Well I know its hard to take someone with the name Male Member seriously! hehe

You got that right! But for me, the principle reason that I find it difficult to take you seriously, is your complete lack of knowledge and understanding on the subject at hand. And you've demonstrated as much again in your most recent post, and in spades!

But your head would have to be phallus shaped if you think running to the Greek versions will win your argument.

Nah. My 'best shot' would likely take your head clean off your shoulders! But to return to the fray, a question: have you any idea about the wealth of history that stands behind this very issue? (clearly this is a rhetorical question, as it's equally obvious that you don't). So, why don't you spend a moment or several reflecting on the following, rather well known piece of wisdom: "those ignorant of history are doomed to repeat its errors". Or perhaps you might find a 'pearl' or two in the Christian "application" of the former, which Spurgeon made in his equally famous quip: "I am forever amazed at those who prize so highly what they believe it is that the Holy Spirit speaks to them, and yet treat with such contempt what He has shared with others beforehand." In other words, perhaps you suspend judgment on the value of the early commentators until you first gain some familiarity with them and their circumstances

And rest assured, I'll be finding my own theological experts, not YOUR henchmen.... thanks

Ha, ha, ha! I can't wait!

"Silly little theologian"?! Fair enough. Well now, here's my response, you silly little Revivalist It's completely irrelevant what you might think certain of the English translations present on the subject at hand, given that each and every one of them remains an interpretative translation of what it is that God chose to record in Greek! That's right, boy-o Greek! Consequently, the authoritative Christian New Testament isn't the one that is found in English dress, or in German, or in French dress my remarkably naive friend. The authoritative Christian New Testament remains the one that is clad in the clothes that God provided: koine Greek.

I spooked some of my staff when I guffawed as I read your response, so "thank you" for brightening an otherwise dull day

In closing, and to paraphrase Sean Connery in The Untouchables: "...you idiot, you've brought a (really little butter knife) to a gun fight!" MM, methinks you might be attempting to 'punch' well above your 'weight'

MM

So you like the NLT? I'd suggest you meditate on its translation of 1 Co 12:30. It's fascinating.

BTW I'm still interested in what your scriptural justification is for the RF 'salvation message'. You can have your 120 and the RF doctrine is still demonstrably false doctrine (from the bible's pov).

PS I've now seen support in KJV, ESV, NIV and NASB (oh and the NLT, too)

           Quote MM - "Yes ENGLISH! Its the lingua franca of Australia"

There's an urban legend (neither proven or disproven) that a Southern senator in the United States once told the head of the Joint National Committee on Languages:

If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me.

This was also included in the book "776 Stupidest Things Ever Said", by Ross and Kathryn Petras.

Funny... and truly (dare I say it) stupid.

Hey Lurch

I know where you're coming from with this body of Christ idea... see AoG and ecumenicalism down the page.

I've been doing some research on AoG including reading Tanya Levin's book on Hillsong and the wider AoG movement.  Pages and pages of AoG's dirty laundry... in a handy paperback too!  Seeing this is a DEMOCRATIC forum lets widen the scope for a mo.

*  Did you know AoG was founded in Australia by a known pedophile?

This is a disgusting topic, but quite popular with priests and clergy from orthodox Christianity.

*  Hillsong don't take communion anymore.

*  AoG was prominent in the introduction of the Toronto Blessing freakshows and the Prosperity gospel.

AoG was first against Toronto but later embraced it. 

"I got disfellowshipped from the AOG simply for asking the pastor, in a friendly and brotherly manner, to check out some theology that was being introduced into our congregation."  Hughie Seaborn, Cairns, who left AoG when their leaders started to introduce the Toronto Blessing in the 90s.

Former General Secretary of the AoG, Phillip Powell, left AoG as a matter of principle.

