despising correction. Why don't you email the preacher you follow who is a DTS grad, and without prompting him with the details of this conversation, ask him if what the verse about their god boing their belly refers to. See if you think he's stupid, too.

And you can think John Chrysostom, that Tertullian was stupid, that Paul was stupid, that Matthew Poole was stupid, that numerous Bible commentators were stupid... and that you are smart, if that makes you feel better.....if you want to follow your emotions and make yourself feel good and superior.
 
Here you dismiss any analysis of grammar as a (trivial) detail, a mere red herring. This is just avoidance and deflection


It was amateurish. Most here have not sat under real live exegetical teaching.
It can be very detailed and not as simple as some here pretend it to be.
I myself am not qualified for such a move, and refuse to fake it.
I refuse to play the game of make believe as some here do, not knowing what they are doing.

In my first years of Bible college I used to approach the Bible that way by opening reference books in the school library.
It was deadness....

If you want some in depth, quality, live exegetical teaching? PM me. I can supply you with a link.
 
You are the one despising correction. Why don't you email the preacher you follow who is a DTS grad, and without prompting him with the details of this conversation, ask him if what the verse about their god boing their belly refers to. See if you think he's stupid, too.
He had his own criticisms of DTS.
He taught exegetically six nights a week!
As a rule he studied eight hours a day.

Now go away.
Go rule over the ignorant.

Stop trying to save face with me.

.......
 
@Genez

I don't care if your DTS grad favorite preacher likes or doesn't like DTS. I'm not pretrib or cessationist... and I believe in Biblical plural eldership... other than that, I don't really have a beef with DTS or know much more about it to care.

I do wonder why live exegesis is supposed to be better than recorded exegesis, but not enough to do more than comment on the strange wording.

How is any of this relevant. Is he where you got the idea that 'whose god is their belly' means ruled by their emotions... as opposed to the impression of those who knew the language earlier who took it as a reference to various types of appetites-- compare to I Corinthians 6 where Paul associates similar wording with fornication? Minding earthly things in Philippians-- aligns with the ideas of carnal appetites-- something gluttony and fornication have in common. Paul doesn't have a body of teaching that being emotion, or even being ruled by emotion is a great area of concern. He certainly does when it comes to lusts and appetites.

Anyway, the point was for you to bounce your idiosyncratic interpretation of a text of scripture which you make without context or other scripture to back it up off of someone else that you __might__ listen to since you won't listen to reason from me and other posters.

Otherwise, why go on about the DTS. If you didn't get your idea from him, why go on about him.

If you got the idea from him, that's all the more reason not to listen to his 'live exegesis.'

There enough preachers out there making wild claims about the original Greek on undiscerning audiences who do not know Greek.
 
I don't care if your DTS grad favorite preacher likes or doesn't like DTS. I'm not pretrib or cessationist...


Enuf said.... Mr. "Dead."

You are definitely led by a different spirit than I am.
So? Why bother?
 
Enuf said.... Mr. "Dead."

You are definitely led by a different spirit than I am.
So? Why bother?
You shouldn't confess such things. The Holy Spirit would not lead you to slander others and invent your own idiosyncratic false teachings.

Your post is another example of the problem with judging I pointed out in your other posts.
 
You shouldn't confess such things. The Holy Spirit would not lead you to slander others and invent your own idiosyncratic false teachings.

Your post is another example of the problem with judging I pointed out in your other posts.
Keep trying.... Dig deeper.

Some day...
God will tell you to jump in.