lol cessation interpretation, yeah, hard to beat a Doctrine secretly designed to be adaptable..out of the context of a cessation interpretation?
lol cessation interpretation, yeah, hard to beat a Doctrine secretly designed to be adaptable..out of the context of a cessation interpretation?
lol cessation interpretation, yeah, hard to beat a Doctrine secretly designed to be adaptable..![]()
interestingAdaptable interpretation.....made me laugh but so true
In a number of your posts. We often post a simple line or verse because we know what is in our thoughts and hearts forgetting the reader is not a mind/hart reader. As for posting 1Cor 14:8 above wiht out chapter and verse was for the intent.Where have I taken any of the verses I quoted out of context?
post number 324 but maybe because i have some on ignore it aint your 324 you .... later i have an appointment to keep ..Do you have an example?
Do you have an example?
Here is post #324:post number 324 but maybe because i have some on ignore it aint your 324 you .... later i have an appointment to keep ..
Assuming this is the correct post 324, what scriptures have I taken out of context?Yes.
When a person speaks in tongues he is speaking to God (1 Cor 14:2), praying in the spirit (1 Cor 14:14), thanking God (1 Cor 14:17), not sharing the gospel.
Yes.
When a person speaks in tongues he is speaking to God (1 Cor 14:2), praying in the spirit (1 Cor 14:14), thanking God (1 Cor 14:17), not sharing the gospel.
They were speaking the "wonderful works of God." In Acts 10, Cornelius was "magnifying God." 1 Cor 14:2 says that when a peson speaks in tongues they are speaking "to" God. 1 Cor 14:17 says they are "giving thanks well."in this contact [context?], I do not see that tongues could not be used to share the gospel in this text. Because they heard the works of GOD.
Both contain speaking in tongues.Right so we are looking at different parts of the Bible.. me at acts 2.. and yourself at 1corinthians.
Tongues was never used for spreading the gospel.They do not contradict but are in different settings.
Acts 2 definitely is for the purpose of spreading Christianity to other nations.
In Acts 2, the apostles were speaking in tongues and speaking the wonderful works of God. Tongues is primarily praise and giving thanks.Especially for the Jews.
So the question is what the difference is when we speak of the Corinthians
is agree, but the context of the unknown is a sign to them that they DO not Believe. The situation in Cornelius' home was not the same as in Acts 2:11 As it was the first time. There was no rush of mighty wind or cloven tongues of fire. Those on the day of pentacost Tongues were used to draw people to the message Peter Preached. which led to 3000 saved, did it not?They were speaking the "wonderful works of God." In Acts 10, Cornelius was "magnifying God." 1 Cor 14:2 says that when a peson speaks in tongues they are speaking "to" God. 1 Cor 14:17 says they are "giving thanks well."
I do not see any place in the Bible that says or suggests that speaking in tongues is used for sharing the gospel.
I'm not sure what you mean.is agree, but the context of the unknown is a sign to them that they DO not Believe.
Right.The situation in Cornelius' home was not the same as in Acts 2:11 As it was the first time. There was no rush of mighty wind or cloven tongues of fire.
I believe they were saved after listening to, and believing, Peter's sermon. Peter preached the gospel to them.Those on the day of pentacost Tongues were used to draw people to the message Peter Preached. which led to 3000 saved, did it not?
they never would have heard Peter that day if the prior event did not draw them.I'm not sure what you mean.
Right.
I believe they were saved after listening to, and believing, Peter's sermon. Peter preached the gospel to them.
Where did that come from? What makes you think i have ever been part of SDA? Never been SDA .In your words what soured me on tongues was the pushing the AofG has done, hearing things like he is not saved he does not speak in tongues. O the cheep fakers .
Maybe not around you Bob but i sure have seen/heard it. Dad and Grandpa both AofG pastors , Gpa and Gma agreed not my dad . Few other pastors names Wood, Grogian , Mellili , The official writings of the AofG may be different. But then a lot of the early AofG writings came from Gene Scott.NEITHER The Assemblies of God, nor any other MAJOR pentecostal group HAS NEVER taught that "Speaking in tongues", and being "Born again of the Holy Spirit", and indwelled by Him are linked in any way.
The "Baptism in the Holy SPirit (to use AG vernacular) HAS ALWAYS been regarded as a "Second act of grace" unrelated to salvation. It's the "Oneness Pentecostals" (UPCI) that push that heresy.
Your understanding of the New Testament is lacking. One Corinthians is an excellent letter because we can see exactly how, a first century church was formed and how it functioned. No other letter gives us a window to see, what a first century church was like.Here is the full context of the verse you put up:
(1 Corinthians 4:17) For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.
(1 Corinthians 4:18) Now some are puffed up, as though I would not come to you.
(1 Corinthians 4:19) But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord will, and will know, not the speech of them which are puffed up, but the power.
(1 Corinthians 4:20) For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power.
(1 Corinthians 4:21) What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness?
All to do with Paul sending Timothy to the Corinthians .. and Paul also willing to come to them to admonish/rebuke. Because of the Corinthians waywardness Paul would want to come in a spirit of meekness and love.. but may have to come with a rod of discipline.
Nothing to do with spiritual gifts here..