Defend your Faith

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Kutless

absolutely!! Great point!

Proof Paul knew Hebrew: Acts 22:1 Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you. 2 (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,)

[Kutless]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Proof Paul knew Hebrew: Acts 22:1 Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you. 2 (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,)

Paul was definitely an educated man.

[RevDWW]

Originally Posted by Kutless

Paul was definitely an educated man.

I would imagine he was the equivalent of a college educated man. A Pharisee of Pharisees would have made him a Lawyer.

[RunningOnFaith]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Those you mention are not babies or mentally handicapped are they?

They are lost. God will judge them that is a fact NOT a dodge.

Until the modern era the infant mortality rate rivaled the number who lived to maturity. In some third world countries the number is still close to 200 out of 1000 who do not live past the first year. The implication of this being if infants are saved, there are possibly hundreds of millions of these souls going to heaven. This group of souls would no doupt be much larger then the total number who have embraced the Oneness Pentecostal message throughout history by obeying the Acts 2:38 pattern. Some might argue that in certain areas where Oneness was not taught these people might very well have been better off dying as an infant!

Do you think these infants will be known as adults in heaven?

[RunningOnFaith]

Originally Posted by RevDWW

I would imagine he was the equivalent of a college educated man. A Pharisee of Pharisees would have made him a Lawyer.

I don't know what criteria he used to come up with this, but Reformed theologian R.C. Sproul said that Paul had the equivelant of two Ph.Ds by his twenty first year.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by RunningOnFaith

I don't know what criteria he used to come up with this, but Reformed theologian R.C. Sproul said that Paul had the equivelant of two Ph.Ds by his twenty first year.

No wonder I'm having a difficult time with some of his teachings in Romans.

I'm in Peter's league and agree with him when he speaks of Paul: As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

[Kutless]

couple more questions. How did Paul know that he spoke intongues more than everybody else? He wasn't there.

And then again, doesn't it seem contradictory by the level of tongue talking we have in church today when looking at these scriptures in Chapter 14?

[Kutless]

this is crazy but I can't get the link to work

on youtube search dueling tongues (from the blind and the dead video)


real scriptural........yeah?????!!!!!!!!

[Kutless]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself;

27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
Here are the verses I was referring to. Paul told the man who spoke in an unknown tongue if there is no interpreter to speak to himself and to God [in an unknown tongue]. My point is if this unknown tongue is, as you as saying, known to the one who speaks it, then how is this man edified by speaking in an unknown tongue to himself? He already knows the language. He would therefore be speaking to himself words he understands.

This would contradict what Paul said in vs 14.

14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

Paul was making a point. He was speaking rhetorically. He couldn't make the point if he said "I speak Hebrew therefore I understand the Torah readings. He makes the point with a hypothetical when he says, "If I don't speak Hebrew how will it edify me to hear the Torah read in Hebrew."

He wanted them to discontinue the traditional use of Hebrew unless there was an interpreter present to make sense of the reading to everyone so they would be edified.

Can you counter the fact that it seems Paul was against the use of tongues in the synagogue?

[Trouvere]

oloroid

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

If a person is really sincere God will send him a preacher preaching truth the Book of Acts gives those examples. Try the Eunuch in the desert.

This was priceless.