Some truth about speaking in tongues, the Holy Ghost, spiritual gifts and 1 Corinthians 14

[wolfwint]

no one here said that please take your red herring and strawman somewhere else thank you. You just have attacks and insults please move on or go. Thank you[/QUOT

Sir, my questions are serious. And i dont ask for for to have Fun with it.
But the way I got the answers, Shows me that nobody can give answers to my questions. Why then somebody should follow your pentecostal/ charismatic teachings, which are not taught in bible to believers nor in churchhistory Till 1900?
If you believe it it is your Thing. But you should not sell it as truth which deceives and confuse believers.

 

[CS1]

wrong

 

[wolfwint]

I have seen the question asked I have not seen the statement made. That being said, the motives to interject someone else comments, and try to tie into my comments because lacking the ability to refute the Biblical position is wrong. The person brought it up and fully knows I would never say that. So why bring it up? Red Herring and Strawman.

If you talk about me. My post was adessed to Kelby. Why you then give the answer?

 

[CS1]

yOUR question was answered some time ago and I want to say it was done so on another thread. Your argument is that there are no new doctrines taught after the canonization? Let say the initial evidence doctrine was started in 1901. I know you are against it that is fine, have you ever asked how they came to that conclusion? And was it unBiblical do you have issues with doctrine coming in the 17th century?

 

[CS1]

If you talk about me. My post was adessed to Kelby. Why you then give the answer?

actually, I asked you a question, about the Trinity which you answered and started our dialog. I will stop and not post back to you.

 

[wolfwint]

actually, I asked you a question, about the Trinity which you answered and started our dialog. I will stop and not post back to you.

The different to the doctrine about the trinity is, that the discussions about it you can find during the churchhistory.
The doctrine that speaking in tongues is the proof that somebody received the Holy Spirit/ baptised with the Holy Spirit/ filled with the Holy Spirit. You cant find during the churchhistory.
Yes, i got answers, but nobody was able to show me where this was teached till 1901.
Otherwise I would not need to ask.

 

[CS1]

The different to the doctrine about the trinity is, that the discussions about it you can find during the churchhistory.
The doctrine that speaking in tongues is the proof that somebody received the Holy Spirit/ baptised with the Holy Spirit/ filled with the Holy Spirit. You cant find during the churchhistory.
Yes, i got answers, but nobody was able to show me where this was teached till 1901.
Otherwise I would not need to ask.

Ok, so church history stopped? and where did the initial evidence doctrine come from? did they base it off a 1901 book? or the book of Acts?

 

[wolfwint]

Ok, so church history stopped? and where did the initial evidence doctrine come from? did they base it off a 1901 book? or the book of Acts?

No, of course not. But it wonders me that such a important doctrine appear in 1901, but not before.
All important doctrines was discussed from beginning, so far i know.
But this teaching is not found.
That the work of the Holy Spirit was neglectet in the churchhistory is no question. That the Holy Spirit gives spirituell gifts today is no question.

But i still cant find this teaching taught to believers ore claimed from anybody.

So is it wrong to doubt to this teaching?

 

[KelbyofGod]

Good morning, my questions are still unanswered. Why we cant find this teaching, that speaking in tongues is the proof to be filled with the spirit/ baptised with the Holy spirit not taught to believers in the NT and churchhistory, till around 1900 ad?
Why teaches Paul clear that not all christians will get the Gift of speaking in tongues( 1. Cor.12,30).?
Have a blessed Day.

All four outpourings of the Holy Ghost recorded in the bible involved an observable sign. 3 times speaking in tongues is named specifically. And in the 4th example it is something given at laying on of hands that made it obvious to onlookers that the Holy Ghost had just been given and received . Speaking in tongues fits this description per Acts 19.

As long as you are willing to disregard these facts, it is easy to "change" what receiving of the Holy Ghost is like to match whatever you'd like.

On the other hand, if you seek for the Holy Ghost that matches the biblical accounts, you get the same Holy Ghost as was given in the 4 biblical accounts.

 

[notuptome]

All four outpourings of the Holy Ghost recorded in the bible involved an observable sign. 3 times speaking in tongues is named specifically. And in the 4th example it is something given at laying on of hands that made it obvious to onlookers that the Holy Ghost had just been given and received . Speaking in tongues fits this description per Acts 19.

As long as you are willing to disregard these facts, it is easy to "change" what receiving of the Holy Ghost is like to match whatever you'd like.

On the other hand, if you seek for the Holy Ghost that matches the biblical accounts, you get the same Holy Ghost as was given in the 4 biblical accounts.

Man does not seek the Holy Spirit. Never has and never will.

