Apostolic Uniqueness - total dependence on God

[Aaron]

That is the logical conclusion to his post.

1. He rejected my view that Scripture is our only authority for doctrine with the Christian deoendent on the Holy Spirit as being imagination and feelings.

2. His solution was teachers rather than the Holy Spirit.

This is romish belief (like a pope).

God gave us Scripture. God gave us the Spirit. And God gave us teachers.

Have you considered why you both object so much with the idea God actually guides His children?

THAT is the question that needs to be considered.

You're one to be speaking of logical conclusions!!

So, describe this guidance. God guides, and God directs our paths. No one has denied that. I know what that means. But I want to hear your take. How does the Spirit guide, and how is the witness borne?

Don't just say Scripture, because the question will be, how do you know you're understanding of the Scripture is true?

 

[Aaron]

As I said I mean no disrespect. This is what I was getting at.
at 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
Mat 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
Mat 23:10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
Mat 23:11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
Mat 23:12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

My point is those terms give men prestige they do not deserve. We are all brothers each just as faulty as the next. None is better except for Christ alone.
MB

No, you quoted 1 John 2:27 to say no one needed teachers. That's a weird way to be "getting at" the humility required of those with the best gifts and who occupy offices in the church.

 

[JonC]

You're one to be speaking of logical conclusions!!

So, describe this guidance. God guides, and God directs our paths. No one has denied that. I know what that means. But I want to hear your take. How does the Spirit guide, and how is the witness borne?

Don't just say Scripture, because the question will be, how do you know you're understanding of the Scripture is true?

No, I do not think that you do know what it means. If you did you would not have made the foolish conclusions you made when I simply commented that we are guided by the Spirit. If you did not deny the truth you would not have denied the truth.

I believe that you were being honest when you rejected my comment and are now backtracking by claiming it was a rejection to what I supposedly meant.

So no. Ask one of your teachers for the doctrine they believe you should hold (perhaps Andy Stanley).

Until you are able to come clean about your absurd comments (me equating the Spirit to imagination, depreciating teachers, etc....you know, all that stuff I said only in your imagination) you and Stanley can figure it out.

 

[Iconoclast]

That is the logical conclusion to his post.

1. He rejected my view that Scripture is our only authority for doctrine with the Christian deoendent on the Holy Spirit as being imagination and feelings.

2. His solution was teachers rather than the Holy Spirit.

This is romish belief (like a pope).

God gave us Scripture. God gave us the Spirit. And God gave us teachers.

Have you considered why you both object so much with the idea God actually guides His children?

THAT is the question that needs to be considered.

I never said God does not guide his children. You said that I said that when I never did

Your "logic" does not let you have poetic liscence to image what we might mean.
Ask Aaron was he suggesting an infallible teacher.

 

[JonC]

I never said God does not guide his children. You said that I said that when I never did

Your "logic" does not let you have poetic liscence to image what we might mean.
Ask Aaron was he suggesting an infallible teacher.

All I ever said was that Scripture is our authority for doctrine and that the Spirit guides the believer - that any spiritual truth we hold is because of God.

That's it @Iconoclast . You have been arguing against my statement for quite some time now. You argue against me, and if I call you out on it you say you agreed with me and then go back to arguing against me.

Make up your mind.

I will summarize my view:

1. Scripture is our authority for doctri e.
2. These spiritually dead cannot understand spiritual things
3. Believers are indwelt by the Spirit.
4. The Spirit is our "Helper".
5. We are guided by the Spirit.
6. God has given teachers to the church.
7. Teachers are subject to Scripture.

I know you must disagree with me on some point otherwise you would not have kept on arguing against me.

Which one - by number - do you reject?

 

[Iconoclast]

All I ever said was that Scripture is our authority for doctrine and that the Spirit guides the believer - that any spiritual truth we hold is because of God.

That's it @Iconoclast . You have been arguing against my statement for quite some time now. You argue against me, and if I call you out on it you say you agreed with me and then go back to arguing against me.

Make up your mind.

I will summarize my view:

1. Scripture is our authority for doctri e.
2. These spiritually dead cannot understand spiritual things
3. Believers are indwelt by the Spirit.
4. The Spirit is our "Helper".
5. We are guided by the Spirit.
6. God has given teachers to the church.
7. Teachers are subject to Scripture.

I know you must disagree with me on some point otherwise you would not have kept on arguing against me.

Which one - by number - do you reject?

I have never disagreed on any of these.
You said I did, but I did not.
I have always agreed with all seven

 

[JonC]

I never said God does not guide his children. You said that I said that when I never did

Your "logic" does not let you have poetic liscence to image what we might mean.
Ask Aaron was he suggesting an infallible teacher.

