Answered above.1 Corinthians 12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
Earnestly Contend
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Answered above.1 Corinthians 12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
It is hard for me. You are divorcing Chapter 13 from Chapter 12, which is about spiritual gifts, and from Chapter 14 which is about spiritual gifts. So yes, it is hard for me to see that as responsible interpretation.Apparently this is hard for you.
You are reading into this passage an interpretation that you've been taught, and not what it actually says.It is hard for me. You are divorcing Chapter 13 from Chapter 12, which is about spiritual gifts, and from Chapter 14 which is about spiritual gifts. So yes, it is hard for me to see that as responsible interpretation.
Then the Bible is wrong in your opinion. The Bible gives us what the standard for a prophet must be and that is not changed anywhere.I my opinion,the prophets in 1 Cor 14 are not held to the standard of infallibility..
---Then the Bible is wrong in your opinion. The Bible gives us what the standard for a prophet must be and that is not changed anywhere.
When 3 different "prophets" can tell a witch that she is on the right track and God is pleased with the direction she is going then we have a problem when they are not held to the Biblical standard.
---
no, you are wrong. Why should on only 2-3 speak? Why should there words be judged?
1 Cor. 14:29. 'Let two or three prophets speak and let the others judge.'I my opinion, the prophets in 1 Cor 14 are not held to the standard of infallibility. Only two or three were allowed to speak. What is said is judged. The word is diakrino (eg, Mt 16:4;Acts 15:3).
Only if you are supposing that OT prophesy is radically different to the NT version, which you have not yet done.Using OT to define NT prophecy is error.
...and shall not endure sound doctrine.I'm wrong for supporting the Biblical definition of a true prophet. Ok so good to know that you think the Biblical definition is wrong, I'm going to go with the Bible on this one.
Why should their words be judged, um to make sure that they fit the qualifications of a true prophet that the Bible has already laid out.
why should only 2 or 3 speak, because that is what God has decreed, so that there is order in worship.
---1 Cor. 14:29. 'Let two or three prophets speak and let the others judge.'
I think you are mistaken here. What is said is not judged (pace the NIV insertion here). The prophets are to judge which ones of them should speak if there were more than two or three prophets. If one set of prophets stand in judgement over another set of prophets, the possibility of rivalry or collusion become very great. That way lies madness.
Only if you are supposing that OT prophesy is radically different to the NT version, which you have not yet done.
...and shall not endure sound doctrine.
I hope you're feeling better very soon, Prof.At the moment I'm i not so good.
You don't know anything about me; you don't know whether I've been taught anything, and if I have, what it is.You are reading into this passage an interpretation that you've been taught, and not what it actually says.
You don't know anything about me; you don't know whether I've been taught anything, and if I have, what it is.
Now please stop showing off and behaving like a spoilt child if you want to discuss theology.
Well I'm sure your whole hermeneutic is faulty because you quote passages without considering the context, so there!I'm not sure what a "spoilt" is, but I'm sure you are reading an interjected interpretation into this passage.
Earnestly Contend
I hope you're feeling better very soon, Prof.
You're keeping us amateur theologians up to the mark!
---I hope you're feeling better very soon, Prof.
You're keeping us amateur theologians up to the mark!
spoilt: past and past participle of spoil.I'm not sure what a "spoilt" is,
I'm not sure that you are capable of a theological discussion.Well I'm sure your whole hermeneutic is faulty because you quote passages without considering the context, so there!
Now do you want to leave the ad homs behind and discuss theology?
Well I'm sure your whole hermeneutic is faulty because you quote passages without considering the context, so there!
Now do you want to leave the ad homs behind and discuss theology?
I remember spoil, spoiling, spoiled, have spoiled, will have spoiled.spoilt: past and past participle of spoil.
You know, like those words learned in 4th grade.
Bent
Built
Burnt
Cleft
Crept
Dealt
Dwelt
Felt
Knelt
Left
Lost
Meant
Sent
Shot
Slept
Spent
Spoilt
Wept
Went