Search results

The point you made is exactly the point I made or rather that the bible makes regarding the distinction in the way the Holy Ghost is referenced in Acts 2 as opposed to the manifestation of the Spirit as delineated in 1 Cor 12:8-10. In Acts 2:38, we all who are baptized receive THE gift of the...

The common misunderstanding is confusing receiving the GIFT (singular) of the Holy Ghost per Acts 2:38, with the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit, the GIFTS, plural, those covered in 1 Cor 12:8-10 which become manifested as discussed previously, by the laying on of the apostle's hands...

I just covered this with someone else yesterday. You have to read the text closely as there's a difference in what the Lord Said in his instructions to Ananias in verse 12, as opposed to what Ananias said in verse 17. See below. The Lord's instructions to Ananias said nothing whatsoever about...

Acts 2 and 10 were unique and not the norm wherein the Spirit fell unilaterally as a sign, to validate what was occurring to the Jews in Jerusalem, and to Peter in Caesarea. In both cases, what occurred was the beginning of the church, 1st in Jerusalem and then amongst the Gentiles in Caesarea...

It does make a difference without the 'a'.

Just FYI, the KJV says "God is a spirit" in John 4:24, however, if you look at the origional Greek in the interlinear, it says "God is spirit", no 'a'. Other translations have likewise translated this to agree with the Greek, even the New KJV leaves out 'a'.

The power from on high as referenced in Luke 24:49 by Jesus to his apostles, gave THEM the ability to enable the manifestation of the Spirit, the gifts as they are commonly referred to today, which they solely did as noted in such passages as Acts 5:12, Acts 6:6-8, Acts 8:9-17, Acts 19:6.

The distinction is between gift and gifts, one being the gift or indwelling of the actual Spirit itself, and the other is the manifestation of the various miraculous gifts that are or were bestowed upon individuals subsequent to having the Spirit within them, brought about by the laying on of...

Just for clarification, the Samarians not only believed, but were baptized, and by doing so, they received the Holy Ghost according to Acts 2:38. And the reasons are the same for both the Samarians and the Ephesians as to when and how they received the gifts (plural) of the Spirit (not the...

Proclaiming or professing to be a Christian doesn't mean you are. There is a process by which one BECOMES a Christian. 1. Belief and faith 2. Confession of belief as did the Ethiopian eunuch and consistent with Romans 10:9 3. Repentance as was told the Jews must do on the day of Pentecost in...

The scriptures tell you why Jesus was baptized: to fulfill righteousness Mat 3:13-15

It's simple. They, the Samarians, had only heard the word, believed, and were baptized meaning they were saved, members or the Lord's body, and received the gift (singular) of the Holy Ghost/Spirit itself (Acts 2:38-47), but not gifts (plural) or manifestations of the Holy Ghost/Spirit, those...

Believe what you like and break God's word wherever it's convenient for you to do so since it's not stated to keep it all the time. Goodbye

Your logic is not sound. In other words, it's OK or it was OK back then to deviate from God's word except for the books only in which the warnings were noted. That's dumb. God's word us everlasting and unchanging and certainly cannot be abridged by man simply because his warnings were not...

New Beachhead? No, just proper understanding of scripture as relates to the manifestation of the Spirit, or gifts of the Spirit as they are commonly referred to. Spiritual gifts: unconfusing them. 2 Parts

FYI, there are already threads on the subject of spiritual gifts that I started posted on the theology forum.

The bible supports that it is complete by inference via warnings in both the OT and NT regarding adding to, taking away, or preaching different than, as found in Deuteronemy 4:2, 12:32, Proverbs 30:5-6, Gal 1:6-9, Rev 22:19. Tradition can only be consistent with his word and not outside or...

The bible is the complete word of God right? So if it is, and such days that have been devised by man aren't in it, i.e., Easter, Christmas, is it really right? Do such man-made so-called religious holidays really deserve reverence as such, as though God demanded reverence or unique observation...

Believe and celebrate whatever you like, but I'll stick to the scriptures as my guide.

What is "hogwash" is that Easter, irrespective of the origin of the word, is man-made tradition and not scriptural as you pointed out above, and the Greek word, pascha, means passover, which is found in the scriptures, not Easter nor any scriptural basis for the resurrection being celebrated and...