1. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    157646
    10 Sep '06 03:49
    Originally posted by xpoferens
    Hi kirksey957,

    The apostles and those to whom they imposed their hands, had several gifts of the Holy Spirit, so that people could know they were messengers of the Son of God.

    Notice the following episode...

    Acts 28:3 "And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid [them] on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on h ...[text shortened]...

    I believe I Corinthians 13, says that these gifts are over, and are not available nowadays.
    I do not believe you can show me where it says the gifts are over.
    Kelly
  2. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    15 Sep '04
    Moves
    7051
    10 Sep '06 04:04
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    I do not believe you can show me where it says the gifts are over.
    Kelly
    In think what Corinthians 13 means, is that we will have no use for such talents in heaven. Paul is expressing an eschatological hope about the end of the world where there will be no need to speak in tongues. I agree with you that Paul is not predicting that such gifts are over. But in reality, the phenomenon of speaking in tongues doesn't seem to happen any more.
  3. Lisbon
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    2972
    10 Sep '06 04:11
    Originally posted by Conrau K
    Hello to you to,

    I'm not sure what you mean by "the inspired word of God". My understanding is that the Holy Spirit is present in the scripture, but I do not believe this implies the literal truth of each word. I am Catholic (not sure if that's a problem or not) and identify with the Spiritual Order called the Carmelites. Over the past Centuries the Car ...[text shortened]... e discipline of study to really understand these and the New Testament.

    Peace.
    Hello Conrau K,

    Thanks for the explanation about the carmelites.

    Regarding the word of God, it claims to be inspired.

    II Timothy 3:16 "All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

    Note: one has to be careful about translations, however.

    In the Bible, you can find historical records, symbolic and apocaliptical passages, poetry, narrative, et cetera.

    Scholars agree in this, and they agree that not everything is to be taken literally.

    I totally agree with your statement: "there is a particular science required to interpreting it - or otherwise we can falsely construe what the original authors were trying to communicate and mistake the meaning of their words."

    However, I don't understand what you mean when you say that "baptism changed after the Church moved to Judaism".

    First of all, The Church didn't move to Judaism; the Church was formed in New Testament times (by Christ); you don't read about the Church in the Old Testament, nor about baptism.

    People converted from Judaism to Christianity, not the Church.

    There were ritual washings, yes, but they had a different purpose and they are never translated as baptism; whenever a person or a priest was considered unclean, bathing was necessary. In opposition, one is to be baptized once (if baptized correctly and for the right purpose).

    Baptism, the act of being immersed, represents the death, burial and ressurection into a new life, for the remission of sins through the blood of Jesus Christ.

    I don't think ngeisler88 and I have been discussing about different things.

    I say the action mentioned above is required for salvation, while ngeisler88 says it isn't; he sees it as just a complement (not essential).

    Acts 2:38 says that one has to be baptized (immersed) for the remission of sins and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit; what do you mean by "baptism by the Holy Spirit"?

    The Holy Spirit came down on the Apostles and to certain gentiles (Acts 10); is this what you mean?

    Regarding simplicity, the passage I mentioned in the previous post demonstrates it.

    The apostles and disciples often didn't understand what Jesus was saying? Yes, sure.

    But, after the day of Pentecost, the Apostles were guided into all truth, and that truth is what they and the writers of the New Testament gave witness of.

    John 16:13 - "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."

    The basic message of the Gospel is simple. Listen, believe (have faith), repent, be baptized, confess Jesus, live faithfully until the end.

    That one has to read and study continously? No doubts about it.

    II Peter 3:18 "But grow in grace, and [in] the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him [be] glory both now and for ever. Amen."

    Regards
  4. Lisbon
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    2972
    10 Sep '06 04:23
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    I do not believe you can show me where it says the gifts are over.
    Kelly
    Hi everyone,

    I believe the gifts served as a powerful evidence that the Apostles were messengers from the Son of God.

    If they had the message but not something to prove it, people that had not witnessed Christ's ministry or Him ressurected, would have less reasons to believe.

    Remember that by then, the canon of the New Testament was not complete, and they couldn't use it as we do nowadays.

    Once that that is perfect (a thing, not a person), has come, then the need of these gifts finishes.

    I Corinthians 13:10 "But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away."

    That which is perfect is the complete Bible, with the witness of eye-witnesses, and written by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

    Regards
  5. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    15 Sep '04
    Moves
    7051
    10 Sep '06 04:352 edits
    Originally posted by xpoferens
    Hello Conrau K,

    Thanks for the explanation about the carmelites.

    Regarding the word of God, it claims to be inspired.

    II Timothy 3:16 "All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all viour Jesus Christ. To him [be] glory both now and for ever. Amen."

    Regards
    [/i]
    Oops. I meant to say that the Church moved from Judaism, not to. Up until about 90CE, Christianity was a Jewish sect. During this time people were baptised to indicate that they had changed their ways (such as John's baptisms), and yes, this was to make them clean. The tradition of baptism representing resurrection into new life developed after Christianity split from Judaism.

    I'll let you and ngeisler88 clarify what you mean about baptism. But I think you should be careful. Paul often refers to a baptism of the heart (which sounds like repentance). This type of baptism is different to the immersion into water that is practised by most Christian denominations.

    The Baptism of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2) is when the Holy Spirit came down on the disciples and gave them gifts. This is in accordance with John's prediction (Luke 3:16) that the Messiah would baptise with (or in) the Holy Spirit and fire. I think that this is different to the Centurion's experience of the Holy Spirit in Acts 10.

    I'm not sure which Gospel you refer to when you say, "the basic message of the Gospel is simple". Each gospel writer has different concerns for his audience. Luke is said to be more concerned for the roles of women, the place for the poor, and the salvation of Gentiles. Mark seems more intent on properly representing Judaism to Gentiles and proclaiming Jesus' second coming.

    But anyway, the basic message you speak of is the firm spirituality of all Christians denominations (well, we're yet to see if baptism is yet so important - but faith and listening ar certainly crucial).

    And grow in faith.
  6. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    157646
    10 Sep '06 04:59
    Originally posted by Conrau K
    In think what Corinthians 13 means, is that we will have no use for such talents in heaven. Paul is expressing an eschatological hope about the end of the world where there will be no need to speak in tongues. I agree with you that Paul is not predicting that such gifts are over. But in reality, the phenomenon of speaking in tongues doesn't seem to happen any more.
    "People could, by these evidences, see that the Apostles had something that only God could bestow; these evidences helped people believe.

    I believe I Corinthians 13, says that these gifts are over, and are not available nowadays."

    I agree, the time will come they will not be needed; however, that
    wasn't what he suggested.
    Kelly
  7. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    157646
    10 Sep '06 05:04
    Originally posted by xpoferens
    Hi everyone,

    I believe the gifts served as a powerful evidence that the Apostles were messengers from the Son of God.

    If they had the message but not something to prove it, people that had not witnessed Christ's ministry or Him ressurected, would have less reasons to believe.

    Remember that by then, the canon of the New Testament was not complete, ...[text shortened]... the witness of eye-witnesses, and written by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

    Regards
    I read what you said, and still do not see anything that leads me
    to believe that time has come. That which is "perfect" you believe
    to be the NT to complete the Bible, where do you get that in these
    passages? Seems like you are reading something into this that
    isn't there in my opinion, but maybe you have something else to
    confirm your position. Could you back up your position with some
    scripture that supports your position?
    Kelly
  8. Lisbon
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    2972
    10 Sep '06 05:13
    Originally posted by Conrau K
    Oops. I meant to say that the Church moved from Judaism, not to. Up until about 90CE, Christianity was a Jewish sect. During this time people were baptised to indicate that they had changed their ways (such as John's baptisms), and yes, this was to make them clean. The tradition of baptism representing resurrection into new life developed after Chris ...[text shortened]... et so important - but faith and listening ar certainly crucial).

    And grow in faith.
    Hi Conrau K,

    I'm in Portugal, it is 5:49 AM, and I have a Bible Study to prepare, but it has been a nice discussion and I want to answer this last post.

    I don't agree that Christianity was a Jewish sect. Paul started to preach to the gentiles not many years after Jesus ascended into heaven.

    The time span in the book of Acts is about thirty years. It ends at around 62 AD, when Paul was taken as a prisioner to Rome.

    By then, Paul had traveled through Asia Minor preaching in the synagogues but to the gentiles as well.

    By AD 50 emperor Claudius expelled the Christians from Rome (they eventually returned). The Bibles says so, as well as secular history.

    Therefore, I cannot agree Christianity was a Jewish sect up until about 90CE.

    In Acts, as far as I can recall, of the Apostles, only Peter, John, James and Paul are mentioned. What about the others? They went through the whole World preaching the Gospel.

    "baptism of the heart"? Paul talks about a circumcision of the heart (Romans 2:29).

    I consider myself as part of the One and True Church, not any denomination; if baptism (immersion) is a commandment in Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38, and is mentioned as saving us, then I'm sure we must obey.

    The fact that some denominations teach it, doesn't make it wrong.

    Regarding the special gifts of the Holy Spirit, people in Cornelius' household, were granted (at least) the ability to speak foreign languages (Acts 10:46), as the Apostles in Acts 2.

