Results 441 - 460 of 558
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: retxar Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
441 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55244 | ||
You need to understand what kind of "sign" Paul was talking about here. He was addressing un-interpreted tongues in a public church service. He is saying that if un-interpreted tongues are allowed to go on, the uninformed or the unbeliever could bring judgement on themselves. They might treat the manifestation of the Holy Spirit with scoff and ridicule (1Co 14:23) and the Holy Spirit would be mocked (Act_2:13). This is the only interpretation that makes since because words of understanding would be the only ones those who are uninformed or unbelieving would recognize as a positive sign from the Lord (1Co 14:24-25). Un-interpreted, the sign to the uninformed or the unbelievers would NOT be a sign of edification, as would occur with interpretation (1Co_14:5). Rather, the manifestation of the Holy Spirit would become a sign of judgement to them because of there possible ridicule. The Isaiah quote in 1Co_14:21 bears this out. retxar |
||||||
442 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55245 | ||
You need to understand what kind of "sign" Paul was talking about here. He was addressing un-interpreted tongues in a public church service. He is saying that if un-interpreted tongues are allowed to go on, the uninformed or the unbeliever could bring judgement on themselves. They might treat the manifestation of the Holy Spirit with scoff and ridicule (1Co 14:23) and the Holy Spirit would be mocked (Act_2:13). This is the only interpretation that makes since because words of understanding would be the only ones those who are uninformed or unbelieving would recognize as a positive sign from the Lord (1Co 14:24-25). Un-interpreted, the sign to the uninformed or the unbelievers would NOT be a sign of edification, as would occur with interpretation (1Co_14:5). Rather, the manifestation of the Holy Spirit would become a sign of judgement to them because of there possible ridicule. The Isaiah quote in 1Co_14:21 bears this out. retxar |
||||||
443 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55699 | ||
Maybe not "evidence" as a Biblical requirement, but certainly as a Biblical “result of”. The Apostles were assured that the Gentiles were indeed filled with the Holy Spirit in Acts 10:45-47 by the result of/evidence of/sign of (pick the phrase that sounds best to you) the manifestation of the Spiritual gift of tongues. retxar |
||||||
444 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55750 | ||
Greetings Aspilos, I can agree with you according to your definition of "evidence". However, following your advice, I see a different meaning when I look up the words in question in a dictionary. ev·i·dence : A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment. sign: Something that suggests the presence or existence of a fact, condition, or quality. re·sult: To come about as a consequence. I think any of the above dictionary definitions would fit very well with what the Jewish believers concluded in Acts 10:45-47. And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered,"Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" (Acts 10:45-47) God bless, retxar |
||||||
445 | Is tongues a matter of fact? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55847 | ||
For the record, the definitions I gave were from the American Heritage Dictionary, not something I made up. Anyway, to answer your question: "Do you believe it is a fact that someone has received the Holy Ghost because they spoke with tongues?" No, I believe it is a fact that someone speaks with tongues because they have been filled with and are enabled by the Holy Ghost. I can't see the Apostles teaching anything different according to Acts 10:45-47. retxar |
||||||
446 | Is tongues a matter of fact? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55874 | ||
I'm glad we agree. Do I believe tongues can be imitated? Yes, but I don't know why someone would accuse another sincere believer of such. It is very hard, and certainly not a position I want to put myself in, to judge the intent of another’s heart. All the warnings in scripture concerning tongues are not for them being imitated, but rather for their use at inappropriate times. I can find no warnings for them being imitated in the early church, so I am assuming it was not a big problem or it would have surely been addressed. I think the same applies today. No mysteries exist in the interpretation of Acts 10:44-47. Peter was speaking. The Holy Spirit fell on those listening. They started praising God an speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. Peter and those with him interpreted what they say and heard as those who believed being born again and also being filled with the Holy Spirit because the same thing had happened to them. Jesus Saves! retxar |
