Faith Healing

[UppsalaDragby]

You have not demonstrated Paul was talking about people's personal faith. When Paul preached the faith was he preaching the various faiths of individuals? No. He was preaching the ONE faith as taught in the NT, Eph 4:5 says "ONE faith". The NT teaches ONE FAITH not a multitude of faithS and when the NT was completely revealed then there was a oneness, wholeness, completeness of that ONE faith.

In 1 Cor 1:10 there was division for they were not all following that one faith. Paul was trying to get rid of the division and get the back to the one faith of the NT, the one faith in Christ.

Of course Paul was not preaching different faiths, as in different truths, no one believes that! But you are confusing having access to exactly the same amount of information or knowledge with unity in the faith. Not everyone living during the first century had access to the same texts, but as long as they agreed on the core tenets of Christianity they could still have unity in the faith.

Paul told the Corinthians to speak the same thing. Paul said in Rom 12:16 be of the same mind. Paul told the Philippians "that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind." Phl 2:2. Paul then tells them " let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing." Phl 3:16

Yes of course he did, and he also told them not to go beyond what is written, which is exactly what you are doing - the very reason it is causing division in the church.

Note the first century Christians, no matter where they were located, where to have the same mind, have a "like precious faith" as Peter said. Specifically Paul told them to "walk by the same rule" The Greek word for 'rule' is kanon meaning a rod, a standard by which things are measured. They were to follow that canon of NT scripture that had been given them by inspiration, i.e., they were to follow THE FAITH the ONE faith as the NT teaches and were not free to have their own personal, contradicting faiths. That canon of faith they were to walk by was completed when all of God's word was revealed.

So you think that Peter and Paul were telling them to have unity in a "canon" of faith that wasn't even established at the time! Don't you see how utterly foolish an argument like that is? The Greek word "kanōn" does not have the same meaning as the english word "canon". Here is what it means:

I.a rod or straight piece of rounded wood to which any thing is fastened to keep it straight
A.used for various purposes
i.a measuring rod, rule
ii.a carpenter's line or measuring tape
iii.the measure of a leap, as in the Olympic games
II.a definitely bounded or fixed space within the limits of which one's power of influence is confined
A.the province assigned one
B.one's sphere of activity
III.metaph. any rule or standard, a principle or law of investigating, judging, living, acting

"Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught" They were to be in THE FAITH which they were taught, as taught by the NT. There were not taught a faith or many faiths but "the faith" as found in the NT canon. "The" is a definite article, denoting one particular, specific faith.

Again, you are in error. You are saying that they were taught "the faith as found in the NT canon" before the NT canon was even complete. But all of this is a huge red herring, because you still haven't given one single verse that teaches us that such an event would cause the gifts of the Spirit to cease.

Finally Jude said "contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" THE FAITH which was once delivered. THE FAITH refers to the NT canon that was once delivered to them. So in Eph 4 "unity of the faith" is speaking of that entire canon of NT scripture that was once delivered. There will never be unity in what all men personally believe but there is a unity, oneness, wholeness, completeness of that NT canon of faith by which Christians are to walk.

It's the same thing here! Look at the very verse you quoted: "contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints". And if Eph 4 is speaking of this and says that it was "once delivered" then it totally disproves your point! Are you really thinking about what you are saying or are you just being obstinate?

Perfect in 1 Cor 13 KJV does not mean sinless perfection, but means to be completed, made whole, finished. Perfect is contrasted in the context to that which is "in part". In the context, what was "in part" was the NT canon, it was not yet completed when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. They did not have the full, perfected, whole, finished word of God revealed to them yet, they were looking through a glass darkly as Paul said.

Yeah, that's what you say, and it is what we disagree about, so why keep on saying it? The word perfect (teleios) means perfect, which is why the word has been translated as "perfect". teleios is the root of "teleiōtēs", or "perfecter" which is used in Hebrews 12:2:

"Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith"

The video did not prove a miracle took place, so we still are where we were at before with there being no objective, scientifically proven case of anyone today being raised from the dead. And the Hebrew writer was not wrong. Men are appointed once to die. Men is used to speak generically of mankind. Naturally men do die once which is what the Hebrew writer speaks of, it is not referring to the supernatural. People today naturally die once for there is no supernatural, miraculous raising from the dead taking place. Jesus walking on water back then does not mean men today can defy laws of gravity supernaturally.

Another diversion. I told you clearly in my previous post that I wasn't using the video to prove any miracle took place!

Why are you ignoring that???

Someone who is raised from the dead will not convince anyone who does not want to believe (Luke 16:31). You obviously don't want to believe it was a miracle because it messes up you cessationist theories. That's your choice. But I submitted the video because of YOUR claim that something like that would be on the news, the newspapers, the internet and so on. You then were so foolish as to claim that "there's nothing". I knew that your assertion was wrong because I have seen such things several times - 1. On the news (just check out the video) 2. In the newspapers, and 3. On the internet.

Now, you are desparately trying to defend your claim by saying that it doesn't prove anything miraculous, but since it is YOU who are making the claim that it is "nothing" then it is YOUR onus to prove that what you claim is true!

Now the way you deal with the link I posted is also the way you deal with scripture. Rather than being a man and admitting that you have been proven wrong, you are all over the place trying to find a way to wriggle out it.

But just continue Ernest.. the more you wriggle, the more obvious it becomes to anyone reading this what kind of game you are playing.

 

[Madad21]

Why not healing?

Why is it we can pray for guidance through the spirit and receive it?
The Spirit brings to mind verses and reveals secrets as we look intently in to the Word.

I once cried out to Christ before giving up on my life and in a split second I was lifted up from the darkest of depressions and then PHYSICALLY wrapped in warmth and felt loved. all I could say was "Thank you Jesus" over and over and over. ,

Another time in the back of an ambulance I called upon Christ just before I went in to a full respiratory arrest that whole week ambulance officers all claimed they had no idea why I lived. I was even on a TV show called "Rapid Response" in NZ because of what had happened.

When I feel tempted I call opon Jesus and with in moments temptation flees.

Some of these things and more happen daily. And those who walk in faith without doubt know exactly what it is Im saying.

The only thing that has changed since NT times is the strength of a mans mustard seed faith. We are told to come to Christ as children.
Children trust unconditionally without doubt. If the Father says "You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."(Jhn 14:14)
Then we need to trust that we have received an answer.
The answer will be "NO" if its not good for us, "Later" if you not ready for it and "Yes" because what you have asked you asked in the Spirit of Glorifying God with your life.

Time has made the Christian man sceptical and hard hearted. they pray with the thought "Well if this doesnt work, I will just have to try this or that" and by doing so already dismissed the power of the Lord, why should they receive anything? (as James has said)

God has given doctors gifts of medical knowledge and know how, of course when it comes to healing we all need to go straight to the docs.

But as far as the miraculous is concerned, we need not give up on the power of our relationship with the Lord God.
If we dismiss his miracles, we dismiss his power, we dismiss his Word and we dismiss the power of his Son.

 

[snr5557]

Why not healing?

Why is it we can pray for guidance through the spirit and receive it?
The Spirit brings to mind verses and reveals secrets as we look intently in to the Word.

I once cried out to Christ before giving up on my life and in a split second I was lifted up from the darkest of depressions and then PHYSICALLY wrapped in warmth and felt loved. all I could say was "Thank you Jesus" over and over and over. ,

Another time in the back of an ambulance I called upon Christ just before I went in to a full respiratory arrest that whole week ambulance officers all claimed they had no idea why I lived. I was even on a TV show called "Rapid Response" in NZ because of what had happened.