    When I say the gospel, I'm refering to the four of them. As I said before, they do complement each other and are not in contradiction.

    God Bless
  9. Lisbon
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    2972
    10 Sep '06 05:14
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    I read what you said, and still do not see anything that leads me
    to believe that time has come. That which is "perfect" you believe
    to be the NT to complete the Bible, where do you get that in these
    passages? Seems like you are reading something into this that
    isn't there in my opinion, but maybe you have something else to
    confirm your position. Could you back up your position with some
    scripture that supports your position?
    Kelly
    Hi KellyJay,

    I'll try to answer you as soon as possible, ok?

    Take care.
  10. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    157646
    10 Sep '06 05:17
    Originally posted by xpoferens
    Hi KellyJay,

    I'll try to answer you as soon as possible, ok?

    Take care.
    No worries I'm not overly concern about this even if we disagree. 🙂
    Kelly
  11. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    15 Sep '04
    Moves
    7051
    10 Sep '06 05:32
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    "People could, by these evidences, see that the Apostles had something that only God could bestow; these evidences helped people believe.

    I believe I Corinthians 13, says that these gifts are over, and are not available nowadays."

    I agree, the time will come they will not be needed; however, that
    wasn't what he suggested.
    Kelly
    No, the Greek is in future tense. The gifts "will come to an end" not "they have come to an end". Paul says "then we will see face to face". When we see God we will have no need for gifts.
  12. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    157646
    10 Sep '06 05:35
    Originally posted by Conrau K
    No, the Greek is in future tense. The gifts "will come to an end" not "they have come to an end". Paul says "then we will see face to face". When we see God we will have no need for gifts.
    I'm in agreement with you, now and before, I disagreed with the
    xpoferens position if I understood his position correctly.
    Kelly
  13. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    15 Sep '04
    Moves
    7051
    10 Sep '06 05:452 edits
    Originally posted by xpoferens
    Hi Conrau K,

    I'm in Portugal, it is 5:49 AM, and I have a Bible Study to prepare, but it has been a nice discussion and I want to answer this last post.

    I don't agree that Christianity was a Jewish sect. Paul started to preach to the gentiles not many years after Jesus ascended into heaven.

    The time span in the book of Acts is about thirty years. I said before, they do complement each other and are not in contradiction.

    God Bless
    Well, yes. Both Luke and Paul did not believe that Christianity should be purely Jewish. Both had Gentile audiences in mind. But Mark and Matthew and Peter defintely had the opinion that Christianity should be restricted to Jewish communities (though Peter's does change). The first witnesses to Jesus were Jews, so the first Christians were Jews. It wasn't until later that Christians stopped attending the synagogues. The date for 90CE is the official date for when Christians were not allowed into synagogues, though Christianity was already diverging.

    AD50 seems like a young date for the expulsion of Christians. Certainly there religion contravened the regulations of the Roman Empire but I think that this only applied to Jews who had converted to Christianity not Roman Citizens (and this could only happen once Christianity was separate from Judaism - I'll look that up).

    Now I do not dispute that the disciples received the ability to speak in tongues or that baptism is necassary (though I do not believe it is compulsory to be baptized to enter the Kingdom of God). All I argue is that you be sure you have a proper definition of baptism (I'll go and look up "baptism of the heart". Of course it makes sense that I had just confused it with "circumcision of the heart".)

    Enjoy your bible studies.

    God bless.
  14. Lisbon
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    2972
    10 Sep '06 11:25
    Originally posted by Conrau K
    No, the Greek is in future tense. The gifts "will come to an end" not "they have come to an end". Paul says "then we will see face to face". When we see God we will have no need for gifts.
    Hi everyone,

    Today is a busy day for me, but here is just a quick note.

    You're right Conrau K, the Greek is in future tense.

    During Paul's time and during the Apostolic era, these special gifts could be witnessed.

    Upon the death of the last Apostle (John ?), and of the last living person to whom they had bestowed the gifts, these would be over.

    When Paul wrote the letter to the Corinthians, it was still something that would come to an end. After all, he himself had these gifts.

    I'll write more on this later, but naturally, although disagreeing, I respect your positions.

    Regards
  15. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    10 Sep '06 14:30
    Originally posted by ngeisler88
    According to the Christian stanpoint, it seems to differ on what salvation is, how to get there, and when it happens. This thread was opened for this debate specifically. Thanks for your time brethren. Grace and peace to you all.
    A psychological security blanket born from human desire and fear of the unknown.

    Oh, I'm sorry...you said from a Christian standpoint. Can't help you there.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree