Being slain in the Spirit?

[DHK]

Originally posted by atestring:
Why are there over 200 post on thus thread?
Sounds like a lot of interest in this subject.
It is interesting that this was a common experience in the Great Awakening that Jonathan Edwards was involved in, the CAne Ridge Revival, The Ministry of George Whitfield,
The New Hebredes Revival, THe Ministry of John Wesley, and common among the Ulster Presbryterians in the 1630's. By the way the "Ulster Presbryterians" were the originators of the term "Redneck" but not for the reason of being slain in the Spirit.
for info on this see my post on the Forum for Polls under Redneck Trivia.

Are you good at revising history or what?
People like Wesley and others that you have mentioned never spoke in tongues. Some of them believed in the possibility of speaking in tongues, but they didn't speak in tongues.

Although Wesley never emphasized certain gifts such as predictive prophecy or tongues and their interpretation, he did regret their loss to Christians in general.
Although there is no record that Wesley himself ever spoke in tongues, there is evidence that he believed that this gift of the Holy Spirit was a legitimate gift for the Church of any age.
http://www.ucmpage.org/articles/rtuttle1.html

Curiously, the practice of speaking in tongues virtually vanished from the church until the dawn of the twentieth century. The reason for the "silence" of tongues is a matter of conjecture, of metaphysical or theological speculation. It was rumored that Martin Luther spoke in tongues, but that reference is likely spurious. Tongues does not seem to be a part of the Reformation. In 1831, Henry Irving was minister of the Regents Square Presbyterian Church in London. He preached about the restoration of spiritual gifts in the modern church, and tongues and prophecies were said to be manifest in his church. However, the major thrust of Pentecostalism occurred in the United States in Topeka, Kansas when followers of Charles Parnham "waited" for the Spirit in 1901. Parnham was a former Methodist minister who left the church to become an itinerant holiness preacher.
http://www.anomalist.com/features/tongues.html

This last link is an excellent link with a good testimony from a previous Charismatic.
DHK

 

[Bible-boy]

Originally posted by tamborine lady:

Bible Boy said:My salvation does not depend on my experience. I would be in real trouble if it did. My salvation is rooted in and depends solely on the fact that Jesus lived, suffered, died, was buried, and rose again according to the Divine plan of His Father so that lost sinners (such as I) who place their faith and trust in Him (Jesus) can be saved. How do I know this? Because it is recorded for me in the objective truth of God’s Word.


Tam says:

My salvation does not depend on tongues, or falling in the spirit, or interpretation, or wisdom, nor knowledge, or any other thing.

The sole reason that I will go to heaven is that I have asked Jesus into my heart. I believe in Him shedding His blood for me, He died on the cross, was buried, rose again after three days, and now sits at the right hand of god.

There is nothing that says you have to do any of that other stuff to be saved.

Working for Jesus,

Tam

P.S. That doesn't mean that those things don't happen today though!!

Hello Tam,

I was not attempting to argue any of the points you raise in your reply to my post. I was specifically addressing a point that Ray raised. However, when you quote me without quoting Ray's material that I was responding to you don't paint the entire picture.

Specifically Ray said:

Originally posted b Ray Berrian:
You know [that you are saved] because in some way your life has experienced the result of your personal salvation. Plus, you have your own salvation story to tell saints and sinners alike.

Thus, my repy that you quoted above. When you quote someone please do so in context and in full.

 

[Ray Berrian]

There are as many ways that people come to know the Lord as there are varied faces of these ones. Yet all claim that Jesus has made a change in their lives and they have been changed from sin to righteousness.

The problem some of you is you have falllen into the trap of trying to legislate from Scripture a rigid explanation as to why the Apostle John fell under the mighty power of the Spirit of the Lord. I agree with your basic premise, but what you fail to see is the accompanying joy and revelation that the Spirit of God makes when He makes full contact and impact on saved people. We are not allowed to put God in a confined theological box and say that progressive revelation was the ONLY reason for the special revelation of the Lord to John's human spirit, soul and body. John found out that since Jesus' ascension, the Lord had fully power and authority to operate in his life and would do so in all Christian lives. He saw the Lord! If you do not see the Lord through the eye of faith, in some way, you will never understand the supernatural power of the Lord God.

