MInTheGap has an interesting post up today, entitled “Cultural Invasion: Spiritual Gifts” in which he explains why he reasons that the gifts of prophecy, tongues and healing are no longer functioning in the body of Christ. His reasoning is found in verse 13:8 which reads,
Charity never faileth: but whether [there be] prophecies, they shall fail; whether [there be] tongues, they shall cease; whether [there be] knowledge, it shall vanish away.
and in verse 10 which reads,
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
MInTheGap reasons that “that which is perfect” is the Bible. I do not refute that the Bible is perfect, but it is not a complete revelation of God, who cannot be known only through words. (If you doubt that statement then think about the scriptures that talk about who can know the heart of God? Only the Holy Spirit knows Him, and therefore we must be baptized with water and the Spirit. The Holy SPirit within us does have a place, that we would be wise to not diminish.) Before you jump off the deep end, let me reiterate that I believe the Bible is not to be added to and in this way it IS COMPLETE, and it IS the Word of God, INFALLIBLE, and therefore perfect. But I do not believe it is the scriptures that this verse is talking about.
Why? Well lets read just a bit further shall we? 1 Cor 13: 12 explains what it is that is perfect,
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
For now we know Jesus in part, we see Him through this glass (the Word) darkly, because we are still separated by our flesh. But we will know Him face to face when He returns, or when we go to heaven (I happen to think that very few are in heaven as of yet, but that is a whole OTHER post). When we see Him face to face, we shall have all knowledge revealed, in our glorified body which is without sin, and THEN we shall know in full even as we are known. And of course then prophecy, tongues and word of knowledge will be unnecessary, because these things all reveal God to us, and of course we will know Him in full at that time.
And also MInTheGap reasons that “healing and prophesy were gifts that passed away with the early church” . It is interesting that he doesn’t mention Knowledge as having passed away but substitutes healing instead. Nowhere in this chapter is healing mentioned as eventually ceasing. This leads me to believe that instead of relying on the Word to form his doctrine, he instead is relying on feelings, nervous feelings about the power of God’s Spirit working today. I admit it is quite scary and strange to see His power work in miracles, but that is not reason enough to say He doesn’t do so anymore.
MInTheGap goes on to mention that he feels Paul is saying in Chapter 14 that tongues is the least of the gifts and not one to be desired. I really don’t see this either…Let me elaborate.
First Paul says “follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.” (1 Cor. 14:1) What does this mean? Well in context we see that we are to follow charity because it never fails (chapter 13), and we are to desire the spiritual gifts, and ESPECIALLY prophecy. In verse 2 Paul explains why we ought to desire prophecy… because
“he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not to men, but to God, for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries”
Ok. that sounds reasonable, and still doesn’t mean that tongues are bad and not to be desired, but they are for God, and I mean to emphasize here that Paul is talking about the tongues of angels, not tongues of men, because OBVIOUSLY a person could understand a tongue of man. (Of course it goes without saying that when the tongues of men are spoken they are used to speak the Word of God to those who speak a foreign language.) Ok going on…
In verse 4 “He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.” we see Paul make the first distinction between prophecy and tongues (in this case tongues of angels, which are unknown), that prophecy edifies the church, while tongues edifies the man. And then in verse 22
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
Paul tells us that prophecy is for the believer, but tongues (of man) is a sign to the unbeliever. Ok, pretty clear. This is not to say that tongues (either of them) is useless, or that it doesn’t have a place in the Body, for he later tells us “wherefore bretheren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.” (1. Cor. 14:39) Which is reflected previously in 1 Cor. 12, which talks about all the diverse gits and how they ALL have a place in the Body of Christ.
One last thing, I think that 1. Cor. 14 is really about order, and how to use the gfts appropriately. Look here:
If any man speak in an [unknown] tongue, [let it be] by two, or at the most [by] three, and [that] by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
So the point of 1 Corinthians 14 is summed up thusly, have ORDER in worship and meeting for fellowship. If there is a person gifted with interpretation of tongues, then two or three can speak in tongues, (either of man or of angels, is my understanding). It specifically says we should not forbid the speaking of tongues, and Paul is telling us how to have order in 1 Cor. 14: 27,28 (above).