When I feel tempted I call opon Jesus and with in moments temptation flees.

Some of these things and more happen daily. And those who walk in faith without doubt know exactly what it is Im saying.

The only thing that has changed since NT times is the strength of a mans mustard seed faith. We are told to come to Christ as children.
Children trust unconditionally without doubt. If the Father says "You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."(Jhn 14:14)
Then we need to trust that we have received an answer.
The answer will be "NO" if its not good for us, "Later" if you not ready for it and "Yes" because what you have asked you asked in the Spirit of Glorifying God with your life.

Time has made the Christian man sceptical and hard hearted. they pray with the thought "Well if this doesnt work, I will just have to try this or that" and by doing so already dismissed the power of the Lord, why should they receive anything? (as James has said)

God has given doctors gifts of medical knowledge and know how, of course when it comes to healing we all need to go straight to the docs.

But as far as the miraculous is concerned, we need not give up on the power of our relationship with the Lord God.
If we dismiss his miracles, we dismiss his power, we dismiss his Word and we dismiss the power of his Son.

I didn't say not to pray. By all means do, I mean when a person refuses medical treatment because they feel that somehow doubts God. You can do both. A doctor will not forcably stop you from praying, they can't.

 

[Madad21]

I didn't say not to pray. By all means do, I mean when a person refuses medical treatment because they feel that somehow doubts God. You can do both. A doctor will not forcably stop you from praying, they can't.

I wasnt jumping on you, I was just talking.
Peace, I hope you are well

 

[snr5557]

I wasnt jumping on you, I was just talking.

ok

 

[Poppin]

Mk 16:20 "And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen."

There is no tongue speaking today. The unintelligible utterances as done by some today is NOT miraculous nor is it as the known eartly tongues as spoken miraculously by the apostles in Acts 2.

This is most certainly true.

 

[KingJ]

The purpose of miraculous signs was to confirm and reveal the complete (perfect) word of God. God's word was completely revealed by the end of the first century with John writing Revelation so the signs ceased, vanished away as Paul said they would in 1 Cor 13

Jesus made a very powerful statement I believe specially for people who believe as you do on this issue. Mark 11:23 Truly I tell you, if anyone says to this ''mountain'' :lol: , 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will happen, it will be done for them.

God is telling us that ''anyone'' can take a leap of faith. When that faith is in Him, He responds.

Then John 9:31 We know that God does not listen to sinners. He listens to the godly person who does his will.

We now know that the only leap of faith that He will respond to is the leap that results in conversion. Ie, not making a leap to put God to the test. We also now properly grasp that He hears all those who are after His heart / worship Him in spirit and truth.

Then there is perhaps the ultimate nail in the coffin John 14:12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.

I'm sure that's what it's called. It's when parents refuse to take their very sick child to the doctor because by asking for a professional doctor to cure their child would be doubting in God's ability to heal them. Many children have died because of this. From things that in the 21st century in a first world country where we can actually deal with diseases.


I've never personally met anyone who would do such a thing, so what are your views on this?


And while we are at it, whose against having people get vaccinated? For whatever reason.

God definitely answers prayers. The most important consideration in any prayer request is 1 John 5:14 And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us.

God prefers to be a back up. He doesn't always want centre stage on miracles. He gave us brains, eyes and hands for a reason! He knew there would be doctors. God is for science!

Mk 16:20 "And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen."

There is no tongue speaking today. The unintelligible utterances as done by some today is NOT miraculous nor is it as the known eartly tongues as spoken miraculously by the apostles in Acts 2.

Sure there are many frauds. Paul makes it clear when and where to speak in tongues. We follow all Paul's teaching but not his high recommendation of speaking in tongues to us all? You would need to show me scripture stating the Holy Spirit has abandoned us, before I listen to any more of your opinion....because of Acts 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying.

Why are you quoting Mark 16:20 as support?

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Of course Paul was not preaching different faiths, as in different truths, no one believes that! But you are confusing having access to exactly the same amount of information or knowledge with unity in the faith. Not everyone living during the first century had access to the same texts, but as long as they agreed on the core tenets of Christianity they could still have unity in the faith.


Yes of course he did, and he also told them not to go beyond what is written, which is exactly what you are doing - the very reason it is causing division in the church.


So you think that Peter and Paul were telling them to have unity in a "canon" of faith that wasn't even established at the time! Don't you see how utterly foolish an argument like that is? The Greek word "kanōn" does not have the same meaning as the english word "canon". Here is what it means:

I.a rod or straight piece of rounded wood to which any thing is fastened to keep it straight
A.used for various purposes
i.a measuring rod, rule
ii.a carpenter's line or measuring tape
iii.the measure of a leap, as in the Olympic games
II.a definitely bounded or fixed space within the limits of which one's power of influence is confined
A.the province assigned one
B.one's sphere of activity
III.metaph. any rule or standard, a principle or law of investigating, judging, living, acting


Again, you are in error. You are saying that they were taught "the faith as found in the NT canon" before the NT canon was even complete. But all of this is a huge red herring, because you still haven't given one single verse that teaches us that such an event would cause the gifts of the Spirit to cease.


It's the same thing here! Look at the very verse you quoted: "contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints". And if Eph 4 is speaking of this and says that it was "once delivered" then it totally disproves your point! Are you really thinking about what you are saying or are you just being obstinate?


Yeah, that's what you say, and it is what we disagree about, so why keep on saying it? The word perfect (teleios) means perfect, which is why the word has been translated as "perfect". teleios is the root of "teleiōtēs", or "perfecter" which is used in Hebrews 12:2:

"Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith"


Another diversion. I told you clearly in my previous post that I wasn't using the video to prove any miracle took place!

Why are you ignoring that???

Someone who is raised from the dead will not convince anyone who does not want to believe (Luke 16:31). You obviously don't want to believe it was a miracle because it messes up you cessationist theories. That's your choice. But I submitted the video because of YOUR claim that something like that would be on the news, the newspapers, the internet and so on. You then were so foolish as to claim that "there's nothing". I knew that your assertion was wrong because I have seen such things several times - 1. On the news (just check out the video) 2. In the newspapers, and 3. On the internet.

Now, you are desparately trying to defend your claim by saying that it doesn't prove anything miraculous, but since it is YOU who are making the claim that it is "nothing" then it is YOUR onus to prove that what you claim is true!

Now the way you deal with the link I posted is also the way you deal with scripture. Rather than being a man and admitting that you have been proven wrong, you are all over the place trying to find a way to wriggle out it.

But just continue Ernest.. the more you wriggle, the more obvious it becomes to anyone reading this what kind of game you are playing.

Yes, they could have unity in the faith, not unity in their own personal faiths. So the oneness or unity of the faith refers to the one, complete unified body of truth of the NT when it was completely revealed. Those gifts Christ gave to men therefore would last TILL there was a oneness, wholeness, togertherness of the ONE unified body of faith and truth and has nothing at all with what people personally believe for what people personally believe may contradict each other and contradict that unified body of the truth found in the NT Again, there will never be a time when there will be unity in what all people personally believe but there is unity, oneness of that body of faith, body of truth as taught in the NT from Matthew to Revelation.

When Paul told his readers to be of the same mind and think the same things, Paul was talking about the faith as his preached. Their faith should be in that body of truth/faith that comes from the NT.


I posted "Specifically Paul told them to "walk by the same rule" The Greek word for 'rule' is kanon meaning a rod, a standard by which things are measured."

What was this rule or rod they were to walk by? THE FAITH in those things Paul had written and preached to them. So the NT canon of scripture is that rule or rod that Christians are to go by. And those gifts would last TILL there was a unity, completeness of that rule/rod, a one, unified body of truth which was completed by the end of the first century. As Paul said in 1 Cor 13 those gifts would cease, vanish away for they would no longer be needed for they fulfilled thier design and purpose.

When Jude said "contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints",
Jude is NOT telling them to contend for A faith or for their own personal beliefs but to contend for that one unified body of truth as taught in the NT. False teachers with false teachings would creep into the church so Jude told them to contend the faith, the one body of truth. Jude did not want them to fall away from "the faith" from that one body of truth. Again, the faith, that one unified body of truth was revealed piece by piece through the use of signs and was completed by the end of the first century whereby those signs would no longer be needed for they fulfilled their purpose.


Once delivered is passive voice showing the faith, one unified body of truth was delivered by Christ, not actively delivered by humans.

Once delivered also means it would just need to be delivered just one time. It would not have to be revealed many, many times over the centuries, just one time. Since miraculous signs were used to reveal God's word, and God's word would only need to be delivered once and not over and over again, then those signs used to deliver "the faith" would only need to be used once and they would then have fulfill their pupose that one time and vanish away never needed to be used again to deliver "the faith" over and over.



In 1 Cor 13 the word perfect as used in the KJV means to make whole, complete, to finish.
Pertect is being contrasted to that which is "in part". That thing which is in part now will be complete later. If 'perfect' refers to Christ then it is saying Christ was in part, imperfect only to be perfect some time later. Yet Christ was never in part or imperfect. Perfect is neuter gender and since it is not referring to Christ it is referring to a thing.


No video will provide proof of one raised from the dead for it does not occur.

Jesus made a very powerful statement I believe specially for people who believe as you do on this issue. Mark 11:23 Truly I tell you, if anyone says to this ''mountain'' :lol: , 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will happen, it will be done for them.

God is telling us that ''anyone'' can take a leap of faith. When that faith is in Him, He responds.

Then John 9:31 We know that God does not listen to sinners. He listens to the godly person who does his will.

We now know that the only leap of faith that He will respond to is the leap that results in conversion. Ie, not making a leap to put God to the test. We also now properly grasp that He hears all those who are after His heart / worship Him in spirit and truth.

Then there is perhaps the ultimate nail in the coffin John 14:12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.


God definitely answers prayers. The most important consideration in any prayer request is 1 John 5:14 And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us.

God prefers to be a back up. He doesn't always want centre stage on miracles. He gave us brains, eyes and hands for a reason! He knew there would be doctors. God is for science!


Sure there are many frauds. Paul makes it clear when and where to speak in tongues. We follow all Paul's teaching but not his high recommendation of speaking in tongues to us all? You would need to show me scripture stating the Holy Spirit has abandoned us, before I listen to any more of your opinion....because of Acts 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying.

Why are you quoting Mark 16:20 as support?

Jn 20:30,31 "Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name."


The verb phase 'are written' is perfect tense denoting an act done in the past that has a continuing effect. What John therefore is saying is those signs Jesus performed in the past that have been written down still continue to induce a belief in people today as they did 2000+ years ago. Since those signs continue to induce a belief in people there is no need for them to be repeated. If they needed to be repeated today then that totally defeats the reason and pupose of John writing them down.

---------

In Jn 14:12 - I do not see that "greater works" is about miraculous works. If He were talking about mirculous works how could they do "greater" miracles than Christ? Christ was unique in the miracles he did, Jn 15:24

Jesus said "he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father" If "greater works" is about miraculous works, why would He have to first go the His Father?

The "greater works" Jesus speaks of is the work of taking the gospel to the lost and making converts. While Christ was on earth, he prepared people for the coming of the gospel, laying the foundation. Yet for the gospel to be preached and souls to be saved Christ would first have to die, be buried and arise from the dead returning to HIs Father. So this work could not start until Jesus arose from the dead. Also, the aposltes to whom Jesus was speaking, Jesus had told them that after He left He would send them the Comforter that would guide them to all truth and give them remembrance of all things as they went about preaching, Jn 16:7-16 So Jesus had to first leave before they could have the Comforter to inspirationally guide them to preach all the truth of the gospel.

Did the apostles to whom Jesus was speaking perform miracles? Yes, but there was a greater work they would be doing in saving souls which is a far greater work than performing miracles.


1 Jn 5:14, say 'according to His will'. Miraculous signs ceased accroding to his will so they cannot be asked for or received.

Mk 16:20, in the context signs were given to the apsoles and the purpose of sings was to conform the word. In the first century, the pupose of signs was to revlea and confrim the word of God. And as Paul points out in 1 Cor 13 and Eph 4, those signs that were used to revela and confirm the word would last till there was a perfect, united, completed revelation of God's word then those signs would cease, vanish away. Since God's word was revealed, confirmed and completed back in the first century, then those signs were no longer need and do not exist today. Again, John wrote some of thsoe signs down which can still induce a belief in pople today as they did 2000+ years ago insuring those signs do not need to be repeated.

 

[UppsalaDragby]

Yes, they could have unity in the faith, not unity in their own personal faiths. So the oneness or unity of the faith refers to the one, complete unified body of truth of the NT when it was completely revealed. Those gifts Christ gave to men therefore would last TILL there was a oneness, wholeness, togertherness of the ONE unified body of faith and truth and has nothing at all with what people personally believe for what people personally believe may contradict each other and contradict that unified body of the truth found in the NT Again, there will never be a time when there will be unity in what all people personally believe but there is unity, oneness of that body of faith, body of truth as taught in the NT from Matthew to Revelation.

None of that makes any sense. If unity of the faith is something entirely separate from personal faith then why did Paul tell the church to have unity in the faith in the first place??? This is utter madness! And if unity of the faith was achieved simply through canonization of scripture then why did God even bother giving the church spiritual gifts? He could have inspired someone to just write down the entire NT immediately after Christ ascended into heaven. But obviously you are so intent on defending this dangerous heresy at any price whatsoever that you invent long-winded but incredibly inconsistent ways to deny the obvious.

I posted "Specifically Paul told them to "walk by the same rule" The Greek word for 'rule' is kanon meaning a rod, a standard by which things are measured."
What was this rule or rod they were to walk by? THE FAITH in those things Paul had written and preached to them. So the NT canon of scripture is that rule or rod that Christians are to go by. And those gifts would last TILL there was a unity, completeness of that rule/rod, a one, unified body of truth which was completed by the end of the first century. As Paul said in 1 Cor 13 those gifts would cease, vanish away for they would no longer be needed for they fulfilled thier design and purpose.

I can hardly believe this. On the one hand you are saying that there will never be a time when there will be unity in what all people personally believe, as though it was SCRIPTURE that the unity refers to. And now you are talking about a rule that "they" were all to walk by. You are all over the place with this. The only unity that Paul speaks about in the NT is the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace, and being of one mind!

Jude is NOT telling them to contend for A faith or for their own personal beliefs but to contend for that one unified body of truth as taught in the NT. False teachers with false teachings would creep into the church so Jude told them to contend the faith, the one body of truth. Jude did not want them to fall away from "the faith" from that one body of truth. Again, the faith, that one unified body of truth was revealed piece by piece through the use of signs and was completed by the end of the first century whereby those signs would no longer be needed for they fulfilled their purpose.

How can someone contend for the faith unless they believe it personally??? And since Jude was written BEFORE the book of Revelation how could he tell them to contend for "the truth" which according to you was not the whole truth.

In 1 Cor 13 the word perfect as used in the KJV means to make whole, complete, to finish.
Pertect is being contrasted to that which is "in part". That thing which is in part now will be complete later. If 'perfect' refers to Christ then it is saying Christ was in part, imperfect only to be perfect some time later. Yet Christ was never in part or imperfect. Perfect is neuter gender and since it is not referring to Christ it is referring to a thing.

What is "in part" is perfect knowledge, not the Bible! And having perfect knowledge does not come simply by having the entire NT in one's hand. Have you ever noticed how people who all read the same Bible have neither unity nor perfect knowledge? We STILL see through a glass darkly (not you of course, but the rest of us!) So that alone totally destroys you claim that canonization replaced the gifts of the spirit which were given to bring the CHURCH to unity, not scripture.

You also claim that Spiritual gifts have "fulfilled their purpose", but that it entirely false, because even saying "Jesus is Lord" is a manifestation of a spiritual gift:

"Now about spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant. You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols. Therefore I tell you that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor 12:1-3)

That means that everyone who is saved is saved through the work of the Holy Spirit, which Paul clearly identifies here as a spiritual gift.

No video will provide proof of one raised from the dead for it does not occur.

Ok, here we go again...

I told you clearly in my previous posts that I wasn't using the video to prove any miracle took place!

Why are you ignoring that???

Someone who is raised from the dead will not convince anyone who does not want to believe (Luke 16:31). You obviously don't want to believe it was a miracle because it messes up you cessationist theories. That's your choice. But I submitted the video because of YOUR claim that something like that would be on the news, the newspapers, the internet and so on. You then were so foolish as to claim that "there's nothing". I knew that your assertion was wrong because I have seen such things several times - 1. On the news (just check out the video) 2. In the newspapers, and 3. On the internet.

Now, you are desparately trying to defend your claim by saying that it doesn't prove anything miraculous, but since it is YOU who are making the claim that it is "nothing" then it is YOUR onus to prove that what you claim is true!

Now the way you deal with the link I posted is also the way you deal with scripture. Rather than being a man and admitting that you have been proven wrong, you are all over the place trying to find a way to wriggle out it.

But just continue Ernest.. the more you wriggle, the more obvious it becomes to anyone reading this what kind of game you are playing.

 

[Tropical Islander]

"Someone who is raised from the dead will not convince anyone who does not want to believe (Luke 16:31). You obviously don't want to believe it was a miracle because it messes up you cessationist theories"

Accurate assessment when reading this page. To hold to cessationist theories really does limit one's ability to understand 'faith' and even 'God' for that matter. It's rather a form of powerless religion.

Looking back at the McArthur conference a few weeks ago, it wasn't clear at that time that cessationism can teach us really nothing. EVEN when taking charismatism apart like a pro.

Turns out McArthur has an even bigger problem than the charismatics he talks about, what should get him blacklisted in every christian household. He teaches that one can take the mark of the beast and still be saved. Like there never was a book called 'revelation'. Dangerous man, should be avoided.

And Ernest here has to ignore a good part of the gospels to come to his 'historical view' approach. It's an utter useless waste of time. Hey Ernest, talk about something you can relate to, this subject here is bigger than your understanding. To be clear it is vain imagination on your part. What is missing is faith, what includes the ability to believe that it is possible to ask for healing and be healed. As simple as that, and you will not have it until you ask for it.

 

[UppsalaDragby]

"Someone who is raised from the dead will not convince anyone who does not want to believe (Luke 16:31). You obviously don't want to believe it was a miracle because it messes up you cessationist theories"

Accurate assessment when reading this page. To hold to cessationist theories really does limit one's ability to understand 'faith' and even 'God' for that matter. It's rather a form of powerless religion.

Looking back at the McArthur conference a few weeks ago, it wasn't clear at that time that cessationism can teach us really nothing. EVEN when taking charismatism apart like a pro.

Turns out McArthur has an even bigger problem than the charismatics he talks about, what should get him blacklisted in every christian household. He teaches that one can take the mark of the beast and still be saved. Like there never was a book called 'revelation'. Dangerous man, should be avoided.

And Ernest here has to ignore a good part of the gospels to come to his 'historical view' approach. It's an utter useless waste of time. Hey Ernest, talk about something you can relate to, this subject here is bigger than your understanding. To be clear it is vain imagination on your part. What is missing is faith, what includes the ability to believe that it is possible to ask for healing and be healed. As simple as that, and you will not have it until you ask for it.

Good assessment Tropical Islander! I enjoyed reading your testimony about how the Holy Spirit still works today and I have no problem believing that God worked a miracle in your life and the life of your family. I was considering chiming in with my own experiences, but I find it futile to even mention them to someone who is so stubbornly bent on defending his doctrine that he doesn't even care whether or not his claims are making sense. The Bible speaks about people who would arise in the end times who would "have a form of godliness, but deny its power". This denialism is destroying the faith of sincere people who want to develop their faith, but are being fed with doubt.

 

[KingJ]

Ernest, the bottom line is you are putting God in a box. You cannot do that. He can do anything! Rom 9 and we can do all things through Christ who strengthens us Phil 4:13.

 

[Tropical Islander]

UppsalaDragby, i'm in agreement with what you said. You still can chime in with your experiences if you like, it's always good to listen to real life stories where Jesus answered prayers.

We had a very long discussion on another forum about this in relationship to the 'faith of Abraham' that simply did what God said to him to do, a principle that also can be applied here. True faith believes and acts upon. Jesus answers prayers today, and that will as you say build up the faith of the ones that ask anything in faith that is in agreement with Jesus.

The very first time I got confronted with a healing was under most severe circumstances. I got bitten by a spider in my foot that injected some very strange poison into my bloodstream. Changed the color of my blood that was flowing upwards towards my heart. Unfortunately I was traveling in a foreign country at the time and could not reach any doctor. It was 5 in the morning and I arrived at my destination and checked into a hotel when I discoverd that the changed color bloodstream has reached my knee. At this time the only thing that came to my mind was to fall on my knees and pray and ask Jesus for mercy and to stop that poison to reach my heart. Then I fell asleep, exhausted because I was on a train all night.

In the late morning I woke up again and found out that I was still at the exact same situation as before, the dark color of the blood looked like to not have crossed the knee line. However I got a severe fever suddenly, and something else that was scary, I started to bleed from every single hole in my body. Nose, ears, eyes and also front and back side, all at once. And I was vomitting blood. And still felt like dying, actually included the possiblity in my mind that I might not leave this place alive. However God did stop the bleedings after a day or two, after prayer, which just left me very exhausted and weak physically. The cleaning girl in the hotel had to buy food and feed me, I was unable to walk upright for a week. Felt better after that, and manged to travel up all the way to LA again and catch a flight back home.

I do praise our Lord Jesus Christ for saving my life, it was the first time since my childhood I 'contacted him' on anything. And he responded with a healing, I was 18 years old at the time and understood then for the first time that He has the power over life and death.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

None of that makes any sense. If unity of the faith is something entirely separate from personal faith then why did Paul tell the church to have unity in the faith in the first place??? This is utter madness! And if unity of the faith was achieved simply through canonization of scripture then why did God even bother giving the church spiritual gifts? He could have inspired someone to just write down the entire NT immediately after Christ ascended into heaven. But obviously you are so intent on defending this dangerous heresy at any price whatsoever that you invent long-winded but incredibly inconsistent ways to deny the obvious.