||||||
447 | Is tongues a matter of fact? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55895 | ||
Aspilos, No mainline Pentecostal churches I know of would support the teaching that a born again believer must speak in tongues. All would consider that a false teaching as you do, and also as I do. If you a judging all Pentecostal churches according to the way the church you were raised up in taught you, that is simply not true, not fair, and is a false assumption. All Pentecostal churches I know of also teach that a believer is in-dwelt with the Holy Spirit when they are born again, as the WORD teaches. Most teach, as the WORD also teaches, that being filled with the Spirit is not the same as being in-dwelt with the Spirit (example: John 20:22-indwelt Acts 2:4-filled). Some teach that the “evidence” of being filled with the Spirit (not a salvation requirement tho) is speaking in tongues. They base this on scriptural example (as above) and experience (as Peter’s evaluation in Acts 10:47). Others believe, as I do, that speaking in tongues is a result of being filled with the Holy Spirit but not a requirement, because scriptural example and experience is not the same thing as scriptural command. I would recommend you read “The Beauty of the Spiritual Language” by Jack Hayford to get a handle on what is believed and taught about the spiritual gift of tongues in most Pentecostal churches today. God bless you my friend, retxar |
||||||
448 | Is tongues a matter of fact? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55974 | ||
If you are to make such a broad accusation, you need to also point a finger! Otherwise, it sounds like you are accusing all Pentecostal churches of teaching that speaking with tongues is a prerequisite to salvation. Please name the "mainline" Pentecostal churches you are referring to, as I am a loss of who you may be talking about. In response to my previous interpretation of 1Co 14:21-22, you said, "I could not agree with you more on every thing that you have just said.” I said that scoff and ridicule of the Spiritual gift of tongues could bring judgement upon the unbelievers and the un-informed and that this possible judgement was the "sign" to unbelievers that Paul was talking about. I assume you have not changed on that position and we are still in agreement, but I don't quite see how that comes into play in Acts 10. Even tho no interpretation occurred, no scoff or ridicule occurred, because only those who believed and were informed were present. retxar |
||||||
449 | Is tongues a matter of fact? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 56010 | ||
Greetings Aspilos, Not that your "question" really needs an answer (2Ti 2:23), but I guess everyone knows what is real is real and what is pretend is pretend. Please consider what I have already spoken to you concerning 1Co 14:21-22. If the "sign" Paul was speaking of serves as a "witness" to unbelievers, as you are saying, would he not be encouraging the church to speak in tongues to them, instead of warning of the hazards of doing so? READ VERSE 24. If you have the right interpretation, should Paul not have said that unbelievers are convinced by tongues instead of prophesy? How in the world is prophesy going to work on unbelievers if that is not the “sign” they need to believe? I believe I have stated my position well and don't really need to continue repeating myself. I’ll give you the last word here my friend, but unless you come up with something new to discuss concerning tongues, my tongue is about all talked out! "With other tongues and other lips I will speak to this people; And yet, for all that, they will not hear Me," says the Lord. retxar |
||||||
450 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 56732 | ||
Greetings HamsteRulz! You seem to be a sincere young man who desires that God's truth be revealed to you thru His WORD. No one here wants to attack you, your beliefs, or your church. No one cares a bit about “winning” any kind of debate. However, we would all like you to PLEASE accept what the Holy Spirit reveals to you thru His WORD, not our words. The Pharisees asked Jesus the same question you are asking. PLEASE, observe and accept Jesus’s answer without any pre-conceived notions that your church or anyone else may have told you. Joh 8:56 "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." Joh 8:57 Then the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" Joh 8:58 Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM." Won't you reconsider your previous stand? Not based on what I, Tim, Kalos, Searcher, Ed, Joe, RevC, Hank, Makarios, or anyone else said, but based on what JESUS alone said? Jesus is Lord! retxar (Gen 1:2, Gen 1:26, Joh 1:1-2, Joh_1:14, etc., etc.) |
