Results 21 - 40 of 51
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: richilou Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10592 | ||
And concerning the challenge I posed to the pastor I mentioned earlier in my note. Let me tell you my friend that he had nothing to answer but to admit that he will continue to practice what he had learned in the past. So I told him: "Poor brother, what you are telling me is that your tradition seems more solid than what the the text says. For more informations on the subject with a deep exegesis, I recommend you to read a book written by Thomas Edgar ("Satisfied By The Promise of the Spirit). | ||||||
22 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10686 | ||
I suggest to you once more to read the book of Dr. Thomas Edgar: "Satisfied by the Promise of the Spirit". You will find in it exactly a chapter dealing of what Paul meant by the "prayer in tongue". I can assure you that you will not be able after to think that there are two things concerning tongue: speaking and praying, as you seem to believe. May God lead you in all the truth according to the TEXT and not according to the EXPERIENCE of yours or others as it is often the case unfortunately. | ||||||
23 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10689 | ||
The fact is that you seem to believe that I am a cessationist, it is NOT the case at all. Do not think that I don't believe in the gift of tongue, otherwise you would have missed all my point. What I try to say and affirm with what I said is that I do not believe in the tongues AS IT IS PRACTISED IN THE PENTECOSTAL AND CHARISMATIC MOVEMENTS OF TODAY. For the rest, God is God and will ever be able to give what He wants to whom He wants. | ||||||
24 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10690 | ||
I appreciated the fact that you have been helped in your question. But do not forget what I will say here: "For all subjects in the Scriptures, the issue is to find the purpose of the author through the context he used and never be tempted to found your beliefs on such and such experience. Doing that, you'll be wiser to the Glory of God. | ||||||
25 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10704 | ||
If you think that all the gibberish (unintelligible sounds) we hear is real tongues as the the word "glossa" means, my friend, you are in trouble. Because be careful about one thing. Many times I heard the same "chalalabadi" in the same sequence and the interpretation was totally different from time to time. So if the tongue was real you must be at least honest enough to say that the gift of interpretation was very poor. Think about that and if you come back on the issue, I will share you an experience the Dr. Don A Carson lived one time in a charismatic church and you will see the point I try to make. | ||||||
26 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10705 | ||
I am not cessationist when the text is well understood and applied. | ||||||
27 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10735 | ||
I think that we differ deeply in our hermeneutic principle guidelines of interpretation. I would like to know, first on what ground you are in that field. Be assured that I will respond to you. | ||||||
28 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10776 | ||
If you understand the meaning of the word hermeneutic, I think, however that you seem to fail to apply it in the interpretation of a passage. When Paul made an allusion to the praying the tongue of angels, he didn't mean that it was a "reality" in the eyes of God, as a THING TO PRACTICE. It is there that hermeneutics comes to our rescue. First, we must keep in mind the real purpose of Paul in that chapter and not forget the real problem the Corinthians had with the gifts of the Spirit, more than likely the one of tongues. Follow the reasoning of Paul (not mine) here. He began the chapter in the words he finished the last (LOVE). But he says immediately, that prophecy was "preferable" to the tongues, not according to him or to God, but because of the corinthian trouble. Right? Why can we say that? Because they missed the point of the gifts in general and he wanted to reestablish the foundational goal that the gifts of the Spirit were for the edification of the saints, right again? Now, follow the rest. He said this: "For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. Now, of what mysteries was he talking about? It is in the sense that it is incomprehensible to the common man or the common language of the church. But now, the trap that so many fall in is this. They think that in saying that, Paul was promoting a spiritual exercice called "praying in tongue" and that, just because they see the expression "speaketh not unto men, but unto God". But, why did he say that? What did he mean by that form of argumentation. My friend, hermeneutics help us to know that in the times of Paul, the rethorical form of language for purpose of argumentation was very much used and above all, by the rabbinical way of teaching (do not forget that Paul had been trained at the feet of Gamaliel). So it was normal for him to borrow the same way of language when he tried to make a point very clear. But, once again, what did he mean by "speaketh not unto men, but unto God"? Here is the answer. The Corinthians have the tendency to forget the goal of spiritual gifts and Paul is saying that if there is no edification at all, you don't have any right to pretend that you do the best thing according to God. But the main point is the following. Verse 2 is another way of saying this: "Dear Corinthians, when you speak in tongue