I never referenced John 16:13 but you claim I did. I never claimed the Holy Spirit guides tge beliver to know all spiritual truth (like God guided the Apostles to write Scripture) but you claim I did.

 

[JonC]

I have never disagreed on any of these.
You said I did, but I did not.
I have always agreed with all seven

In the OP on the other thread you provided a quote from me stating that we cannot know spiritual truth except by the Spirit. Rather than agreeing you proceded to lift one sentence out and form an argument agai st the quote.

Do you need the reference or are you starting to recall? You made several assumptions and ran with it.

I assume it was an error and you've gone too far to admit fault. But my post you argued against was numbers 2,3,4, and 5.

2. These spiritually dead cannot understand spiritual things
3. Believers are indwelt by the Spirit.
4. The Spirit is our "Helper".
5. We are guided by the Spirit.

 

[JonC]

I think it is fair to say that @Iconoclast mistook one sentence in my quote to be a reference to John 16 and ran with the assumption.

I meant the sentence to remain in context of the whole quote. I was not referencing John 16 but was simply saying that we arrive at no spiritual truth except by the Spirit.

In other words, I was not claiming that the Spirit guides us to all spiritual truth there is to be known but that the Spirit guides us to all spiritual truth that we possess.

@Iconoclast made a simple mistake. I was wrong on the other thread to keep pushing the error. It was part light-hearted on my behalf and part trying to get him to own up to his mistake.

In trying to get @Iconoclast to own up to the mistake I also made fun of the assumption and ultimately pushed him further into defending the error. This was mean-spirited of me and for that I apologize to the board and @Iconoclast .

If you want to know what I believe it is stated on this thread.

 

[Iconoclast]

I think it is fair to say that @Iconoclast mistook one sentence in my quote to be a reference to John 16 and ran with the assumption.

I meant the sentence to remain in context of the whole quote. I was not referencing John 16 but was simply saying that we arrive at no spiritual truth except by the Spirit.

In other words, I was not claiming that the Spirit guides us to all spiritual truth there is to be known but that the Spirit guides us to all spiritual truth that we possess.

@Iconoclast made a simple mistake. I was wrong on the other thread to keep pushing the error. It was part light-hearted on my behalf and part trying to get him to own up to his mistake.

In trying to get @Iconoclast to own up to the mistake I also made fun of the assumption and ultimately pushed him further into defending the error. This was mean-spirited of me and for that I apologize to the board and @Iconoclast .

If you want to know what I believe it is stated on this thread.

No need to apologize.
In the seed of the serpent thread pt2....in.post 3....I clarified my statement about the Apostles. That would have been the time to clarify your thought.

 

[JonC]

No need to apologize.
In the seed of the serpent thread pt2....in.post 3....I clarified my statement about the Apostles. That would have been the time to clarify your thought.

No, there is a need. I own up to my actions not for other people but for myself.

I knew you mistook my comment and I intentionally continued to exploit the error. I did not mean it to be mean-spirited but given the context of the thread it is easy to see my comments were indulgent rather than Spirit-led.

 

[Aaron]

No, I do not think that you do know what it means. If you did you would not have made the foolish conclusions you made when I simply commented that we are guided by the Spirit. If you did not deny the truth you would not have denied the truth.

I believe that you were being honest when you rejected my comment and are now backtracking by claiming it was a rejection to what I supposedly meant.

So no. Ask one of your teachers for the doctrine they believe you should hold (perhaps Andy Stanley).

Until you are able to come clean about your absurd comments (me equating the Spirit to imagination, depreciating teachers, etc....you know, all that stuff I said only in your imagination) you and Stanley can figure it out.

I'm not backtracking one iota. You're just reading things into what I said. Many have corrected you in this very thread.

As far as your view, if it isn't some feeling . . . how do you know the Spirit is confirming the truth of what your pastor is saying?

Again, don't say Scripture, because then the question will be, how do you know you're seeing the Scriptures correctly?

 

[JonC]

IAs far as your view, if it isn't some feeling . . . how do you know the Spirit is confirming the truth of what your pastor is saying?

Again, don't say Scripture, because then the question will be, how do you know you're seeing the Scriptures correctly?

I do not believe that the Spirit confirms the truth of what a pastor or teacher says, so how this is done is supposedly done or how it looks like not my problem to solve. I think that you have a very unorthodox view of the Spirit and a very liberal view of Scripture.


So you tell us - how you believe the Spirit confirms what the teachers you have chosen tell you since you rule out Scripture as the criteria?

 

[Aaron]

I do not believe that the Spirit confirms the truth of what a pastor or teacher says, so how this is done is supposedly done or how it looks like not my problem to solve. I think that you have a very unorthodox view of the Spirit and a very liberal view of Scripture.