||||||
451 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 57273 | ||
The way I understand what Jesus said in John 8:58 is by following your very good recommendation of using other scripture to interpret and confirm scripture, and also your very true words that scripture never contradicts itself. For example, what John said about Jesus in John 1:1-3 confirms and helps to interpret what Jesus is saying here in John 8:58. Jesus was saying He had existed for eternity with God and as God (same as John 1:1-2!). Also, if we read John 1:3 we see that Jesus was more that just a “plan” or “idea”. When did a “plan” ever physically create anything? Listen to Jesus’s own words in John 17:5 "And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” Jesus was getting ready to go to the cross and He knew that after that, His work was complete and His glory would be restored to it’s previous state that had existed from eternity. If what you are saying is true, the ”glory” Jesus had was only a “thought” in God’s mind. What kind of glory was that? If what you are saying is true, after God’s thought turned into a plan, and the plan was completed, the “plan”, which was Jesus, would exist no more. What kind of “glory” would that be? What kind of "glory" is there in existing no more? What “glory” was He talking about that would be restored if He no longer existed? If I don’t understand what Jesus said in John 8:58, I can see very clearly by the next verse, that the Pharisees did not understood either. I hear, as the Pharisee heard, Jesus saying He was, and is, the ever existing, self-sustaining, great I AM. The only difference between them and me is that I believe what Jesus said and they did not. If the Pharisees had misunderstood what Jesus was saying, don’t you think He would have attempted to correct them at least once? They denied what Jesus said because they refused to believe what He said, not because they did not hear what He said. You deny what Jesus said only because you refuse to hear what He said, but your reaction of un-belief is not a whole lot different. Now, won’t you please put down your rocks and just believe? “Do not be unbelieving, but believing" (John 20:27) retxar |
||||||
452 | WHAT DOES PRAYING IN THE SPIRIT MEAN? | 1 Cor 14:15 | retxar | 55031 | ||
In the 1Co 14:15 reference Paul is saying he will use the gift of tongues in both prayer and song and that it was important for him to us it often and religiously, along with praying and singing with understanding. Therefore praying in the sprit is praying in tongues in this instance. I am not saying that praying in the spirit is always exclusive to praying in tongues only, but I don’t know of any scripture that uses that term where praying in tongues would be excluded. retxar |
||||||
453 | WHAT DOES PRAYING IN THE SPIRIT MEAN? | 1 Cor 14:15 | retxar | 55240 | ||
Jesus promised that He would not return until He was welcomed by His people (Mat 23:37-39). One day that will happen and Israel will be saved (Rom 11:25-29). I think that will begin to happen when the Zec. prophesy you have presented here comes to pass. retxar |
||||||
454 | Meaning of "Praying with our Spirit" | 1 Cor 14:15 | retxar | 93950 | ||
I think what the churches you are referring to are saying is that scripture simply refers to praying in tongues as praying in the spirit. This is exactly what Paul said and taught, so I don’t see how this could be considered wrong. As you have said 1Co 14:14 says ‘if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays’ How hard is that to understand? Just read what it says and then read it again for the interpretation! Here is a verse by verse commentary by David Guzik that is an honest interpretation of what Paul said without all the twisting and squirming that some commentators must resort to in order to get things to fit in with a pre-conceived theology. (1Co 14:14) My spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful: speaking in tongues is communication with God on a spiritual level, by-passing our understanding. My understanding does not benefit when I speak in tongues (is unfruitful), but my spirit prays. (1Co 14:15) Paul gladly proclaims: I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit, I will also sing with the understanding. Paul will use the gift of tongues, both in prayer and in song, and he will use it often. (1Co 14:16) Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how will he who occupies the place of the uninformed say "Amen" at your giving of thanks: if no one understands my blessing of the Lord, if no one understands my thanks to God, they can’t say "Amen" with me. When I am gathered together with other believers, I can’t just do my own thing and say, "Well, it blesses me." I must have a concern for others also. (1Co 14:17) You indeed give thanks well, but the other is not edified: Paul is completely consistent in his emphasis on tongues being directed to God. Just in these verses, he points out what we do with the gift of tongues: we pray, we sing, we bless, and we give thanks. All of these we do unto the Lord, not unto man with the gift of tongues. (1Co 14:18) So, Paul saw great value in the gift of tongues for his own devotional life before the Lord: I thank my God I speak with tongues more than you all. Yet, when he gathered with other Christians, his concern was to be a blessing, not with getting a blessing. (1Co 14:19) Yet in the church I would rather speak five words with my understanding . . . than ten thousand words in a tongue. Therefore, Paul’s use of tongues was pretty much focused in his devotional life with the Lord. God bless! retxar |
||||||
455 | Meaning of "Praying with our Spirit" | 1 Cor 14:15 | retxar | 94063 | ||
The thought that when Paul used the singular form of "tongue" he was talking about a false estatic tongue is totally absurb and totally un-scriptural. This is yet another example of how far otherwise sound bible scholars and teachers will go to try to prove some un-scriptural, pre-concieved theology and how those who want to beleive the same thing will eat it up. Otherwise, explain to me why Paul would give instrustions to the church for the proper use of a fake gift?????? 1 Cor 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue (notice the singular form), let there be two or at the most three, each in turn, and let one interpret. retxar |
||||||
456 | Meaning of "Praying with our Spirit" | 1 Cor 14:15 | retxar | 94133 | ||
Thanks bro! It seems I get caught up in this debate much too often, but when I see respected Bible teachers quoted on something that has no scriptural basis as if it's the Gospel, I have a hard time keeping my mouth shut. Thanks for your support of me on this and I agree with all you have posted here. Let all things be done decently and in order! retxar |
||||||
457 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | retxar | 25776 | ||
God always convicts with specifics, satan always condemns with generalities. Do your accusations against Charis have any specifics or only generalities? retxar |
||||||
458 | Can women be preachers? 1Cor.11:4,5 | 1 Cor 14:34 | retxar | 26128 | ||
Paul may have still been addressing judging of the prophets (1Cor 14:29-33), and stating that the women were to remain silent concerning this, as this would upset the male leadership role in the church. Just a thought. retxar |
||||||
459 | Can women be preachers? 1Cor.11:4,5 | 1 Cor 14:34 | retxar | 26225 | ||
Maybe I said that wrong before. It would upset the male leadership in a church because it would require the women to exercise authority over the men. The meaning of "judge" in 1Cor 2:15 is to discern and scrutinize for one's self. The meaning of "judge" here is to decide what the church will allow, accept, and receive. Big difference. retxar |
||||||
460 | Can women be preachers? 1Cor.11:4,5 | 1 Cor 14:34 | retxar | 26356 | ||
The prophecy of the one prophesying is what is being judged in 1Cor 14:29. The context is what demands a different interpretation than 1Cor 2:15, not the different Greek word used for “judge”. The context in 1Cor 14:29 is talking about the judging by those in an authoritative role in a church service. I personally believe, according to scripture (1Tim 2:12), this would exclude women. Either way, this would not, and could not include anybody and everybody, agreed? The context of 1Cor 2:15 is speaking to each and every Christian. With the help of the Holy Spirit, ALL Christians are to be spiritually discerning. 1Co 2:14 But the natural MAN (not men) does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to HIM (not them) ; nor can HE (not they) know them, because they (the things of God) are spiritually discerned (not naturally discerned). 1Co 2:15 But HE (not they) who is spiritual (walks in the Spirit) judges all things, yet HE (not they) HIMSELF (not themselves) is rightly judged by no one. 1Co 2:16 For "who has known the mind of the LORD that HE (not they) may instruct Him?" But we have the mind of Christ. The Holy Spirit speaks to ALL believers who walk after the Spirit and not the flesh (Rom 8:1). But not all believers (male or female) are called to be in an authoritative role in the church. Please re-read and understand my originally post you responded to. I was only giving another possible meaning for 1Cor 14:34. I am not convinced that Paul was speaking of women judging prophesy here. I was only presenting a possible interpretation that may explain a verse that troubles many. retxar |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ] Next > Last [28] >> |