Search results

I can't and won't defend the author or the books you posted a link to; I haven't read them, don't know anything about them or him. But I'll defend arminianism this way: you continue to confuse arminianism and pelagianism.

This is exactly why I asked you to re-read 1 Cor from the point of view of one of the members. You don't recognize verse 4 for what it actually says-just what you want it to say.

Scripture, please. We should not seek using the gifts for the edification of ourselves; that's selfish and unloving...and as Paul stated, if we don't know what's being said, unprofitable.

Now that's funny ... because the guy I heard it from? Our conversation took place back in 2002.

Actually, Awaken's not the only one. I personally know of an Independent Fundamental Baptist pastor who will swear to this day that he started witnessing to a man in English; and the man will swear to this day that the pastor was speaking in Spanish. The man responded the same as in your story...

How about: What does it say? For example, Billy Joel's "It's Still Rock and Roll to Me" is catchy, and arguably pretty neutral about what it says; while his song "Only the Good Die Young" encourages a young girl to give up her virginity, and "I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the...

Biblicist, RevMitchell - would y'all agree to say "speaking in languages" rather than "speaking in tongues"? I think it might help clarify some things on both sides of the discussion.

Exactly; and what does he say about edification in verse 5? "greater is he...that the church may receive edifying." How about verse 12? "seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church." How about verse 17? "For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified." What about...

"Mostly" a book of correction? Here's an exercise for you: Re-read the book of 1 Corinthians, pretending to be a member of that church; knowing that, as a member, you've been participating in the things Paul talks about throughout the whole letter to your church. Because, when you look at...

....we've covered this territory before; so allow me to ask this: What was the purpose of the book 1 Corinthians?

No; I'm saying that it's incorrect to say the apostles had to pray for the interpretation. Based on what I said in my point #3, I believe they consciously knew what they were saying. I believe you're mixing up what 1 Cor 14 says. In the entire discourse, Paul is talking about someone...

Three things I see wrong there: 1) They didn't need interpretation, because they had all those observing talking about what they were saying; this is proven by when it says that they thought the apostles were drunk, but Peter was able to hear them say that and corrected them. 2) I agree...

So - did the apostles n Acts 2 *not* know what they were saying when they started speaking in other languages?

Question: Could we say "speak in languages" rather than "speak in tongues"?

The Catholic media is up in arms over comments President Obama made during a speech while in Northern Ireland for the G8 summit. Obama made what is described as “an alarming call for an end to Catholic education,” in spite of the fact that it is considered “a critical component of the Church.”...

And thus, the thread takes on a life of its own.... Sorry, Lugnut!

...that's what I said....

Which is something that's already been agreed upon in this and other threads (except for the part about being confused about what they heard; they knew what they heard, and even stated exactly what they heard, each in their own languages; they were confused because they didn't understand how it...

So - since you want to keep acting like a teacher, instead of presenting your position and then allowing debate on it - what does the sign tell an unbeliever?

If you had the answer, then why did you pose it as a question?