D
Dave L
Guest
Human faith is not biblical faith.As I already pointed out it is faithfulness, as in fidelity. But, seeing as you want it your way, I agree to disagree.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Human faith is not biblical faith.As I already pointed out it is faithfulness, as in fidelity. But, seeing as you want it your way, I agree to disagree.
I too have the Holy Spirit but after studying the gifts, realized today's versions are not the biblical ones.I won't debate this....I know what I have experienced and witnessed throughout my life and it is very real for today.
Articulation is not one of my gifts, especially when I haven't rehearsed, practiced or shared my testimony. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word. Logos. But when I 'saw' what I perceived to be Jesus, my faith and prayer turned pretty radical that night. Faith is substantial. <<Watchman Nee helped me get a better grasp of faith.I believe it, some people receive by simple faith.
But scripture only shows two outpourings and an apostle's hands as a means for distributing the gifts.
I too have the Holy Spirit but after studying the gifts, realized today's versions are not the biblical ones.
Human faith is not biblical faith.
“and that we may be delivered from perverse and evil people. For not all have faith.” (2 Thessalonians 3:2) (NET)The measure of faith given to mankind is from God, and is biblical faith. Therefore, man is without excuse. (And Calvinism is error to the extreme, in more than one area of doctrine.)
If we begin a new thread, I can show you what the real gifts were and how today's "gifts" only imitate them. But we should not take this thread off topic. I simply answered the OP and people didn't like the answer. So it became tangled.Wrong - they are. What some don't realize is they are trying to impose rules on one gift, when it only applies to another gift. I suspect that is what you may be doing. For instance, there are two manifestations of tongues. One of them does not REQUIRE interpretation, but the unlearned only sees the rules for the other.
This is one of two outpourings I mentioned. All other giving of the gifts were through the hands of an apostle (one sent by Jesus).Wrong.
Acts 10: While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. 45 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.
No laying on of hands.
“and that we may be delivered from perverse and evil people. For not all have faith.” (2 Thessalonians 3:2) (NET)
This is one of two outpourings I mentioned. All other giving of the gifts were through the hands of an apostle (one sent by Jesus).
No, but he used the gifts to confirm the Apostles authority. (the signs of an Apostle). Tongues were also for a sign of impending doom which happened in 70 AD in Jerusalem Isaiah 28:11–13.So exactly what formula are you trying to impose? God does the baptizing, whether sovereignly or by laying on of hands. God doesn't need an apostle.
No, but he used the gifts to confirm the Apostles authority. (the signs of an Apostle). Tongues were also for a sign of impending doom which happened in 70 AD in Jerusalem Isaiah 28:11–13.
In the OT God threatened the Jews with serving men of other tongues or languages they did not understand. This was the main purpose behind the gift, that prophecy already covered for.No the "judgment" of 1 Corinthians 14:21 was impending doom to those who wouldn't accept CHRIST. It had nothing to do with the temple. But, you are right in that tongues was a negative sign, not a positive sign as most believe. Good for you. You just got the 'what' wrong. You see, it pointed to the same type of sign that CHRIST is, not the type of sign that the temple was - none. Can you tell me what type of sign Christ was and how it was a negative sign?
In the OT God threatened the Jews with serving men of other tongues or languages they did not understand. This was the main purpose behind the gift, that prophecy already covered for.
Tongues + interpretation = prophecy.And how do you believe tongues replicated that?
Tongues + interpretation = prophecy.
“For with stammering lips and another tongue Will he speak to this people. To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; And this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. But the word of the Lord was unto them Precept upon precept, precept upon precept; Line upon line, line upon line; Here a little, and there a little; That they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, And snared, and taken.” (Isaiah 28:11–13)
Plus several other threats based on foreign tongues as a symbol of judgement.
But, Paul said tongues were for a sign.Yes, that is one of the tongues manifestations of the Spirit. But the one in verse 23 is not the gift of diverse kinds of tongues that requires interpretation, and does not equal prophecy.
But, Paul said tongues were for a sign.
I believe you have misunderstood the gift of tongues (as have many others). Interpretation is quite necessary for genuine tongues (glossais =languages). And there are NOT two manifestations of tongues.For instance, there are two manifestations of tongues. One of them does not REQUIRE interpretation, but the unlearned only sees the rules for the other.