Rejection of the Charasmatics and Biblical Literalism

I know all the arguments of cessasanionists and can tell you whatever argument you want from those quarters, but none are based on hard and fast scriptures stating the gifts will cease, and all misunderstand that signs and wonders accompanied God at various seasons throughout history, not just at the beginning of the preaching of the gospel, and note did not accompany John the Baptist's ministry.Also, the idea that tongues ceased is unfounded. Keep in mind that those that say the Church quit speaking in tongues also call the Church the same people that torturing people to death. Well, no kidding if those people didn't speak in tongues. All the tongues-speakers were either running for their lives or becoming martyrs for the kingdom.Edited by randman, : No reason given.Edited by randman, : No reason given.

Actually, there is a lot of testimony from the early church that tongues had ceased by the 2nd century. Here's the Wikipedia article on Cessationism This article is challenged so there is another one to read on the subject, but I see nothing that changes this basic historical fact.

Faith, church history unfortunately has been a weak discipline. You are gonna have to really seek and search to get the to the truth here.If you want to follow St Augustine, etc,....I hope you accept that people are saved for all eternity via infant baptism and the procedures of blessing from the Catholic priesthood.Edited by randman, : No reason given.

quote:

---

It just happened to me spontaneously the same way you describe but I certainly knew what it was since I was in a charismatic church.

---

So, you had what you at the time believed to be a God-given experience, but then later came to realize that it wasn't God-given at all.Hmmmm.

sometimes people package things....and if something seems false, they throw the baby out with the bathwater.

quote:

---

It often isn't unambiguous or crystal clear. You trust those who make the best case in your judgment. That's all you can do.

---

That seems reasonable.

quote:

---

But there are some things that are open and shut and obvious to anyone.

---

This is demonstrably not the case in practice.

quote:

---

When someone who had a vision they think was from God and say they were taught something in that vision to tell the church, but what they were taught contradicts what the Bible says, you know their vision wasn't from God.

---

But who has the "correct" interpretation of the Bible so that we may know if it is being contradicted or not?

quote:

---

So, if this someone says the teaching was about "Twelve Steps to the Throne of Grace," which is an example from my own experience, but you know that scripture says "come boldly to the throne of grace" then you know there are no intervening steps and that teaching did not come from God.

---

So, you are saying that, for that particular Biblical teaching, that you have the crystal-clear, unambiguous "correct" interpretation of the Bible?

quote:

---

No, this is an interpretation I have gleaned from many different sources discussing this subject.

---

But are you saying that you and all those who agree with you have the correct interpretation and all those who disagree with you and have a different interpretation are wrong?You and those who agree with you are in the position to judge, in this case, what is from God and what isn't?

quote:

---

Why do you think there is only one person?

---

I don't think that there is only one person, necessarily.

quote:

---

I wouldn't be saying what I'm saying if I didn't think it true, but I *already* told you and am telling you *again* that I don't give my own opinion on these things, but what I've learned from many teachings on the subject by many different teachers.

---

So which of them have the correct interpretation of the Bible so that we may know what is Biblical and what is not?

quote:

---

That many people just can't be good at making up sound patterns.

---

Humans as a species are incredibly focused upon language. We are all good at making up sound patterns.Anyone listening to an infant babbling away to themselves, seemingly speaking their own language, complete with inflection and fluent expression, can't help but agree.

You did not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Look at all the baggage you would have to carry if you kept Biblical literalism. You would have to keep to the 6 day creation, the flood, dino's walking with humans, and all sorts of things that there are tons of evidence against.Then, you would have to show disapprovemnt of anybody that doesn't accept 'salvation' in the way you do. What a burden that would be.

Well if you think you could duplicate the sounds of some of these "tongues" it shouldn't be too hard to set up a test.

to which you replied: I think what Faith said is a very important point and one of the keys to understanding the difference between Jazzns experience and that of many others. Faith says, and likely believes, that she is not giving her own opinion. Instead, as she says, she is only expressing what she learned from "others". She agrees with them. There is a mass of people that hold the same opinions.That can be very comforting. It can be a shelter, a refuge, the theological equivalent of pre-teens dressing alike and using the same slang, of forming cliques and best friends.There is another approach, and that is to be taught how to make your own decisions even if those decisions run counter to all the others around you and to your teacher. What you end up with in that case would be "Your opinions" and not necessarily those of the very people who taught you.The risk involved in such an approach is that you have to acknowledge that they are but your opinions and that they may well be wrong. You cannot use the defense that the opinion must be right because others believe the same, you must instead step up and try to explain how you arrived at the conclusion and be willing to change the conclusion if someone presents an argument you find more compelling.It appears to me that many people, theists and atheists alike, simply seek answers to questions, too few seek answers to question.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

randman How do you know it had definite meaning if you did not understand the language being spoken? You have heard ancient aramaic being spoken where that would allow you to state this claim?Edited by sidelined, : No reason given.

