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!
You still don't get it.....Thomas Grantham said 'all of the gifts' - and specifically mentions tongues. tongues occured during the Methodist revivals. Prophecies - well I wouldn't know where to begin - I have already given some examples of that. How can you continued to state that tongues and prophecy were non-existent until 1900? And by the way, I agree that most of what goes on today is "nonsense" - that is not in dispute. That is why I am not Pentecostal or Charistmatic. No, it wasn't the modern nonsense - it was the real thing.Huh? Early Baptists allowed for God to heal or do miracles. Some of us OLD Baptists today still do. He is God! But don't lump in "Speaking in tongues", okay? No way, Hosea!
Remember, the modern faux tongues is from 1900 CE, so when you see "gifts of the Spirit" mentioned in pre-1900 literature isn't the modern nonsense.
I agree brother.Originally posted by dean198:
"I don't know of any Baptist that would disagree and say God does not still heal. He does."
Most probably wouldn't go up to a blind lady with oil, saying "the Lord Jesus restore thy sight" as the early Baptists did.
I agree. The two are mutually exclusive!A poster said that they are a "Baptist" and believe the "Baptist distinctives", but that they are "pentecostal".
That means they SAY they believe the Bible is the sole authority for faith and practice {#1 distinctive of Baptists) but ALSO believe that God reveals Himself in tongues, prophecy and word of knowledge.
I contend these two are mutually exclusive. A "Baptist" who is pentecostal is NOT A BAPTIST. They are, by definition, a "Pentecostal".
This is unlike a person who can freely hold the baptist distinctives while being "reformed" or "free will", "SBC" or "IFB".
Thoughts?
That is the problem with these "rare" incidents. They occur just like the miracles of Mary's face showing up on a cloth, or tears of blood streaming from a stutue of Mary in a church in Denmark.Originally posted by Matt Black:
Alright, I'll bite![]()
Now, unfortunately, that is a rare - but not unique - example of what I consider to be Biblical 'tongues'. I do not consider most of what purports to be 'tongues' today to be the real Scriptural deal but gibberish, but I don't think it does a lot of harm either
Yours in Christ
Matt
I have a question. Does the "Baptist Distinctive" above mean that God does not, cannot, or will not speak to person directly? The above "Baptist Distinctive" mentions the Bible as "sole authority for faith and practice". Can God talk to a person about things other than "faith and practice"? I find this discussion quite interesting.Originally posted by Dr. Bob:
A poster said that they are a "Baptist" and believe the "Baptist distinctives", but that they are "pentecostal".
That means they SAY they believe the Bible is the sole authority for faith and practice {#1 distinctive of Baptists) but ALSO believe that God reveals Himself in tongues, prophecy and word of knowledge.
I contend these two are mutually exclusive. A "Baptist" who is pentecostal is NOT A BAPTIST. They are, by definition, a "Pentecostal".
This is unlike a person who can freely hold the baptist distinctives while being "reformed" or "free will", "SBC" or "IFB".
Thoughts?
That means they SAY they believe the Bible is the sole authority for faith and practice {#1 distinctive of Baptists) but ALSO believe that God reveals Himself in tongues, prophecy and word of knowledge.