Is 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.
What you are presenting is a hoax.
What the Pentecostal movement is claiming is not happening.
You are simply attempting to defend the hoax with Biblical language.
Much like Flat Earth Christians . Welcome to their club.
Believers can't win with you who are full of doubt an unbelief. Your claim is baseless. People are being healed. You and Lamar refuse to accept it. I've been healed by the power of God many times. The first time was due to a word of knowledge that described my symptoms to the letter. I'd been saved a few weeks, I knew nothing of God's healing power and I knew nothing about spiritual gifts. The leader of the fellowship prayed for me and I was healed instantly.
You will never see the power of God at work for the same reason that Lord Jesus did few miracles in Nazareth.
Pentecostalism has many issues, as do other denominations. That does not mean that God has changed. When the church is perfect, there will be no need for spiritual gifts. That won't happen until Lord Jesus returns.
You will never see the power of God at work for the same reason that Lord Jesus did few miracles in Nazareth.
Pentecostalism has many issues, as do other denominations. That does not mean that God has changed. When the church is perfect, there will be no need for spiritual gifts. That won't happen until Lord Jesus returns.
No.
Pentecostalism is not a issue it is a false gospel.
It is a theology based on human lies and believed by naive people like yourself.
Much like the lies of the Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons and Christian Science.
Feel free to dismiss God's word and form your own version of Christianity. As you say, many other cults are guilty of this.
How do you explain miracles and healings that take place now?
Trust and Obey is not "dismissing God's word" and you know it!
He is dismissing the dubious claims of the Pentecostal movement.
Since you have neglected to present any confirmable miracles or supernatural healings, there is nothing to explain.
Just as the Mormons present unconfirmable miracles as validation of their theology, so also do the Pentecostals.
Take your pick, they are all the same.
View attachment 291334 
Attachments
Was James presenting a hoax when he said: 13 Is any one of you suffering? He should pray. Is anyone cheerful? He should sing praises. 14 Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to PRAY OVER HIM and ANOINT HIM with oil IN THE NAME OF THE LORD 15And the prayer offered in faith will restore the one who is sick. The Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven.…
(James 5:13-15)
Are ALL miraculous healings a hoax - an empty ritual consisting of promises God never made and therefore will not honor? If so, then you should denounce James the brother of Jesus as a fraud too. Calling people who still believe in the scriptures "flat-earthers" does nothing to prove your point. It is an fallacious ad hominem and a non sequitur as well, since, after all, what do astronomical facts about the material universe have to do whether God has or has not done a supernatural work? Thus I conclude that your statement is more about your need to attack someone whose beliefs you despise rather than about whether their doctrines are true or false. De-constructing straw men versions of what others believe does nothing to disprove anything they believe. It is all your own make-believe picture about what they really think. Rather than deal with real people and their actual beliefs you prefer shadow-boxing with your own fabrications.
To make it clear that I am not making this up let us look to what the actual definition of a Straw Man is:
A strawman is a fallacious argument that distorts an opposing stance in order to make it easier to attack.
Essentially, the person using the strawman pretends to attack their opponent’s stance, while in reality they are actually attacking a distorted version of that stance, one which their opponent doesn’t necessarily support.
Straw Man???
Have you no shame?
Your argument have been nothing more than a mindless attack against a distortion of the OP.
You ceaselessly drone on about about past physical supernatural manifestations and ignore that the OP is about claims of current manifestations.
Put down your book of philosophical terms and just address the OP.
You are a rather tricky little fellow.
He said the people who believe in the theology of Pentecostalism are naive not those who believe miracles can still happen are naive.
You are distorting what Trust and Obey wrote.
I do not believe in the theology of Pentecostalism but I most certainly believe miracles can still happen.
What is wrong with you?
James 5:13-15 has nothing to do with physical supernatural manifestations.
It is you who is shadow-boxing.
Trust and Obey is right, put down your pocket book of philosophical terms and just address the OP.
Apparently, you still do not understand what a STRAW MAN argument is. A straw man is not your TRUE VIEW about a subject, Instead, it is a misrepresentation of your views created because it is easier to disprove than your real view
If someone claims you are misrepresenting their view on something is that something they should be ashamed of? If we cannot clarify what we believe then how can possibly discuss anything meaningfully?
I am not using a philosophy book. The terms I have used are in common usage and are used particularly in debates to distinguish logical well-reasoned arguments from those that are irrational and false.
Compare this to the guidelines for debating the truth set down by the Apostle Peter:
15 But in your hearts sanctify Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give a defense to everyone who asks you the reason for the hope that is in you. But respond with gentleness and respect, 16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who slander you may be put to shame by your good behavior in Christ.…(1 Peter 3:15-16)
The word defense is the translation of the Greek word apología (from 575 /apó, "from" and 3056 /LOGOS, "intelligent reasoning") – properly, a well-reasoned reply; a thought-out response to adequately address the issue(s) that is raised.
Though Peter was a fisherman by trade, not educated in philosophy or rhetoric he knew how important clear rational arguments were in persuading people of the truth of the gospel. (https://biblehub.com/greek/627.htm)
"Tricky little fellow, huh?" I have come to expect this sort of snide arrogance from you. Well, I did not come here to play deceitful games, sir. When it comes to interpreting God's word, I attempt to do so according as objectively as I can, according to sound hermeneutical principles. Nothing I have said to you or your acolyte is a trick.
