He has done this over the years. Nothing new under the sun
He does seem to love attention thoughIs cessation an observation or theology?
- Thread starter Lamar
- 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.
He has done this over the years. Nothing new under the sun
He does seem to love attention thoughYou are a fraud for playing evasive word games while not defining your terms.
What would NON-SPIRITUAL supernatural manifestations consist of? Define that and then show me where the scriptures use this phrase.
I very much doubt that you are totally neutral about how they worship. You have already shown that you think most of what they do is manipulation.
That's precisely my point. No amount of preaching converted him, quite the contrary, he was present at the stoning of Stephen, whose passionate sermon probably convinced him that the Way was a dangerous cult that must be eliminated. It was the Damascus road, his personal experience with Jesus, first in blinding light than in utter dark, converted him to a vessel of God.
Yes personal experience encounter with God, absolutely
needed to be in the covenant with Jesus.Not just follow rules, not just high moralities, not just cause.... personal encounter, repent, accept, Jesus blood flowing in our vein, born again, all miraculous!!!
Physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit.
What part of this term is evasive?
I have no idea what you mean by this.
What do you mean by "NON-SPIRITUAL supernatural manifestations"?
This is your term, you define it.
Again, this is about whether their claims of physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit are true. This is not about them raising hands to the Lord.
You seem to want to dance around the real issue of the validity of their claims.
Why?
I don't know if the preaching he heard had a cumulative effect on changing his mind. Certainly, when he watched the men's coats who were stoning Stephen, he was not persuaded. Perhaps seeing Stevens countenance which was like that of an angel had an effect.
Does God still perform any miraculous healing at all? If you do not believe this basic proposition then you will automatically reject EVERY claim of this sort even before you examine any evidence.
If you or anyone else knew of a physical supernatural manifestation of the Holy Spirit you would have presented it a long time ago.
I do not reject any physical supernatural manifestation of the Holy Spirit. There is simply nothing to reject.
Once again, why are you dancing around the real issue of the validity of the claims?
What part of physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit do you not understand?
"Miraculous healing" can mean many things to different people, some will call relief from a ingrown toenail a miraculous event.
Using such vague terms makes you sound evasive, I suggest using more precise language such as physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit.
This is the OP.
It is precise and clear.
I find little in scripture to defend cessation but even less to support the claims of physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit continuing today as it was during the New Testament.
It seems that the miraculous New Testament types of manifestations have ceased to exist.
Most New Testament miracles were meant to be observed and not simply claimed.
They were used as a means to increase faith and their supernatural essence was not debated.
This is not true of modern day claims of physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit.
It seems the claims of Pentecostals and Charismatics are but wishful thinking and self-delusion.
Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit --- he who claims must prove.
Jesus did.
So should the Pentecostals, Charismatics and their sort.
You had a "personal experience encounter with God"???Yes personal experience encounter with God, absolutely
Not just follow rules, not just high moralities, not just cause.... personal encounter, repent, accept, Jesus blood flowing in our vein, born again, all miraculous!!!
Please let the forum know the details.
how can one be in a personal relationship and not have a personal encounter with GOD? You think what you are asking?
Many many many.
But the way you ask almost sounds like an unbeliever asking someone for miracles. Even the miracle is in front of their eyes, they still can't see.
Also curious, you never had personal encounter with God?
Then how were you saved? By high morality ideas?
I fully understand the statement but the context is: YOU must see it for it to have happen.
What you like to do and others, is create a intellectual term that satisfies your lack of experience in your own personal relationship.
You want to control what you did not see. Trying to control the work Holy Spirit with human reasoning.
You think if you gain enough worldly knowledge , you will be able to explain what you can't understand.
Please, your no English teacher, so spare me the spell check grammar corrections . I can go back to many of your incoherent postings.
He is. just a hatful person. He will attack those with wonderful godly testimonies that he will explain with human reasoning and secularism.
You're actually proving my point. Cessationism is a theological conclusion because there is no verse that explicitly says the gifts ceased when the canon was completed. The real question is whether that conclusion is biblically justified. Personally, I think 1 Corinthians 13:8–12 fits Christ's return better than the completion of the canon, so I don't find the canon-based cessationist argument particularly convincing.
a. Here you admit to having found little exegetical evidence for Cessationism. This is a surprising admission considering how dogmatic you are about many things not explicitly stated in scripture.
b. Historically, the early Christians believed in Continuationism which is why they kept having periodic revivals of the faith attended with ongoing manifestation of the Charismata. The historical accounts of Christians living in the post-Apostolic times and in the Ante-Nicene period show that they were, essentially, Continuationists who had no specific doctrine that the gifts would cease within their lifetimes.
d. This did not mean that the frequency of the charismata did not wax and wane. Apparently they did - enough so that Chrysostom wondered why they had become infrequent in his day. However, he never claimed that their cessation would be triggered by specific event. The idea that this event would be the completion of the canon was wholly unknown to him.
This OP is not sacred it was invented by you to lend the most support to your views and to suppress discussion of any other view.
a. The OP has not changed. I was rather clear on the issue of a lack of evidence for Cessationism which is why I do not defend it as a theology but as an observation. Are you just figuring this out now???
b. These so called "periodic revivals" is mindless mumbo jumbo that you cannot prove nor is it germane to the issue of the claims of modern day Pentecostals performing physical supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit today.
c. ??? You really need for proofread before you post.
d. You have no evidence of this "wax and wane", just more mumbo jumbo.
The OP is very straight forward and this is what seems to bother you the most.