Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Scriptural evidence? | Bible general Archive 2 | Morant61 | 131855 | ||
Greetings Doc! These are awfully broad strokes with which you are painting! Are you really trying to argue that all believers in 'tongues' are not pure, holy, obedient, or knowledgeable about Scripture? Historically, the vast majority of holiness denominations have pentecostal roots! :-) Individuals are simply individuals. You will have some of every stripe in every group. I'm more interested in why people 'put down' a gift of the Holy Spirit, when Scripture certainly doesn't denegrate a gift of the Spirit. What does Scripture say about tongues? Scripture says of tongues (and all of the gifts) in 1 Cor. 12:11, "All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines." It also says in 1 Cor. 12:28, "And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues." 1 Cor. 13:14-15 says, " For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind." By the way, this is a clear indication that tongues can be used as a private prayer language. Paul explictly instructs that when an interpreter is not present to keep his 'tongues' private (1 Cor. 13:28). 1 Cor. 13:26-33 presents 'tongues' as a normal and orderly part of a worship service. 1 Cor. 13:39 specifically commands us not to forbid people from speaking in tongues. The Corinthian church certainly had elevated 'tongues' to a position that it was not intended to have and Paul corrected their view of it. However, the problem was with the Corithians, not with the gift. It is my opinion that we are missing a 'vital, scriptural spirituality' because we no longer have a place for the gifts of the Holy Spirit in today's Church. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | Scriptural evidence? | Bible general Archive 2 | DocTrinsograce | 131860 | ||
I apologize for the generalizations, Tim. You asked for the origins of my doubts, and I provided them. Pentecostalism is a 20th century doctrine. So it isn't true that "the vast majority of holiness denominations have pentecostal roots." John Wesley originated the holiness doctrine, which has a number of contradictions with orthodoxy (as Ed defines the word.) Furthermore, the implication that only pentecostal denominations are interested in holiness is easily disputed. Luther was continuously interested in this subject, speaking and writing often upon it. Calvin spends an incredible amount of time on the subject as well. Even the word "Puritan" has its roots in a desire for purity and godliness. All that the Puritans wrote on the subject of the Christian's pursuit of holiness would fill libraries. The Baptists John Bunyan, Roger Williams, and Charles Spurgeon spent an incredible amount of energy on this important discipline of the believer. Gentlemen, I do not find further discussion of this topic to be of value for our edification. I love you both. There are many things that we can and ought to discuss to the glory of our God. Let us please have done with this subject and move on. |
||||||
3 | Scriptural evidence? | Bible general Archive 2 | EdB | 131871 | ||
doc I agree I think Tim is wrong. The Pentecostal movement came out the of the Holiness movement not the other way around. As far as the Holiness movement having contradiction to orthodoxy are you sure you don't me they have contradictions to what you hold to orthodox? I think they stand in agreement with the early church creeds where they differ is Westminster catechism. EdB |
||||||
4 | Scriptural evidence? | Bible general Archive 2 | DocTrinsograce | 131882 | ||
Yes, it differs there, but only because the Westminster catechism is simply a reaffirmantion of orthodoxy dating back through Augustine and ultimately Paul (1 Tim 4:1-3, Titus 1:9) This is another area in which you are highly senstive, brother Ed... In respectful deference to that sensitivity and your senior position to me, I will no longer respond to this thread. :-) |
||||||
5 | Scriptural evidence? | Bible general Archive 2 | EdB | 131909 | ||
I think possibly it is one sides slant on what Augustine and others said. As far as not responding is say "okay dokey!!!" :-) EdB |
||||||