Ro 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

God does the seeking not man.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[wolfwint]

All four outpourings of the Holy Ghost recorded in the bible involved an observable sign. 3 times speaking in tongues is named specifically. And in the 4th example it is something given at laying on of hands that made it obvious to onlookers that the Holy Ghost had just been given and received . Speaking in tongues fits this description per Acts 19.

As long as you are willing to disregard these facts, it is easy to "change" what receiving of the Holy Ghost is like to match whatever you'd like.

On the other hand, if you seek for the Holy Ghost that matches the biblical accounts, you get the same Holy Ghost as was given in the 4 biblical accounts.

All 4 examples you find in acts. Right?
These 4 "examples" you can also see as an onetime event for special groups ( samaritians,gentiles and followers of John the baptist) for to show the fourth group (jejewsthat the Gospel is also for the from the jews not acceptet groups.
And no one in NT, ore churchhistory tsught this. Even those who mentioned in churchhistory that there is tonguespeaking taught this ore claimed this teaching for himself.
This why you cant find this teaching not before 1900. My question is: Why you cant find this teaching before?

 

[CS1]

No, of course not. But it wonders me that such a important doctrine appear in 1901, but not before.
All important doctrines was discussed from beginning, so far i know.
But this teaching is not found.
That the work of the Holy Spirit was neglectet in the churchhistory is no question. That the Holy Spirit gives spirituell gifts today is no question.

But i still cant find this teaching taught to believers ore claimed from anybody.

So is it wrong to doubt to this teaching?

maybe it's because of the false teaching of the ending of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. IF you know church History there was a dark period where man setup false doctrines and did not adhere to the Holy Spirits leading or was the Catholic church completely Biblical and the Reformation was the error? Or was it used to set up the great awaking? IF you knew church history the Catholic church went from conversion to membership removing the conversion experience which led to The Spirit of God departing from that church.

 

[CS1]

All 4 examples you find in acts. Right?
These 4 "examples" you can also see as an onetime event for special groups ( samaritians,gentiles and followers of John the baptist) for to show the fourth group (jejewsthat the Gospel is also for the from the jews not acceptet groups.
And no one in NT, ore churchhistory tsught this. Even those who mentioned in churchhistory that there is tonguespeaking taught this ore claimed this teaching for himself.
This way you can't find this teaching not before 1900. My question is: Why you cant find this teaching before?

that is a good question the problem with it is, just because there is not one to be found in your understanding, does that make the teaching unbiblical? or how did they come to that conclusion? They looked at Acts to get the understanding

 

[Absolutely]

Your welcome😊
There is no teaching in acts. There is something what you teach out of acts. That there is a trinity, you find in several books of the bible(without useing this word of course) Your teaching is a man made doctrine which cant find in any biblical book taught to believers, nor you can find in churchhistory.

We find indulgences and the pretrib rapture in early belivers.
The bible is secondary huh?

 

[Absolutely]

A huge thank you to all those tirelessly combing through the bible to help us "understand" how little of it is worth applying or even reading.
At some point it will shrink into 5 or so pages.

 

[Absolutely]

I have in my hand the new authorized cessationists bible by tinkerbell publishing

Holds up a barbie and ken sized book with some tweezers

 

[CS1]

Man does not seek the Holy Spirit. Never has and never will.

Ro 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

God does the seeking not man.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

wrong !!!!! Jesus said to go and wait until you receive power from on high.

 

[Absolutely]

The different to the doctrine about the trinity is, that the discussions about it you can find during the churchhistory.
The doctrine that speaking in tongues is the proof that somebody received the Holy Spirit/ baptised with the Holy Spirit/ filled with the Holy Spirit. You cant find during the churchhistory.
Yes, i got answers, but nobody was able to show me where this was teached till 1901.
Otherwise I would not need to ask.

The catholics burned many " heretics" and their writings.
Can you find " pew" or " altar" or "hymnal" or "carpet",or "wafer" in the early church?

The baptism in the Holy Spirit is power and anointing,not saved < > lost.
Of course they sought it. No brainer.

 

[Absolutely]

Man does not seek the Holy Spirit. Never has and never will.

Ro 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

God does the seeking not man.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

See, this is the problem.
You speak baloney with authority,as if you could be right.

A babe in Christ knows what you are saying is false.

 

[notuptome]

wrong !!!!! Jesus said to go and wait until you receive power from on high.

Almost right but not quite. They were waiting but they did not ask God to give them to power. They were simply open to receiving the promise that Jesus had given to them. The disciples did not endeavor to lead God but allowed God to lead them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger