Is what is presented as tongues today demonic [Archive]

abiyah

08-17-2006, 03:00 PM

Ezekiel WROTE:
-------------------------------------------------
QUOTE: "....., is this fake tongues, unknown utterances, the work of Satan and his, or just an over active imagination crossed with misunderstanding scripture..." END QUOTE
-------------------------------------------------

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gifGood Morning Ezekiel !

And Peace unto you. Since you are asking for opinions I guess I will tell you my own thoughts regarding the ' speaking in tongues 'has it is thought to be in many, many present day churches.

I will share a little story with you..... when I was younger, ohhh about ... seventeen or eighteen, maybe younger, one of my best friends mom would have me go to church with them. Now, right about the first few times in going, I noticed that some people were talking and some seemingly in a trance, yet it sounded very, very odd, as it was something that I had never EVER heard anyone do in my own family's church. So I asked my friend... what are those people doing ? As my intial vibe was not a good one, I found it to be somewhat 'creepy'. And she replied.... " their speaking in tongues ? " And I thought wow, as I never heard this before. So I leaned over and asker her.... " What are they saying ? " And she said... " I don't know, they are talking to the angels " And I asked her... " why can we not understand or know what they are saying ? " and she relpied... " I don't know, The Holy Spirit is speaking through them. " And well, at that time being completely Biblically illiterate and ignorant, I believed her, and really thought that The Holy Spirit was speaking through them, and that they were talking with the angels.

Now another thing that I found disturbing was that when they would get the music going there, for praise, that some people would start jumping like uncontrolable, and moving around in a way that I can only describe as an epileptic seizure, but while they were on their feet, because they would shake, pop, and jump, and they seemed as though they were not in control of their own bodies, and some while at the same time rattling on at the mouth, and what they speak could not be understood. I found it to be frightening. So I asked my friend.... " what are they doing ?, what's going on with those people ?". And she told me this.... " they have The Holy Spirit ". And I thought... really ? Again, this was something I had NEVER seen in my own family's church. I also saw women who wore all white & white gloves, they looked like nurses of old when they use to dress in all white, and they would stand around the church to help people from falling or hurting themselves when they got what my friend told me was The Holy Spirit. And when they had revivals... some of the people that would go to the front of the alter to get a healing, the preacher would touch them and they would fall down ?

Since being a student of The Word, I see that nothing such as this is written in The Word of The LORD. This type of behavior is not spoken of
in The Bible, especially this jumping, out of control behavior. So my opinion then Ezekiel to your question would have to be, yes I think and find this behavior to be demonic. The babel out of their mouths, and the uncontrolable jumping around. I always sensed that something was not right about it all, but at that time, I believed my friend; but the reality of it at that time in my life is that I greatly lacked The Truth of our Father's Word, and did not know the difference.

Agape,

Abiyah

arron

08-18-2006, 04:43 PM

my belief and that of GODS WORD THE BIBLE is that the gifts are real, they have not been taken away. yes there are those who abuse the use of tongues. i have been in services where the gift of tongues were manifested. the interpretation followed and what was said came to pass or in some cases it went to an individual and they said it was true and then it came to pass at which time they testified to it. many do not beleive and there fore do not receive this gift but it ios real and there is nothing demonic about it. of course there are false ones just as there are false preachers who "put " on and make a real mock of GOD but GOD IS NOT MOCKED. i truly believe that the gifts are real for today.

skooter942000

08-18-2006, 06:24 PM

ALMIGHTY GOD does not allow BABEL.
- Not in HIS CHURCH.

The post explains things pretty well.

TONGUES MERELY means LANGUAGE (PERIOD).

Read the verses in this MANNER.
- ALL of them in the NT.

- SUCH as:

1Cr 12:10 To another the working of miracles;
to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits;
to another [divers] kinds of tongues;
to another the interpretation of tongues:

1Cr 12:10 To another the working of miracles;
to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits;
to another [divers] kinds of ==> LANGUAGES;
to another the interpretation of ==> LANGUAGES:

- This is where the word comes from.

Strong's #1100 glossa / gloce-sah' of uncertain affinity;
the tongue; by implication, a language (specially,
====> one naturally unacquired):--tongue.

(ADDED BY SKOOTER942000/Don)
A LANGUAGE NOT ACQUIRED NATURALLY MEANS ,
(Another LEARNED LANGUAGE).
- Not ones own NATURAL LANGUAGE.

[Thayer's Greek]

tongues

glossa {gloce-sah'}

TDNT Reference Root Word
TDNT - 1:719,123 of uncertain affinity
Part of Speech
n f
Outline of Biblical Usage

1) the tongue, a member of the body,
an organ of speech

2) a tongue

a) the language or dialect used by
a particular people distinct from that of other nations

===> the language or dialect used by Other Nations
====> (Means just that).

Peoples of the EARTH.
Not a LANGUAGE of THE ANGELIC HOST.

They understand all of our Languages.
They are supernatural after all.

OKhttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

-----------------------------------------

The PENTECOSTAL LANGUAGE (Or TONGUE).

This is a TONGUE that ALL PEOPLE WOULD CLEARLY Understand.

Acts 2:8
And how hear we every man in our own tongue (LANGUAGE),
wherein we were born?

Their Natural BIRTH LANGUAGE.

The HOLY SPIRIT INTERPRETED FOR ALL.
Even down to the Exact same Dialect as the HEARER.

- this is not an Unknown Language (I.E. BABEL).

What others do in some churches,
are Speaking in an unknown language,
is not an actual Language , it is babel.

It is UNKNOWN, for it is NOT a real LANGUAGE.

Bippy dee puppidee yuppy dee abba lowla qualle puh.

- Gibberish is just that!!!

They are full of confusion when they do this.
This is not the GIFT from GOD.
Though they believe it is.
It is something else.

- But it is NOT FROM THE LORD!!!

There is nothing UNKNOWN about the WORDS
that would be coming forth.
(As in the verse above from Acts 2http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif.

ALL would clearly understand the SPEECH.
- EVERYONE!!!

A Gift of TONGUES (1Cor Chapter 12) ,
means ONE who is learned
in other Languages, (More than ONE).

Schooled in more than ONE LANGUAGE.

- That's IT!!!!

Say Spanish and English and French.
Some are gifted to speak in all three.

But do all peoples of the EARTH?

(I don't think so).

- It is a GIFT.

....To be continued.

skooter942000

08-18-2006, 06:28 PM

- Continuing

You can teach IN All Three Languages,
(If you are a Teacher with this GIFT).

If you are a teacher, speaking only English,
you go to a Foreign country, you had better take
an interpreter with you.

- Or they will not understand your SPEECH!!!

1Cr 14:27 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.

1Cr 14:28 But if there be no interpreter,
let him keep silence in the church; and let him
speak to himself, and to God.

But if a English speaking person
(Who does not understand Spanish),
is hearing only in Spanish ,(It would be Confusion to him).

- GET IT?

- it would not make a lick of sense to you.

The True PENTECOSTAL TONGUE (LANGUAGE), can be
clearly understood by Everyone that is in listening
range.

- Understand?

This is the TRUE Pentecostal LANGUAGE (TONGUE).
- The REAL CLOVEN TONGUE that shall go forth.

WHICH MEANS IT GOES OUT IN MANY DIRECTIONS AT ONCE.
That's what CLOVEN MEANS.

- IT IS DIVINE.
- ONLY GOD CAN CAUSE THIS TO BE...

GOD'S ELECT shall use it (To speak out against the Spurious
Jesus) when he is here claiming to be god/christ,
in the Very Near FUTURE.

Just as in Acts Chapter TWO.
- Same GIFT here.

[Book of MATTHEW]

10:16
Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves:
be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

10:17
But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils,
and they will scourge you in their synagogues;

10:18
And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake,
for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.

10:19
==> But when they deliver you up, <==
===> take no thought how or what <===
====> ye shall speak: <====
===> for it shall be given you in that same hour <===
======> what ye shall speak. <======

10:20
===> For it is not ye that speak, <====
===> but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you. <===

10:21
And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death,
and the father the child: and the children shall rise up
against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.

10:22
And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake:
but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

- Cross check REVELATION 2:10 (The CHURCH of the FIG)/Smyrna

GOD'S ELECT shall be Delivered up to the FALSE MESSIAH,
as a WITNESS.

(RE:CAP)

[1.]

One GIFT is a LANGUAGE that ALL can CLEARLY understand.
(The HOLY SPIRIT) Allows or DOES this.
That's the TRUE PENTECOSTAL LANGUAGE OR TONGUE. (Acts 2)

If you had a room full of Foreigners.
Everyone that only speaks their ONE Natural
LANGUAGE.

ALL WOULD UNDERSTAND WHAT IS BEING SAID.

EVERYONE ,(ALL AT THE SAME TIME)!!!!!!
In the Very Dialect that you were raised.

If you cannot understand it, -(IT IS FAKE)!!!

...to be continued

skooter942000

08-18-2006, 06:31 PM

...Continuing

[2.]

The Second GIFT (Is one learned in more than ONE LANGUAGE).

SIMPLE
SIMPLE

These can take the Gospel Forward to Others.
Say to Mexico, France, Iran (Wherever).

- To sow The GOSPELhttp://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif
-To take the TRUTH to the WORLD.

Remember the TOWER of BABEL?

http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Gen/Gen011.html#9

At that point in time (ALL PEOPLE HAD ONE LANGUAGE).

That all changed that day.

BABEL is CONFUSION.

- Don't BE DECEIVED by anyone!!!!

:JESUS CHRIST: - Is The "LIVING WORD"...

In {HIS} Service

.....Don <*))><

=========================================

smyrna

08-18-2006, 07:50 PM

Arron claims there is something legitimate in the claim of speaking in tongues today. The fact that he admits there is a need for an interpreter is just like admitting that what he has witnessed is all fake, all of it.

Arron like so many others who believe this nonsense, have to gloss over the miracle described in Acts 2. The actual miracle was that the people who listened to the Apostles as they were filled with the Holy Spirirt Who spoke through them heard their speech in their own individual languages, and thus did not need an interpreter.

As for that gibberish they call the miarcle of tongues in some Churches today, all that needs to be done is to get them to agree to provide two interpreters, and one speaker. Record the gibberish and play it to the "interpreters" each in their own room. If they don't come out with the same interpretation, then it is fake, which of course it is.

(Message edited by smyrna on August 18, 2006)

david_munson

09-19-2006, 03:56 PM

What really needs to be done is to have the congregation return to "decently and in order." as the Word of God says.

Two or three at most and none without an interpretor.
The gifts are still in operation today but are seriously abused for fleshly entertainment by thrill seekers.

People need to study and see the proper use of the giftings and then hold them in honor instead of using them to exalt themselves above others.
(I speak in tongues,I'm more spiritual than you)
I've seen this type of stupidity many times over.

I have gifts that I operate in but not at will.
When the Lord has me use them it's to glorify Him and edify or warn others in the process.
I take it very seriously and dispise the games that some play with them.

At least 80% of what is called tongues is fleshly excitement.
How does that benefit the body of Christ?
Paul said five words understood where better than all the tongues that could be spoken.
(my paraphrase)
I know a man who spoke polish (through the gift of tongues) to a man he did not know.My friend spoke only english and is a simple man.
The Polish gentlemen turned to Christ because of what my friend said to him in his "own" language.
This is the gift that is not for the believer (though he is moved to use it) but the unbeliever as Paul has told us.

God is not the author of confusion.

}

arron

09-19-2006, 04:17 PM

amen munson... i do the gifts as GOD SPIRIT leads but never of my self. the bible says for an interpreter to give so that is whay i beleive in that too and not as symrna says that it is fake for it is real and those who believe as she he does are false themselves

angie0401

09-19-2006, 04:51 PM

So arron, what language do you and the people in your congregation speak (when you are speaking in tongues)? Russian? Greek? Latin? Spanish?

I believe in the gift of tongues, as it was manifested on the day of Pentecost and in the example that David posted above, where someone spoke in their native tongue and another heard it their own (different) native tongue. NOT in some "unknown" language that is not spoken anywhere on earth and that no one has ever before heard. If that's what you're doing arron, you have no Biblical foundation for it.

smyrna

09-19-2006, 05:07 PM

One thing I've always wondered about those who believe in speaking in tongues:

What have all these people been saying? If they truly believe the Holy Spirit is speaking through them, wouldn't they think it important enough to share it all with us?

Hey, maybe we would all convert to Pentacostals if they let us in on what the Holy Spirit is saying to our Pentecostal brothers and sisters.

Since all these folks say they speak in tongues all the time, certainly there are plenty of things they can tell us the Holy Spirit told them.

So how about it? Don't tell us we are unbelievers and don't deserve to be told. After all, those who where there on Pentecost Sunday
(Read Acts 2)didn't believe what they were hearing. But they heard it.

So let's go, I'm real curious to hear what the Holy Spirit says to all you Pentecostals. Come on Arron, let's hear it.

arron

09-19-2006, 06:23 PM

go to a pentecostal church with a beleiveing heart and mind and soul and listen to what is said.

smyrna

09-19-2006, 06:41 PM

I can't understand senseless babble. And if that babble can't be understood unless there is an interpreter, then it is not the Holy Spirit. Why don't you read Acts 2 before you tell anyone that your speaking in tongues is a true gift?

terluvire

09-19-2006, 06:43 PM

Arron,

When I was younger, my whole family went to a Penecostal church. I'll tell you what...those peoples babbling, all at one time, scared the crap out of me!! No one could make any sense out of it. No one knew what was being said even if they said they did. Anyone could say it meant anything and no one would be any the wiser.

