25 Year Anniversary - Page 15

mfblume · #**141** 10-19-2016, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

OK, I do accept and see that there are differences in tongues being
1) Praising God, or praying to God
2) Speaking a message from God needing interpretation.

This would concur with PO's above statement that she (as have I) experienced two different types tongues in different settings.

The perspective you broke it down into makes logical sense. One tongue is glorifying the works of God not needing interpretation in the setting of prayer or praise, as opposed to the message of tongues that comes needing interpretation, being a message from God to the church.

You always have such a great attitude to a discussion.

shazeep · #**142** 10-20-2016, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I'll admit at times Shaz, I have trouble following your train of thought, and an interpretation would be helpful... or clarification, lol...

sure, i mean it's easy to think i are being clear when i are not; we lack inflection, typing. Feel free to ask for a restatement, or twist my words to what you heard, and we can proceed from there i guess.

shazeep · #**143** 10-20-2016, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfblume

Says the guy who thinks it's "legalism" and "law" to tell people they have to believe Christ died as them as their only means of salvation, and there are no works we can do to earn heaven. And who says And "fulfills the law" means "it saves you from sin."

But what is it with these constant references to me?

WOW lo,

um, i guess i did not mean that like you read it, i apologize if that seemed like an attack or something. Really, i meant what K said. I only referred to you because you are the one with the courage of your convictions, that i am currently sword-fighting with. No offense meant.

shazeep · #**144** 10-20-2016, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

OK, I do accept and see that there are differences in tongues being
1) Praising God, or praying to God
2) Speaking a message from God needing interpretation.

This would concur with PO's above statement that she (as have I) experienced two different types tongues in different settings.

The perspective you broke it down into makes logical sense. One tongue is glorifying the works of God not needing interpretation in the setting of prayer or praise, as opposed to the message of tongues that comes needing interpretation, being a message from God to the church.

it should not be too difficult to conflate these two with the noise we all make privately to ourselves out of frustration when trying to do the right thing and getting resistance from some one else, and a third party telling you "what he means is..." when the second party has evinced an opinion that makes no sense to you. imo.

mfblume · #**145** 10-20-2016, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shazeep

um, i guess i did not mean that like you read it, i apologize if that seemed like an attack or something. Really, i meant what K said. I only referred to you because you are the one with the courage of your convictions, that i am currently sword-fighting with. No offense meant.

Thanks for the note.

KeptByTheWord · #**146** 10-20-2016, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfblume

You always have such a great attitude to a discussion.

I like to learn, and one has to consider both sides of a discussion before honestly being able to come to any sort of a conclusion. I am not locked into any mindset, other than I want to stand on what the Word says as best I can. I don't want to add, or take away from the written Word.

KeptByTheWord · #**147** 10-20-2016, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shazeep

it should not be too difficult to conflate these two with the noise we all make privately to ourselves out of frustration when trying to do the right thing and getting resistance from some one else, and a third party telling you "what he means is..." when the second party has evinced an opinion that makes no sense to you. imo.

I'm open to discussion, but when the WORD states clearly, with certain sound, I stand on that. Some things are quite clear. Some things are not so clear, and are up for anyone's interpretation.

I would say the scripture that I stand on most is Heb. 6:1-2 - the doctrines of Christ. These are the doctrines we can stand for, and hold fast to. The rest become personal convictions and interpretations.

shazeep · #**148** 10-21-2016, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I'm open to discussion, but when the WORD states clearly, with certain sound, I stand on that. Some things are quite clear. Some things are not so clear, and are up for anyone's interpretation.

If you can present a single clear concept from Scripture, that cannot be Scripturally refuted, then i can present a concept in which God has removed your free will, because no dividing joint from marrow can happen that way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I would say the scripture that I stand on most is Heb. 6:1-2 - the doctrines of Christ. These are the doctrines we can stand for, and hold fast to. The rest become personal convictions and interpretations.

seems to me OPS would avoid that passage the most, since all they talk about is fixing the foundation, that is not broken. But maybe if i heard your interpetation i would change my mind, dunno K.

Godsdrummer · #**149** 10-21-2016, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by good samaritan

It's amazing how life causes us to question the things we think we know. Every time I read the book of Acts it becomes clear to me that tongues is the initial evidence experience that they had, but stories like you told makes people doubt it. I don't think it's strange, but instead it is how the adversary works.

When we teach that you don't necessarily speak in tongues as the initial experience of the Holy Ghost baptism, then we damage their faith right of the bat. Faith comes by hearing the word of God and we should be preaching the promise of the Father. We should not tell people "they must" speak in tongues to get the Holy Ghost, but instead that "they will" speak in tongues when they receive the Holy Ghost.

Both damage their faith, when one does not speak in tongues when everything else in their life lines up with the word of God! Why don't we teach cloven tongues of fire must light upon everyone that receives the HG too. After all did not that happen on the day of Pentecost too?

As for John 3:7-8, there is another way to read this than to imply that there must be a sound when one receives the HG. That is simply that Christ is only saying that as the wind blows we don't know where it comes from because we cannot see it, so is being born of the spirit. Else the next words of Christ do not make sense.
Joh 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
There was not sound when one looked upon the serpent and was healed, there was only the individual belief they would be healed.
In my opinion we need to quite telling others that they have received spiritual birth, but let them tell us. For it is based on their belief and experience not what we hear or see.
1Co 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
It seems we have reversed the teaching of Paul in this verse. Those that believe should not need a sign, for they know in their heart that they have been born of the spirit.

Amanah · #**150** 10-21-2016, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

In my opinion we need to quite telling others that they have received spiritual birth, but let them tell us.
.

I think this is important, especially with children. Let them tell us because when they declare it, it strengthens their faith and dispels the doubt that the enemy will attack them with.