You have not to define which aspect(s) of Pentecostal theology makes an individusl "naive" for believing it. I disagree with some of it myself, but, then again, I also disagree with some major points of theology held by Reformed Churches and Baptists. This does not necessarily make either of those groups heretical, though I have heard many make this claim.
No, I was showing how some of her arguments did not constitute what Peter described as a "well reasoned (rational) reply" I was focusing most on how she arrived at her conclusions more than the ultimate truth of what she was saying.
Let us look at this passage again:
14 Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15And the prayer offered in faith will restore the one who is sick. The Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven.…
James says that the PRAYER offered in faith will RESTORE the one who is sick and that the THE LORD WILL RAISE HIM UP
(James 5:14-15)
The scripture does not say the sick person merely got over his sickness or or "went into remission" by natural healing powers of his body. It attributes his recovery directly to an intervention by God. If God is the agent who accomplishes something we cannot, that makes the event supernatural wouldn't you say?
Now let us use some of your favorite terminology to see if they are in agreement with the scriptures.
1). One thing you said is that James 5:13-15 has NOTHING to do with PHYSICAL SUPERNATURAL manifestations
2). Let me ask you this, was the ANSWER James was seeking a purely SPIRITUAL one or was it PHYSICAL?
3). I think we can say BOTH. Of course, the ANSWER to his prayer would be a PHYSICAL MIRACLE of healing;
however, although the POWER to accomplish it would come from the Holy Spirit
4). James says this outright when he declared: THE LORD WILL RAISE HIM UP
5). Notice that James did not carefully parse his words to differentiate between miracles and physical supernatural manifestations of the Spirit. In context, this was understood without the necessity of adding unnecessary terminology
What kind of miracles are you saying you believe can still happen?
A. Since you are still trying to be evasive, let us review again what happened, this time, directly from the passage
(1) The petitioner, in this case, was someone who had gotten sick
(2). The adjective the Bible used to describe him was asthenes from the verb astheneó (ἀσθενέω): means
to be weak, to be sick, to be without strength (in any sense)
(3). This tells us that what he was suffering from was some sort of PHYSICAL MALADY
B. James instructed the man that he should:
(1) call the elders of the church
(2) to pray over him and
(3) anoint him with oil
(4) in the name of the Lord.
B. What did James believe would happen as a result of this?
He tells us specifically: 15 And the prayer offered in faith will RESTORE the one who is sick. The Lord will RAISE HIM UP.
If he has sinned, HE WILL BE FORGIVEN.…
C. Next, let me ask you a few questions
(1). Does the text suggest the man had a real physical illness or was his affliction psychosomatic?
(2). Was James expecting the Holy Spirit to respond by HEALING the man supernaturally?
(3). Assuming their prayers for healing WERE answered then we have to conclude that
the answer they received would be a physical miracle accomplished by the Holy Spirit
D. These terms are commonly used in reasoned debates. However, if you have to consult a book then feel free.
E. Perhaps we should listen to what, the Apostle Peter said:
15But in your hearts sanctify Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give a defense to everyone who asks you the reason for the hope that is in you. But respond with gentleness and respect, 16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who slander you may be put to shame by your good behavior in Christ.… (1 Peter 3:15)
E. In Greek, the word defense is: apología (from 575 /apó, "from" and 3056 /lógos, "intelligent reasoning") –
properly, a well-reasoned reply; a thought-out response to adequately address the issue(s) that is raised.
You seem to prefer using contemptuous accusations aimed at other people rather than their views.
E. YOU use the OP, not to channel discussion into more fruitful areas but to control and suppress what the disfavored side says while prejudicially is advancing your own beliefs. This is what happens when you made the topic an open-ended expose of another Church
Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."
— Matthew 21:43 (KJV)
— Matthew 21:43 (KJV)
Hello! I believe there is a gap between the Old and New Testaments, 400 or so years when there was no new revelation from God. Rather a patiently waiting for the Messiah to come.
In the same way the book of Revelation was the last canonical book in the bible. Is it possible we're now waiting patiently for the return of the Lord- rather than seeking new revelation should we not just be doing what God has already told us, i'e the Great Commission etc.
Just some food for thought. Hope you're well today, God Bless you all.
In the same way the book of Revelation was the last canonical book in the bible. Is it possible we're now waiting patiently for the return of the Lord- rather than seeking new revelation should we not just be doing what God has already told us, i'e the Great Commission etc.
Just some food for thought. Hope you're well today, God Bless you all.
Fillan:
Based on the last chapter of Daniel, which was added to an existing older text, one can very accurately determine that this text was written around 167 BC - based on the idea that whoever wrote Daniel was looking backward for much of the text incorporating stories from the Babylonian captivity. Thus putting the author back in time and making "predictions" about the future. This is not an uncommon approach as most of the Hebrew Bible is a retrospective looking back. All the visions in the Book of Daniel are accurate until exactly 167 BC. (because they were never predictions) After that time, nothing of Daniel's prophecy is accurate. Thus, those today who recognize these prophecies have never come to pass now must forecast them to our future 2,200 years later. This leaves those who believe that Daniel is prophesizing' about the future are required to see "events" and "revelations" driven by their beliefs in last chapters of Daniel. This has led, after 1830, to an entire Christian perspective of continuing revelation via prophesied "events."
Or, Daniel's prophecies are true and we just don't what they mean yet.
A definite possibility. However, they are courched in such archaic and symbolic language that it might be a tough chore. It has been a popular bible passtime for generations.