the way you seem to do, you are in reality not speaking to men that would have the right to be edified, but it is AS THOUGH YOU WOULD SPEAK TO GOD, BECAUSE IN THE WAY YOU SPEAK, THERE WOULD BE ONLY HIM THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND ANYWAY, SINCE NOBODY IN THE CHURCH UNDERSTANDS WHAT YOU SAY BY YOUR WORDS". Do you get the point he tried to make? He wanted to show that a mysterious language is good when it is accessible to others by the way of interpretation, and nothing else. But, for them it was totally the contrary; nobody was able to understand because there were not always good interpreters in their midst. So the second verse is a way of saying: "Hey Corinthians, for the sake of God and for the sake of your brothers in Christ, be not foolish in saying things that only God could understand. Remember that God would like you to practice in such a way that everybody would be able to get the mysterious message. Mysterious until it is interpreted correctly. That is the key of the passage and the help hermeneutics can give. | ||||||
29 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10832 | ||
You are very inconsistent with your critic of mine. You said that you have never seen the approach I had and at the same time, you say that you suspect that it could be the one of Dr. Edgar. So, what I noticed at 100 percent sure, is that you have never read the book of Dr. Edgar. So, read and after you will speak more solidly. And for the rest, study the hermeneutics in the times of the apostles and you will find that it is not an idea taken in the air... I conclude with this remark: Do you think you have all read what has been written on a subject? | ||||||
30 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10834 | ||
My friend, there is a huge difference between applying the rules of hermeneutics and the outline of a letter. Sorry! | ||||||
31 | Holy Spirit baptism and tongues | Mark 9:24 | richilou | 10926 | ||
Ok, my friend, let us study more on our own side. In Heaven we will try to find Paul...LOL | ||||||
32 | Jesus' early years? | Luke 2:52 | richilou | 10576 | ||
In passing, James Stalker is an evangelical christian. | ||||||
33 | the divinity of Christ | John 1:1 | richilou | 10577 | ||
Did you know that the probably next battle that evangelicalism will have to fight against in the next years, will be concerning the divinity of Christ? If you want some books on the subject that can prepare you to stand the trend, I can give you some. | ||||||
34 | Please explain the Trinity. | John 1:1 | richilou | 10583 | ||
If I may another feeble illustration to clarify the concept of the Trinity let me say this. One day, I opened the door to two women of Jehovah's Witnesses (who are the farthest than them in rejecting the trinity?). But, in the providence of God it has been given to me to be face to face with not only two women, but the mother and her daughter. So trying to give them a simple illustration of the trinity (while it is always limited), I asked to the older: "Are you a woman?" She said: "Yes." Then, I asked to the younger: "Are you a woman?" She said yes too. But as a second question I asked them do you notice that while you are both women, you are not the same in your role; one is the mother and one is the daughter. They understood that very well. So I concluded like this. When we say that you are two women, but not the same person at the same time in your role, we make an allusion to your nature (womanhood) and your role (mother-daughter). In the same way, when we, christians say that Jesus is God, we don't mean by that that the Son IS the Father and the Father IS the Son. We say that they are one concerning their nature (divine). It is in that way that John said in his Gospel that the Word was God. Not to say that the Son is the Father or vice versa, but that they are of divine nature, equal in essence, but not confusing each other. It is exactly that in the Creed of the Nicea and Chalcedon as well. | ||||||
35 | the divinity of Christ | John 1:1 | richilou | 10593 | ||
"Jesus Under Fire!" (Michael J. Wilkins and J.P. Moreland) "The Jesus Crisis" (Robert L. Thomas and F. David Farnell). These 4 men are all solid conservative evangelical scholars). Thank God for their insight. |
||||||
36 | How can one be sure of his/her salvation | John 3:16 | richilou | 10411 | ||
It is an interesting answer, but I think that we have to be shorter as much as possible in our intervention. But I agree with you. | ||||||
37 | can you know people you never met before | John 3:16 | richilou | 10413 | ||
I think that your sincerity and the shortness of your answer is what you had to say to glorify God. | ||||||
38 | What does it mean to believe. . . ? | John 3:16 | richilou | 10416 | ||
You have not be a scholar to answer that question, but I would say that there would been many things to add to that question. Being a teacher of theology in my local church, I would like to meet you on the mail once again. Thanks! | ||||||
39 | What does it mean to believe. . . ? | John 3:16 | richilou | 10417 | ||
I think that if you had read the other book of John MacArthur, "The Gospel according to the Apostles" you would change your point of view. Unfortunately, those who think that repentance is not a prerequisite to salvation don't understand what Jesus means by it. Without any blemish... | ||||||
40 | What does it mean to believe. . . ? | John 3:16 | richilou | 10418 | ||
I think you have explained the theoretical meaning of the word, but you didn't have answer the very question. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] Next > Last [3] >> |