So you tell us - how you believe the Spirit confirms what the teachers you have chosen tell you since you rule out Scripture as the criteria?

Stop being pedantic. How does the Spirit "guide you into truth" independently of teachers? And if you say "Scripture," then you know what the next question will be.

 

[JonC]

Stop being pedantic. How does the Spirit "guide you into truth" independently of teachers? And if you say "Scripture," then you know what the next question will be.

I think John Owens said it best - the Holy Spirit guides the believer to understand spiritual things in a spiritual manner.

If this does not make sense to you, I am not the one who can guide you to understand. I never claimed that role.

You, @Aaron , are the one insisting that Scripture cannot be the criteria for testing spiritual things because of differences in interpretation. I believe that your conclusion misses the point of "spiritual truths". But that's another issue.

YOU assume that neither the Holy Spirit nor Scripture is the criteria for teachings, but rather that we are to follow "God given teachers". The problem is you have not been able to explain how you choose the teachers you follow absent the Spirit and Scripture.

Apart from Scripture as a standard, how do you decide to follow the teachers you select?

 

[MB]

Stop being pedantic. How does the Spirit "guide you into truth" independently of teachers? And if you say "Scripture," then you know what the next question will be.

I just could not resist. I know this is addressed to Jon and this is not meant to answer for him.
My answer would be that I am guided to the answer by the Spirit through Prayer. It's really simple "Ask and you will receive" I ask all the time and in the matter of truth I am always guided to it.
MB

 

[MB]

Stop being pedantic. How does the Spirit "guide you into truth" independently of teachers? And if you say "Scripture," then you know what the next question will be.

Why not ask God how it's done. Personally I don't understand how someone with your obvious education doesn't know. Doesn't God direct your path?
How is it anyone knows the truth from a lie. Knowing starts with questions and when those questions are in God's hand they will be answered.
MB

 

[Reformed]

I just could not resist. I know this is addressed to Jon and this is not meant to answer for him.
My answer would be that I am guided to the answer by the Spirit through Prayer. It's really simple "Ask and you will receive" I ask all the time and in the matter of truth I am always guided to it.
MB

OK, but how do you know you are being lead by the Spirit? I had a woman recently tell me that God gave her peace in leaving her husband because she no longer loves him and God does not want her to be miserable. I asked her how she knew her "peace" was from God and she replied, "Because I prayed about it." You may say this is an extreme example but it is not. It happens all the time.

Could it be that the real answer lies in the Spirit confirming in our minds the truth of scripture and that scripture is the source of truth about God?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[agedman]

Very often, I have seen folks stumble in this topic of how the Spirit guides and leads. More often the folks fall into two categories.

One category I would perhaps label as “rejectionism” aligns tha God will only speak through His Word, that all “light, insight, wisdom, understanding, ...” can only be brought by the pure truth of The Word.

The other category I would perhaps label as “acceptionism” more often embraces extrabiblical experience of feeling, emotions, sights, signs, ... as equally valid irrespective of the Word.

Those are the extremes.

What is the Scripture perspective?

The creation is declaring the truth of God according to the Psalms.
The Spirit comes and goes at its own volition and no human can understand where it is from or where it is heading according to The Lord Jesus.

Hebrews records that the Word is living, powerful, having discernment of being able to separate soul and spirit, thoughts from intents, and even cleaving joints to expose the inner marrow.

Therefore, when it comes to guidance, the use of both the Word and the experiences of the believer are important.

The Wisemen at the birth had both the head knowledge of discernment and also the physical star.

Peter had both the Spirit of discernment and physical dreams directing him.

Paul had abundant knowledge to know mysteries of multitudes of revelations, yet, through the affliction of Satan given him, he not be puffed up, but guided.

Therefore, a standard is proposed concerning the thread.

God will use whatever God pleases to guide His children.

Some may gravitate to the senses, some to the intellect pursuits in The Word.

But neither is to be exclusive, and neither should be discounted with one exception.

The power and authority of The Word to openly and often most publicly display the separation of truth from coverup must be discerned.

Bones cover marrow.
Thoughts form from intents of the heart.
The soul (that which pertains to flesh) covers that which is the eternal spirit of the human.

Guidance of believers must engage both the wisdom of the Spirit and that of experiential. The Word be true, and every man a liar, and that God be displayed and praised. That the believer respond, “It pleased The Lord to ....” and a path is walked.

 

[percho]

Had Paul read the Word of God prior to his trip to Damascus? Having so read, and assuming, he assumed he understood the Word of God was he not in reality blind and in ignorance to the Word of God.

Are we not the very same. By the will of God, do we not have to have the scales of blindness removed from our minds in order to know the truth of the Word of God?

When was the blindness of Paul's mind removed? 9:15 or 9:18?