Maybe this is a poor example. But here goes the idea. If you have a head ache and take two aspirin, the main reason is to stop the pain in the head. But, beyond this major reason for taking the asprin there are secondary experiences as you take the glass and by faith fill it with cold water in ingest the cold clear water. By faith you experience ancillary benefits, beyond the two little white tablets entering your stomach.

In like manner John's main thrust was to give progressive revelation which would form the canon for the church as its only guide for faith and practice of the Christian life.

Just as everyones initial salvation experience is unique, so too every person's experience in the Holy Spirit as they move through the Christian life differs; and yet we all are guided by the Spirit and always in confomity with the Word of God the Bible.

So, when people claim that the Holy Spirit has dealt with them differently than your experience in the things of God, does not make them people who believe error. Your main problem is that you rigidly want God to perform for you exactly as He did 2,000 years ago. This view of the Holy Spirit places people in a legalist dimension in your view that is unwarranted by the Lord God.

The Apostle Paul fell unconscious in the Presence of the Triune God in his experience of personal salvation. Does this mean that we are not saved, if we do not fall and become blind for a few days as was Paul's experience. No! Why? Because the Lord is not limited in the ways He brings sinners to Christ.

So too, God the Holy Spirit cannot be bound by man's attempts to regiment His Divine activities in the lives of maturing saints.

We are not to seek being 'slain in the Spirit' to prove our spiritual excellence; this would be wrong. But to deny that the Lord has deal with other Christians different than with us is also wrong and unChristian. Why? Because there is a lack of spiritual understanding and depth of maturity in Christ.

Merely quoting 'I believe in the life, death and resurrection of Christ' does not place us in the family of God. This is head religion which never changes the life. But, receiving Christ as Savior and Lord of life will have His affect on all souls though in unique ways.

Merely, repeating a denominational creed may be good but it can also place people into a 'legalism' that teaches Christians to think that their branch of the church is the only group that the Lord loves and ministers to in this lifetime.

Legalism is not Christianity, merely Christian thoughts gathered in pill form for all to swallow, or be called unsaved or unspiritual.

I am not against creeds, because I always at Holy Communion used either the Apostle's Creed or the Nicene Creed. But this an of itself does not change sinners into Christians.

Every thing in the Christian life demands balance and not taking these severe postures. The Lord God is much greater than our little concepts as to Who He is and what He is allowed by us to do in the lives of His people.

And yet what He does in Christians' lives always has to agree with the Bible, even in matters found in I Corinthians 12 & 14.

Berrian, Th.D.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
He saw the Lord! If you do not see the Lord through the eye of faith, in some way, you will never understand the supernatural power of the Lord God.
Berrian, Th.D.

Your argument is self-defeating. John did not see the Lord through the eye of faith. "We walk by faith and not by sight. John saw the Lord. He was not walking by faith, but rather by sight.
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
--John saw the Lord. This was not the evidence of things not seen. When Christ comes faith also will cease.
DHK

 

[Ray Berrian]

I would say it is more Scriptural that the Apostle John also walked by faith in the light that Jesus had ascended into Heaven before he penned the Book of Revelation.

It is also true, as you said, that John did see the Lord and when he saw Him--John fell at his feet as having died [Revelation 1:17]. There was no personal hypnosis at this event, only the revealing of the mighty spiritual Being of the Lord.

DHK, I see as usual you merely restate your dogma and seldom respond to my insights as to the secondary phenemenon of John falling because of the mighty spiritual revelation of Jesus' Presence.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
I would say it is more Scriptural that the Apostle John also walked by faith in the light that Jesus had ascended into Heaven before he penned the Book of Revelation.

It is also true, as you said, that John did see the Lord and when he saw Him--John fell at his feet as having died [Revelation 1:17]. There was no personal hypnosis at this event, only the revealing of the mighty spiritual Being of the Lord.

DHK, I see as usual you merely restate your dogma and seldom respond to my insights as to the secondary phenemenon of John falling because of the mighty spiritual revelation of Jesus' Presence.

I have explained these passages before, but you don't listen. If I tell you again will you change your mind?
John, like Isaiah did 800 years before his time, fell prostrate before the Lord of glory. He did not fall in a frantic frenzy arms flailing backwards, flat on his derriere, knocking his head to the floor in the most ungraceful way that brings typical chaos and confusion to any Charismatic service. God forbid if you can read that into any of these passages. Learn hermeneutics please. The act of "slain in the spirit" has more similarities to a demon possessed person than one referently worshiping the Lord. Mary fell at Jesus feet and worshiped Him. Jesus said that Mary "had the better part." But she was not slain in the spirit.
DHK

 

[DHK]

Biblical examples of being slain in the spirit:

Matthew 17:15 Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water.

Mark 9:18 And wheresoever he taketh him, he teareth him: and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth, and pineth away: and I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him out; and they could not.

 

[Bible-boy]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
There are as many ways that people come to know the Lord as there are varied faces of these ones. Yet all claim that Jesus has made a change in their lives and they have been changed from sin to righteousness.

No Ray. There is only one way that people come to know the Lord. That is by placing their faith and trust in Him. Then He becomes the Lord and Master of our lives. As such we have a personal relationship with Him. However, the only way that we come to this saving knowledge of Him is through the Bible. That is not to say that there is no general revelation of the existence of God. Clearly the Bible teaches us that all the world knows through the evidence revealed in creation that God exists (Rom. 1-18-20). However, saving knowledge of Christ and need for faith (in Him) and repentance comes only by the reading, preaching, and teaching of the Word.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
The problem some of you is you have falllen into the trap of trying to legislate from Scripture a rigid explanation as to why the Apostle John fell under the mighty power of the Spirit of the Lord.

The Scripture is our only source of objective truth. We can speculate all we want about the reason why John fell at Christ’s feet. However, all our speculation, no matter how fine it may be, is simply subjective musing and hypothesis if it does not line up with and correspond to the clear teaching of objective truth of the Scripture.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
I agree with your basic premise, but what you fail to see is the accompanying joy and revelation that the Spirit of God makes when He makes full contact and impact on saved people.

I am glad you agree with our basic premise. No one here is failing to see (or imagine) the joy that John surely experienced from having been in the presence of the exalted Christ and from being given a glimpse of heaven. So I don’t understand what you are trying to argue here.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
We are not allowed to put God in a confined theological box and say that progressive revelation was the ONLY reason for the special revelation of the Lord to John's human spirit, soul and body.

No one is trying to argue that progressive revelation is the ONLY reason. However, it was the primary reason. The argument I am making is that you are attempting to use this passage as a proof text for your position. However, by your own admission you did not experience exactly what John experienced because you did not receive progressive revelation of God’s Word. The two experiences are vastly different. Therefore, you must find a different proof text because this one does not support your argument.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
John found out that since Jesus' ascension, the Lord had fully power and authority to operate in his life and would do so in all Christian lives.

Please provide some Scripture references that support your idea that “John found out…” and that he knew the Lord would “operate” in the lives of all Christians just as He did in the John’s own life.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
He saw the Lord! If you do not see the Lord through the eye of faith, in some way, you will never understand the supernatural power of the Lord God.

See DHK’s reply to this statement above.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Maybe this is a poor example. But here goes the idea. If you have a head ache and take two aspirin, the main reason is to stop the pain in the head. But, beyond this major reason for taking the asprin there are secondary experiences as you take the glass and by faith fill it with cold water in ingest the cold clear water. By faith you experience ancillary benefits, beyond the two little white tablets entering your stomach.

You’re right it is a poor example. First, there are physical/biological/chemical reasons why aspirin has pain relieving effects on the body, and it works throughout the entire body not just in the head. Second, we do not have the refreshing and hydrating experience of drinking cool water by faith. We drink the water so we can swallow the aspirin easier. A drink of water is not refreshing and hydrating because I believe (have faith) that it will be. Again it is another physical/biological/chemical reality.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
In like manner John's main thrust was to give progressive revelation which would form the canon for the church as its only guide for faith and practice of the Christian life.

Wrong. I don’t think John had a “main thrust” when the events of the Book Revelation took place. He certainly is not able to “give” progressive revelation on his own accord. Now, it would be more correct to say that Christ’s main thrust was to “give” progressive revelation. I’ll let you work out the difference in those two statements.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Just as everyones initial salvation experience is unique, so too every person's experience in the Holy Spirit as they move through the Christian life differs; and yet we all are guided by the Spirit and always in confomity with the Word of God the Bible.

If you boil it down to the absolute basics all of our salvation experiences are identical. We were all vile sinners in need of a Savior. When we placed our faith and trust in Him and repented He saved us. Were our circumstances and events different? Yes. However, our salvation is identical.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
So, when people claim that the Holy Spirit has dealt with them differently than your experience in the things of God, does not make them people who believe error.