My take on it is that Jesus quotes from Genesis over 20 times in the Gospels. That tells us that if you are a Christian, then what Jesus speaks is the Truth, therefore the Genesis account is true. I assume you can appreciate that. What it doesn't say is whether or not we should view it as literal or allegorical. I think you could appreciate that as well. I have my own beliefs concerning it. The way I see it, Scripture must be read as literature first and foremost. In other words, if we want to interpret the Bible literally or allegorically, we have to first interpret it as literature, while paying close attention to genre and figures of speach. Clearly, Jesus Himself uses many allegories in his parables. I think we would all agree that Jesus wasn't telling us that our faith is literally a mustard seed. IMO, the Bible is a historical narrative interlaced with symbolism. If we were to view the Bible to be a mere allegory that conveys only abstract meanings on morality, we would miss the historical significance. Contrastly, if we were to simply view it as only being a historical narrative we would miss, what I believe, to be the true intent of Scripture. What I find to be true about Scripture is that it speaks about actual events in human history, but, the real significance lies in its ability to reach an underlying, spiritual message just below the surface. God Himself is providing a homily laced with historical truth.Case in point: If we were to view Adam and Eve as just an account as the first human beings on earth, we'd miss the true intent about our spritual disposition. But if the story of Adam and Eve were only an allegory, we'd miss the significance of the accounting of man. God is intending to edify the believer and to bring about repentance in the unbeliever. The true message about the first humans, even though I believe it to be a factual account, is a story about habitual sin and the consequences of rebellion God's perfect will.Likewise, if we were to view Satan as a literal serpent we would not only misunderstand the nature of fallen angels, but we might also come to a faulty conclusion that Jesus triumphed over him by literaly stepping on his head. Two days ago, I was looking for something specific in Josephus' books and began reading his discourse on the Genesis account. He words it this way:"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. But when the earth did not come into sight, but was covered with thick darkness, and a wind moved upon its surface, God commanded that there should be light: and when that was made, he considered the whole mass, and separated the light and the darkness; and the name he gave to one was Night, and the other he called Day: and he named the beginning of light, and the time of rest, The Evening and The Morning, and this was indeed the first day. But Moses said it was one day; the cause of which I am able to give even now; but because I have promised to give such reasons for all things in a treatise by itself, I shall put off its exposition till that time. After this, on the second day, he placed the heaven over the whole world, and separated it from the other parts, and he determined it should stand by itself. He also placed a crystalline [firmament] round it, and put it together in a manner agreeable to the earth, and fitted it for giving moisture and rain, and for affording the advantage of dews. On the third day he appointed the dry land to appear, with the sea itself round about it; and on the very same day he made the plants and the seeds to spring out of the earth. On the fourth day he adorned the heaven with the sun, the moon, and the other stars, and appointed them their motions and courses, that the vicissitudes of the seasons might be clearly signified. And on the fifth day he produced the living creatures, both those that swim, and those that fly; the former in the sea, the latter in the air: he also sorted them as to society and mixture, for procreation, and that their kinds might increase and multiply. On the sixth day he created the four-footed beasts, and made them male and female: on the same day he also formed man. Accordingly Moses says, That in just six days the world, and all that is therein, was made. And that the seventh day was a rest, and a release from the labor of such operations; whence it is that we Celebrate a rest from our labors on that day, and call it the Sabbath, which word denotes rest in the Hebrew tongue.

​

Moreover, Moses, after the seventh day was over begins to talk philosophically; and concerning the formation of man, says thus: That God took dust from the ground, and formed man, and inserted in him a spirit and a soul. This man was called Adam, which in the Hebrew tongue signifies one that is red, because he was formed out of red earth, compounded together; for of that kind is virgin and true earth. God also presented the living creatures, when he had made them, according to their kinds, both male and female, to Adam, who gave them those names by which they are still called. But when he saw that Adam had no female companion, no society, for there was no such created, and that he wondered at the other animals which were male and female, he laid him asleep, and took away one of his ribs, and out of it formed the woman; whereupon Adam knew her when she was brought to him, and acknowledged that she was made out of himself. Now a woman is called in the Hebrew tongue Issa; but the name of this woman was Eve, which signifies the mother of all living." -Flavius Josephushttp://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-1.htmAs you can see, (not that it is neccessarily correct), Josephus speaks about Creation Week being literal, but that Moses's description about the formation of man is more philosophical. I happen to agree with this view. Let me know how you all feel abut it.

---

“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner

quote:

---

You have heard ancient aramaic being spoken where that would allow you to state this claim?

---

[smartass]Probably at the same place his buddies got their amalgam fillings "miracled" into gold ones.[/smartass]

I've heard "tongues" hundreds of times, and mostly they all sound the same. I think somebody with an "ear" for it could duplicate (fake) it quite easily.In fact, I suspect that that's what many of the participants are doing.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

As I said, , it shouldn't be too hard to set up a test. Suspicions are worthless.