I can hardly believe this. On the one hand you are saying that there will never be a time when there will be unity in what all people personally believe, as though it was SCRIPTURE that the unity refers to. And now you are talking about a rule that "they" were all to walk by. You are all over the place with this. The only unity that Paul speaks about in the NT is the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace, and being of one mind!


How can someone contend for the faith unless they believe it personally??? And since Jude was written BEFORE the book of Revelation how could he tell them to contend for "the truth" which according to you was not the whole truth.


What is "in part" is perfect knowledge, not the Bible! And having perfect knowledge does not come simply by having the entire NT in one's hand. Have you ever noticed how people who all read the same Bible have neither unity nor perfect knowledge? We STILL see through a glass darkly (not you of course, but the rest of us!) So that alone totally destroys you claim that canonization replaced the gifts of the spirit which were given to bring the CHURCH to unity, not scripture.

You also claim that Spiritual gifts have "fulfilled their purpose", but that it entirely false, because even saying "Jesus is Lord" is a manifestation of a spiritual gift:

"Now about spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant. You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols. Therefore I tell you that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor 12:1-3)

That means that everyone who is saved is saved through the work of the Holy Spirit, which Paul clearly identifies here as a spiritual gift.


Ok, here we go again...

I told you clearly in my previous posts that I wasn't using the video to prove any miracle took place!

Why are you ignoring that???

Someone who is raised from the dead will not convince anyone who does not want to believe (Luke 16:31). You obviously don't want to believe it was a miracle because it messes up you cessationist theories. That's your choice. But I submitted the video because of YOUR claim that something like that would be on the news, the newspapers, the internet and so on. You then were so foolish as to claim that "there's nothing". I knew that your assertion was wrong because I have seen such things several times - 1. On the news (just check out the video) 2. In the newspapers, and 3. On the internet.

Now, you are desparately trying to defend your claim by saying that it doesn't prove anything miraculous, but since it is YOU who are making the claim that it is "nothing" then it is YOUR onus to prove that what you claim is true!

Now the way you deal with the link I posted is also the way you deal with scripture. Rather than being a man and admitting that you have been proven wrong, you are all over the place trying to find a way to wriggle out it.

But just continue Ernest.. the more you wriggle, the more obvious it becomes to anyone reading this what kind of game you are playing.

"The faith", that unified bodyof truth/faith found from Matthew to Revelation is what everyone is to have his personal faith in. Everyone cannot just have a faith in whatever they want to even though the current religious climate in this country is perverted with that idea. Have you ever had anyone ask you "what faith are you?" The question is unbiblical for it implies there are many faithS, a buffett of faithS and you can just chose what faith you like, another can choose what faith he likes and so on until you end up with many faiths that contradict each other. Yet the bible says there is ONE faith, Eph 4:5 "THE faith", the one unified body of truth and it is this one faith, one unfied body of truth that everyone is to have their personal faith in. And it was this unified body of truth that was being revealed in the first century by signs and the signs would cease when this unified body of truth was completely revealed as it was by the end of the first century.


Till the end of the world, people will put their personal faith in all these contradicting false faithS and be lost for they did not put their personal faith in that ONE faith, that one unified body of truth found within the NT canon of scripture. THE FAITH, that unified body of truth is the standard, the rule by which people are to have their personal faith in.


Those who have thier faith in all the manmade contradicting faith and not the faith, the unified body of thruth cannot contend for the faith.

Jude did not say "contend for wahtever you personally believe" or "contend for a bunch of contradicting man-made faithS" but to contend for "THE FAITH" that unified body of truth. If one does not have THE FAITH as taught in the NT they cannot be saved. Again, the purpose of signs was to reveal this one faith, this unified body of truth and when it was compeltely revealed, as it was by the end of the first century, then the signs were n longer needed and ceased, vanished away as Paul said they would.


Do you now see a difference between the faith of the bible and the host of man-made contradicting false faithS men possess? All of the various religous groups from Catholics, to Baptists, to Pentecostals, to Methodists, to Presbyterians, to Mormons, to 7th Day Adentists, plus thousands of other groups CANNOT all be possessing THE ONE FAITH, the ONE unfied body of truth as found in the bible and CONTRADICT each other. Jude did not tell Baptists to contend for the Baptists faith and Catholics to contend for the Catholic faith and Pentcostals to contend for the Pentecostal faith and Mormons to contend for the Morman faith but ALL are to contend for THE FAITH, the ONE faith of the NT. And any group or person that does not have this ONE faith, this one unified body of turth cannot be saved.


In 1 Cor 13 what was "in part" was the revealed word of God brought about by signs as supernatural knowledge and prophecies. It was not perfectly/completely revealed until John wrote Revelation. Yet upon perfection/completion, the in part signs as knowledge and prohecies would cease, pass away, verse 8.

1 Cor 12:1-3 does not help your position either. The Holy SPirit authored the bible thru inspired men. And if it were not for the HS giving us this inpsired written word, we could not know and say 'Jesus is Lord" for apart from this written word we would not know who Jesus was or that He is Lord. But since the HS has revealed to us in his written word "Jesus is Lord" then we can "say Jesus is Lord". And all it takes is just a reading of that inspired written word to know that Jesus is Lord and does not take any miraculous signs....and the context does NOT say it requires supernatural signs...that is being read into the context.


You posted "Someone who is raised from the dead will not convince anyone who does not want to believe (Luke 16:31)."

No one was raised from the dead in the video or any video that you show so there is nothing in those videos to believe in. Again, Jn 20:30.31, John's point in writing down those signs Jesus did is so they would have a CONTINUING effect of inducing a belief in people. Since John wrote them down they can induce belief in people today as they did 2000+ years ago so there is no need for those signs to be repeated today. So if one wants to believe in the dead being raised, then read those examples in the bible that was wrote down and believe them and not videos that have no miracles in them. For anyone to say we need signs today is defeating what John said.

"Someone who is raised from the dead will not convince anyone who does not want to believe (Luke 16:31). You obviously don't want to believe it was a miracle because it messes up you cessationist theories"

Accurate assessment when reading this page. To hold to cessationist theories really does limit one's ability to understand 'faith' and even 'God' for that matter. It's rather a form of powerless religion.

Looking back at the McArthur conference a few weeks ago, it wasn't clear at that time that cessationism can teach us really nothing. EVEN when taking charismatism apart like a pro.

Turns out McArthur has an even bigger problem than the charismatics he talks about, what should get him blacklisted in every christian household. He teaches that one can take the mark of the beast and still be saved. Like there never was a book called 'revelation'. Dangerous man, should be avoided.

And Ernest here has to ignore a good part of the gospels to come to his 'historical view' approach. It's an utter useless waste of time. Hey Ernest, talk about something you can relate to, this subject here is bigger than your understanding. To be clear it is vain imagination on your part. What is missing is faith, what includes the ability to believe that it is possible to ask for healing and be healed. As simple as that, and you will not have it until you ask for it.

Your position defeats and goes against what John said in Jn 20:30,31. I understand signs were used to reveal and confirm the word and when the word was completely revealed those signs were needed no longer. I have dealt with many charismatics and not a solitary single one of them can or have ever performed signs they CLAIM - CLAIM - CLAIM God performs through them,those claims are lacking. The proof is in the pudding or I should say lack of pudding.

Ernest, the bottom line is you are putting God in a box. You cannot do that. He can do anything! Rom 9 and we can do all things through Christ who strengthens us Phil 4:13.

God is not in any box because He designed signs to cease, vanish away. God has no need to perform any signs today. We have all we need in God's written word. Want to believe in miraculous signs? Then read GOd's word and believe those John wrote down, Jn 20:30,31.
(Don't look to YouTube for signs for you will not find any but look to God's word)

 

[UppsalaDragby]

"The faith", that unified bodyof truth/faith found from Matthew to Revelation is what everyone is to have his personal faith in. Everyone cannot just have a faith in whatever they want to even though the current religious climate in this country is perverted with that idea. Have you ever had anyone ask you "what faith are you?" The question is unbiblical for it implies there are many faithS, a buffett of faithS and you can just chose what faith you like, another can choose what faith he likes and so on until you end up with many faiths that contradict each other. Yet the bible says there is ONE faith, Eph 4:5 "THE faith", the one unified body of truth and it is this one faith, one unfied body of truth that everyone is to have their personal faith in. And it was this unified body of truth that was being revealed in the first century by signs and the signs would cease when this unified body of truth was completely revealed as it was by the end of the first century.

Where did I say that everyone can have faith in whatever they want to? This is a strawman, as well as another example that shows how your arguments fail. If canonization doesn't bring unity in the church then it obviosly cannot be the perfection that causes spiritual gifts to cease.

Till the end of the world, people will put their personal faith in all these contradicting false faithS and be lost for they did not put their personal faith in that ONE faith, that one unified body of truth found within the NT canon of scripture. THE FAITH, that unified body of truth is the standard, the rule by which people are to have their personal faith in.

Since the Bible itself doesn't mention the canon of scripture or that the spiritual gifts would cease in any future time when scripture was considered complete then this MUST be YOUR personal faith. So the very argument you use here is self-defeating.

Those who have thier faith in all the manmade contradicting faith and not the faith, the unified body of thruth cannot contend for the faith.

Exactly, so why add "manmade" theories to scripture?

Jude did not say "contend for wahtever you personally believe" or "contend for a bunch of contradicting man-made faithS" but to contend for "THE FAITH" that unified body of truth. If one does not have THE FAITH as taught in the NT they cannot be saved. Again, the purpose of signs was to reveal this one faith, this unified body of truth and when it was compeltely revealed, as it was by the end of the first century, then the signs were n longer needed and ceased, vanished away as Paul said they would.

I have already dealt with these poorly supported ideas. Why are you repeating the same mantra over and over again?

Do you now see a difference between the faith of the bible and the host of man-made contradicting false faithS men possess? All of the various religous groups from Catholics, to Baptists, to Pentecostals, to Methodists, to Presbyterians, to Mormons, to 7th Day Adentists, plus thousands of other groups CANNOT all be possessing THE ONE FAITH, the ONE unfied body of truth as found in the bible and CONTRADICT each other. Jude did not tell Baptists to contend for the Baptists faith and Catholics to contend for the Catholic faith and Pentcostals to contend for the Pentecostal faith and Mormons to contend for the Morman faith but ALL are to contend for THE FAITH, the ONE faith of the NT. And any group or person that does not have this ONE faith, this one unified body of turth cannot be saved.

What I see is a difference between what the Bible is saying and what you are saying. The Bible doesn't have faith, people do. And all the denominations that you list here arose after the canon of scripture was complete, so that alone totally demolishes your argument. The gifts of the spirit were given by God to the church so that they would achieve unity of the Spirit. When the church abandoned the use of these gifts in favor of destructive heresies the unity of the Spirit disappeared and the rest is church history.

Let me ask you something Ernest. If all the "religious groups" you mentioned cannot all be possessing the ONE FAITH, and not having THE FAITH as taught in the NT means they cannot be saved, then who among these groups are saved?

In 1 Cor 13 what was "in part" was the revealed word of God brought about by signs as supernatural knowledge and prophecies. It was not perfectly/completely revealed until John wrote Revelation. Yet upon perfection/completion, the in part signs as knowledge and prohecies would cease, pass away, verse 8.

Once again, that claim is found nowhere in the 1 Cor 13. On the one hand you are saying that the canon of scripture provides us with something that is "complete" (i.e. not "in part") and yet you cannot USE scripture to prove your point. YOU have to add to something that supposedly gives us perfect knowledge. I think if you were honest about this Ernest then you would agree that the only possible "perfection" that scripture testifies to is Christ. When we see him face to face then we will "see him as he is" (1 John 3:2).

1 Cor 12:1-3 does not help your position either. The Holy SPirit authored the bible thru inspired men. And if it were not for the HS giving us this inpsired written word, we could not know and say 'Jesus is Lord" for apart from this written word we would not know who Jesus was or that He is Lord. But since the HS has revealed to us in his written word "Jesus is Lord" then we can "say Jesus is Lord". And all it takes is just a reading of that inspired written word to know that Jesus is Lord and does not take any miraculous signs....and the context does NOT say it requires supernatural signs...that is being read into the context.

This is what scripture says:

"no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit."

How does the fact that it is written in scripture NEGATE the fact that it requires the Holy Spirit to make that utterance? Your argument is a non sequitur. You are saying it doesn't help my position when it absolutely DOES support it.

You last point confuses me. Are you saying that an utterance inspired and enabled by the Holy Spirit is not supernatural?

You posted "Someone who is raised from the dead will not convince anyone who does not want to believe (Luke 16:31)."
No one was raised from the dead in the video or any video that you show so there is nothing in those videos to believe in.

Firstly, you cannot prove that no one was raised from the dead, so the fact that you claim that it didn't happen does not weigh into this discussion. Secondly, I did not quote Luke 16:31 as proof that anyone was raised from the dead. Aaaaand thirdly:
"I submitted the video because of YOUR claim that something like that would be on the news, the newspapers, the internet and so on. You then were so foolish as to claim that "there's nothing". I knew that your assertion was wrong because I have seen such things several times - 1. On the news (just check out the video) 2. In the newspapers, and 3. On the internet."

Again, Jn 20:30.31, John's point in writing down those signs Jesus did is so they would have a CONTINUING effect of inducing a belief in people. Since John wrote them down they can induce belief in people today as they did 2000 years ago so there is no need for those signs to be repeated today. So if one wants to believe in the dead being raised, then read those examples in the bible that was wrote down and believe them and not videos that have no miracles in them. For anyone to say we need signs today is defeating what John said.

I already responed to that argument:

"If simply writing about the signs was enough to do the trick then why wasn't the gospel of John written before Paul wasted time encouraging the church to employ the gifts of the spirit? If it was sufficient to induce belief then why were the other books even included?"

 

[KingJ]

The bible explains miraculous signs were for a certain time and purpose and that time and purpose has long passed. Not only does the bible say they have ceased there is no physical, objective proof they still exist today. With 24 hour news services, the internet, cell phones that take videos surely someone could post a video of a person walking on water, raising the dead, the hungry in the world feed with just a basket of food...but there's nothing. If one were raised from the dead it would be all over the tv news services, newspapers, the internet, everywhere...but there's nothing.

It just struck me that you believe in absolutely NO miracles taking place today...?? Really is that what you believe?

There are NO miracles today? No testimonies that are truthful?