I am not trying to argue that point. I am asking you to show me from the objective truth of the Bible (our only source of objective truth) that what you are saying is correct and valid. So far, your argument has been laden with errors that do not agree with the clear teaching of the Scripture. That does not mean that you believe error (yet). It just means that your interpretation of the Scripture has been wrong. All I am doing is pointing out the errors you made in your presentation of the argument and giving you the chance to return to the Scripture and seek another proof text that actually supports your stated belief.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Your main problem is that you rigidly want God to perform for you exactly as He did 2,000 years ago. This view of the Holy Spirit places people in a legalist dimension in your view that is unwarranted by the Lord God.

Wrong again Ray. We already agreed that God never changes (Mal. 3:6; Heb. 1:12). His word said that not me. Either you believe His Word or you don’t. I only expect God to act as He says that He will act in His Word. This is not legalism. Legalism has to do with people following a proscribed set of rules that dictate how they act so I am not sure what you are trying to say here.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
The Apostle Paul fell unconscious in the Presence of the Triune God in his experience of personal salvation. Does this mean that we are not saved, if we do not fall and become blind for a few days as was Paul's experience. No! Why? Because the Lord is not limited in the ways He brings sinners to Christ.

Sorry Ray but none of the related texts say that Paul fell unconscious at that time (Acts 9:4; 22:7; and 26:14). Plus, we are not discussing the “how” or the “what takes place” when we are saved. Our topic is “Being slain in the Spirit.” So you need to find a more relevant line of argumentation.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
So too, God the Holy Spirit cannot be bound by man's attempts to regiment His Divine activities in the lives of maturing saints.

No one here is trying bind that Holy Spirit. We are simply asking you to provide biblical support for your stated doctrinal belief. So far you have not done so.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
We are not to seek being 'slain in the Spirit' to prove our spiritual excellence; this would be wrong. But to deny that the Lord has deal with other Christians different than with us is also wrong and unChristian. Why? Because there is a lack of spiritual understanding and depth of maturity in Christ.

First, you need to demonstrate from the pages of Scripture that people are indeed “slain in the Spirit.” It is not un-Christian or spiritually immature to expect someone who professes a doctrinal position to be able to prove that position from the Scriptures. This is exactly what the Bible says the people in Berea did when Paul and Silas came preaching to them. They “examined the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so” (Acts 17:11, NASB). You will note that the Bible also praised the people of Berea for being this way and calls them “more noble minded” than those in Thessalonica (Acts 17:10).

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Merely quoting 'I believe in the life, death and resurrection of Christ' does not place us in the family of God. This is head religion which never changes the life. But, receiving Christ as Savior and Lord of life will have His affect on all souls though in unique ways.

I agree, except I would say that doing so has His effect on all souls in the exact same way (He saves them from their sins when they had no power to do so for themselves).

Originally posted by Ray Berian:
Merely, repeating a denominational creed may be good but it can also place people into a 'legalism' that teaches Christians to think that their branch of the church is the only group that the Lord loves and ministers to in this lifetime.

See my comments on legalism above. Additionally, no one here is arguing for the repeating of denominational creeds. We are talking about being slain in the Spirit and asking you to support your doctrinal belief with Scripture. BTW, You are correct that this could happen to some. However, the problem is not with the stated beliefs contained in the creed (as long as they are biblical). The problem is with the church leaders not properly teaching their people to read the Word for themselves and to discern truth from it.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Legalism is not Christianity, merely Christian thoughts gathered in pill form for all to swallow, or be called unsaved or unspiritual.

I agree with you. However, our topic is not legalism. We are talking about being slain in the Spirit and seeking the Scriptural support for the belief in that doctrinal position. You have not provided such Scriptural support so far.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
I am not against creeds, because I always at Holy Communion used either the Apostle's Creed or the Nicene Creed. But this an of itself does not change sinners into Christians.

I agree. However, what does this have to do with our topic of being slain in the Spirit and the Scriptural support for this doctrinal position?

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Every thing in the Christian life demands balance and not taking these severe postures. The Lord God is much greater than our little concepts as to Who He is and what He is allowed by us to do in the lives of His people.

