Subject: is tounges a sign of holyghost |
Bible Note: I thought the Montanist Heresy was condemned due to their bringing practices of the orgiastic cult of Cybele. Eusebius records "Many [leaders in the church] thought Montanus to be possessed by an evil spirit, and a troubler of the people; they rebuked him and tried to stop his prophesying; the faithful of Asia assembled in many places, and examining the prophecies declared them profane, and condemned the heresy, so that the disciples were thrust out of the Church and its communion." What really got folks upset was "the declaration that the new prophecy was of a higher order than the old, and therefore unlike it. It came to be thought higher than the Apostles, and even beyond the teaching of Christ." (as the Catholic Encyclopedia puts it). The sect was founded by three "prophets:" Montanus and two women, Maximilla and Priscilla. The entry in the same source goes on, "Priscilla went to sleep, she said, at Pepuza, and Christ came to her and slept by her side 'in the form of a woman, clad in a bright garment, and put wisdom into me, and revealed to me that this place is holy, and that here Jerusalem above comes down'." Sorry for summarizing. There's just too much to write about. Tertullian on the Montanist Heresy's side, Chrysostom, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Zephyrinus on the other. I do not find undocumented claims of anything to be very persuasive. Christianity is about facts rooted in verifiable, truth. Paul said, "Test all things, hold to that which is good." You're right, Montanism in its various forms have caused a great deal of strife, turmoil, and schism in the church. Ed, the truth of a doctrine cannot be verified by the number of people who adhere to it. Just as the truth of a doctrine cannot be falsified by the number of people who abuse it. We need to carefully search the scriptures, and test the fruit of the adherents, as we are commanded. Regarding my use of biased information, my sources were from early church documents. I also found a lot of useful information in the Catholic Encyclopedia at www.newadvent.org. I won't try to defend them or their bias. Not that this has anything to do with the discussion of tongues: Where did you get your 50,000,000 figure for the AOG? The AOG in 2002 had 2,687,366 members in the US according to National Council of Churches annual publication "Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches." That is about half the number of LDS, and about an eighth of SDC. Only the RCC exceed the 50,000,000 number you mentioned. Just curious. At some other point we ought to have a discussion on what is meant by "orthodoxy" since it specifically relates to the handling of scripture. |