 

[Poppin]

Hebrews 2
3how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, 4God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will.

1. After it was at the first spoken through the Lord
2. it was confirmed to us by those who heard
3. God also testifying with them both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will.

Acts 14:3
So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to perform signs and wonders.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

It just struck me that you believe in absolutely NO miracles taking place today...?? Really is that what you believe?

There are NO miracles today? No testimonies that are truthful?

No miracles today. The pupose of miracles was for revelation and confirmation of God's word back in the first century when it was still in the process of being revealed and written by inspired men. When John penned Revelation, miracles served their purpose and ended, ceased, vanished away.

Where did I say that everyone can have faith in whatever they want to? This is a strawman, as well as another example that shows how your arguments fail. If canonization doesn't bring unity in the church then it obviosly cannot be the perfection that causes spiritual gifts to cease.


Since the Bible itself doesn't mention the canon of scripture or that the spiritual gifts would cease in any future time when scripture was considered complete then this MUST be YOUR personal faith. So the very argument you use here is self-defeating.


Exactly, so why add "manmade" theories to scripture?


I have already dealt with these poorly supported ideas. Why are you repeating the same mantra over and over again?


What I see is a difference between what the Bible is saying and what you are saying. The Bible doesn't have faith, people do. And all the denominations that you list here arose after the canon of scripture was complete, so that alone totally demolishes your argument. The gifts of the spirit were given by God to the church so that they would achieve unity of the Spirit. When the church abandoned the use of these gifts in favor of destructive heresies the unity of the Spirit disappeared and the rest is church history.

Let me ask you something Ernest. If all the "religious groups" you mentioned cannot all be possessing the ONE FAITH, and not having THE FAITH as taught in the NT means they cannot be saved, then who among these groups are saved?


Once again, that claim is found nowhere in the 1 Cor 13. On the one hand you are saying that the canon of scripture provides us with something that is "complete" (i.e. not "in part") and yet you cannot USE scripture to prove your point. YOU have to add to something that supposedly gives us perfect knowledge. I think if you were honest about this Ernest then you would agree that the only possible "perfection" that scripture testifies to is Christ. When we see him face to face then we will "see him as he is" (1 John 3:2).


This is what scripture says:

"no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit."

How does the fact that it is written in scripture NEGATE the fact that it requires the Holy Spirit to make that utterance? Your argument is a non sequitur. You are saying it doesn't help my position when it absolutely DOES support it.

You last point confuses me. Are you saying that an utterance inspired and enabled by the Holy Spirit is not supernatural?


Firstly, you cannot prove that no one was raised from the dead, so the fact that you claim that it didn't happen does not weigh into this discussion. Secondly, I did not quote Luke 16:31 as proof that anyone was raised from the dead. Aaaaand thirdly:
"I submitted the video because of YOUR claim that something like that would be on the news, the newspapers, the internet and so on. You then were so foolish as to claim that "there's nothing". I knew that your assertion was wrong because I have seen such things several times - 1. On the news (just check out the video) 2. In the newspapers, and 3. On the internet."


I already responed to that argument:

"If simply writing about the signs was enough to do the trick then why wasn't the gospel of John written before Paul wasted time encouraging the church to employ the gifts of the spirit? If it was sufficient to induce belief then why were the other books even included?"

The personal faith of many people does not consist of nor consistent with "the faith" that God's word teaches. That is why you have so many religious groups that believe in thing totally contradictory to each other. This is why there will never be any unity in what people personally believe in but there is a unity of the completed word of God/the faith/unified body of truth. There was completion, unity of the cannonization of the bible but never unity in what people personally believe.

1 Cor 13 and Eph 4 speak of the perfection, complete, unity of scripture. You have yet to provide any evidence otherwise about 1 Cor 13 or Eph 4. Neither passage is talking about what people personally believe, there will NEVER EVER be unity as long as this world exists among people's personal beliefs. If every person's personal faith consisted of "the faith" of the bible, then everyone's belief would be alike and there would not be all these various reiligous groups with contridicting beliefs. The faith/the truth as taught in the bible does not contradict itself as all these groups do, so that is all the proof I need to know that all these groups cannot be possessing the faith/the truth/God's word.



"no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit."


I do not see where this verse says "no one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by some mirculous endowment of the Holy Spirit".
That idea is what you are ADDING to the verse. As I already posted about this, the Holy Spirit is the author of the word and it is by reading and understanding the word that one can know and say Jesus is Lord. If we did not have God's written word, we would not know anything about Christ or the Holy Spirit or many other things taught in the bible.
Paul told the Ephesians "Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)" One reading God's word can bring about understanding. Note here also that Paul did NOT say 'when ye read ye may understand with miraculous illumination of the Holy Spirit.

So for one to say 'Jesus is Lord' required the Holy Spirit to author the word of God so we can read and understand that Jesus is Lord. Nothing miraculous needed for one to say Jesus is Lord, just reading and understanding of God's written word.


As far as the video, the onus is not upon to prove that one was NOT raised from the dead. You are making the affirmation one was raised from the dead so the onus is upon you to prove your own affirmation not for me to prove a negative. You are making an assumption one was raised from the dead and it is not upon me to unprove your assumption.

What John wrote in Jn 20:30,31 was for future readers extending beyond the age of miracles. At the time of 1 Cor, the word of God was not yet perfected/completed so those signs were still needed at that time Paul wrote to the Corinthians to bring about all the canon, all the word of God. Since the canon was completed by the end of the first century, the signs have ceased and those signs John wrote down can still induce a belief in people today as they did 2000 years ago so there is no need for a repetition of those signs. The charismtics argument is with John, not me. John said signs are not needed today since he wrote them down for posterity and they continue to induce a belief in people, yet the charismatics say they are needed today. I'll side with John.

 

[UppsalaDragby]

No miracles today. The pupose of miracles was for revelation and confirmation of God's word back in the first century when it was still in the process of being revealed and written by inspired men. When John penned Revelation, miracles served their purpose and ended, ceased, vanished away.

The personal faith of many people does not consist of nor consistent with "the faith" that God's word teaches. That is why you have so many religious groups that believe in thing totally contradictory to each other. This is why there will never be any unity in what people personally believe in but there is a unity of the completed word of God/the faith/unified body of truth. There was completion, unity of the cannonization of the bible but never unity in what people personally believe.

Sure, but that does not explain why the gifts of the Spirit would have ceased. On the contrary, if you had argued the canonization of scripture brought unity to the church then you would have a totally valid point. But nothing you have said so far in this discussion makes sense.
You should also be aware that IF canonization brought about the cessation of prophecy, tongues, and so on, then it would also have caused "knowledge to pass away". Has cannonization cause knowledge to pass away?

1 Cor 13 and Eph 4 speak of the perfection, complete, unity of scripture. You have yet to provide any evidence otherwise about 1 Cor 13 or Eph 4. Neither passage is talking about what people personally believe, there will NEVER EVER be unity as long as this world exists among people's personal beliefs. If every person's personal faith consisted of "the faith" of the bible, then everyone's belief would be alike and there would not be all these various reiligous groups with contridicting beliefs. The faith/the truth as taught in the bible does not contradict itself as all these groups do, so that is all the proof I need to know that all these groups cannot be possessing the faith/the truth/God's word.

Why would I need to provide scriptural evidence of something that you yourself have not established. If neither 1 Cor 13 nor Eph 4 even so much as mention scripture, why on earth would I need to provide scriptural evidence that they don't??? That is like saying that Romans 8 deals with kitchen sinks unless you can provide scriptural evidence that it doesn't!