What? We are talking about what the Bible says and does not say about a doctrinal belief. All doctrinal positions must be supported by the Scripture. If they are not then we should not be dogmatic about their reality and reliability. We are not talking about “our little concepts” about God; but rather, we are talking about what He has revealed about Himself to us in His Word.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
And yet what He does in Christians' lives always has to agree with the Bible, even in matters found in I Corinthians 12 & 14.

Berrian, Th.D.

I fully agree. However, I may not agree with the hermeneutical approach that you employ to arrive at your interpretation of those passages of Scripture (but that is a whole other debate).

[ February 05, 2006, 08:08 PM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

[Ray Berrian]

Bible-boy,

[Quote} I say that the American flag is colored with red, white and blue, but there is no way for me to convince you of this if you have a hardened view that our flag is colored, purple, white and black. So too, with exegeting Scripture; the truth stands forever. This being said people believe what they want to believe apart from letting Scripture speak clearly to them.

On this board I am convinced that if I were to say that Heaven were up--at least two of you men would argue that Heaven is down. This is what I am dealing with in explaining the Word to you. [/Quote].

You said, 'A drink of water is not refreshing and hydrating because I believe (have faith) that it will be.'

Actually, Jesus says 'Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again. But whosoever drinketh of the water THAT I SHALL GIVE him shall
bein him a well of water spring up into everlasting life. This is true spiritual hydration! To believe and accept Jesus as Savior and Lord is an experience of refreshment and dissolving of our guilt

.

 

[Ray Berrian]

Bible-boy,

You said, 'We already agreed that God never changes (Mal. 3:6; Heb. 1:12).'

Yes we agree that God is changeless. Beyond this I am telling you that some of you Christians believe that the Lord has to save a person by the exact same way. I do not hear of anyone being saved while sitting in a chariot, but it is possible for a person to be saved while sitting in a Volvo. So too, the Holy Spirit does not have to operate on or in the lives of saved people in the exact same way. Some cry when they get saved while others merely experience inner joy. And since the Lord dealt with the Apostle John by giving him one aspect of the Word of God in the Book of Revelation, does not mean that He has limited Himself by allowing other Christians in our age to experience--falling under the mighty power of the Holy Spirit. You will agree with me that the closer you get to the Lord in your Christian life, your life will change more into His likeness. The Lord is sovereign and not even a Baptist church can dictate as to how He will minister in the lives of people--both saved and lost people.

.

 

[Bible-boy]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Bible-boy,

I say that the American flag is colored with red, white and blue, but there is no way for me to convince you of this if you have a hardened view that our flag is colored, purple, white and black. So too, with exegeting Scripture; the truth stands forever. This being said people believe what they want to believe apart from letting Scripture speak clearly to them.

Hello Ray,

Do you really want me to point out the flaws in this analogy? You would be much better served if you stuck with the Scriptures and allowed them to speak for themselves to demonstrate your position. I believe the Word. I believe what it says when it is read and interpreted in a literal, historical, grammatical fashion. This means allowing the Word to speak for itself without adding outside words or meanings to the text. This is called exegesis. I do not accept interpretations that are based upon eisegesis (adding outside words and meanings to the text to arrive at a presupposition). Likewise, I do not accept doctrinal positions that are based on anything other than the objective truth of the Word (that means don't try to hand me a doctrine that is based on subjective personal experience). If you can provide an exposition of the Scripture that is based on sound hermeneutics and solid exegesis I'll accept it. If not, I'll reject it and let you know why I reject it.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
On this board I am convinced that if I were to say that Heaven were up--at least two of you men would argue that Heaven is down. This is what I am dealing with in explaining the Word to you.

.

I don't think anyone here disagrees with you just for the sake of disagreeing. We disagree when you state things that do not line up with the clear teaching of Scripture. We disagree with you when you fall prey to fallacy in your presentation of logical debate. Generally we take the time to point out your error and explain why it is an error.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
You said, 'A drink of water is not refreshing and hydrating because I believe (have faith) that it will be.'

Actually, Jesus says 'Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again. But whosoever drinketh of the water THAT I SHALL GIVE him shall
bein him a well of water spring up into everlasting life. This is true spiritual hydration! To believe and accept Jesus as Savior and Lord is an experience of refreshment and dissolving of our guilt.

Ray...

that has nothing to do with the example of taking aspirin and drinking water that you used previously or my response that showed why it was a poor choice of analogy in attempting to prove your point.