On the Toronto Blessing: Yes I do. I think most of them are phoney. For example now with the 'signs and wonders' thing, the latest thing is through a man called Rodney Howard-Brown, who the Assemblies of God brought to this country a few years ago. Now what he does, he puts on almost like a hypnotist sort of mesmerism, a show, from the platform, where he gets people laughing. He in fact walks up and down the platform going 'Ho, ho, ho; he, he, he, ha, ha, ha' and all that sort of thing, and gets people laughing. And then they claim that these are signs and wonders, where people end up rolling on the floor, barking like dogs, roaring like lions, even clucking like hens, and all that sort of thing. 
                                                                                                    
On the Prosperity gospel: I believe the doorway into all of this - and you see my background is Assemblies of God: I was in the Assemblies of God as a pastor for many, many years, and occupied various positions both in Britain and here in Australia in the hierarchical system. And we always withstood the idea that Jesus Christ saves us to make us rich. The Bible in my understanding, is against that. But there is a group of people, some of which their names are Kenneth Copeland he's very much at the root of this...

ABC RADIO NATIONAL, November 1997

 *  AoG is moving into ecumenicalism, even with the Catholic church.

“These examples of ecumenity within the Assemblies of God illustrate the dangerous strides made by the organisation in the name of Christian unity. As doctrinal positions are downplayed and ignored by leading figures within the organisation and as an increased vision of a mainstream voice within the Christian renewal community replace doctrinal distinctions and stalwart reservations, a deep, centrifugal force is threatening the delicate union of many within the Assemblies. There is a marked polarisation within the Assemblies of God as 'pro' and 'con' camps form around the renewal movement, with Brownsville at the critical centre of the controversy.”

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~rseaborn/the_tie_that_binds.html

*   AoG is a CULT according to a Christian pyschologist who sees its thought reform program or mind control system as one of the criteria to being classified as a cult.

Levin Pg 132

* AoG believes there is a demon of homosexuality, gambling, etc and that such demons can control Christians too!

Well I have much more information about this AoG group. 

But that's enough for now.  There are many problems in AoG in Australia and around the world.

They have many schisms and at one point lost ¼ of their membership in the US. (see the Tie that Binds article) 

Oh yes and HYPOCRITES are also 'pots who call the kettle black'.

Male Member,

I simply treasure a person who can make me laugh!

Sheeesh guys don't get shirty! "Shirty"? Or is it more a case of some simply wanting you to "put-up-or-shut-up"? You see, here's the key issue as I perceive it: you apparently can't even "talk-the-talk", nevermind "walk-the-walk"  You simply "blow" in here occasionally, you then briefly "blow" hard for a short spell,  before "blowing" off whilst being none-the-wiser about the issues at hand. In some respects, then, you're a lot like a desert breeze (to borrow your metaphor): hot, windy and full of cluster, but basically lacking in any real substance.

I don't live in the desert like Ian's favourite monk (see earlier posts). I'm sure like you guys that time limits things. Okay, but I guess it befalls me to point out to you that you actually do live in a desert: the arid, "spiritual desert" of Revivalism. But this remains your choice; the blame for such rests with no-one but yourself. And to respond to the second part of your statement, above: you seem to have ample time with which to engage in "research" of the AoG (for example), so one could probably assume that you have had equal opportunity to back-up your various hollow statements and/or claims.

I spend enough time at this Revival slagfest and its hard to respond to every member of the pack as they gnaw on my bones. **) Why would anyone want to "gnaw" on your bones? From what I've seen thus far, there doesn't seem to be enough of a meal to warrant the effort! ;)

So sorry if I haven't responded to all the questions ( I have read your posts) and for straying from this DEMOCRATIC yet legalistic forum of discussing other denominations. We're only allowed to slag Revival ay? But, MM, you haven't responded to any of the questions that have been put to you! And to be frank, I doubt that you properly understand what is meant by the term, "legalism". If you did, then you wouldn't have applied it in the sense that you have. Further, I find it to be remarkably hypocritical (there's that word again) of you to be passing comment on people you presume to be speaking ill of your particular denomination. After all, your own "church" (I use the term quite loosely in this instance) has quite the reputation for ignorant comments made at the expense of, for example, the Roman Catholic Church on the one hand, and all non-Revivalist churches on the other. So sorry, but for reasons like these I simply don't find you to be in the least bit credible.  

Ian I haven't finished with you yet you petulant pontificating person. What are you going to do punch me or shoot me? Your posts are unclear... maybe I should learn Greek to decypher my fate. Well, well. A little alliteration: "petulant, pontificating, person" :) Perhaps, then, you're not completely as dull as you've presented yourself being to date! But in any case, if my posts are as "unclear" as you state, then perhaps they're so only to those who "...are perishing"? But to be serious for a brief moment, I don't believe what I write to be anywhere near as unclear as you presume. Consider, many, many people have found my writings to be of considerable benefit in helping them to make sense of Scripture; further, they're also apparently explicitly clear to the small coterie of men who run your fellowship.  And finally, why on earth would I want to either punch you or shoot you?!

I haven't finished with your Apostles Only doctrine... give me time man! Okay. I'd just assumed that given you've claimed my explanation about Pentecost and the apostles was so clearly flawed, that you'd be able to explain to me, why. Had I mistakenly assumed too much?

And yes ROFL we will get to Salvation messages... you show me yours first. Not wishing for one moment to intrude upon RFOTE's response, but have you not heard the biblical "salvation message", yourself? It's called the "gospel", the "good news" about Jesus Christ, and the small passage of John 3:16 pretty much sums it up.

In closing, I'd suggest you need to (a) reflect on a few things that have been pointed out to you; (b) reconsider just what it is that you hope to achieve, here; and (c) repent of your arrogance and ignorance. There you have it! An example of three-point alliteration of my own!

Blessings,

Ian

Male body part: Hey Lurch, I know where you're coming from with this body of Christ idea...

Lurchin: Oh no MM, you've sprung me!  Yes, that's right, I'm caught, done for, totally guilty - of believing the Bible! And I was hoping that no-one would ever find out that I've read scriptures such as Eph 1:22-23 and Eph 5:29-30 about the church being His body.
 Answer one question MM, is the church the body of Christ or not (and if you think not please quote scripture please) Why do you think it is just an 'idea'? 

Male body part: I've been doing some research on AoG including reading Tanya Levin's book on Hillsong and the wider AoG movement.  Pages and pages of AoG's dirty laundry... in a handy paperback too! 

Lurchin: (trying not to laugh too hard) Gosh, a ' handy paperback' ! How titillating and exciting! Wow, can you smuggle it in to Easter Camp to read under the covers in your dorm (when you're meant to be pretending to be interested in listening to the same old boring talks)? 

Male body part: Did you know AoG was founded in Australia by a known pedophile?
This is a disgusting topic, but quite popular with priests  and clergy from orthodox Christianity.

Lurchin: (really laughing hard now) MM, do you actually KNOW any of your RF's history? Cos you came from the same root - ha ha ha ha! YEP, that makes you a descendant of the same paedophile (check your spelling). And I really don't know that it's a 'popular topic' although have heard of several instances of child molestation being covered up in RF.
'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone'   

Male body part:  Hillsong don't take communion anymore.

Lurchin: That's funny cos I partook of communion when at Hillsong in Sydney last year!

Male body part:  AoG was prominent in the introduction of the Toronto Blessing freakshows and the Prosperity gospel.AoG was first against  Toronto but  later embraced it. 
Lurchin: Sorry, dunno anything about Toronto Blessing freakshow or properity gospel - I go to church!

Male body part: "I got disfellowshipped from the AOG simply for asking the pastor, in a friendly and brotherly manner, to check out some theology that was being introduced into our congregation."  Hughie Seaborn, Cairns, who left AoG when their leaders started to introduce the Toronto Blessing in the 90s.

