The Most Asked Question During Ordination Exam

[TCassidy]

Your opinion. You can make a case it ended, but you can not come anywhere close to proving it beyond a reasonable doubt.

That depends on how you view the bible. If you view it as the inspired, infallible word of God then the case is iron clad. If you don't consider it inspired and infallible you will reject the plain statements and "spiritualize" it into nonsense. I am of the former persuasion.

 

[TCassidy]

I have not missed the point. I agree that tongues has ended - but the FACT is that there are Sou Baptists who do (attempt to) speak in tongues.

They may attempt it but they don't do it. Tongues, as discussed in the bible, are no more. You can't do what doesn't exist.

 

[TCassidy]

He was the last of the original apostles, but there were more than 12 apostles. I would say there were 24 or 25 named or mentioned but not directly named.

There are 17 people specifically called an "apostle" in the bible, including the Lord Jesus Christ. But "The Twelve" is what we are talking about. The word "apostle" is a transliteration of αποστολος, one of two Greek words meaning "messenger" (the other is αγγελος from which we derive the word "angel").

There are messengers (αποστολος) who were not part of The Twelve, it is The Twelve who will have their names on the twelve foundations of the Heavenly Jerusalem.

Paul was not one of "The Twelve" as he did not meet the criteria Peter iterated in Acts 1.

Paul says he was a messenger, sent from God, with a specific message (the gospel) to a specific people (gentiles). He makes that very clear in Romans 1:1 "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be a messenger, set apart for the Good News of God."

In fact he says the same thing over and over.

1 Corinthians 1:1 Paul, called to be a messenger of Jesus Christ through the will of God.

1 Corinthians15:9 For I am the least of the messengers, who is not worthy to be called a messenger, because I persecuted the assembly of God.

Galatians 1:1 Paul, a messenger (not from men, nor through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead),

Ephesians 1:1 Paul, a messenger of Christ Jesus through the will of God, to the saints who are at Ephesus, and the faithful in Christ Jesus:

Colossians 1:1 Paul, a messenger of Christ Jesus through the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

1 Timothy 2:7 to which I was appointed a preacher and a messenger (I am telling the truth in Christ, not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.

2 Timothy 1:11 For this, I was appointed as a preacher, a messenger, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

We know the gift of tongues was widespread in the early Church. The day John died all the believers who had spoken in tongues for many years could no longer speak in tongues?

No. The gifts of the Spirit were given by God according to His will, at the time of conversion. Those gifts lasted for the life of the person gifted. What Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians is that the gifts were no longer being given to new converts, but those who already had the gifts were to be allowed to use them (forbid not to speak in tongues). But as those senior saints aged and died those gifts died with them. I use John as an example because he is one with whom we are all familiar and we have a pretty good idea when he died.

Bet without CNN to tell them John died, they were confused as to what happened.

The only confusion seems to be on your part. Nobody who had a gift lost the gift (the gifts and calling of God are without repentance - Romans 11:29). The gifts given to the older saints at the time of their conversion continued to operate even though no new converts were being given the gifts.

 

[Reynolds]

There are 17 people specifically called an "apostle" in the bible, including the Lord Jesus Christ. But "The Twelve" is what we are talking about. The word "apostle" is a transliteration of αποστολος, one of two Greek words meaning "messenger" (the other is αγγελος from which we derive the word "angel").

There are messengers (αποστολος) who were not part of The Twelve, it is The Twelve who will have their names on the twelve foundations of the Heavenly Jerusalem.

Paul was not one of "The Twelve" as he did not meet the criteria Peter iterated in Acts 1.

Paul says he was a messenger, sent from God, with a specific message (the gospel) to a specific people (gentiles). He makes that very clear in Romans 1:1 "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be a messenger, set apart for the Good News of God."

In fact he says the same thing over and over.

1 Corinthians 1:1 Paul, called to be a messenger of Jesus Christ through the will of God.

1 Corinthians15:9 For I am the least of the messengers, who is not worthy to be called a messenger, because I persecuted the assembly of God.

