Speaking in Tongues Continued

DHK,

I usually dont get involved in things between 2 other posters, but it seems like Ray has a case.

Your are saying you didnt call him a blaphemer, but that you are saying that something he said was blasphemy.

Which would seem to be saying that when he said what you called blaphemy, you would be calling him a blasphemer that one time.

Which would...technically...make his comment about you calling him a blasphemer correct.

It would be like if I said to someone...

"George, you murdered that person, I saw you!"

And he said...

"How dare you call me a murderer!"

And then I said...

"I never once called you a murderer...I said that you murdered that person. There is a difference"

See?

God bless,

Mike

 

Not true. Ray Berrian (sp?) on another page said something that was untrue that I had said. I did not call him a liar, although he stated an untruth. However, if he misrepresented what I said intentionally, then I would call him a liar.

All that demonstrates is their appeal to people. Strip clubs appeal to people as well.

Now, I have a question: Why do you confuse miracles from God with the temporary sign-gifts? If God chooses to miraculously heal someone of cancer (which I have personally witnessed on two occasions), what does that have to do with the sign-gifts? (Those who had the power of healing could simply lay their hands on people and heal them. There are no instances in which they laid hands on a person and then hoped for the best.)

What in the world makes you think that "the maturity" is the second coming of our Lord?

There are many things included for our learning and admonition. We have all the rules and instructions having to do with the tabernacle, animal sacrifices, etc., and they no longer apply. Do we need to remove them as well? It's all given to us as examples.

What you did is that you stated from your personal opinion that this is so. That does not make it true. You're assuming that the Holy Spirit did not have the ability to state exactly what he meant, and now he needs your help to complete his thought. I don't think the Holy Spirit is sitting there saying, "Oops! I left out 'unknown'. I sure hope someone figures out that that's what I meant."

 

Ed: // the 'instruction'
written in 56AD but only good until 70AD was
included.//

Hope of Glory: //There are many things included for our learning
and admonition. We have all the rules and instructions having to do
with the tabernacle, animal sacrifices, etc., and they no longer
apply. Do we need to remove them as well? It's all given to us
as examples.//

Seems awefully inefficient to have an instruction useful
for 24 years and useless for 1900 years.
By contrast OT instructions were used for thousands of years
and have been invalid for a couple thousand years.

The KJV says 'unknown tongue' in
1 Cor 14 verses 2,4,13,14,19, and 27.
'Tongue' is used without 'unknown' twice: v. 9 and v. 26
'Tongues' is used without 'unknown' in
1 Cor 14 verses 5,6,18,21,23, and 39

The Greek word 'glossa', in it's various forms, is
used throughout. I respect the KJV Translators who
apparently translate 'glossa' as 'unknown tongue' 7 times
in this chapter 14, twice as 'tongue', and
six times as 'tongues'. Paul was IMHO speaking of the
same thing every time - a tongue not spoken on earth
by other people.

 

The word "unknown" was inserted by translators in every single case. Any time you see a word in italics, it's not in the original text. Why didn't the Holy Spirit include it, if it belongs?

 

DHK,

The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are God. He is One God.

I thought you knew that a theologian or even an unorthodox theologian had to be either a man or a woman.

This post is with reference to my statement on the previous page and your response to my ideas.

 

If 'the gift of tongues' were a foreign language as some carelessly suggest, what would be the value of every saint being able to speak in 'tongues?' All of the saints in the church at Corinth we laity, who went to their own craft or place of work every day. They did not go to Spain, Crete, Ethiopia, Libya Egypt, or Italy for example. And yet the Apostle Paul said that he wished that '. . . all could speak with tongues.' [I Corinthians 14:5]. As you see there would have been no value for the locals to be gifted in multiple nationalistic languages.

We do know that the Lord gives His gifts sovereignly and that not every Christian receives the 'gift of tongues.' [I Corinthians 12:10-11].

Did not Paul say to the Church at Corinth, 'forbid not to speak with tongues.?'

 

DHK said...

And then Hope of Glory said...

OK. You guys might be right. I was just throwing something out for consideration, not saying anything dogmatically.

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

Ed Edwards said...

Couldnt have said it better myself!

And THEN Ed Edwards said...

And I couldnt have said THAT any better myself!

You're on a roll, Ed.

Or...as you sometimes say...

"Amen, brother Ed Edwards. Preach it!"

God bless,

Mike

 

Thank you D28guy (Mike).
Flattery can get you nearly anywhere

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what Ray said:

Due tell us what quasi-theologian told you this erring view first. We all want to blacken his name for such a virus placed in the Word of God--the Bible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is DHK's answer.

God is not a quasit-theologian. To say such is blasphemy. God is the author of the Bible. The doctrine which you attack is straight from the Bible. I have shown that to you. When you have an argument with God, you shouldn't call him names.

*********************

Tam says,

First of all Ray did not say God was a quasit-theologian, you put words in his mouth! He was not attacking the Bible or God!! He was asking where the theology that you preach came from.

We, Ray, myself, and obviosly others don't agree with you on all points. That does not make us blasphemers, evil, or heritics.

The people on this board are very intelligent. You can very cleverly turn a phrase so that you are "technacally" within the rules for the board, but the Holy Spirit can see through the jumping jacks that are done to make fun of Him and the things He does.

There is nothing worse than calling Gods people evil.

That's my say for the night. I'm going to bed!!

Working for Jesus,

Tam

 

Ed,

I've actually saved this...

...on a document on my computer to use when appropriate on any discussion threads that might come up somewhere in the future. I love it! Of course I wont take credit, I'll mention I got it from someone elses post.

(If its here on BB I'll give you credit by name.)

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

DHK: //Tongues was a sign to the Jews. The sign happened on the
day of Pentecost when they heard Gentiles speaking in other languages.//

IMHO one errs to call the miracle of the day of Pentecost 'tongues'.
The 'unknown tongues', 'tongue', and 'tongues of 1 Corinthians 14
is NOT the miracle of the Day of Pentecost, it is speaking in an
unlearned/unused-by-other language. I prefer the term 'miracle
of hearing' instead of 'tongues' to describe the miracle of the
Day of Pentecost.

In Acts 2:8 the 'tongue' used is the Greek word 'dialektos' from which
we get 'dielect' NOT the same word used in 1 Cor 14.

In Acts 2:26 Peter in his sermon quotes King David using 'tongue',
the same Greek word 'glossa' used in 1 Cor 14.

DHK: //The fallacy in your post is that the canon was "finalized" in 98 A.D. when John wrote the book of Revelation, the last book of the Bible to be written.//

Yes, John wrote the book of Revelation in 98AD. It was not generally
accepted that Revelation was canocial until the Council of Nicea in 325AD.
Thus my statement is correct.

BTW and IMHO the we Baptists are Catholic, the problem is not with
'catholic' = universal church, but with "Roman Catholic Church".
The Roman Catholic Church hardly existed until 1054 when the Metropolitans
of the Easter Church (who according to the Bible call no man father (or
Poppa, or 'Pope') expelled the Biship of Rome from the Church.
The Original Church is what we would call 'Eastern Orthodox'

DHK: "Give the apostles and early credit more hoonor than the Catholic Church for knowing what our canon was. "

You lead by example. Please don't follow the RCC propaganda.
You should know that the East Syrian Church expanded East to China
and into India. In the 8th century (0701-0800) the East Syrian Church
was the biggest Christian Church in the World (bigger than the proto-RCC).
It remains so and will killed in Western & Central Asia by the
rising tide of the Muslims. Yet the RCC propaganda dismisses this
whole MAJOR CHRISTIN CHURCH with the name of 'heriticial Nestorians'.

Don't buy the RCC propaganda that Christians are only Catholic (i.e. RCC)
or Protestant. Some even see the 'two witnesses' of Revelation 11
as 'catholic' and 'protestant'.

There are four great branches (sperated by geography) of Christianity
until the formation of the RCC in 1054:
1. RCC
2. Eastern Orthodox (the Metropolitian Sees"
3. Eastern Syrian (AKA: Nestorian)
4. Coptic (

Pardon me, dates and spellings may need minor adjustment, I'm typing
this off the top of my head (my memory ain't what it used to be,
as near as I can remember).

 

Hi all, this thread has gotten far away from me. I made a challange on page 4 and I don't think anybody took me up on it. I believe Link made a post after mine that said something about my use of the two Greek words not making sense but he gave no other interpretation of the Greek words in question. Does the fact that no one took the challange mean I won that part of this debate?? I thnik it does. Still time here for someone to do what Link could not. Se page four for the challange.

In Christ,
Brian

BTW, only tongues were connected to Isaiah 28 Prophecy and faded away after 70AD. The other sign gifts stayed around until the Bible was complete because they gave authority to the Gospel message the early believers were preaching.

 

Ed Edwards,

Yes, the tongues of Pentecost are worlds apart from the tongues of Corinth. Pentecost each witness in the market place had one God given tongue and all nations in Jerusalem understood.

In the Corinthian/basicly Gentile congregation it was a tongue with interpretation especially because the N.T. was not yet completed nor written down for all of Paul's churches.

In Assembly of God churches today the above mentioned is not uttered in worship to give new Biblical truth but to edify the saints in Divine Presence in the church.

I agree with you in my reading that the Book of Revelation and a couple of the other books were not accepted by the Christian Church until well into the second century.

The information about the Syrian Church was new and interesting to me.

 

Ain't the
internet wonderful

----------------------
In a board far-far-away and long-long-ago a person named: Thessalonian said:
"Isn't it odd that before the deformation (reformation)
there was the Catholic Church, the Orthodox (which split
off from the Catholic Church in about 1350) and an odd
come and go sect or three for 1500 years?"

Actually that is revisionist history.

In the year 1001 there were numerous pilgrimages to the
Holy Land from Europe, Africa, and India to
celbrate the start of the second Millinnium.
That year the largest Christian Church was the
East Syrian (Nestorian).
This church, the Catholic Apostolic Church of the East,
had over 250 dioceses across Asia and
12 million adhernets. More saints were commanded by this
chruch than the Bishop of Rome (Pope, the Roman
Catholic CHurch or the
Bishop of Conistanople/Patriarch of Antioch (Orthodox
Catholic Apostolic Church, AKA: Easter Orthodox). By 1051 the
Patriarch of Antioch and the Bishop of Rome excommunicated
the bishops, priests, and members each of the group.

During the next 200 years the Catholic Apostolic Church
of the East was crushed between the Mongols of the
East and the Muslim from the Southwest.

Needless to say, it is NOT in the best interests of
the Papists to have that information be of general knowledge.

NESTORIANS:

from: http://mb-soft.com/believe/txw/eastern.htm

The Nestorians are now only a pitiful remnant of what was once a great Church. Long before the heresy from which they have their name, there was a flourishing Christian community in Chaldea and Mesopotamia. According to their tradition it was founded by Addai and Mari (Addeus and Maris), two of the seventy-two Disciples. The present Nestorians count Mar Mari as the first Bishop of Ctesiphon and predecessor of their patriarch. In any case this community was originally subject to the Patriarch of Antioch. As his vicar, the metropolitan of the twin-cities of Seleucia and Ctesiphon (on either side of the Tigris, north-east of Babylon) bore the title of catholicos. One of these metropolitans was present at the Council of Nicaea in 325. The great distance of this Church from Antioch led in early times to a state of semi-independence that prepared the way for the later schism. Already in the fourth century the Patriarch of Antioch waived his right of ordaining the catholicos of Seleucia-Ctesiphon, and allowed him to be ordained by his own suffragans. In view of the great importance of the right of ordaining, as a sign of jurisdiction throughout the East, this fact is important. But it does not seem that real independence of Antioch was acknowledged or even claimed till after the schism. In the fifth century the influence of the famous Theodore of Mopsuestia and that of his school of Edessa spread the heresy of Nestorius throughout this extreme Eastern Church. Naturally, the later Nestorians deny that their fathers accepted any new doctrine at that time, and they claim that Nestorius learned from them rather than they from him ("Nestorius eos secutus est, non ipsi Nestorium", Ebed-Jesu of Nisibis, about 1300. Assemani, "Bibli. Orient.", III, 1, 355). There may be truth in this. Theodore and his school had certainly prepared the way for Nestorius. In any case the rejection of the Council of Ephesus (431) by these Christians in Chaldea and Mesopotamia produced a schism between them and the rest of Christendom. When Babaeus, himself a Nestorian, became catholicos, in 498, there were practically no more Catholics in those parts. From Ctesiphon the Faith had spread across the frontier into Persia, even before that city was conquered bythe Persian king (244). The Persian Church, then, always depended on Ctesiphon and shared its heresy. From the fifth century this most remote of the Eastern Churches has been cut off from the rest of Christendom, and till modern times was the most separate and forgotten community of all. Shut out from the Roman Empire (Zeno closed the school of Edessa in 489), but, for a time at least, protected by the Persian kings, the Nestorian Church flourished around Ctesiphon, Nisibis (where the school was reorganized), and throughout Persia. Since the schism the catholicos occasionally assumed the title of patriarch. The Church then spread towards the East and sent missionaries to India and even China. A Nestorian inscription of the year 781 has been found at Singan Fu in China (J. Heller, S.J., "Prolegomena zu einer neuen Ausgabe der nestorianischen Inschrift von Singan Fu", in the "Verhandlungen des VII. internationalen Orientalistencongresses", Vienna, 1886, pp. 37 sp.). Its greatest extent was in the eleventh century, when twenty-five metropolitans obeyed the Nestorian patriarch. But since the end of the fourteenth century it has gradually sunk to a very small sect, first, because of a fierce persecution by the Mongols (Timur Leng), and then through internal disputes and schisms. Two great schisms as to the patriarchal succession in the sixteenth century led to a reunion of part of the Nestorian Church with Rome, forming the Catholic Chaldean Church. At present there are about 150,000 Nestorians living chiefly in highlands west of Lake Urumiah. They speak a modern dialect of Syriac. The patriarchate descends from uncle to nephew, or to younger brothers, in the family of Mama; each patriarch bears the name Simon (Mar Shimun) as a title. Ignoring the Second General Council, and of course strongly opposed to the Third (Ephesus), they only acknowledge the First Nicene (325). They have a Creed of their own, formed from an old Antiochene Creed, which does not contain any trace of the particular heresy from which their Church is named. In deed it is difficult to say how far any Nestorians now are conscious of the particular teaching condemned by the Council of Ephesus, though they still honour Nestorius, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and other undoubted heretics as saints and doctors. The patriarch rules over twelve other bishops (the list in Silbernagl, "Verfassung", p. 267). Their hierarchy consists of the patriarch, metropolitans, bishops, chorepiscopi, archdeacons, priests, deacons, subdeacons, and readers. There are also many monasteries. They use Syriac liturgically written in their own (Nestorian) form of the alphabet. The patriarch, who now generally calls himself "Patriarch of the East", resides at Kochanes, a remote valley of the Kurdish mountains by the Zab, on the frontier between Persia and Turkey. He has an undefined political jurisdiction over his people, though he does not receive a berat from the Sultan. In any ways this most remote Church stands alone; it has kept a number of curious and archaic customs (such as the perpetual abstinence of the patriarch, etc.) that separate it from other Eastern Churches almost as much as from those of the West. Lately the Archbishop of Canterbury's mission to the Nestorians has aroused a certain interest about them in England.
--------------------------------

Eschew RCC propaganda incorporated into
the Protestant liturgy