 

[Bible-boy]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Bible-boy,

Notice in Acts 26:14 that you included in your previous post, points to the fact that not merely Rev. Benny Hinn's congregation falls under the power of the Holy Spirit. Neither was this limited to just Saul/Paul but rather that 'they all had fallen to the ground.' This is was not a formal bowing of the knee to Jesus in adoration or worship, but an event that our Lord ministered to said people as Paul recounts to King Agrippa. It is because of these verses that we cannot deny that at times the Lord ministers to human beings in this way.

There is no need to set up a formal doctrine like Regeneration, but the Lord included this verse so people can never deny that He ministers in various ways to some people by the giving or refreshing experience of the Holy Spirit.

Some of you hate the phrase 'being slain in the Spirit.' There may be a better way to express these happenings in the lives of people, but this is what some Christians call it.

Ray...

Since these others were traveling with Paul for the purpose of persecuting Christians they clearly were not believers. The text never says that they became believers along with Paul. In fact, it does say that they saw the bright light but did not understand the voice of the One who spoke. The text says nothing about them being blessed by this encounter.

They were temporarily blinded by the great light. Thus, they also fell down. However, the text makes it clear that once Jesus was finished speaking to Paul they rose up and helped him on to Damascus (because he was still blind they led him by the hand). Then we do not hear or see anything else about them. They left him in the house of Judas on Straight Street.

[ February 06, 2006, 12:33 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

[Ray Berrian]

Bible-boy,

I was not saved last night at your church. I have an advanced theological degree and do not need you to give me definitions of theological words. Save this for you illiterate, spiritual novices.

.

You said among other things, 'I do not accept interpretations that are based upon eisegesis (adding outside words and meanings to the text to arrive at a presupposition).'

 

[Bible-boy]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Bible-boy,

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I was not saved last night at your church. I have an advanced theological degree and do not need you to give me definitions of theological words. Save this for you illiterate, spiritual novices.

.

You said among other things, 'I do not accept interpretations that are based upon eisegesis (adding outside words and meanings to the text to arrive at a presupposition).'

</font>[/QUOTE]Okay Ray, but surely you understand that not everyone who reads these pages has an advanced Theological degree and that it is good for us to expalin ourselves for their benefit. Right?

 

[Ray Berrian]

The call on Saul's life alone was to the Apostolate and not to all who walked with Saul/Paul. Nevertheless, all traveling with him were blessed by the appearance of the Divine Being of God. '...all fell to the earth.' Does this ring a bell yet? Some people are affected by the Holy Spirit in this way when they draw nigh unto the Lord and He ministers in their lives in this way. (Acts 26:14)

.

 

[Bible-boy]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
The call on Saul's life alone was to the Apostolate and not to all who walked with Saul/Paul. Nevertheless, all traveling with him were blessed by the appearance of the Divine Being of God. '...all fell to the earth.' Does this ring a bell yet? Some people are affected by the Holy Spirit in this way when they draw nigh unto the Lord and He ministers in their lives in this way. (Acts 26:14).

So it is your position that the Lord blesses unbelievers in the same manner that He blesses born again believers?

 

[Bible-boy]

Ray,

Please look again at the text. It says nothing about these men being blessed. It only says that they fell. Why did they fall? Because they had been temporarily blinded. That is all we know from a literal reading of the text. Where does the idea that they were somehow blessed come from? I would argue that you imported that meaning onto the text (eisegesis) in order to support your presupposition about being slain in the Spirit. The text says nothing about anyone being blessed on the Damascus road with Paul.

We previously agreed that eisegesis resulted in flawed interpretation of the Scripture.

8. A sound hermeneutical approach to the Scripture requires that we rely on a literal, historical grammatical, reading and understanding of the text. The only exception to this rule being when the context of a passage indicates otherwise such as in certain O.T. prophecies, the parables, and the Book of Revelation, or when the passage itself makes it clear that it is speaking metaphorically (e.g. Ps. 98:8; or Isa. 55:12, clearly rivers and trees do not literally have hands with which to clap).

A. Eisogesis—that is adding words and/or meanings that are not clearly present in the text in order to force our presuppositions upon the Scripture is unacceptable. We must allow the Scripture to speak for itself.

B. Exegesis—that is allowing the Scripture to speak for itself without forcing outside words and/or meanings upon the text results in proper interpretation and correct exposition of the Word.