Galatians 1:1 Paul, a messenger (not from men, nor through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead),

Ephesians 1:1 Paul, a messenger of Christ Jesus through the will of God, to the saints who are at Ephesus, and the faithful in Christ Jesus:

Colossians 1:1 Paul, a messenger of Christ Jesus through the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

1 Timothy 2:7 to which I was appointed a preacher and a messenger (I am telling the truth in Christ, not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.

2 Timothy 1:11 For this, I was appointed as a preacher, a messenger, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

No. The gifts of the Spirit were given by God according to His will, at the time of conversion. Those gifts lasted for the life of the person gifted. What Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians is that the gifts were no longer being given to new converts, but those who already had the gifts were to be allowed to use them (forbid not to speak in tongues). But as those senior saints aged and died those gifts died with them. I use John as an example because he is one with whom we are all familiar and we have a pretty good idea when he died.

The only confusion seems to be on your part. Nobody who had a gift lost the gift (the gifts and calling of God are without repentance - Romans 11:29). The gifts given to the older saints at the time of their conversion continued to operate even though no new converts were being given the gifts.

But that's not what you said. You did not say the giving of gifts died with John. You said the gifts died with John.

 

[TCassidy]

You did not say the giving of gifts died with John.

I know. Because they didn't. The giving of the gifts ended prior to Paul's writing 1st Corinthians. He said, in 1 Corinthians 13:13 "And now abide faith, hope, and love, these three." He did not say "And now abide faith, hope, love, tongues, prophecy, and knowledge, these six."

You said the gifts died with John.

Yes. As the gifted men of John's generation died the gifts died with them.

 

[Reynolds]

I know. Because they didn't. The giving of the gifts ended prior to Paul's writing 1st Corinthians. He said, in 1 Corinthians 13:13 "And now abide faith, hope, and love, these three." He did not say "And now abide faith, hope, love, tongues, prophecy, and knowledge, these six."

Yes. As the gifted men of John's generation died the gifts died with them.

Why did you even mention John? It seems Paul writing was the time point. What did it have to do with John?

 

[TCassidy]

Why did you even mention John?

Because he, and his contemporaries, were the last surviving members of the first century generation who had been gifted.

It seems Paul writing was the time point.

Two points. #1 When God no longer gave the gifts. #2 When those already gifted, died.

What did it have to do with John?

The death of John marked the end of the generation who had been gifted prior to the completion of the bible.

 

[Felipe Rios]

Well, the two I always ask are:

1. Briefly discuss the Hypostatic Union and its implication on the Lord's Supper.

2. What will you do if, in its infinite wisdom, this Council recommends you NOT be ordained?

(The proper answer to #2 is "I will do as the Lord leads me to do regardless of what this Council recommends.")

1. What is the Hypostatic Union?
2. What would you do if they did not recommend you?

 

[TCassidy]

1. What is the Hypostatic Union?

The perfect unity of the Divine and human natures of Christ.

2. What would you do if they did not recommend you?

I would do as the Lord commanded.

 

[agedman]

Unknown Tongues is its own discussion, but we agree on prophecy. Any prophecy that does not perfectly harmonize with scripture is false. Any "prophet" who gives prophecy that does not come true is a false prophet. That fact in and of its self eliminates about 99% of the modern "prophets."

This is in error.

The word “glossa” is the language of a nation.

There is no “unknown” tongue.

It is a very sad translation that puts “unknown” in the English.

1 Corinthians 13, “If I speak using the languages of the world, or speak the language of the angels,...”

1 Corinthians 14, “One who speaks the language speaks to God ...”

The point is BOTH are known languages to the listeners.

When the people were spreading the gospel on the day of Pentecost, they were not using gibberish, but each heard the message in the language of their homeland.

Readers, be very careful to not slip into accepting the modern thinking concerning “unknown tongues” as the charismatic folks teach.

Such does not stand up to Scripture scrutiny.

Caveat:

When in private prayer, it is private. It is between two - God and that person.

Should that person be in such earnestness that they appear as did Samuel’s mom, it is no ones business.

Who cares the language used at that time. It is private, it is “closeted” and it is an actual language. It is not for the public, not to be used in public gatherings, and any who claim differently are unsupported by Scripture.

