So many anti charismatic smear jobs allowed?

[biker]

The gospel is the word of God. The revealing of the will of God. Without that perfect law no man could seek after him who has no form. The gospel from faith, the unseen to faith it quickens our souls giving us his understanding. The good news .

We do not know what Peter was saying here to conclude it was the Gospel. He wrote 2 Epistles that later became known as part of the Word of God, and those were not Gospel related. The Gospels have Jesus in Matthew 28:19 instructing to Baptize in the "Titles," and then Peter in Acts 2:38 and all throughout the Book of Acts is Baptizing in Jesus Name only. So I reject your answer because it has no Scriptural backing knowing what Peter preached and wrote about later on. It's purely your opinion only!

 

[wolfwint]

That's pleasing to know .. I know I was a born again Christian for a few years before I ever had hands laid on me to receive .. It took a while and I can see where some would give up instead of waiting on the Holy Spirit .. I began to speak in distinct syllables and words and I sat there just listening for a few minutes then it just cut off .. I also know some folks get offended because it either scares them or they just don't believe it to begin with .. I've got some powerful testimony through the years and so do many others .. There's a big difference between gifts of the Spirit and fruit of the Spirit imo ..

Of course is there is a different.

 

[garee]

We do not know what Peter was saying here to conclude it was the Gospel. He wrote 2 Epistles that later became known as part of the Word of God, and those were not Gospel related. The Gospels have Jesus in Matthew 28:19 instructing to Baptize in the "Titles," and then Peter in Acts 2:38 and all throughout the Book of Acts is Baptizing in Jesus Name only. So I reject your answer because it has no Scriptural backing knowing what Peter preached and wrote about later on. It's purely your opinion only!

Peter was used to spread the incorruptible seed, the word of God, as a prophet apostle. the affect had nothing to do with his corrupted feet moved by the Holy Spirit .The gospel washes them making them beautiful .Or like Jesus said to Peter the serial denier he had no part of the gospel. . the cleansing power of God .

The whole Bible is the gospel of Christ (not the gospel of mankind) .The gospel begins with .In the beginning God who is glorious light said let there be the presence of Gods glorious witness .And he formed matter the temporal to be used in parables to reveal his thoughts to mankind .He finished the good news (gospel as it is written) with a Amen in the last chapter of the book of the law the bible (Revelation 22,)

Revelation 22: 21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

Its one of the problems that comes by naming gospel after those he moved to both will and perform his good pleasure. People start attributing the work to the corrupted feet of mankind not washed by the gospel.

It would seem every time the news came of Jesus disappearing. Peter would deny the faith that does work in us. He was forgiven of his blasphemy against the Son of man Jesus seen .

That window of opportunity disappeared with the Son of man.

Blasphemy against the Holy unseen Holy Spirit of Christ is not forgivable. Forbidding the power will not profit. Marvel not.

Jesus had to reveal the gospel meaning of the parable "washing feet" it is hid from those who walk by sight (no faith)

The idea of beautiful feet LOl.

John 13:7-9 King James Version (KJV) Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter. Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me. Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.

 

[garee]

That's pleasing to know .. I know I was a born again Christian for a few years before I ever had hands laid on me to receive .. It took a while and I can see where some would give up instead of waiting on the Holy Spirit .. I began to speak in distinct syllables and words and I sat there just listening for a few minutes then it just cut off .. I also know some folks get offended because it either scares them or they just don't believe it to begin with .. I've got some powerful testimony through the years and so do many others .. There's a big difference between gifts of the Spirit and fruit of the Spirit imo ..

God is not served by the corrupted hands of mankind .He is the Potter .He has no needs but satisfies all.

The gifts of the Spirit is the fruit of his Spirit, not the fruit of ours His is the greater that works in us. If we would trust ourselves as self control must would fail. The fruit of his Spirt is the power of control . The food the disciples at first knew not of doing the the will of Him not seen

I would suggest to be careful how we hear or say we hear what the Spirit says to us. We do not want to go above that which is written and open the lying spirit world the legion lies spoken of . we must stay in the limits of his two witnesses .the law and the prophets or called sola scriptura.

In that way experience is not the validator of the unseen things of faith. The Son of man Jesus at the beginning of His ministry ( Mathew 4) was sent out as a scapegoat to testify to the beginning of his ministry. The revealing of the father not seen the Son seen as a prophet and apostle. In his weakness the spirit of lies brought into the fleshly mind of Jesus showing Him all the kingdoms of the world and all the glory that comes with them . Three times he brought in a lying vision in or what some call out of the body experience. All three times the father gave his words to the Son in order for the Lord to rebuke Satan . "It is written", and again "it is written". Three times to denote the end of a matter. . struck him out sent him back to the bottomless dugout

 

[CS1]

We do not know what Peter was saying here to conclude it was the Gospel. He wrote 2 Epistles that later became known as part of the Word of God, and those were not Gospel related. The Gospels have Jesus in Matthew 28:19 instructing to Baptize in the "Titles," and then Peter in Acts 2:38 and all throughout the Book of Acts is Baptizing in Jesus' Name only. So I reject your answer because it has no Scriptural backing knowing what Peter preached and wrote about later on. It's purely your opinion only!

They are not Baptizing in the name of Jesus only LOL. When we read the Book of Acts we must remember 1. Luke wrote it. The Acts 2:38 account had already happened. Peter and the other disciples we Order not to preach of Jesus.

Peter in Acts preaches Christ who was Jesus of Nazareth whom they crucified. Acts 2:22-36
They were proclaiming Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ. In Chapter four of Acts, they were asked a question by Caiaphas the high priest

“By what power or by what name have you done this?”
in Verse 8 Peter no longer hiding or denying Jesus but full of the Holy Spirit said:

“Rulers of the people and elders of Israel: 9 If we this day are judged for a good deed done to a helpless man, by what means he has been made well, 10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. 11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

• Why was the name of Jesus emphasized in baptism in Acts?

because Jesus Christ was the authority by which they spoke or did what they did in preaching, healing, and baptizing.
This was done in direct opposition and defiance to the order or command they were given in chapter 4 of Acts.

18 they called them and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus. 19 But Peter and John answered and said to them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. 20 For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.”


Baptizing in the name of Jesus was not a method of requirement it was a public witness to obeying God and not the when they were ordered not to do so.

When they baptized they were asked " by what name do you do this? " That does not mean they were asking when you perform a baptism in water what word do you speak.

the question " by what name do you baptize it " was asking who gave you the authority to do this?
They said Jesus of Nazareth the Christ who was crucified and rose again.

 

[garee]

And Cornelius was mocking God and falling backward in self-edification, right?

Cornelius prophesied edifying God not seen . The God who gave him words as a vision to speak and also a new born again heart to believe.

The other ones that make a noise without meaning fall backward mock God . God calls falling backward the spirit of judgement . . They say by their actions they love mocking God being slain by the spirit (great wonderment). .

Which spirit is doing the slaying is the question?

The one that comes with lying wonders the spirit of the strong delusion that empowers them to have a hard heart the delusion God sends? . It comes by not mixing faith (the eternal) in what they see or heard (the temporal) .

They are ones that puff up the tradition of men above all things written in the law and prophets .Again as traditions of men inspired earthly of the father of lies.

Same ones that refuse to hear and look to the foundation of the law spoken of in 1 Corinthian 14 :22-23 .which is found in Isiah 28 the older testament . They simply make that foundation without effect as a oral tradition of men . Remember signs follow. Prophecy, tongues lead.

The sign of falling backwards follows after a noise is made. There is a reason a foundation as a self edifying wonderment. That oral tradition of men mocking God. Most like unintentionally. . . is hidden from the scriptures as a oral tradition of men it turns things upside down and mocks God, the Potter.

Prophecy the tongue of God.

God's interpretation is for those who believe sola scriptura. (prophecy) It reasons God has spoken as it is written

 

[Dino246]

Cornelius prophesied edifying God not seen . The God who gave him words as a vision to speak and also a new born again heart to believe.

The other ones that make a noise without meaning fall backward mock God . God calls falling backward the spirit of judgement . . They say by their actions they love mocking God being slain by the spirit (great wonderment). .

Which spirit is doing the slaying is the question?

The one that comes with lying wonders the spirit of the strong delusion that empowers them to have a hard heart the delusion God sends? . It comes by not mixing faith (the eternal) in what they see or heard (the temporal) .

They are ones that puff up the tradition of men above all things written in the law and prophets .Again as traditions of men inspired earthly of the father of lies.

Same ones that refuse to hear and look to the foundation of the law spoken of in 1 Corinthian 14 :22-23 .which is found in Isiah 28 the older testament . They simply make that foundation without effect as a oral tradition of men . Remember signs follow. Prophecy, tongues lead.

The sign of falling backwards follows after a noise is made. There is a reason a foundation as a self edifying wonderment. That oral tradition of men mocking God. Most like unintentionally. . . is hidden from the scriptures as a oral tradition of men it turns things upside down and mocks God, the Potter.

Prophecy the tongue of God.

God's interpretation is for those who believe sola scriptura. (prophecy) It reasons God has spoken as it is written

I see that you prefer your own erroneous made-up version of things rather than the truth. So be it.

 

[biker]

They are not Baptizing in the name of Jesus only LOL. When we read the Book of Acts we must remember 1. Luke wrote it. The Acts 2:38 account had already happened. Peter and the other disciples we Order not to preach of Jesus.

Peter in Acts preaches Christ who was Jesus of Nazareth whom they crucified. Acts 2:22-36
They were proclaiming Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ. In Chapter four of Acts, they were asked a question by Caiaphas the high priest

“By what power or by what name have you done this?”
in Verse 8 Peter no longer hiding or denying Jesus but full of the Holy Spirit said:

“Rulers of the people and elders of Israel: 9 If we this day are judged for a good deed done to a helpless man, by what means he has been made well, 10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. 11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

• Why was the name of Jesus emphasized in baptism in Acts?

because Jesus Christ was the authority by which they spoke or did what they did in preaching, healing, and baptizing.
This was done in direct opposition and defiance to the order or command they were given in chapter 4 of Acts.

18 they called them and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus. 19 But Peter and John answered and said to them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. 20 For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.”


Baptizing in the name of Jesus was not a method of requirement it was a public witness to obeying God and not the when they were ordered not to do so.

When they baptized they were asked " by what name do you do this? " That does not mean they were asking when you perform a baptism in water what word do you speak.

the question " by what name do you baptize it " was asking who gave you the authority to do this?
They said Jesus of Nazareth the Christ who was crucified and rose again.

I was going off what Church Fathers claimed and from the Catechism that claims up to the 4th Century they were Baptizing in Jesus Name only.

 

[bojack]

God is not served by the corrupted hands of mankind .He is the Potter .He has no needs but satisfies all.

The gifts of the Spirit is the fruit of his Spirit, not the fruit of ours His is the greater that works in us. If we would trust ourselves as self control must would fail. The fruit of his Spirt is the power of control . The food the disciples at first knew not of doing the the will of Him not seen

I would suggest to be careful how we hear or say we hear what the Spirit says to us. We do not want to go above that which is written and open the lying spirit world the legion lies spoken of . we must stay in the limits of his two witnesses .the law and the prophets or called sola scriptura.

In that way experience is not the validator of the unseen things of faith. The Son of man Jesus at the beginning of His ministry ( Mathew 4) was sent out as a scapegoat to testify to the beginning of his ministry. The revealing of the father not seen the Son seen as a prophet and apostle. In his weakness the spirit of lies brought into the fleshly mind of Jesus showing Him all the kingdoms of the world and all the glory that comes with them . Three times he brought in a lying vision in or what some call out of the body experience. All three times the father gave his words to the Son in order for the Lord to rebuke Satan . "It is written", and again "it is written". Three times to denote the end of a matter. . struck him out sent him back to the bottomless dugout

The Word plainly says what the fruit of the Spirit is .. Gifts of the Spirit are subject to the prophet and can be diverse ..

 

[Guojing]

David clearly didn't obey the Law of Moses, 'cause he killed a man and adulterated his wife!

I already stated that is the reason for the system of animal sacrifice.

 

[Guojing]

David didn't offer sacrifices for his sins against Uriah and Bathsheba, because he couldn't. The sins carried the death penalty, and no sacrifice could be offered.

Leviticus 20:10
10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

Leviticus 24:17
17 And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death.

Don't you remember what Jesus said? "Before Abraham was, I AM!"

Jesus not arriving in the flesh didn't stop Abraham being credited with righteousness for believing God.

Picking up sticks on the Sabbath also carried the death penalty and the Lord also executed that. That does not mean the system of animal sacrifice was worthless.

 

[Guojing]

Agree but I still think the OT Saints were held in Paradise waiting on The Lamb of God was a similar faith in Jesus as now ..

Yes, all of the OT saints had to keep the law, imperfectly. The animal sacrifice was to cover them until, as you have stated, Jesus went to Paradise to preach to them.

If they did not do animal sacrifices, they would have failed to reach Paradise, and Jesus would not be able to save them later.

 

[hornetguy]

Your question is too inaccurately worded to be answered with a simple yes or no. I might be able to agree with the first part but not the second part.

What do you mean by "saved"?

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

How many definitions of "saved" do YOU have? I only know of one.

My question was very accurately worded. Very simple question, actually....

 

[KelbyofGod]

How many definitions of "saved" do YOU have? I only know of one.

My question was very accurately worded. Very simple question, actually....

If I take that question as honest, perhaps I do only have one, but I don't think it's the same as the definition I think you have been using. That's why I was asking for clarification of your definition.

The definition I use is similar to the Webster's definition #1 which means to be set aside, delivered or protected but the length of time is not necessarily eternal...although it can be.

If the definition you use automatically assumes that "saved"= eternally, then it is either inaccurate, or needs a second definition to cover several of the usages in the Old Testament as well as at least a few in the new testament. (Exodus 1:17 and 1 Peter 3:20 for examples.)

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[notuptome]

If I take that question as honest, perhaps I do only have one, but I don't think it's the same as the definition I think you have been using. That's why I was asking for clarification of your definition.

The definition I use is similar to the Webster's definition #1 which means to be set aside, delivered or protected but the length of time is not necessarily eternal...although it can be.

If the definition you use automatically assumes that "saved"= eternally, then it is either inaccurate, or needs a second definition to cover several of the usages in the Old Testament as well as at least a few in the new testament. (Exodus 1:17 and 1 Peter 3:20 for examples.)

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Third option is it is biblical and confirmed by the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.

You will never answer the critical question as to the evidence of tongues being necessary for salvation. You believe it but cannot say it.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[bojack]

Third option is it is biblical and confirmed by the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.

You will never answer the critical question as to the evidence of tongues being necessary for salvation. You believe it but cannot say it.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I'll say it . The answer is no and Paul said it in scripture .. He covered it all pretty well .. But some folks seem to forbid it in spite of what Paul taught ..

 

[notuptome]

I'll say it . The answer is no and Paul said it in scripture .. He covered it all pretty well .. But some folks seem to forbid it in spite of what Paul taught ..

Not necessary to forbid that which ceased according to scripture.

Many will not agree with you but will say that speaking in tongues is a required evidence of the Holy Spirit baptism.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[bojack]

Not necessary to forbid that which ceased according to scripture.

Many will not agree with you but will say that speaking in tongues is a required evidence of the Holy Spirit baptism.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

What the Word says works for me .. As for your view that gifts have ceased many take that view imo because you can't deal with it ..
Don't believe it is fine with me and your choice but don't call me a liar if I have the testimony .. You folks ask for proof from folks like me, all we can do is tell our testimony .. If Jesus keeps it hid or reveals it to someone it's His business .. Ask Him for proof but don't ask as a test or you'll stay at square one .. And I'm preaching to my ownself more than anyone else here

1 From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?
2 Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
3 Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
5 Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?
6 But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

 

[DBurrage]

I am a charismatic member of Jesuses body.
And yet I am fair game.
Attacking the body of christ is demonic.

Actual believers with a green light to attack other believers for their beliefs.

End times madness
And this forum incubates it.

So you're suggesting that anybody who so much as challenges your beliefs is attacking Christ's body and is therefore demonic?

Have a day off, love!

I think you'll find that many Christians take issue with the 'charismatic' perception of faith that has came about over the last couple of decades because of the false teaching that is so often associated with it.

From experience, 'charismatic' teaching basically says "give me your money or else you're robbing God".

 

[garee]

Yes, all of the OT saints had to keep the law, imperfectly. The animal sacrifice was to cover them until, as you have stated, Jesus went to Paradise to preach to them.

If they did not do animal sacrifices, they would have failed to reach Paradise, and Jesus would not be able to save them later.

No man could keep the letter of the law. "Thou shall surely die"

The word "keep" must be defined.

I remember once for a long period sharing with another person who used the word "keep" in a way that opposed the gospel.

No man could keep any commandment coming from God who is not a man.

To "keep" is to guard closely with all of ones new heart, soul and mind. We can keep in that way because he empowers us living in these bodies of death who keep his laws imperfectly. He is the perfect One.

As the just one(letter of the law) and the justifier (law of faith) He is one who kept the law perfectly. We therefore can keep his commandments as he works in us with us. . His loving commandments forgive as well as show error . Without his perfect law we would have no way to hear Him and seek after when we do violate it denying him if and when do .

With Him there is forgiveness without. . . .the letter of the law death

Romans 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.