C. Therefore, sound hermeneutics and solid exegesis must be employed to insure that we arrive at the proper interpretation and correct exposition of the Bible.

So let's stick with this method of interpretation and not add outside words and meanings to the text.

[ February 06, 2006, 12:58 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

[Ray Berrian]

Bible-boy,

In Acts 9:7 who travelled with Saul/Paul got up from the ground, but it does not say they fled from the Lord because of conviction about being saved. Rather, they attended to Paul and led him to Damascus. If these men remained unsaved I doubt if they would have ministered to Saul.

No one can be struck down by the power of the the Holy One and ever be the same. Yes, truly these men attending Saul were blessed as all people who fall under the mighty power of the Holy Spirit. This is one of God's sovereign actions on the lives of human beings, which some of you refuse to accept as coming from Him.

 

[Bible-boy]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Bible-boy,

In Acts 9:7 who travelled with Saul/Paul got up from the ground, but it does not say they fled from the Lord because of conviction about being saved. Rather, they attended to Paul and led him to Damascus. If these men remained unsaved I doubt if they would have ministered to Saul.

Hello Ray,

Why would someone flee from the Lord because of conviction about being saved? Once someone is saved they are drawn to the Lord and not the opposite. Look at the text again. We do not want to talk about what we think or doubt about the story. We only want to discuss what the Word actually says about the event. Anything that we say outside of what the text actually says is merely speculation on our part. The text clearly says that there was the bright and blinding light (Acts 9:3; 22:6; and 26:13-14). The text clearly says that those who were traveling with Saul/Paul, “…saw the light but did not understand the voice of the one who was speaking to me” (Acts 22:9, ESV). The text clearly says that the voice spoke to Saul/Paul in the Hebrew language (Acts 27:14). The text does not indicate that Saul/Paul or any of the others were unconscious during this time. This is proven by the fact the Paul testifies to his hearing the voice and the others hearing it but not understanding it.

Why were Saul and these men traveling to Damascus? The text clearly says that they were going there with letters from the high priest in Jerusalem for the express purpose of persecuting Christians. The text makes it clear that this is Saul’s posse tasked with the job of rounding up and bringing Christians, bound as criminals, back to Jerusalem to be executed (Acts 9:1-2). As such these men would have been faithful Jews, perhaps Saul’s fellow Pharisees, and they would have spoken and understood the Hebrew language. So why did they not understand the Lord’s voice when He spoke to Saul? Because His message was not for them.

The text never says that Saul/Paul communicated to them what had taken place. The text only makes it clear that when they arose they assisted Saul/Paul on into Damascus and left him at the house of Judas on Straight Street (Acts 9:8-11). Why did they do this? The most probable explanation is that at this point they still believed that Saul/Paul was one of their own (Christ-hating unbelievers).

The text never says anything about anyone being blessed on the Damascus Road. So where does that idea come from? You added that meaning into the text in order to support your presupposition regarding being slain in the Spirit. This is eisegesis.

You previously agreed that eisegesis is an unacceptable hermeneutical approach that leads to improper exposition and flawed interpretation of biblical texts. However, when the tried and true hermeneutical method of exegesis results in a conflict with your predetermined belief system you chuck it out the window (so to speak) so that you can maintain and embrace your presupposition regarding this issue. Your stated belief in the principles of hermeneutics and the practical working out of your Theological position on this issue do not agree. You have given intellectual assent to the principles of sound hermeneutics and solid exegesis. However, when they result in a conflict with your presupposition on this issue you embrace eisegesis. This is a violation of the Law of Non-contradiction (to which you also previously agreed), and as such makes your entire line of argumentation here invalid.

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
No one can be struck down by the power of the the Holy One and ever be the same. Yes, truly these men attending Saul were blessed as all people who fall under the mighty power of the Holy Spirit. This is one of God's sovereign actions on the lives of human beings, which some of you refuse to accept as coming from Him.

The text never says anything about anyone of them being blessed. You added that meaning to the text. Eisegesis, eisegesis, eisegesis.

[ February 07, 2006, 06:24 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

[Bible-boy]

Gentlemen,

From this point on if I so much as see a post that mentions the name of Benny Hinn it will be deleted post haste. I am going to open a new thread entitled with his name for you all to use for this discussion. Please keep it in there. Link to Benny's discussion thread

[ February 07, 2006, 06:26 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]