 

[Deacon]

1. What is the Hypostatic Union?

It's not a Rock group from the 60's

Here's just a bit from my handout on Matthew 4 - Re: The temptation of Jesus:

Doctrine – Could Jesus have sinned?

The Hypostatic Union

The union of the Divine and human natures in the One Person of Jesus Christ. “Both natures are necessary for redemption. As a man, Christ could represent man and die as a man; as God the death of Christ could have infinite value “sufficient to provide redemption for the sins of the world.’” Paul P. Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1989), 228.​

It is important to realize that in order for the redemptive nature of Christ to be adequate, both natures must remain at one hundred percent each. To make him more human than God would eradicate his being able to remain blameless. And to make him more God than human would eradicate his ability to completely self-identify with those He came to save. (borrowed from 'Why is the Hypostatic Union of Christ Necessary?' [link])

Through his becoming human, he was able to identify with humanity (Hebrews 2:9) and give his life as a sacrifice for all (9:12), so that all those who would believe in him can enter into a new relationship with God that is eternal in nature (Romans 5:2). His sacrifice for all could not have been accomplished in any other way.

Rob

 

[agedman]

....sounds about right:

28 Verily I say unto you, there are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Mt 16

21 Peter therefore seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me. Jn 21

34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be accomplished. Mt 24

Could it be that both John and Paul (as reported by Paul) actually did see the Lords return?

Certainly.

Paul records what was seen as unspeakable.

John wrote down what he saw in the Revelation.

The way some would interpret the statements of Christ is that the return had to actually occur within a certain time line, however an interpretation may also allow for the statements to be taken as to be seen (revealed) to them in their lifetime.

“Seen” is not always taken as that actually witnessed as occurring.

Such is the vision of prophets.

 

[Deacon]

Felipe Rios said: ↑
What would you do if they did not recommend you?

I would do as the Lord commanded.

Would submitting to those in authority be low priority?

Rob

 

[TCassidy]

Would submitting to those in authority be low priority?

Rob

Is it better to obey God or man?

 

[Felipe Rios]

amen

This is in error.

The word “glossa” is the language of a nation.

There is no “unknown” tongue.

It is a very sad translation that puts “unknown” in the English.

1 Corinthians 13, “If I speak using the languages of the world, or speak the language of the angels,...”

1 Corinthians 14, “One who speaks the language speaks to God ...”

The point is BOTH are known languages to the listeners.

When the people were spreading the gospel on the day of Pentecost, they were not using gibberish, but each heard the message in the language of their homeland.

Readers, be very careful to not slip into accepting the modern thinking concerning “unknown tongues” as the charismatic folks teach.

Such does not stand up to Scripture scrutiny.

Caveat:

When in private prayer, it is private. It is between two - God and that person.

Should that person be in such earnestness that they appear as did Samuel’s mom, it is no ones business.

Who cares the language used at that time. It is private, it is “closeted” and it is an actual language. It is not for the public, not to be used in public gatherings, and any who claim differently are unsupported by Scripture.

 

[Felipe Rios]

Would submitting to those in authority be low priority?

Rob

The local church is the one that ordains me, so if I was not recommended, I would still be ordained by the church, assuming the church would be willing to ordain me.

 

[Deacon]

Is it better to obey God or man?

When one goes before a council they are acknowledging that they are the leaders.
God has already said that we should submit to those in authority over us.

I'd obey God.

Rob

 

[Salty]

When one goes before a council they are acknowledging that they are the leaders.
God has already said that we should submit to those in authority over us.

But normally a council is not in authority - they are simply an advisory board - esp if they are pastors from sister churches.

 

[Deacon]

The council is given the task of examining a candidate for ordination.
On every certificate of ordination I’ve seen they’ve signed their names.
It is upon their recommendation that a candidate is ordained.

I’d tread carefully before thumbing my nose at a recomendation not to ordain.

That being said, there are plenty of Christians in positions of worth that have never been ordained.

It is another path that the candidate could take - and perhaps what TC had in mind

Rob

 

[Salty]

I’d tread carefully before thumbing my nose at a recomendation not to ordain.

Fully agree!