|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:14/03/2008 23:50:32)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
Didaktikon
|
102#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To Male Member
(Date Posted:15/03/2008 00:21:40)
Dude,
The reason these people aren't in Revival is that they don't hold to the Word of God.
Really? Well, speaking for myself, the reason that I'm not in "Revival" (a misnomer if ever there was one) is because I do hold to the Word of God. And, of course, I understand it too.
Truth is, we don't want their nonsense in our fellowship.
What? The Word of God?
I have presented 5 Bible translations to support my view that ALL the believers spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost.
The sad bit is that you don't even understand why your position with respect to the "5 Bible translations" is so stupid 
That's not good enough for this mob. The Bible should be the END of the argument. Not for this mob.
It is for me. Which is why I keep raising it with you. But with you, the "end" clearly isn't Scripture at all, it's your personal "experience".
And not that it would do any good in this forum but here are some MORE expert translations that support this view. Ian hasn't come up with ONE SINGLE translation that supports HIS view.
I think you'll find that I've already disproved your position. Others are smart enough to understand why, clearly though, you aren't. Your problem, not mine 
Dear reader please consider...
Good News translation
When the day of Pentecost came, all the believers were gathered together in one place.
The Complete Jewish Bible
Guess what? The words "all the believers" doesn't appear in the original Greek text. Anywhere. In any manuscript.
God’s Word Translation Acts 2
1 When Pentecost, the fiftieth day after Passover, came, all the believers were together in one place. 2 Suddenly, a sound like a violently blowing wind came from the sky and filled the whole house where they were staying. 3 Tongues that looked like fire appeared to them. The tongues arranged themselves so that one came to rest on each believer. 4 All the believers were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages as the Spirit gave them the ability to speak.
Guess what? The words "all the believers" doesn't appear in the original Greek text. Anywhere. In any manusript.
Weymouth New Testament Acts 2
1 At length, on the day of the Harvest Festival, they had all met in one place; 2 when suddenly there came from the sky a sound as of a strong rushing blast of wind. This filled the whole house where they were sitting; 3 and they saw tongues of what looked like fire distributing themselves over the assembly, and on the head of each person a tongue alighted. 4 They were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in foreign languages according as the Spirit gave them words to utter.
'Yep'. "They" had all met in one place. Guess who the "they" refers to? Any ideas yet?
You're not arguing with me. This is the Word of God.
Actually 'nope'. It isn't the Word of God at all, simply your (as I've said before) thoroughly stupid misrepresentation of the same 
Hey guys you've tried the put downs, maybe if you start swearing at me I'll go away........ maybe... hahahahaha
Interesting. I'd prefer that you stayed. You've much to learn.
Blessings,
Ian
(Message edited by Didaktikon On 15/03/2008 02:31:27)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
MothandRust
|
103#
|
Rank:Ghost in the machine
Score:34610
Posts:1585
Registered:27/02/2004
|
Reply To Male Member
(Date Posted:15/03/2008 00:31:25)
Rust Bucket: What do you expect at the OK Corral, a tea party? Ian just called me a twit!
No, he said you 'present yourself' as a twit. I used to present myself as Santa Claus in Myers by my appearance. We recognise the twittyness because most of us spent many years in Revival and remember what life was like wearing the 'blinkers'. You may not be an actual twit, but your 'presentation' thus far speaks for itself. Ignoring the actual Greek text is, in itself, fairly stupid. Not to say you are stupid... get the distinction?
Boo hoo. I've been mortally wounded! Don't think so. Yeah I've been a bit cheeky here, thrown in some ideas out of left field and rattled some cages.
I was guessing early twenties before, but I'm going for late teens? Let me know if I'm getting closer.
If you want to rewind way back to the start of this thread I said this would be a merry go round. Only it's not so merry.
Yeah, reading back through the thread was interesting AND entertaining (so therefore it WAS and continues to be actually merry to me).
The reason these people aren't in Revival is that they don't hold to the Word of God.
And they're probably fornicators too. Bastards... they certainly don't hold to the word of Revivalism. You use the same words, with a uniquely twisted interpretation, and lots of jibberish language to boot.
I have presented 5 Bible translations to support my view that ALL the believers spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost.
A list of English bible names of English translations that they're also using and studying... and they still didn't agree with your deluded interpretations of them? Maybe you could actually commentate or give an informed opinion other than what your house-leaders have told you.
That's not good enough for this mob. The Bible should be the END of the argument. Not for this mob.
And not that it would do any good in this forum but here are some MORE expert translations that support this view.
OK, and LOOK... you've brought scriptures into the discussion. How novel! Cool, let's have a look.
Good News translation - Acts 21 When Pentecost, the fiftieth day after Passover, came, all the believers were together in one place. 2 Suddenly, a sound like a violently blowing wind came from the sky and filled the whole house where they were staying.
Hey, MaleMember did you get the sound of violent blowing wind in your experience? Is that the testimony of all the believers of Revival?
3 Tongues that looked like fire appeared to them. The tongues arranged themselves so that one came to rest on each believer.
Hey MaleMember, did you get the little tongues of fire resting on you? Be honest. No? Hmmm... No one has ever testified of this other than renaissance artists. Nice paintings and literary device, but nah... not happening is it?
4 All the believers were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages as the Spirit gave them the ability to speak.
Hey MaleMember, did you speak in other languages, or just a repetitive jumble of sounds? Be honest.
Weymouth New Testament - Acts 2 1 At length, on the day of the Harvest Festival, they had all met in one place; 2 when suddenly there came from the sky a sound as of a strong rushing blast of wind. This filled the whole house where they were sitting; 3 and they saw tongues of what looked like fire distributing themselves over the assembly, and on the head of each person a tongue alighted. 4 They were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in foreign languages according as the Spirit gave them words to utter.Hey MM, did you get the ability to speak in foreign languages? Is this a common experience of all who speak in tongues and are 'saved' in your church... or is it all shigida shigida? Again, be honest with yourself and others reading.
You're not arguing with me. This is the Word of God.
Yes OK. I'm looking straight at your English versions and I'm not seeing much match up at all with your 'experience', to start with.
Hey guys you've tried the put downs, maybe if you start swearing at me I'll go away... maybe... hahahahaha
No, stay as long as you're prepared to discuss your beliefs. It's very interesting and well, after adding up all the put downs, I can safely conclude that yours outnumber everyone elses so don't be confused it there's tit for tat. What if we use the swear words in the King James bible? Pisseth and bastards - hehe.
So yes, don't go away, stay and 'fellowship' with us here and bring some more scriptures to look at, but if you're gonna make like a pigeon that continually craps on the chess board you can eventually 'pisseth' off thank you very much.
(Pigeon quote: No matter how well you set up the rules the Reivalist will fly in knock over all the pieces, cluck a great deal, crap all over the board, and fly off claiming victory.)
Regards
(Message edited by MothandRust On 15/03/2008 03:26:05)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
|
|
Didaktikon
|
104#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To MothandRust
(Date Posted:15/03/2008 04:00:30)
Hi, Pete.No, he said you 'present yourself' as a twit. I used to present myself as Santa Claus in Myers by my appearance. We recognise the twittyness because most of us spent many years in Revival and remember what life was like wearing the 'blinkers'. You may not be an actual twit, but your 'presentation' thus far speaks for itself. Ignoring the actual Greek text is, in itself, fairly stupid. Not to say you are stupid... get the distinction?There's a saying that gets trotted around (tongue-in-cheek) by biblical scholars from time-to-time: "... if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then clearly it's a camel pretending to be a duck!" Somehow I don't think 'MM' is actually pretending, if you catch my drift
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
MothandRust
|
105#
|
Rank:Ghost in the machine
Score:34610
Posts:1585
Registered:27/02/2004
|
RE: Male Member
(Date Posted:15/03/2008 05:07:37)
Wait, is this GWM? Don't lie... it makes baby Jesus cry. Your problem really is ignorance and like my favourite scripture says (yes, I have a favourite scripture) in Hosea 4:6 - My people are destroyed through lack of knowledge. You're going to be a cocky misinformed guy for a very long time as long as you're only listening to the same tarred friends, and you'll only develop the same fruit if you limit yourself to the scripture skimming english translations only. It's the 'glory of kings' to search out a matter, afterall. Even your oversight (the guys with ties) will tell you that english words have been added by the translators here and there, and it doesn't take much study to discover which ones they are. Eg. (a known Revival example) Mark 9:29 - Jesus said a certain type of demon could only be exorcised through "prayer and fasting", but the word 'fasting' in NOT found in the oldest manuscripts and because of this discovery New English translations have dropped the word. You can find more examples here - http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_bibl.htm but then I know it's a whole lot easier to stick with what you know with your head in the sand... until you run out of oxygen that is. All the best.
(Message edited by MothandRust On 15/03/2008 07:56:28)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
|
|
Didaktikon
|
106#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To Male Member
(Date Posted:15/03/2008 19:15:20)
Male Member,
Now that my essay is available for dowload from this site, and that you clearly have begun to read it, 'hows-about' you engage me on the issues that I've raised therein? Although I know that it might be a little 'high-brow' for you, and although I appreciate that it forces you to actually think, I'd still like to see something definitive from you that presents the faintest glimmer demonstrating that you actually understand the issues involved.
A handful of RF pastors have responded to me on the essay so far. And with one notable exception, they demonstrate a profound inability to grapple with the biblical text in a way that is honest. Their preference, instead, is to follow the: "... I was told that I would speak in tongues, and I did!", mantra This simply reinforces to me that the Bible, Holy Writ, Scripture is not the ultimate authority in your fellowship. Personal experience enjoys that elevated position.
Blessings,
Ian
(Message edited by Didaktikon On 15/03/2008 19:17:07)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
RF_on_the_edge
|
107#
|
Rank:Regular Poster
Score:3180
Posts:156
Registered:12/03/2007
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:16/03/2008 03:44:59)
The reason these people aren't in Revival is that they don't hold to the Word of God.
RF'rs take note. This is a typical smear tactic used by some (particulalrly immature examples) of your leaders. First who are 'they'? Second, what does 'hold to the Word of God' really mean. Sure some posters at this site are not Christian and so, quite rationally do not consider the bible to be Holy Writ. Others, however most certainly do consider the bible to be God's Holy Writ. You can see that for yourselves. I for one do, and it is because I do, that I consider the RF 'no tongues => no Holy Spirit' is unscriptural. I aim to have the bible as my 'rule of faith'.
Is 'don't hold to the Word of God' really code for 'don't agree with RF interpretation of the bible'? If so, well, duuuh.
RF'rs do you realise that when someone leaves your fellowship, and you are not allowed to speak with them, you don't hear their side of the story, you don't hear from them what their attitude is to the bible.. Remember the furphys (not to say untruths) put out in some RCI's about what was going on in the assemblies that eventually banded together under the RF banner?
Truth is, we don't want their nonsense in our fellowship.
Smear tactic alert for RF'rs! Who are 'we'? Is MM qualified to speak on behalf of 'we'? What specifically is the 'nonsense'? Whose nonsense is this referring to? This site has postings from people with all sorts of belief systems and even the Christians come from a range of 'denominations'.
BTW RF'rs Read through the '2 questions' thread if haven't done so already and you want some more clues as to why MM's claim that the bible translations he nominated 'support his view that ALL believers spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost' is more than a wee bit suspect.
|
|
Disciple(Ex-member)
|
|
|
Reply To Male Member
(Date Posted:16/03/2008 19:25:44)
Ian
No I'm not a Greek freak.
And I find it sickening when people run off to the greek to try and prove a point that can't be made with an English bible.
|
Lets face one fact. The Greek New Testament is the witness, NOT ANY OF THE VARIOUS ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS ON OFFER.... and I am amazed at how a day doesn't go by that I am now finding interesting gems contained within the Greek Text that the translaters have completely missed altogether due to misunderstanding of important grammer points such as "mood" and "tense" etc and I have to admit that I have many upon many miles to go before I can catch up to Ian in this area of theology.... For me, Greek is a beautiful language and it was written in Koine because that was the international tongue at that time and I feel that God intended it to be in Koine, because He wanted His word to be clearly understood.. Get one thing clear. When you read an english translation, you read through the eyes of a translater but get some formal Greek learning and you will soon see otherwise. I can understand now why Ian chooses to do his devotional reading from just the Greek alone. The Greek is just so nourishing to the human heart in a way that the English will never do. Eric
|
|
Didaktikon
|
109#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To Disciple
(Date Posted:17/03/2008 15:21:47)
Good morning, Eric.
Lets face one fact. The Greek New Testament is the witness, NOT ANY OF THE VARIOUS ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS ON OFFER....
Correct.
and I am amazed at how a day doesn't go by that I am now finding interesting gems contained within the Greek Text that the translaters have completely missed altogether due to misunderstanding of important grammer points such as "mood" and "tense" etc
Well, I think you might be being a little harsh with the Bible translators For one thing, they are generally extraordinarily competent at handling Greek; they well understand the minutiae of Greek grammar too, and note well that meaning doesn't necessarily reside simply with "mood" and/or "tense" (in isolation). The fact is, Bible translation is a complex issue. Translation committees must take God's revelation and convert it from source language (Hebrew and Greek) into a receptor language (such as English), but then in such a way as to make it 'smooth' and 'readable'. This is no mean feat! And the average believer simply doesn't want to read a version that contains a running commentary of translational/grammatical/syntactical/exegetical issues that better exposits the text. People are generally content with turning to commentaries for this sort of detail 
and I have to admit that I have many upon many miles to go before I can catch up to Ian in this area of theology....
Shucks! 
For me, Greek is a beautiful language and it was written in Koine because that was the international tongue at that time and I feel that God intended it to be in Koine, because He wanted His word to be clearly understood.. Get one thing clear. When you read an english translation, you read through the eyes of a translater but get some formal Greek learning and you will soon see otherwise.
I agree. The benefits of being able to read Scripture in the 'original' are massive for those who are prepared to labour for the years needed to develop the required level of competence. Because Greek is inflected, I find it is often more precise than English is, in certain respects at least.
I can understand now why Ian chooses to do his devotional reading from just the Greek alone.
Sure. But to be brutally honest, in the earlier years disciplining myself to study Scripture in Hebrew and Greek really was a chore! It was hard! But the effort eventually paid off, to the point where I can read the Bible 'devotionally', as originally written. But such isn't for everyone. Statistically, 75% of people who learn Greek as part of their ministerial or theological studies don't continue to actively use the language a mere three years after graduation. Things are even more dire with respect to Hebrew, where a whopping 95% (!!!) never regularly pick up their BHS after graduation
The Greek is just so nourishing to the human heart in a way that the English will never do.
I disagree. Reading the English Bible is every bit as 'nourishing' as is reading Scripture in Hebrew or Greek. One simply needs to have access to a greater range of contextual tools, that's all.
Blessings,
Ian
(Message edited by Didaktikon On 17/03/2008 15:24:18)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Male Member
|
110#
|
Registered:15/03/2007
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 00:47:19)
This is fun! Now the Greeks are arguing! lol
I'm not against people learning Greek, just for the record.
Eric, could you please clairfy WHICH Greek NT is THE witness?
Are you a Textus Receptus man or a Byzantine? You make it sound as if there is ONE witness that you stand on.
Ian, I would also like your opinon... AFTER Eric gives his.
Mothman, lots of questions there but I know your core issues are much wider than that. And yeah I reckon you'd be A LOT OLDER than me! hehe
The main reason I am here is to bring some ideas that might not have been considered by forum members.
And ROTE, throwing nine English translations in the bin ay? I'll get you the phone numbers of the theologians who worked on these publications and you can explain to them your theories on Textual Criticism.
And your professional qualifications would be? Can I say nutter on here?
--------------------------------------------------------------
GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.
|
|
Male Member
|
111#
|
Registered:15/03/2007
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 01:22:34)
Oh sorry that should say... you present yourself as a nutter. That makes it okay hey guys?
--------------------------------------------------------------
GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.
|
|
MothandRust
|
112#
|
Rank:Ghost in the machine
Score:34610
Posts:1585
Registered:27/02/2004
|
Reply To Male Member
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 01:54:02)
Mothman, lots of questions there but I know your core issues are much wider than that. And yeah I reckon you'd be A LOT OLDER than me! hehe
I'm sure of it.
Nutter..? Surely we'll be progressing past the name calling at some stage.
The main reason I am here is to bring some ideas that might not have been considered by forum members.
Some ideas we weren't savvy to after a lifetime in the Revival system? What ideas have these been so far? Ignore the Greek text? ummm... yeah, great idea.. not
Oh, what was another idea... The United Pentecostals get a thumbs up?
Hmm, you're an ideas man, for sure. hehe
--------------------------------------------------------------
Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
|
|
Akriboo
|
113#
|
Rank:Not quite new
Score:750
Posts:36
Registered:16/03/2008
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 02:59:22)
Reply To Male Member
Date Posted: 18/03/2008 01:22:34)
MM, have you read or considered Ian's exegetical and theological evaluation re Revivalist dogma and the book of Acts?
If you have then you must acknowledge that it makes sense...even without the use of Greek. The intended audience, manner and purpose makes sense.
This direction would seem to naturally follow if taken in conjunction with the intended purpose. Consider John 20:22. The Revival theory and teaching is that the word 'breathed' means 'emphasized'. Thus Revial would teach that Jesus emphasized to the deciples the Holy Gohst.
Let me ask you, who are the deciples? It is clear from these and the following passages all the way to the end of chapter 21 that jesus was talking to the Apostles. Hence on the day of Pentacost, the Apostles (not the 120) were expecting the Holy Spirit which Jesus emphasized to them earlier in the Gospel according to John.
It follows with the logic that Ian has stated in his paper. Perhaps you may want to read it?
God bless in your journey
Akriboo
|
|
RF_on_the_edge
|
114#
|
Rank:Regular Poster
Score:3180
Posts:156
Registered:12/03/2007
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 03:48:03)
MM
And ROTE, throwing nine English translations in the bin ay?
Wow, where did you get that idea? For the sake of newcomers I don't in any way shape of form think any of the translations mentioned in this thread should be thrown in any bin. Check the thread and I'll resile from any such remark you find.
I'll get you the phone numbers of the theologians who worked on these publications and you can explain to them your theories on Textual Criticism.
Hey you're encroaching on my snideness territory. Actually, my understanding of translation theories might be appropriate, but I can't see what I've said that relates to textual criticism. (Verstanden sie?)
And your professional qualifications would be?
Grow up. I've presented myself as a Christian layman. What about yours?
Can I say nutter on here?
Is this your sense of humour again? I don't really care what you call me here as long as you don't call me late for dinner. I would like to know though what evidence you have for that thought.
... Do you have any idea how foolish and unattractive you are as a representative of RF? (Especially in that 2nd last post of yours before you started 'joking' with me) ... Do you realise that it's really, really obvious that you've diverted from your 120 vs apostles-only goal? ... Please, for your own sake, take a good hard look at yourself.
(Message edited by RF_on_the_edge On 18/03/2008 05:12:53)
|
|
Sea Urchin
|
115#
|
Rank:Poster Venti III
Score:9010
Posts:431
Registered:15/02/2007
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 05:40:02)
RFOTE to MM ... Do you have any idea how foolish and unattractive you are as a representative of RF?
___________________________________________________________________________
Dunno about anyone else but I think MM sounds just right for a representative of RF!
Let's not forget that maybe in the past we've all been a bit guilty of being the same (when we were "RF'ed") Most of us just accepted and believed whatever we were fed and didn't think to question the oversight, let alone to check scripture for ourselves. It was just so easy to read INTO scripture what we 'thought' it said - or worse, what we WANTED it to say cos then it fitted in with our doctrine. Thank God that we eventually all began questioning and researching for ourselves! Maybe even the fact that MM posts on this forum is a start for him - at least he's brave enough to do what his oversight forbid him to do.
I wouldn't be letting MM's attitude bother you too much rfote - he enjoys making personal attacks because that is how HE is treated in RF. There's a saying that's very appropriate, 'the God we know is the God we show'. When people are only shown a God of judgement, fear, control etc then that is the God they show (in their fruits) to others. But when we come to know a God of love, mercy, compassion, love and grace, then that is the God we show (in our fruits) to others.
Urch
--------------------------------------------------------------
Your unfailing love, O Lord, is as vast as the heavens; your faithfulness reaches beyond the clouds. Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains, your justice like the ocean depths.
|
|
Akriboo
|
116#
|
Rank:Not quite new
Score:750
Posts:36
Registered:16/03/2008
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 05:52:00)
Good on you Urch, not only do I like what you said, but agree with you. Now the hardest part, can we be doers of the word?? Akriboo
|
|
RF_on_the_edge
|
117#
|
Rank:Regular Poster
Score:3180
Posts:156
Registered:12/03/2007
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 06:19:20)
Urch, Akriboo
Cool. MM's comments are pretty much water off a duck's back. Still, when I was a 'true believer' I *always* tried to maintain a rational approach (even though I was deluded) and virtually all my current RF associates are the same. One reason I respond is to make certain things obvious to RF observers.
Yeah it *is* good that he would defy his oversight and post, but not all RF's come the heavy on that sort of thing.
|
|
Didaktikon
|
118#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To Male Member
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 15:59:59)
MM,
You really are a goose! There's an old saying that you might care to reflect upon: "arrogance is inversely proportional to intelligence", and you're presenting as being very, very arrogant Now, as I recall before you started to go down the ad hom argument path, this discussion was about Pentecost and the Twelve. Have you anything new to bring to the table? 
Blessings,
Ian
P.S. There's a really good discussion going on about this subject elsewhere in this part of the forum. You might care to read-up on in a bit.
(Message edited by Didaktikon On 18/03/2008 16:01:42)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Episkopeo
|
119#
|
Rank:Regular Rookier
Score:5700
Posts:267
Registered:30/08/2007
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:18/03/2008 21:12:40)
Message to MM (and all)
Prayer is a great way to understand scripture. Whether a person has studied koine Greek, think they have a monopoly on the truth or have a wonderful intellect, God is the ultimate revealer.
Asking God in prayer by simply "God, I don't understand so show me - reveal it" - he surely will. Ask with our understanding and also pray in the Spirit if you so desire.
Quote :-
Prayer is the most powerful form of energy we can generate. When we pray we link ourselves with the inexhaustible motive power which spins the universe.
Dr Alexis Carrel Nobel Prize Winner (1912)
|
|
Male Member
|
120#
|
Registered:15/03/2007
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:19/03/2008 00:17:52)
Ian I have read and understood your hypothesis and other threads. Just because I don’t agree with your view doesn’t mean I don’t understand your theory. I have seen that some theologians support your view. If you were honest you would admit your theory isn’t the dominant view of theologians. There can be only ONE truth. I have provided nine scholarly Bible translations that clearly indicate ALL the disciples spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost. Is there any point providing more evidence? The answer is a resounding YES! Because although I admit to being frivolous at times it is important that forum members get a wider range of views than what is provided by you. Any honest researcher will soon see that the idea that ALL the disciples received the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost and spoke in tongues is not a unique Revival dogma and is supported by respected Theologians. (And I see your cunning… because if this theological construct of yours falls over… and ALL the disciples spoke in tongues, you would have to rethink your whole soteriology.) Your theory also goes against the whole message of the New Testament that salvation and the Holy Spirit is for ALL people of all nations as Peter also attests to in his Pentecost sermon. Jesus’ teaching is clear that the gift of the Holy Spirit is available for ALL believers. Not just for the leading disciples. Luke 11:13
If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him? John 7:39
(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) That you argue the Holy Spirit was only given to the Apostles on the day of Pentecost shows you do not understand the ‘intent’ of the Author of salvation. Now let me walk you through the first Theological commentaries that destroy your theory. Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary | |
3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 3. cloven tongues, like as of fire, &c.-"disparted tongues," that is, tongue-shaped, flame-like appearances, rising from a common center or root, and resting upon each of that large company:-beautiful visible symbol of the burning energy of the Spirit now descending in all His plenitude upon the Church, and about to pour itself through every tongue, and over every tribe of men under heaven! 15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. 15. these are not drunken-meaning, not the Eleven, but the body of the disciples. but the third hour-nine A.M. (see Ec 10:16; Isa 5:11; 1Th 5:17). Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible | |
Chapter 2 Verses 1-4 We have here an account of the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the disciples of Christ. “It seems evident to me that not only the twelve apostles, but all the hundred and twenty disciples were filled with the Holy Ghost alike at this time-all the seventy disciples, who were apostolic men, and employed in the same work, and all the rest too that were to preach the gospel; for it is said expressly (Eph. 4:8, 11), When Christ ascended on high (which refers to this, v. 33), he gave gifts unto men, not only some apostles (such were the twelve), but some prophets and some evangelists (such were many of the seventy disciples, itinerant preachers), and some pastors and teachers settled in particular churches, as we may suppose some of these afterwards were. The all here must refer to the all that were together, v. 1; ch. 1:14, 15. 2.” Wesley's Notes on the Bible | |
1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. They were all with one accord in one place - So here was a conjunction of company, minds, and place; the whole hundred and twenty being present. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. 2:4 And they began to speak with other tongues - The miracle was not in the ears of the hearers, (as some have unaccountably supposed,) but in the mouth of the speakers. And this family praising God together, with the tongues of all the world, was an earnest that the whole world should in due time praise God in their various tongues. As the Spirit gave them utterance - Moses, the type of the law, was of a slow tongue; but the Gospel speaks with a fiery and flaming one. Other commentaries in support of ALL disciples receiving the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. Scofield, Darby, Gill I also direct readers to the commentary on Acts by Dr. Bob Utley, a retired Professor of Hermeneutics with more than 16 years full-time university teaching experience in the U.S. and now an international Bible teacher. I await your next post. I note most members now have resorted to belittling my intelligence rather than providing anything meaningful to the discussion. I have done the research. I stand unmoved.
--------------------------------------------------------------
GAL 5 v 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.
|
|
Didaktikon
|
121#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To Male Member
(Date Posted:19/03/2008 03:02:36)
MM,
Oho! Thou thinkest thyself a scholar!?
Guess what? I'm actually inclined to humour you, to see how much rope you take. Let's begin then, shall we? So my fellow, how well versed are you in the scholarly debate on this issue, to warrant the assertion that my view isn't the dominant one? How many Greek grammars have you personally consulted? How many scholarly commentaries on Acts have you personally reviewed (and I don't mean the few 'devotional' ones that you've introduced recently, for no other reason than the fact that they're readily available on the internet)? Have many journals have you reviewed? How many biblical scholars and/or qualified theologians have you personally 'bounced' your ideas off, to test their validity? I pose these questions because if you've not engaged the necessary research 'spade-work' needed to substantiate your views, whatever statements you make don't amount to very much at all
There are many fine and very reputable scholars who hold to a position that is different to my own on this issue. A number of them are personal friends. Several are mentors of mine. And while we disagree, and no doubt will continue to disagree, we do so being fully conversant of the issues and the reasons that underpin each other's perspectives. I've personally engaged in scholarly debate with my peers at a level that far exceeds what you're currently capable of; therein we've thrashed-out issues that relate to this subject, and to our current passage, that haven't even entered into your consciousness! But in spite of our differences (which actually tend towards theological inferences rather than exegetical conclusions in any case), I've yet to come across a single scholar who believes as you do. Not a one. Not even among the cadre of Pentecostal biblical scholars. You see, contrary to your stated assertion, the number of people who experienced the manifestations at Pentecost isn't important to my soteriology. Not even tangentially! The number could have been 12, 120 or 1200 for all the relevance the issue has to orthodox teaching on salvation. What doesn't change, however, is that your own Revivalist position is crucially dependant on there having been more than simply the 12 apostles in view. Your theology hinges on this issue, not mine 
Now you continue to base your claim on your particular interpretation of our passage in any number of English Bible versions. I've been engaged in a conversation elsewhere on this site, that demonstrates that your 'reading-into' the passage is quite at odds with what the passage actually states. And I've given voluminous and detailed explanation and examples to support my view. But what do you bring to the table? Nothing more than a (very small) handful of devotional commentaries written by the likes of J-F-B and MH. These are supposed to shore-up your position?! You really are clutching at straws; I can quote significantly more credible modern and far more learned scholarly commentators that support the idea of the '120' than the very few you've presented! But I can also demonstrate where and why I believe they've erred in their judgments. But you?! Well. All I can suggest is that you go find a theological library somewhere, and spend some quality time acquainting yourself with the discussion, and with the material that is relevant to the same. If you come back with something substantial, then I'll devote more of my time to you. Until then, I can't see that it's worth my effort the truth be told
Blessings,
Ian
(Message edited by Didaktikon On 19/03/2008 16:54:45)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
RF_on_the_edge
|
122#
|
Rank:Regular Poster
Score:3180
Posts:156
Registered:12/03/2007
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:19/03/2008 03:34:09)
MM
(And I see your cunning… because if this theological construct of yours falls over… and ALL the disciples spoke in tongues, you would have to rethink your whole soteriology.)
You can have the 120 tongues speakers if you like, and RF soteriology still is unbiblical and contradicts scripture. Ian's flagged some reasons already. Have you ever wondered why the vast majority of churches which preach the need to speak in tongues, believing in the 120, still say that one receives or is sealed with the Holy Spirit at the point of belief and confession? (Hint: It's not because they're imitating 'Romanism'.)
Personally, I still thought it was 120 when my last 'theological escape route to RF tongues doctrine' disappearred.
Your theory also goes against the whole message of the New Testament that salvation and the Holy Spirit is for ALL people of all nations as Peter also attests to in his Pentecost sermon.
The apostles-only pov does not imply that the Holy Spirit is only given to only some Christians, or even posit that only some of the 120 received the Spirit. Rather it posits that speaking in tongues did not accompany the receieving of the Spirit for all the 120.
Jesus' teaching is clear that the gift of the Holy Spirit is available for ALL believers. Not just for the leading disciples.
You know, I believe He (the Spirit) is much more integral to God's plan than just 'being available for all believers', but that's not the question. The real question (wrt soteriology) is whether (according to scripture) tongues universally accompanies Him.
(Message edited by RF_on_the_edge On 19/03/2008 03:59:00)
|
|
Uncoolman
|
123#
|
Rank:Regular Rookier
Score:5550
Posts:156
Registered:05/04/2003
|
RE:Light reading
(Date Posted:19/03/2008 05:38:30)
This thread is long enough. I'm locking it there. For more information on the subjects discussed here, see this thread where the topics have already been thoroughly explored.
|
|
|