Lurchin:  HA HA HA HA - again, you could be describing RF here. How many hundreds or it could be thousands of innocent, seeking, responsible Christians have been told by Rf that if they so much as question the doctrine they are out of fellowship? 

Male body part: Now what he does, he puts on almost like a hypnotist sort of mesmerism, a show, from the platform, where he gets people laughing. He in fact walks up and down the platform going 'Ho, ho, ho; he, he, he, ha, ha, ha' and all that sort of thing, and gets people laughing. And then they claim that these are signs and wonders, where people end up rolling on the floor, barking like dogs, roaring like lions, even clucking like hens, and all that sort of thing. 
                                                                                                                                                            Lurchin: This is just so typical Rf - slam everyone else and what you don't know just make up cos it sounds good and it keeps the flock from straying. I actually believed all the lies I'd heard from the platform for many many years about the ' Pentecostal church down the road'. The Adelaide RF were so paranoid about people leaving and going to this church that they made up huge lies about the place - which we all believed at the time cos one wouldn't expect their pastors to LIE, would one?  However, I've discovered that there are literally hundreds of ex-rf'ers now attending that same church. AND I've never seen anything like you describe above - no chooks clucking, no cows mooing, no lions roaring, no dogs barking and no partridge in a pear  tree - in fact none of ' that sort of thing' at all.                                  

Male body part: AoG is a CULT according to a Christian pyschologist who sees its thought reform program or mind control system as one of the criteria to being classified as a cult.

Lurchin: It's not actually called AOG anymore - it's ACC Australian Christian Churches. I must remember to tell the psychologists (again, check your spelling) and  the counsellors that are full-time staff members of 'AOG' that they are part of a cult according to another ' Christian psychologist'. Oh, and what's that?  RF is definitely NOT a cult?

Male body part: AoG believes there is a demon of homosexuality, gambling, etc and that such demons can control Christians too!

Lurchin: You know what - I'm starting to think there's a demon of stupidity and it is controlling you! C'mon man, be real!

Male body part: Well I have  much more information  about this AoG group.  But that's enough for now.  There are many problems in AoG in Australia and around the world.They have many schisms and at one point lost ¼ of their membership in the US.

Lurchin: Gee, can hardly wait for more interesting 'information' about 'this AoG group'. 
Of course there are problems in AoG, there are problems in EVERY church and every place you find humanity. It is not the churches that are the problems, it's the people that attend them. "they have many schisms"  - that's very funny cos RF/RCI and their offshoots are one of the 'schisms'.

Frankly MM, I have never read such drivel in my life! If this is the best you can do to try to divert the heat away from RF, it's a pretty pathetic path - not as good a laugh as ' petulant pontificating person' (sorry Ian, but just can't help laughing!)

Urchin

Mark 16v16   He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Squabble over the meaning of that one for a few hours guys! he he
      ___________________________________________________________________________

The revivalist stance of making Mark 16:16 a "conditional statement" for "being saved" is in my considered a thought a very poor prooftext.

Look the verbs in the NA27 "believeth" and "baptized" are Aorist and the stem word for saved "sozo" is talking about being rescued or delivered so the revivalist are picturing something that appears quite contrary to the text..  What do you think Ian ??

Eric
______________________________________________________________________________________

Eric,

I'm not sure why you quoted me as saying the above when it's definitely not something I'd write.
Sounds more like a 'Male Member' post to me!

Urchin

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.

I trust that God's Word has been faithfully translated by honest Bible scholars who fear God.

Do you believe that unless a Bible reader is an expert in Koine Greek they cannot understand the Bible?

Would you say that the Bible leads people into error? 

You were waiting for some definitive information from me that proves the "120" were the focus of the manifestations at Pentecost?

I have provided you with FIVE Bible versions (or as you call them interpretations) which are the work of theologians, working within committees no doubt with vast expertise in Bible scholarship, but this is not conclusive enough for you.

The versions for those who came in  late were…

Contemporary English Version

New Living Translation

New Life Version   

New International Reader's Version

Wycliffe New Testament

I was actually worried YOU were going to come up with a Bible version that supported your views! hahaha

I haven’t seen ONE Bible version that says the Apostles alone received the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost.

But no, you’ve got YOUR Greek new testament and ephrem syrus.  (suppresses giggle with a cough)

Bully for you!

Do you believe that unless a Bible reader is an expert in Koine Greek they cannot understand the Bible? Hardly. I have great confidence that the average man or woman can approach the English Bible and fully understand just what it is that God requires of him or her. And the established facts bear this out. It's only in those groups who twist Scripture to suit their own novel doctrines that "special explanations" are required to morph a "this" into "that".

Would you say that the Bible leads people into error?  Nope. I would say that it's the twisting of Scripture to support novel theories by ignorant men, that leads people into error.

You were waiting for some definitive information from me that proves the "120" were the focus of the manifestations at Pentecost? Yep, and I'm still waiting.

I have provided you with FIVE Bible versions (or as you call them interpretations) which are the work of theologians, working within committees no doubt with vast expertise in Bible scholarship, but this is not conclusive enough for you. You've provided me with FIVE Bible versions, huh? Right. So your misinterpreting a number of English versions is supposed to be taken as somehow "definitive" by me? Are you serious? Sorry, but you're going to have to do much, much better than that!

I was actually worried YOU were going to come up with a Bible version that supported your views! hahaha I haven't seen ONE Bible version that says the Apostles alone received the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. I'm left with the very distinct impression that you haven't been following this conversation. At all.

But no, you've got YOUR Greek new testament and ephrem syrus. (suppresses giggle with a cough) Well, it's not my Greek New Testament, it's the Greek New Testament. The Word of God. Holy Scripture. The Bible. Further, instead of making light of the Church's historical understanding of this matter, you should try studying the same. Broaden your horizons a bit ;)

Blessings,

Ian

Oh such flowery words and bluster!

But let's move on from the usual insults and infantile "your dumb" insinuations.



Ian, I had a quick look at your Revival/Acts dogma essay that you've been shamelessly promoting throughout this website.  Is Unkoolman one of your minions? Did he post it for you so you wouldn't look vain? 

I wonder how well you know your Bible after this comment...

"Carefully note that Luke nowhere mentions Jesus teaching the much broader group of his disciples after his resurrection! The first five verses of chapter one clearly demonstrates that he limited this sort of interaction to just his apostles."

You'd better read Luke 24 again (here's a cut and paste for all you fans)

32And they said to one another, "Did not our hearts burn within us while He talked with us on the way and while He opened to us the Scriptures?"

33And they rose up that same hour and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together and those who were with them,

34saying, "The Lord is risen indeed and hath appeared to Simon!"

35And they told what things were done on the way, and how He was known to them in the breaking of bread.

36And as they thus spoke, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them and said unto them, "Peace be unto you."

37But they were terrified and afraid, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.

38And He said unto them, "Why are ye troubled, and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 

39Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me to have." 

40And when He had thus spoken, He showed them His hands and His feet.

41And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, He said unto them, "Have ye here any meat?"

42And they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and of a honeycomb.

43And He took it and ate before them.

   
 44And He said unto them, "These are the words which I spoke unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and in the Prophets and in the Psalms concerning Me."

   
 45Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures,

   
 46and said unto them, "Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day,

   
 47and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

   
 48And ye are witnesses of these things.

   
 49And behold, I send the promise of My Father upon you; but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem until ye be endued with power from on high."

   
 50And He led them out as far as to Bethany, and He lifted up His hands and blessed them.

   
 51And it came to pass, while He blessed them, He was parted from them and carried up into Heaven.

   
 52And they worshiped Him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy,

   
 53and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.


I'm just not persuaded by ANY of your mumblings.
And if I'm such a Revival clone, why am I here talking to you and your cronies?

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

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.

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).

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.”

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.