I do not see where this verse says "no one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by some mirculous endowment of the Holy Spirit".

Obviously, you see what you want to see, and no one can possible change that. But let me ask you this Ernest, to you consider the ability to speak in tongues to be the result of "miraculous endowment of the Holy spirit":

"All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them." (Acts 2:4)

Why, why not?

Paul told the Ephesians "Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)" One reading God's word can bring about understanding. Note here also that Paul did NOT say 'when ye read ye may understand with miraculous illumination of the Holy Spirit.

Nowhere did Paul say that he understood the mystery of Christ through one reading of God's word. What he said was that the mystery made known to me "by revelation". If you want to be contentious and claim that revelation is equivalent to reading then do so. I can't be bothered with stiff-necked claims that you give absolutely no scriptural support for.

So for one to say 'Jesus is Lord' required the Holy Spirit to author the word of God so we can read and understand that Jesus is Lord. Nothing miraculous needed for one to say Jesus is Lord, just reading and understanding of God's written word.

That's what you say. I prefer to believe scripture. You might have a point if you could prove that everyone saying "Jesus is Lord" was just uttering the words without meaning what they said.. maybe.. but I doubt that.

As far as the video, the onus is not upon to prove that one was NOT raised from the dead. You are making the affirmation one was raised from the dead so the onus is upon you to prove your own affirmation not for me to prove a negative. You are making an assumption one was raised from the dead and it is not upon me to unprove your assumption.

Ladedadedah... Firstly, you cannot prove that no one was raised from the dead, so the fact that you claim that it didn't happen does not weigh into this discussion. Secondly, I did not quote Luke 16:31 as proof that anyone was raised from the dead. And thirdly:

"I submitted the video because of YOUR claim that something like that would be on the news, the newspapers, the internet and so on. You then were so foolish as to claim that "there's nothing". I knew that your assertion was wrong because I have seen such things several times - 1. On the news (just check out the video) 2. In the newspapers, and 3. On the internet."

What John wrote in Jn 20:30,31 was for future readers extending beyond the age of miracles. At the time of 1 Cor, the word of God was not yet perfected/completed so those signs were still needed at that time Paul wrote to the Corinthians to bring about all the canon, all the word of God. Since the canon was completed by the end of the first century, the signs have ceased and those signs John wrote down can still induce a belief in people today as they did 2000 years ago so there is no need for a repetition of those signs. The charismtics argument is with John, not me. John said signs are not needed today since he wrote them down for posterity and they continue to induce a belief in people, yet the charismatics say they are needed today. I'll side with John.

Really, can you back that up with ANY scriptural support whatsoever? Nowhere does John claim that what he wrote was for readers extending "beyond the age of miracles". You cannot claim to "side with John" when you are just making up things that John didn't even say. This is a complete joke!

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Sure, but that does not explain why the gifts of the Spirit would have ceased. On the contrary, if you had argued the canonization of scripture brought unity to the church then you would have a totally valid point. But nothing you have said so far in this discussion makes sense.
You should also be aware that IF canonization brought about the cessation of prophecy, tongues, and so on, then it would also have caused "knowledge to pass away". Has cannonization cause knowledge to pass away?


Why would I need to provide scriptural evidence of something that you yourself have not established. If neither 1 Cor 13 nor Eph 4 even so much as mention scripture, why on earth would I need to provide scriptural evidence that they don't??? That is like saying that Romans 8 deals with kitchen sinks unless you can provide scriptural evidence that it doesn't!


Obviously, you see what you want to see, and no one can possible change that. But let me ask you this Ernest, to you consider the ability to speak in tongues to be the result of "miraculous endowment of the Holy spirit":

"All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them." (Acts 2:4)

Why, why not?



Nowhere did Paul say that he understood the mystery of Christ through one reading of God's word. What he said was that the mystery made known to me "by revelation". If you want to be contentious and claim that revelation is equivalent to reading then do so. I can't be bothered with stiff-necked claims that you give absolutely no scriptural support for.


That's what you say. I prefer to believe scripture. You might have a point if you could prove that everyone saying "Jesus is Lord" was just uttering the words without meaning what they said.. maybe.. but I doubt that.


Ladedadedah... Firstly, you cannot prove that no one was raised from the dead, so the fact that you claim that it didn't happen does not weigh into this discussion. Secondly, I did not quote Luke 16:31 as proof that anyone was raised from the dead. And thirdly:

"I submitted the video because of YOUR claim that something like that would be on the news, the newspapers, the internet and so on. You then were so foolish as to claim that "there's nothing". I knew that your assertion was wrong because I have seen such things several times - 1. On the news (just check out the video) 2. In the newspapers, and 3. On the internet."


Really, can you back that up with ANY scriptural support whatsoever? Nowhere does John claim that what he wrote was for readers extending "beyond the age of miracles". You cannot claim to "side with John" when you are just making up things that John didn't even say. This is a complete joke!

The purpose of miracles was for revealing Go'ds word and confirmation of that word. So when the word had been completely revealed by the end of the first ventury, then the signs were no longer needed. As the analogy of signs as scaffolding which is used to construct a building but taken away and no longer needed when the building is completed. So the miraculous signs fulfilled thier purpose and went away as Paul said they would.


John wrote various signs down that occurred over 2000 years ago which can still induce a belief in people today so you cannot, have not given a valid, biblcal reason for signs existing today.


Again, you continue to read into the text that one cannot say Jesus is Lord except by some miracle of God. If that were the case, then those unable to say "Jesus is Lord" would be unable due to the culpability and fault of God in failing to miraculously allow them. They would be lost failing to confess Jesus, Matt 10:32,33 and thier condemnation would be 100% God's fault, God's blame, God's culpability.

You posted "Nowhere did Paul say that he understood the mystery of Christ through one reading of God's word."
But that is not what the verse says nor did I say this. The verse says "Whereby, when ye (Ephesians) read, ye (Ephesians) may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)" Paul, an inspired writer of the bible, received miraculous revelations from God and wrote those revelations down for the EPHESIANS to read and understand.
So it becomes even more evident that miraculous signs were used to reveal the word of God to inspired men as Paul yet miracles were not needed to read and understand those inspired written words. So when God's word was completely revealed, the signs used to reveal this word ceased leaving us with the written word that we, just as the Epshesians, can read and understand without any miraculous 'illumination'. I can read the Holy Spirit's revealed word and can know and say "Jesus is Lord" with no miraculous intervention at all.


As far as the video, it is not up to me to prove or disprove something that you can only CLAIM happened. Nor am I worng simply because I do not go along with the CLAIMS made in the video. Jesus did not resuscitate an unconscience person but went to a cemetery and raised one that was dead for 4 days and stinking, Jn 11:39. What the doctor claimed in the video does not remotely compare to what Jesus did. It is too easy to make claims in a video but it is not easy to go to a cemetery and do as Jesus did, to walk on water, to feed a multitude with only a basket of food. When Jesus performed a miracle there was no doubt a miracle was performed....Jesus did not make claims as the video.


Your response in no way refutes Jn 20:30,31. Again, "are written" is in the perfect tense denoting an act in the past with a continuing effect. SO those signs Jesus performed in the past still have a continuing effect in inducing a belief in people since John wrote them down to be read. So there was a specific purpose for John writing them down and that continued purpose means there is no valid reason for those signs being repeated today. If anyone argues signs are needed today then they are arguing with John, not me.