Results 1 - 11 of 11
|
|
|||||
Results from: Notes Author: Phil12123 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | This is a genuine Miracle!!! | Psalm | Phil12123 | 127347 | ||
Justme, you're absolutely right that nonbelievers may not be convinced and believers need no convincing and I am in the latter category. I certainly believe the Lord performed the miracle and I believe your account of it. It may not convince them but I would love to show the "hard evidence" to some unsaved doctor friends of mine, perhaps to "put to silence the ignorance of foolish men" (1 Pet.2:15). Or who knows, maybe it will soften hearts to later receive a gospel witness. In any event, let's not just "preach to the choir"; let's share the good works of God with the lost world out there! (I know you're not "preaching" to us, just sharing a praise report of how God has blessed you, but you know what I mean.) May God continue to bless you and your family! Phil |
||||||
2 | Age of Miracles - Past or Present | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 126093 | ||
I see your point, but don't you think God knew from the beginning of the Apostolic age that to give certain members in the Body "the gifts of healing" (1 Cor.12:9) or "the working of miracles" (v.10) might result in "worshipping such beings," as you say? Is the solution, remove the gift to avoid such improper worship, or instead, give immediate and adequate rebuke and counsel, as Peter did in Acts 10:26? Should the eye be blind so that it does not receive too much appreciation? I fear this thinking leads to the total removal of ANY man having ANY particular gift that is supernatural or miraculous, including knowledge and wisdom. That's like shooting the dog because he may have fleas. Phil |
||||||
3 | Age of Miracles - Past or Present | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 126091 | ||
Rowdy, Let me also respond to your presupposition, namely, that expressed in this part of your post: "Again, throughout the NT, there was only two instances where christians manifested miraculous powers WITHOUT the gift of "the laying on of the Apostles hands," in Acts 2 and Acts 10. We all know Acts 2 was when the church was established and Acts 10 was the endowment of power to Cornelius and his household for the single express purpose of impressing on Apostle Peter and the rest of the Apostles that the Gospel was for the whole world and not just for the Jews. So, the conclusion is that only the Apostles and those on whom they "laid their hands" manifested these miraculous powers. Further, we can conclude that since none of these folks are here living any longer, there can be no one with such God given powers. Any such miraculous powers must be from another source." 1 Cor.12:7-11 discusses nine supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit which HE divides "to every man severally as HE will" (v.11). We are also told, "the manifestation of the Spirit is given to EVERY MAN to profit withal" (v.7). Where does it say the Spirit HAS TO use an apostle to distribute these gifts to the Body of Christ? Did the apostles lay hands on EVERY MAN in every church in every city in every country? Is that how the Holy Spirit HAS TO operate? Is that what Paul said? You are looking at the Book of Acts and making conclusions that far exceed the teaching of Paul in his epistle. In my humble opinion, you are coming to a faulty conclusion. Now, remove that false supposition, and your search for a true miracle has the chance of yielding a different result. Phil |
||||||
4 | Age of Miracles - Past or Present | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 126089 | ||
Rowdy, thank you for your more complete explanation of where you're coming from. If you stated it before, I missed it. Having said that, I am now puzzled. You start out saying we are living in the age of miracles today, but then you conclude by saying miraculous powers today "must be from another source [other than God]." Well, the only other source of miraculous powers is the devil or demons, right? So, your bottom line is, unless you can be convinced by being shown someone who performs the miracles you described, all miracles today are demonic, right? And what if you were indeed shown such miracles? With your presuppositions, how would not still conclude that such miracles "must be from another source"? Help me out here, if I'm misconstruing what you have said. Phil |
||||||
5 | Age of Miracles - Past or Present | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 125888 | ||
Rowdy, the first thing a person has to come to grips with is your original question---has the age of miracles passed? If it has, then the unavoidable conclusion is anything miraculous is not of God. Other the other hand, if that age has not passed, then of course what God does miraculously through the gifts should line up with the instruction Paul was moved by the Holy Spirit to give the church in his letters, especially 1 Corinthians, which is about all we have on the subject. But another problem may exist, in that, even if some operation of the gift of tongues, for example, is not strictly in line with instructions in 1 Cor. 14, can we really conclude that it was not of God, or at worst, of the devil? Didn't Paul have to correct that church in some of what was going on in that respect? Did he yell at them and say what they were doing was of the devil? Was it not the Holy Spirit operating, not the devil, and yet they still needed instruction such as (1) you need an interpreter too, or (2) do it one at a time, etc.? Not sure I can figure that out. If you have any thoughts there, let me know. The bottom line though is that in everything, God (particularly Jesus, John 16:14) should be glorified. And we are told God is not the author of confusion, so there should be no confusion. Finally, if it is truly a God-given gift, a miraculous power, it will be something that the person could not have done on his own but only by the power of God, Who should therefore get all the honor and praise, not the individual. Don't know if that answers your question, but those are my thoughts for the moment. Phil |
||||||
6 | Why did Paul react so harshly? | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 125882 | ||
First, consider what the Judaizers were doing. They were insisting that to be approved of God the Gentiles had to, in effect, become Jews first, observing circumcision and other Jewish rites and practices. To the Jew, until a Gentile became a Jew and did all that, he was considered in some sense "unclean." As you recall, it took a vision and voice from God to correct Peter's thinking like that (Acts 10). Secondly, consider what the effect of that was, namely, to deny the purity and simplicity of the Gospel, that Christ died for our sins and rose again, and that by simple faith in His finished work at Calvary we can be saved and justified. They were making it a different gospel by adding to it rites and rituals, the effect of which was to deny Christ's work was sufficient and therefore in need of man's works to complete. For anyone to do that would obviously bring the curse and condemnation of God, which Paul was simply articulating in his preaching and writings. Phil |
||||||
7 | Age of Miracles - Past or Present | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 125874 | ||
OK, thanks. Hope both of you see it, since we are all in this together! Phil |
||||||
8 | Age of Miracles - Past or Present | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 125872 | ||
The questions that I asked you to ask yourself are all personal for YOU. I can't answer those for YOU. For ME, if I were to honestly and humbly answer them for ME, I could only admit that I still only "know in part" even with the completed canon. I still look through a glass darkly. I still do not know even as also I am known. The full, complete knowledge has not come, for me, and so the "part" or partial or incomplete is what I am presently stuck with, and therefore it has not been done away yet. So, "that which is perfect" need not refer to Jesus (though He IS perfect), but merely the "perfect" or complete or nonpartial knowledge or realm when partial, incomplete supernatural endowments will no longer be necessary or operating. You don't suppose we are going to have any language barriers in heaven, do you? Or the need for an interpreter for believers to communicate with each other? Well, at that point, the gift of interpretation will obviously be done away. Or the gift of healings. Where there is no disease, there is no use for the gift of healings. When we have full, complete health in a new body, no healing will be needed. Until then, how can anyone think the gift of healings could not only be useful for our sick bodies but for confirmation of the preaching of the gospel, as in Philip's case in Acts 8:6-8. Now back to the question of the age of miracles. If it has past, and I'm not willing to admit that yet, it is NOT because "that which is perfect" has already come. If God is not presently operating in believers, through the supernatural gifts HE sovereignly and graciously gives them, and I repeat IF, it is not because they have been done away by the coming of the perfect. It may be because of sin or lack of faith or some other reason, but not the other. Phil |
||||||
9 | Age of Miracles - Past or Present | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 125836 | ||
I was adding a "Note" to what you said to Rowdy, to add it to your post. This is my first use of this forum and I'm not sure how to add a comment to what someone else has said, basically agreeing with it and adding to it. Phil |
||||||
10 | is jesus god | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 125835 | ||
The third phrase of John 1:1 reads in the English translation, "and the Word was God." The subject of all three phrases of the verse is "the Word" or Logos. Although the word order in the last phrase in the Greek is, "God was the Word," the little word "the" tells the translator that the subject of the phrase is "Word," not "God." It is a rule of Greek grammar. Also, the last phrase by referring to the Logos as "God" is not telling us WHO the Word is, but WHAT the Word is. The Word is not "the Father" but is just as much "GOD" as the Father. The second phrase of the verse, "and the Word was with God" shows the distinction between "the Word" and the Father (or "God"), the key word being "with." One is WITH the Other. That shows a distinction, a separateness of the two personages. If they were the same person and interchangeable, the last phrase would have "the" before both, and would read, "the God was the Word," which would be equal to "the Word was the God." But the omission of the word "the" before the last "God" in the verse, shows the word "God" is used in a descriptive way, describing WHAT the Word is, not WHO. He is DEITY. HE is GOD. Another verse, Col. 2:9, says, "In Christ dwells all the fulness of the DEITY in a body." The word in the KJV is "Godhead" and is theotetos, a grammatical form of theotes, which Thayer defines as "deity, i.e., the state of being God." So in Christ all that is GOD lives in a body. Theotetos means not just divine quality but deity---divine essence, substance, and nature. To illustrate, the qualities of the SUN include hot and bright. But the essence, substance, and nature of the SUN is hydrogen, nitrogen, or whatever the sun's actual substance or makeup is. In Christ lives not only qualities like loving, merciful, just, forgiving, etc., but the essence, substance, and nature of GOD, namely DEITY. Phil |
||||||
11 | Age of Miracles - Past or Present | Bible general Archive 2 | Phil12123 | 125825 | ||
The "that which is perfect" is contrasted with "that which is in part" (1 Cor. 13:10). When the "perfect" (or complete) comes, the "part" (or partial or incomplete) will be done away. Verse 9 says, "we know in part" and in verse 12 Paul reiterates, "now I know in part" but Paul doesn't stop there. He goes on to say, "but THEN [when the perfect, complete comes] shall I know even as also I am known." Rowdy, ask yourself the question, "Do I know NOW even as also I am known?" And, "Do I NOW know perfectly, completely, or do I NOW still look through a glass darkly?" How you answer those questions will also answer your main question. Phil |
||||||