|
brolga
|
1# |
Rank:Poster Grande III
Score:14470
Registered:
01/03/2007
|
RE:Are RF correct in some areas?
(Date Posted:15/04/2008 01:56:39)
Ian Further to Epis', I am a bit at a loss with your comment "supportive of tongues" recently in the shout box. I personally had come to the conclusion, tongues for today can only used as a "Mantra" when in private prayer. Would you expand a little for us. Might get a few tongues wagging.
Thanks
brolga
Mantra: • noun 1 (originally in Hinduism and Buddhism) a word or sound repeated to aid concentration in meditation. (Oxford Dictionary)
(Message edited by brolga On 15/04/2008 02:02:40)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Who said it could not be done? And tell me what great victories does he have to his credit which qualifies him to judge others accurately?
|
|
Didaktikon
|
2# |
Rank:Posterior Maximus I
Score:17390
Registered:
29/08/2007
|
Reply To Episkopeo
(Date Posted:15/04/2008 18:52:24)
Reply to Episkopeo (14/04/2008 18:58:53) Quote from Chat Box:- "Here's the thing; on some fronts the RF actually got things almost correct"
Hi Ian,
Will you please explain in detail your above remarks so that I can ascertain where the RF actually got things almost correct. I, and those in RF (many read this forum) will then have the benefit of a clear knowledge of such. I don't see that many correct areas myself. It would not be a good thing, however, to appear to be merely fault finding for the sake of it, or to be suffering severe and chronic ODD.
God Bless
Epi
The context of that particular statement had to do with the RF's position on Pentecostalism, a position that I (more or less) agree with. Other than that, there's not much that they believe which I actually support.
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Didaktikon
|
3# |
Rank:Posterior Maximus I
Score:17390
Registered:
29/08/2007
|
Reply To brolga
(Date Posted:15/04/2008 19:00:47)
Reply to brolga (14/04/2008 23:56:39) Ian Further to Epis', I am a bit at a loss with your comment "supportive of tongues" recently in the shout box. I personally had come to the conclusion, tongues for today can only used as a "Mantra" when in private prayer. Would you expand a little for us. Might get a few tongues wagging.
Thanks
brolga
Mantra: • noun 1 (originally in Hinduism and Buddhism) a word or sound repeated to aid concentration in meditation. (Oxford Dictionary)
Good morning, Ralph. Well then, your conclusion is incorrect. There's nothing wrong with the whole "tongues" and "interpretation" bit; Paul certainly allows this, although he doesn't encourage the same. Then, of course, there is the private use of "tongues" in personal prayer. It too finds its place in the broader scheme of things. Blessings, Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
brolga
|
4# |
Rank:Poster Grande III
Score:14470
Registered:
01/03/2007
|
RE:Are RF correct in some areas?
(Date Posted:15/04/2008 20:48:21)
Ian, With all the reading, studying, researching, performing and experiencing this particular crap of tongues bit, I am no further in understanding the significance, other than the Pentecost phenomenon, to what it all achieves, other than confusion  , from the start. It now begs the question. (Knowing that the Revivalist version is the "pits") Does it really matter whether we have this "Gift" or not, or that we need it for prayer or anything else, for today? What I am sure of is that nobody really has the answer to it.  brolga
(Message edited by brolga On 15/04/2008 20:53:54)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Who said it could not be done? And tell me what great victories does he have to his credit which qualifies him to judge others accurately?
|
|
Didaktikon
|
5# |
Rank:Posterior Maximus I
Score:17390
Registered:
29/08/2007
|
Reply To brolga
(Date Posted:15/04/2008 20:54:17)
Reply to brolga (15/04/2008 18:48:21) Ian, With all the reading, studying, researching, performing and experiencing this particular crap of tongues bit, I am no further in understanding the significance, other than the Pentecost phenomenon, to what it all achieves, other than confusion , from the start. It now begs the question. (Knowing that the Revivalist version is the "pits") Does it really matter whether we have this "Gift" or not, or that we need it for prayer or anything else, for today? brolga Hi, Ralph.
Possession of "tongues", the "least" of all the gifts, biblically-speaking is of no temporal or eternal consequence whatsoever. In other words, it's so inconsequential a matter that it doesn't have very much bearing on very much at all.
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
| |