MInTheGap also claims that the use of the gifts is to edify the church,
I believe that the Bible clearly speaks to the concept that each believer, upon salvation, is given a number of gifts (as few as one, but can be many) of which they are to use to edify the church.
and he goes on to imply tongues (or healing or prophecy) should no longer be in operation, because tongues is for the edification of self, or for a sign unto unbelievers. (He never mentions further why prophecy or healing especially should no longer be in evidence.) My rebuttal to that is found in Ephesians 4:12,13 which reads
For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come into the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:…
You see, here Paul is discussing the gifts/offices of Apostle, Prophet, Evangelist, Pastor and Teacher, just as he starts with those in 1 Cor. 12:28, and he tells us what the gifts are for. “For perfecting the saints… for ministry, for edifiying the whole Body”. Which is to say, perfecting individuals, (tongues of angels, edifies the man) for outreach (tongues as signs to unbelievers) and edifiying the whole body (tongues with interpretation.) And for us to come into unity of faith and knowledge, not division over them.
In 1 Cor 12:28, Paul expresses the order of importance of the gifts, and in verse 31 goes on to tell us to covet the best ones… i.e. apostle, prophet, teachers. We understand that these are the most desireable because they are called “firstly”, “secondly”, “thirdly”, after which Paul stops giving them precise order and says “after that”, and “then”, to describe miracles, and healing and so on, until the least is mentioned, and yes it is TONGUES, I will give MInTheGap credit for calling a spade a spade here, they are the least desirable.
“The issue of Spiritual Gifts is one that divides Christianity multiple ways because of what people expect from a church because of their culture.”
I’d also like to mention that I do not find this to be a cultural issue. And it is not explained in MInTheGap’s article just how this is cultural invasion. Seems to me the cultural issue at hand is if the whole chapeter of 1 Cor. 14 ought to be considered cultural, and no longer appropriate. I mean has this long explanation of what tongues’s uses are and how they are to be ordered to just be considered unnecessary? I highly doubt that. If Christ wanted us to just forget about tongues, and to not use them in services today, I would think He would make that plain, and omit this whole business about how they are to be used in church.
There is so much more I would like to say about this. But I just cannot continue to write and put off my mothering duties. Please leave me any questions or dissents you have in the comments, and I will try to get to it later.
In His Word,
Mrs. Meg Logan
This is a good point of view and a well rounded approach to understanding this subject.
I’ve given my opinion on why the Bible is considered “the perfect” rather than Jesus, over at MInTheGap the first time tongues came up (a couple days ago).
However, tongues isn’t an issue that concerns me overmuch. I really enjoyed your thoughts about it, and your comments about the cultural aspects. I often wonder (not really about tongues per se) but other issues that come up labeled as “cultural” in the Bible.
I also wanted to say, that I drop by your blog every day, and enjoy your posts!
Thanks for writing all of this,
I largely agree with you, but I think there might be a cultural element to tongues too. For instance, if our culture is becoming disatisfied with conventional church structures, and increasingly experiential, could it be that tongues has an appeal beyond what was meant biblically?
BTW, I have added a link to your blog from mine at http://safle.org on my blogroll. Would it be possible to link back to me on yours?
Thanks,
Stephen
Oh thanks Mary! Do I have you on myblogroll yet? If you just leave your URL I will be sure to get you up. I also do not think that these are things we ought to be separated on. I would go to a church that was cessationist, though I think I would struggle there, not over the tongues issue, but the other things that go with cessationist thinking, like prophecy having ended, and healing not happening. Both things I have witnessed myself. (well i have witnessed tongues too, but it isn’t super important to my life…) I think I must have missed why you think the perfect is the Word, if you know where it is maybe you could have it as a link in either a post here or there, i tend to read all of the new ones, so… that would help me out a bunch thanks.
Thanks for the comments Stephen, I added you to the blogroll. I read your blog too.
Mrs Meg Logan
Thanks,
Stephen
Whoa… what a mess.
What do I do now? If I make it a point to refute all this, it will be a long post, not a comment; and I really hate it when people do that on my blog. Also, there is probably very little profit in dealing exhautively with this issue with you Meg, for our last exchange on this matter was MOST UNFRUITFUL.
I will therefore only make these three points, which are irrefutable, by any measure of logic and experience.
1- If you believe that prophecies are still in operation today, then you most certainly do NOT believe the Bible is complete. Either prophecy is complete, or it is not. There is no such thing as “small p” prophecy and “big p” prophecy. If prophecies (which are revelations from God) are being uttered today, then we should be adding pages to the Bible. They are, after all, the revelations of God.
This, of course, is heresy and blasphemy.
2- Glass. Check in “Strong’s Concordance” or any other Greek lexicon of New Testament words what the word translated “glass” really is. You will find that the word is “esoptron” which is: A MIRROR. A mirror which was not made of glass, but one made of polished metal, like brass or silver (I actually got to see one of these at an exhibit of Old Testament objects a few years ago). It’s NOT we see Jesus through a messed up glass! Rather, it’s the early Christians couldn’t get the whole Gospel picture and what it meant for them because the prophecies were incomplete.
The correct interpretation is plain: without the Bible, people had to rely on spoken, incomplete prophecies which would only give them a partial picture of who they were (in a spiritual sense), what God was like, and what He required. With the complete, inerrant Bible however, we see perfectly.
You will notice, that this interpretation fits 100% with v.11, which is always an indication of a good interpretation.
3- Assemblies that practice these “spiritual gifts” are always poor in Scriptural knowledge. ALWAYS. I spent 5-6 years in charismatic circles which included a variety of Pentecostal churches and Assemblies of God and not one of them taught me any significant and deep doctrines of the Word. Quite simply, they are not Bible-people.
And please don’t take offence to this Meg, but the reality of the matter is, I have been used to teach you Scripture, not vice-versa. From Calvinism to Dispensationalism (if memory serves, you didn’t even know that there were such a group called Dispensationalists and Amillenialists), you inquired of me. Now you have to admit, it’s pretty strange to think that “a people who are not used of the Holy Spirit” to speak in tongues would grow in more knowledge of the Truth than those “who the Spirit is causing to speak in tongues/prophecy… etc.
So, I’m totally NOT going to argue over this. “Set me straight” in your own eyes if you wish, it’s your blog after all. But be sure of this, this post is unsound and unbiblical, and as your brother in Christ, I HAD to tell you.
Ignore this at your own risk and peril.
Rand
And please don’t take offence to this Meg, but the reality of the matter is, I have been used to teach you Scripture, not vice-versa.
Meg, I use this as an example to illustrate what I meant earlier when I said your faith was self-serving. Do you see how Rand worships not the Bible, but his exclusive interpretation of it? And there will be no convincing him that his interpretation is wrong. Ultimately, what this amounts to is worship of one’s own mind. Now you, Meg, are a little more open to criticism of your interpretations than most, but I predict that the more time you spend with people like Rand, the less willing you will be to see the failings of your readings, and the more you will stop worshiping the bible and start worshiping only what you *think* the bible says. There’s a subtle but important distinction there. I’ll elaborate:
Someone who worships any book, including the bible, just as it is, will quest to always read new interpretations, new translations, study the languages of the original texts, and always come to new interpretations with an open mind and heart, never allowing themselves to grow too attached to any single interpretation, but always understanding that they’re not in a position to know what the original authors intended, and can only formulate best guesses, based on the information available. Someone else, like Rand, who is more interested in proving their own superiority to themselves than in actually learning will never be able to let go of their favoured interpretation, because that would mean admitting that they had been wrong, had been following a possibly mistaken doctrine, and had therefore not been superior to others. Rand is interested only in being superior to those who follow different doctrines than him. I hope you are not also like that, Meg.
“Ultimately, what this amounts to is worship of one’s own mind.”
Considering the source of the above statement… man! that’s funny!
Jake is right about one thing though Meg… you have the fundamentalist on one side, and the unrepentant queer on the other. One is telling you there is a correct interpretation, one is telling you that you never can really know the Truth.
Your choice.
Rand
ps: Jake, your deceptiveness is remarkable. I have seen you coming a mile away, but surely others have not. You serve your master well.
Rand, I’d like to know what you think was untrue about what I wrote.
Oh dear oh Dear….
Well Rand, I appreciate your comments, because actually you are the first person in this discussion to use scripture and interpret it consistently verse to verse. When I was responding to MInTHeGap, he never was able to really explain how what he saw as true was proven by scriptures other than verse 8 and 9. He completely refused to discuss verse 11, i suppose because he could not rationalize them together.
I am not sure I completely agree with you yet however. I know what you think though, and I totally respect your willingness to show me scripture, and in fact I appreciate it. Though I will say, while you are right that some churches who practice this do not teach the deeper doctrines, I am now in a church that teaches straight from the Word verse by verse, and (BOY I WAS MISSING OUT), but that is besides the point…. they are a deeper doctrine church, and they hold to tongues and prophecy still functioning today.
With regards to prophecy, when I pray, I often “feel” or “hear” (however you try to explain it, it is not well done) the prompting of the Holy Spirit. You mention that you think that prophecy in any form ought to be written into the Bible, but then jeez I woudl be writing a lot of stuff, and I have this feeling so would you. We both agree that the Holy Bible is completed, but would I say it is the complete revelation of God? uhm, no. I really don’t see how that could be true. GOd is far to immense to be contained within the pages of a book, even though it is a living book as it were. Seems to me that I recall some scriptures talking about how there are still mysteries about God, and how can we know Him? The only one able to Know His heart is the Holy Spirit, which thankfully resides within us, and can reveal more directly to our spirits. To deny this would be to deny the Holy Spirit’s power.
Another point is that MInTheGap seems to think that healing is no longer practiced today. This is also not found in scripture, he has yet to show me one place that would say that all sign gifts, or healing specifically have been ceased. Yet he remains skeptical simply because no one has ever gone through a hospital healing everyone at will. (Which I might point out Jesus didn’t do either.)
As for tongues, prophecy and word of knowledge, I guess I might be open to hearing more of a sound reasoning regarding these gifts ceasing today, (If it is indeed sound. ) They are not simply sign gifts as often supposed, but you mention rightly that they are revelatory gifts. But what I have heard so far (from others) is not leaning on Scripture but on experience, and on someone else’s written doctrine. I cannot lean on Calvin, neither on the Fundamental Evangelical Association (or what ever they are called), I can lean only on Jesus and His unfailing Word.
So I encourage you friend to reason with me a bit longer. Perhaps I may be won over yet.
and Jake, There IS a right answer here, it may be that Rand is correct, and it may be that I am. BUt once that answer is revealed and I am convinced, I will no longer entertain “theories” on it. I may refute them, but I will no longer be interested in reasoning it out. There is the possiblilty that I would be wrong in one of my understandings, but I trust the the Holy Spirit would be able to soften my resolve if I were, as He has done so many times in the past, starting first with my hardness against Him His Son and His power. You see, God is able to “finish the work He started in me” and bring me unto righteousness. And, I would wager, that if Rand were wrong on this issue, God would deal with him in due time. I really have no reason to worry about it at all. If his mind is closed wrongly, well then God will deal with him. I pray that God will deal with you quickly, because you are still walking in daily sin, and the hour is drawing near in which you will have to make a choice, I hope that you will make the decision before it is too late. Your sin separates you from His forgiveness, grace and fellowship… not to mention without repentance and believing on the Gospel you will surely perish into Hell for all eternity. Which I would never wish on anyone, not even a man who abused children. (which I would consider far worse than what sin you commit, though I might add that God considers all sin terrible and worthy of the fires of Hell even the sins of the mind.) I am still working on that article for you regarding why I believe the Bible is true. I have a draft of it as we speak, but it is hard to write because there is so much to say, and I am trying to revise it to something manageable, and short, and then refer you to other longer more complete essays on the subject. For there are many many good reasonings out there regarding this.
Mrs. Meg Logan
Rand, I have another question… You mention that you think the mirror is referring to knowing ourselves? For then (before the Cannon of Scripture) they saw themselves darkly as in a mirror (yes I did know the word meant this, and precisely how cloudy they were too.), but now with the perfect Word come they see themselves clearly?
“For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.”
I don’t understand how that lines up with the last part about knowing even as we are also known. You see, it can’t “then I will know myself even as I am also known” for that makes no logical sense, it make more sense to say “for then I will know God even as He knows me… that is completely”. And of course the only time we will know Him completely is when we are made perfect and abide in Heaven with Him forever, without any sin to blurr our vision.
As for Calvinism, I am still not a Calvinist, preferring to align myself only to Christ, I have not taken a side in this arguement. I do not think I am Arminian either, I think both of them are just awee bit too far in opposite directions. I think more Calvinistically than not in general I suppose… and did recently read something that made Calvinism make far more sense to me… wich I could remember what it was, something by and old dead guy LOL…
Meg
Oh Jake, one of those things of which I am absolutely convinced and will not argue or reason out any longer is that Jesus is the Son of God, He died a painful death on a cross to PAY FOR MY SINS, because without a perfect atonement I was destined for Hell, and I could not pay for myself, because I was not perfect. I believe He died and three days later rose again. (and this is supported by other books besides the Bible, in case you were wondering) I believe that the ONLY way to spend eternity with God is to believ on the saving power of Christ on the Cross… and His blood shed for me. Repent and believe also before it is too late!
Meg
I don’t have an opinion to give on the subject at hand. Its just something that I don’t understand and I go with my hubby’s view that its confusing and God doesn’t need us to know everything.
I did want to compliment you on a well written post.
Go Meg! Way to stir up controversy!
My spiritual gift is diffusing tense situations with humor. Not sure it really works in the blogosphere as well as it does in person.
BTW, as long as I’m here, congrats on your party!
ROFL… well, I wouldn’t like to boast about causing controversy, since God doesn’t like us to quarrel over little things. But thanks for the enthusiasm. I’m glad you are reading.
MML
Rand,
In which case, could you point me to the prophecies of the daughters of Philip the evangelist? (Acts 21:9), or indeed the prophecies of the churches such as the church at Corinth – to which Paul wrote: “Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy”. What about the Ephesian Christians who prophesied when the Holy Spirit came upn them? (Acts 19:6).
It is one thing to say that the only prophecy is that which we have in scripture – it is quite another thing to support that very view from scripture.
You seem to be aware of the view (as expounded by such luminaries as Martyn Lloyd Jones, Wayne Grudem, J I Packer and indeed puritans such as Richard Baxter et al.) that prophecy is direct personal informative revelation (some of them would put it differently). But you dismiss the view too quickly. There is plenty of evidence in the New Testament that this was exactly the New Testament expectation of prophecy.
It is not seeing through a glass – it is seeing in a polished metal mirror that gives a poor reflection of the true image. On the other hand, when we see face to face, then we shall know fully – even as we are fully known. It is bad exegesis to suppose that the Corinthian Christians would not have naturally interpreted this to refer to seeing Christ face to face.
Not so plain that it occurred to Calvin, nor really to anyone else who has not first assumed that gifts do not (and cannot) persist in the Church today.
Firstly I think this observation is wrong, based on a too limited sample (although I find some sympathy with your view… more on that another time).
Secondly, the argument is ad hominem. We can accept or reject the possibility of persistence of the gifts based on your other arguments, but your third argument attacks the character of Charismatic congregations, without actually taking issue with the doctrine at all.
If I was writing a little over 170 years ago, I might note that the only congregation practising these gifts was the Irvingite “Catholic Apostolic Church”. I could argue (rightly) that this Church is unsound and preaching error, and that the prophesyings were not a true gift of prophecy. But this would say nothing about whether the gifts had ceased with the apostolic age or not.
I happen to believe that we are seeing very little of the true spiritual gifts in today’s Church. But from scripture I am convinced that cessationism as a doctrine is wrong.
As for your suggestion that you are right on this because you have taught Meg on other issues – this argument is also ad hominem. It is quite possible that you are correct on many issues that Meg has not considered, but incorrect on this issue. Indeed, it is infeasible that you are right on every point of doctrine. That is not a problem – argue your position. But the argument that you are right because you have taught Meg on other issues is fallacious.
Rand,
I have one question. If prophecy no longer exists, then what is Acts 2:17-18 talking about when it states, “And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy”
If this does in fact state that in the last days, after the canonization of the Bible, prophecy will exist; how can 1 Corinthians 13:8 be stating that prophesy, or tongues have ceased before the last days?
As stated in my last comment, I do not have the time or energy to debate all this with you all. There are volumes and volumes of books out there by men who are way more eloquent and knowledgeable than I on this issue, you should seek your answers there. My comment was not a challenge, it was a statement of fact.
Sadly, my statement was disregarded by weak and poor arguments such as “what about Philip’s daughters” and “what about the last days”. What about the prophecies of Philip’s daughters? The prophecies were Scripture. What if it wasn’t? Well, if they were found today, there would be no reason to not add them to the Bible. Why? Because they are revelations from God, just like the Bible. What about Acts 2:17-18 (which btw is taken from Joel 2)? It is fulfilled. How do I know that? The apostle Peter himself states it in Acts 2:16! The days of the apostles were part of the “Last Days”. There is no argument here.
Look… there is a reason why I don’t go on “Catholic” sites to argue against Romanism. There is a reason why I don’t go to Arminians sites to argue for Calvinism. There is a reason why I don’t go to Amillenial sites to argue Dispensationalism. Why? Because it is unprofitable. I have given you three arguments, and despite your resistance, they are good arguments; definitely worthy of serious thought and continued research. I hope that this will become a reality in your lives, and soon.
Here is a quick link I have found:
http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/articles/full.asp?id=40|40|43
Now that article still isn’t enough to really give you a firm grasp on this issue, but it’s a start.
The fact of the matter is all this can quickly become “words to no profit”, to the “subverting of the hearers/readers” (2 Timothy 2:14). Of that, I must be mindful.
I hope you all do your homework, as I have when I left Pentecostalism.
Rand
Dear Rand,
Saying an argument is weak and demonstrating it is so are two different things. If you do not wish to take issue with the arguments, then it is your right to refrain from response. However, I do not think it is reasonable to simply state a view is wrong and expect that to settle a matter.
You appear to assume prophecy in the NT is similar to prophecy in the OT, such as the prophecies of Joel and Elijah et al. However, most of the NT does not fit that model. The gospels contain prophecies from Jesus, but they are largely historical narratives. Paul’s letters are occasioned documents, except for Romans which is a theological discourse. The other epistles are also occasioned, and really only the Revelation of Jesus Christ to John fits the model of prophecy found in the OT.
And yet we read in Acts (another historical narrative) of Ephesian christians who prophecied (but Luke did not bother tell us what they prophesied) and likewise Philip’s daughters. We see Paul urging Corinthian Christians to desire that they may prophesy, because in that way someone entering their assembly would have the secrets of their hearts laid bare.
I believe that Old Testament prophecy also often followed this pattern, but what we have recorded are the major prophecies. We read that “The word of the Lord came to Joel, son of Pethuel”. But how did Joel know the word of the Lord? Only through prayer and a life of devotion to God. Had Joel never heard the word of the Lord before? Was there no prior revelation?
We are not given the answer to that, but if we look at – say – Elijah or Jonah, we see God speaking in both the macro and micro situations.
You say you hope we have done our homework. I have indeed studied the issue at some length. What I have discovered is no Biblical warrant for assuming the gifts will have ceased even though I don’t believe that much of what we see in the church today are true gifts of the Spirit.
You say you left pentecostalism. Are you allowing your experience of pentecostalism to inform your theology? The Bible does not say that the gifts will cease until the end of the age.
(Of course, you hint that you have embraced dispensationalism, which might make you interpret the end of the age differently. I’ll leave that issue alone for now).
You say you gave three arguments. I gave three refutations. You state that they are good arguments. I disagree (in particular, number 3 was ad hominem as I demonstrated).
If you do not wish to debate the issue, that is your choice. Please don’t persist with saying that charismatics, or those that hold to such a theology are “not Bible people” though. To make such a statement and refuse to defend it is an unfair and uncharitable attack.
Regards,
Stephen
Hey Meg!
I think you did a great job with these scriptures; my view is the same as yours on this issue. I have always found “the ‘perfect’ is the canon” to be very weak. Stephen and Doug, thanks for your input on this.
So, Meg, where are you guys going to church now?
We go to a Calvary Chapel church. It is just two minutes up the street (by car) yeehaw! We are really enjoying it. The teaching is fantastic, and straight from the Word. Very nice.
Im so happy for your pregnancy! Congrats!! I cant wait to see photos of the little blessing when he finally arrives.
When are you due again??
MML
I’m due in January.
That’s so great that you guys have found a solid church; it’s a tall order these days, it seems to me!
Meg: Jake, There IS a right answer here
I never said there wasn’t. I said you weren’t in a position to know what it was. There’s a very important difference.
Repent and believe also before it is too late!
Give me compelling evidence that 1) there is a god, 2) s/he inspired the writings of the bible, and 3) that we can trust him/her to tell the truth in the bible, and I MIGHT consider it. But only might. For clarification of my third point, read “Why do we bother” an old post of mine. Also, watch for an upcoming post about the pure evil that Calvinists attribute to their god.
*edited by moderator*
Jake, It is quite interesting getting to know you. Though I am beginning to think that no matter what evidence any of us Christians provide you you will find reason to disregard it. You say specifically that even if all of your questions could be answered to your satisfaction, and if the evidence were supplied quite rationally, you are still not willing to repent. It is precisely this heart attitude that will keep you from seeing the Kingdom of God. It is also this attitude which makes me less interested in showing you what I have already discovered to be true. Because you really aren’t interested in the Truth, you are interested in refuting it. You are seeking any reason you can find to argue away the presence of God, or if there is a God, you look for reasons to doubt that He is good and loving and telling the truth, so that you can continue to justify yourself and your sin.
You are already aware that there is a God, that He has already presented Himself to the whole world, and that everyone of us is convicted within our own hearts. None of us will have an excuse in that terrible day, when we go before His judgement. He has sent many people to show you the truth, you keep reading my blog and Rand’s and who knows what other fundamentalist Christian blogs because some part of you wants to be conviced so that you could be restored to the God you know loves you and longs for your soul.
I would argue that you do not want to acknowledge that Jesus is Lord, because you realize what that would do to your lifestyle. You are well aware of what He requires of you. And you love your sin more than you love Truth, therefore you seek any reason to appeal to your mind, that you might justify yourself before your god, who is YOURSELF.
You would do well to think on this carefully, to examine your heart to see if I may be right. Do not just quip back at me, really think on this and wrestle with it, to determine if it is true. The devil will do all he can to keep you from God’s grace and forgiveness… he will set arguements in your mind to keep you from believeing what I say. If you have even a little thought that what I say is true, then listen to it, it is the voice of truth whispering to your soul through all the garbage your soul is filled with. God’s voice is still and small.
Once again, I argue that you do not need any more convincing or evidendce, you simply need to CHOOSE to believe. You need to DECIDE to put sin away from you, and to trust Jesus for your salvation and redemption. He can make you clean, and it is a change you will FEEL within you. The weight of sin is one we do not realize until we are set free of it…
Praying for you,
Mrs Meg Logan
You are already aware that there is a God
No, I’m really not. No one has ever presented me with even a shred of evidence. I’m still waiting for your post on why you believe the bible to be the literal word of a supreme being. Every time I ask a Christian to justify that assertion with evidence I get nothing.
This is one of those misconceptions about atheists that I talked about in that post of mine.
You say specifically that even if all of your questions could be answered to your satisfaction, and if the evidence were supplied quite rationally, you are still not willing to repent.
The reason for this is very simple. If there is a God as described in the Bible then he is a cruel, unjust, and downright evil. Even if it were proven to me that such a being existed, I would be constitutionally incapable of offering it my worship. The very idea sickens me.
Hey Meg, I’ve elaborated on my above point here.
*edited by moderator*