|
Disciple(Ex-member)
|
|
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:28/09/2008 14:29:35)
Strange thing I was just thinking when perusing the latest musings from Alm...
To say or make a statement that one "has to speak in tongues" to be saved can easily be equated to the doctrine of salvation by works. That is to say "if I don't speak in tongues, then Jesus says that I am not saved" ..... and that explains why when so many people make claim to being able to "speak in tongues" are generally pretending to speak in tongues or "make it up" rather than submit to the real deal. The real deal is to know the Person of the Holy Spirit....
and that's the dilemma that a lot of the Revival Fellowship membership must find themselves in... (including all the 'Revivalist' churches at that too..)
What an interesting thought..
blessings all
ps made it bigger fonting for those who use glasses like me...
(Message edited by Disciple On 28/09/2008 14:39:14)
|
|
Sea Urchin
|
2#
|
Rank:Poster Venti III
Score:9010
Posts:431
Registered:15/02/2007
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:29/09/2008 01:25:17)
Hi Disciple (with the fading eyesight) I don't think anyone in the Revival groups has an understanding of the person of the Holy Spirit - I certainly didn't and I don't think I was the only one. I always 'associated' the Holy Spirit with 'speaking in tongues'. I was just so dumb for so many years, and I had to repent. Even though I could blame the oversight for not 'teaching'me correctly, I also have to take responsibility for not searching the things of God for myself. Once I realised that I could have a personal relationship with my Lord and Saviour, I was blown away by the love and understanding that He showed me. I praise Him every single day that He took me from being a 'lukewarm seat-warmer' for 24 years - whilst it has only been just on 2 years since I left RF,it would have to be the BEST 2 years of my entire life. I love my Jesus so much and just want to live for Him now - sad that I missed out for so many years.
Yes, the Revival groups do have a 'works' doctrine, they do not understand grace and I think they honestly cannot even see it. When 'conditions' are put on salvation (eg MUST speak in tongues to be saved etc) we close our minds to the awesome wonder of God's grace.
God bless, Urch
|
|
Didaktikon
|
3#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31540
Posts:1514
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To Sea%20Urchin
(Date Posted:29/09/2008 02:17:07)
Urchie,
I think the reason why the impact has been so great for you over the past two years, is that you went from being a "lost" Revivalist, to a "found" Christian. You became spiritually regenerate through God's grace, hence the significant personal transformation. I would that more Revivalists would similarly find Christ, and be found by him 
Blessings,
Ian
P.S. Chriss, sit up and take note. Until something similar happens to you, you'll remain unregenerate, un-saved and destined for the very same hell you threaten others with, here.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Disciple(Ex-member)
|
|
|
Reply To Didaktikon
(Date Posted:29/09/2008 15:58:48)
Reply to Didaktikon, Urchie,
P.S. Chriss, sit up and take note. Until something similar happens to you, you'll remain unregenerate, un-saved and destined for the very same hell you threaten others with, here.
Hi Didaktikon and Urchie,
But this page on the 'Official' RF website says it all with the magniloquent headline:
"What is the Holy Spirit ?" .... and really the headline should read:
" Who is the Holy Spirit ? "blessings
Disciple.
ps BTW Didaktikon is that a pic of you playing with angels up there in the heavens ??
..
(Message edited by Disciple On 29/09/2008 16:01:13)
|
|
Didaktikon
|
5#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31540
Posts:1514
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To Disciple
(Date Posted:29/09/2008 23:48:52)
Hi, Eric.
The picture in question is a few years old now, but to answer your question, "yep". Sadly, given my relatively recent "Series of Unfortunate Events", Mrs Didaktikos has forbidden all future parachuting unless absolutely necessary (i.e. work-related and work-required) 
Still, now that I've hit the big "Four-Zero", I'm probably a little old to be engaging in such shenanigans anyway 
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:30/09/2008 02:58:52)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
Didaktikon
|
7#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31540
Posts:1514
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To brolga
(Date Posted:30/09/2008 05:29:47)
Ralph,
Sure. But in "dog years" I'm older 'en Methuselah! 
Blessings, you fogey.
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:30/09/2008 06:17:21)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
SPDC16TR
|
9#
|
Rank:Lurker
Score:160
Posts:8
Registered:31/12/2008
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 15:45:45)
Ian, can you express your thoughts on the significants of the greek word "Genos" (translated as "Kinds" or "Diversities") in Corinthians. In your article on your "Please Consider" website your state that the tongues mentioned in Corinthians may not be human languages. Doesn't the greek word Genos imply that they are human languages?? My understanding of Genos is that it refers to "Parentage"", "Race", "Offspring", "Kindred", "Nation". How can an inhuman language be any of these things? If so, why wouldn't the greek word have been "Phusis"?
I appreciate you views
SP
|
|
spitchips
|
10#
|
Rank:Rookier
Score:1700
Posts:82
Registered:24/10/2008
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 18:32:36)
SPDC16TR In Corinthians there's a reference to 'tongues of men and of angels'. Angels aren't human. Just a thought - Chips
|
|
SPDC16TR
|
11#
|
Rank:Lurker
Score:160
Posts:8
Registered:31/12/2008
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 18:46:53)
Spitchips, My understanding of that passage is that is talking about extremes. I don't see the link between the tongues of angels and speaking in tongues. I think that maybe an assumption.
|
|
spitchips
|
12#
|
Rank:Rookier
Score:1700
Posts:82
Registered:24/10/2008
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 19:01:32)
SPDC16TR
You're probably right. I'm leaning on my own understanding of this little passage. But I do confess to liking the image of angels having a chin wag and how it would sound.
Chips
|
|
SPDC16TR
|
13#
|
Rank:Lurker
Score:160
Posts:8
Registered:31/12/2008
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 19:25:56)
Spitchips, These days since leaving RF a year or so ago, I'm trying not to assume anything as it tends to come from pre-conceived ideas that are generally formed from looking at the world through RF glasses. Kinda like the religious equivalent of beer glasses for men, although instead of looking good, every other denomination looks bad, except for oversight.........I'm hoping that maybe Ian will pickup on this thread and give me his views for thought. Like many others I have recently removed myself and my family from the RF after attending (personally) for 33 years. My father was a pastor for around 10 years, so I have been somewhat privey to the debarkle that is the oversight. It is certainly a case of Appointment over Annointment, the effects of which are obviously. Consequently my own decision to leave was based on the fact that most (not all) of these guys are so much less then they make themselves out to be. This dissillusionment with the oversight was the catalyst researching things in greater detail (effectively doing what the RF aristocracy advises against) and becoming aware of the serious descrepancies in their doctrine. Thus the journey had begun...............
SP
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 19:29:28)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 19:33:05)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
SPDC16TR
|
16#
|
Rank:Lurker
Score:160
Posts:8
Registered:31/12/2008
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 19:40:11)
Brolga, Thanks for that, I'm still a bit new to all this. Maybe you have a view regarding my original question re tongues??
SP
|
|
Didaktikon
|
17#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31540
Posts:1514
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To SPDC16TR
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 22:29:46)
Hi, SP.
Ian, can you express your thoughts on the significants of the greek word "Genos" (translated as "Kinds" or "Diversities") in Corinthians.
Well, the fact that is that 'genos' has a fairly broad semantic range, one which extends to include word/concepts such as 'species', 'sort' and 'kind'. There's nothing about the word that requires it, intrinsically, to be linked specifically to 'humanity'.
In your article on your "Please Consider" website your state that the tongues mentioned in Corinthians may not be human languages.
I think it's very likely that Paul didn't have strictly human languages in the forefront of his mind at the time.
Doesn't the greek word Genos imply that they are human languages??
'Nope'.
My understanding of Genos is that it refers to "Parentage"", "Race", "Offspring", "Kindred", "Nation". How can an inhuman language be any of these things? If so, why wouldn't the greek word have been "Phusis"?
Again, 'nope'. Greek, like any language, doesn't work the way that you think it does. Meaning doesn't reside, primarily, at the lexical level but at the syntactical level: it's the relationship of words with words in clauses, phrases, sentences and discourse units that leads to meaning. What I think has probably happened is that you've read something, somewhere along the line, that infers a great deal about matters based on supposed distinctions between the two words 'genos' and 'physis'. If you did, the sort answer is that it's wrong.
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
SPDC16TR
|
18#
|
Rank:Lurker
Score:160
Posts:8
Registered:31/12/2008
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:08/01/2009 23:47:07)
Didaktikon, Thanks for the explanation, I can see that my understanding of Koine Greek is 1/5th of stuff all!! I have another question though that has been of interest for me for some time that you may be able to shed some light on. It is to do with Jesus' discourse with Nicodemus in John 3. As below:- Joh 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Joh 3:4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Joh 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. Joh 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit. Joh 3:9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be? Joh 3:10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? Joh 3:11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
KJVA
The last two verses are of particular interest at the moment. Jesus basically tells off Nicodemus for suppossedly being a teacher of Israel and not knowing these things. Then goes onto say that they testify of something that they (plural) know and have already seen (past-tense). To the RF eye's how can this be?? To the RF, to be filled with spirit equals tongues. Obviously this cannot be for this hasn't happened yet. This may be a ridiculous question, but to what are they referring?? This question has been asked of RF pastors without any satisfactory answers.
Regards
SP
|
|
Didaktikon
|
19#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31540
Posts:1514
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To SPDC16TR
(Date Posted:09/01/2009 00:00:34)
SP, again.
Thanks for the explanation, I can see that my understanding of Koine Greek is 1/5th of stuff all!! I have another question though that has been of interest for me for some time that you may be able to shed some light on. It is to do with Jesus' discourse with Nicodemus in John 3.
'Yes'. Revivalists always presume a great deal about Greek and Hebrew meanings without first having the faintest idea of what is what. Anyway, I've written a response to the misunderstanding of the Nicodemus discourse of John 3, which is currently in draft form.
The last two verses are of particular interest at the moment. Jesus basically tells off Nicodemus for suppossedly being a teacher of Israel and not knowing these things.
'No'. Jesus tells off Nicodemus for being 'the' teacher of Israel, and yet was ignorant of the facts.
Then goes onto say that they testify of something that they (plural) know and have already seen (past-tense).
The 'we' refers to Jesus and his disciples.
To the RF eye's how can this be?? To the RF, to be filled with spirit equals tongues.
'Yes', but such is completely wrong.
Obviously this cannot be for this hasn't happened yet. This may be a ridiculous question, but to what are they referring?? This question has been asked of RF pastors without any satisfactory answers.
The Revivalist position WRT 'salvation' is completely wrong. Consider, Jesus clearly states, "...your (the disciples) names are written in heaven..." (see Luke 10:20) And this very clear statement was also made pre-Pentecost, wasn't it?
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
SPDC16TR
|
20#
|
Rank:Lurker
Score:160
Posts:8
Registered:31/12/2008
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:09/01/2009 00:08:38)
Ian, Thanks, you've basically confirmed my thoughts on the matter. I think it will still take some time to cast off the RF indoctrination. I'm enjoying the freedom in seeking out the truth though........
Kind Regards SP
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:09/01/2009 01:34:03)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:09/01/2009 01:39:38)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
Didaktikon
|
23#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31540
Posts:1514
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To SPDC16TR
(Date Posted:09/01/2009 02:07:59)
SP,
You're most welcome. Gaining a proper perspective will take time, but it's well worth it. As the Good Book says, the truth will set you free.
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
SPDC16TR
|
24#
|
Rank:Lurker
Score:160
Posts:8
Registered:31/12/2008
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:09/01/2009 02:25:11)
Brolga, Thanks for the advise, everybody's on the journey, some just decide to sit up the front of the bus.
Ian, With reference to our first discourse re tongues and human languages, Paul states that tongues are for a sign to the unbelievers (1 Cor 14:22). What exactly is the sign? As with any RF meeting where tongues are exercised, 2 or 3 etc with interpretation etc, the unbeliever has no way of actually determining whether the tongues are genuine or even whether the interpretation is actually what was said in the tongue. Certainly at Pentecost this was not the case as they could confirm the languages spoken. I know you have said that these tongues are completely different. Are we therefore to assume that A.) the unbeliever has to use faith (or somehow convince themselves) to believe the actual sign that is supposed to make them believe ( a little backwards and odd) or B.) somehow the whole experience of seeing someone ramble in tongues (human or otherwise) shocks/prompts them into a state of openess to the salvation message?? Surely I am not the only person that has thought this all a little odd with the whole post communion operation of the gifts in an RF meeting.
Regards SP
|
|
Didaktikon
|
25#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31540
Posts:1514
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To SPDC16TR
(Date Posted:09/01/2009 02:33:00)
SP,
My general advice? 'Dump' everything that you've ever been taught about this and related subjects within Revivalism. It's all wrong. As for a specific response to your particular questions, I've addressed this subject in detail elsewhere on this forum (a couple of times, in fact). I can't remember where, exactly, but I'd rather not rehearse the matter again (or 'over', and 'over' if you will, each time a 'newbie' comes on the scene). So have a bit of a ferret through the various archived threads herein, and you'll probably find the answers you seek (eventually!).
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
SPDC16TR
|
26#
|
Rank:Lurker
Score:160
Posts:8
Registered:31/12/2008
|
RE:Modern-day
(Date Posted:09/01/2009 02:40:39)
Ian, Will do, I was being a little lazy hoping for a quick response. Will keep hunting...........
SP
|
|
Didaktikon
|
27#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31540
Posts:1514
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To SPDC16TR
(Date Posted:09/01/2009 03:26:38)
SP,
In case you hadn't noticed yet, I prefer thorough to quick.
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:02/04/2009 05:33:34)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:27/05/2009 18:27:36)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
Didaktikon
|
30#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31540
Posts:1514
Registered:29/08/2007
|
Reply To brolga
(Date Posted:27/05/2009 18:53:49)
Good morning, Ralph.
In reference to the person that does the interpretation for the operation of the gift of tongues in the church/public 1 Cor. ch14 (excluding Pentecost, the recognized languages); Does that person know beforehand what is being said, i.e. in his own dialect, so he is able to expound the message or is the interpretation performed by the Holy Spirit in that person, or not either?
'No', the person doesn't know what is being said beforehand. I'd like to suggest that if one goes to the trouble of reading what Paul has to say on the matter, and then in context, several issues should become apparent. The first, is that Paul nowhere promotes the gift of "tongues" as being either an essential aspect to public Christian worship, nor even as a desirable one. Quite the opposite seems to be the case; at best Paul allows for the gift of "tongues" in a public assembly, but then only under carefully prescribed conditions (i.e. that it must always be interpreted, and that it's use be limited to no more than three occurrences). This fact, of course, pours cold water on the common Revivalist practice of group "tongues" at prayer-meetings, prayer-lines, "seeker's-meetings", etc. Second, it's Paul's expectation that the person who exercises the gift of "tongues" then immediately goes on to 'interpret' what s/he said. Consequently, "tongues" and the 'interpretation' of "tongues" are presented as companion giftings, such that are ordinarily to be exercised by the same Christian. How often (if ever) does one witness this to be the case in 'Revival'?! Third, Paul explicitly states that "tongues" equals an offering of praise from a person's human spirit to God. Revivalists, for whatever reason, mistakenly believe that the gift of "tongues" equals God speaking to people via the Holy Spirit! In other words, they illegitimately and mistakenly reverse both the source and the direction of the message! This, of course, makes their 'interpretations' equally as problematic, and equally as suspect, as are their "tongues", in that they invariably present as being 'messages' from God to people! According to Paul what they should be, are understandable expressions of praise directed towards God from people.
I decided not to list the individual verses from 1 Corinthians 12 through 14 at this stage, as I'd rather that people dragged out their Bibles to read the entire passage in full, and (hopefully) in context.
Blessings,
Ian
(Message edited by Didaktikon On 27/05/2009 19:04:57)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
Re:Modern-day
(Date Posted:27/05/2009 20:22:25)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
|