The Holy Spirit in the book of Acts did not opereate the way people supposively speak in tongues at these Penecostal churches.

arron

09-19-2006, 10:56 PM

they do not all speak at one in tongues ato our church. one speaks and we have an interpreter some one who is filled with THE SPIRIT and get the interpretation form THE LORD

kimberlyfredrick

09-19-2006, 11:54 PM

Terluvire, I had the same thoughts as you on this subject. Of what I have experienced, I was left me feeling "spooky". Not at all feeling surrounded by the Holy Spirit. Of those that I saw doing this, they were either faking(which I think is blashphemy) or it was demonic. I do not doubt that the Holy Spirit is at work in this manner. I for one have just not experienced it. Most of what I have seen veered far from any biblical interpretation.

terluvire

09-20-2006, 05:17 AM

Arron, you should have your church members do what Smyrna said awhile back. Have someone tape the "unknown tongue", and then have 2 interpretors go into seperate rooms and write down their interpretations. If the 2 don't match up, and I'm certain it won't, they are speaking out of their own delusion.

That would be good test. And if any were afraid to try it, well...that should tell you something. Right?

arron

09-20-2006, 02:44 PM

the interpretations are only given(by THE SPIRIT )and si for that time there and are not to be examined like a doctor. if you have faith that is what is necessary

david_munson

09-20-2006, 04:55 PM

I don't think it very fair to have Arron tell the Holy Spirit how to operate in a meeting.

Being sensitive to the Holy Spirit is what's needed.
I know that when a tongue that is not given by the Lord is spoken aloud,I get a very unconfortable sensation about it.My spirit does not bare witness to it's validity.

Arron has said that tongues,though allowed to be spoken,fall under the order that Paul has laid out.
Do you folks disbelieve the gifts because of thrill seekers abusing them?

The gifts are given to help build up the body of Christ.Why doubt that they are being used today?
At least by "some" in their proper order.

Dave

}

smyrna

09-20-2006, 05:23 PM

I didn't understand your post Dave.
All I've ever said about the "gift" of tongues is that claimed exhibits of such phenomena do not ever match the description of the miracle chronicled in Acts 2. That is all we need to know.

I don't even know why this thread was started on the SC forum. It really belongs in the Pentecostal threads. The SC does not practice tongues, for the same reason I just described.

In short, there is no "gift of tongues" unless you want to claim that all children under the age of six months, and Democratic speech writers have it.
Get my drift? It's all senseless babble.

arron

09-20-2006, 05:30 PM

then i suppose that you do not believe in 1 cor. where it tells of the gift of tongues.
since you know so much about everything there is to know i am suprised that you have not read that. symrna

smyrna

09-20-2006, 06:15 PM

I've read I Corinthians 12:10, many times. It speaks of languages, not of some unkown tongue.
I know you have been brainwashed (which wouldn't take long) to believe in some unkown tongue,but it merely is referring to other languages other than a person's own native language.
Of course, because I do know so much about everything http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif I also know that it is an issue that has been debated for many years, and will not be settled here, that's for sure.

I would never consider any other explanation or claim of speaking in tongues unless it perfectly matched the miracle of the Apostles described in Acts 2. Anything different than that is not legitimate, based on Scripture.

No interpreter, everyone heard what was said in their own language, and that does not occur in any Church or anyhwere else in the world today. Period.

david_munson

09-20-2006, 07:56 PM

Smyrna,
it does occur in many places today.I have a friend that spoke in tongues as I have posted above.He spoke the language of the Polish people to a man that the Lord led him to witness to and it led him to the Lord.
My friend does not speak anything but english,so I conclude that he spoke in the gift of tongues as it was meant to be used.
I have several gifts,none of which I can will into operation.It is the Holy Spirit that uses them in His workings with the body for His intended purpose which is to glorify Christ.

Dave

}

david_munson

09-20-2006, 08:00 PM

I almost forgot,
if you are interested do a google on "kundalini."
You will be surprised at the source of the tongues that are not from the Lord.
Let me know what you think.

Dave

}

smyrna

09-20-2006, 08:09 PM

I think the tongues you are referring to is called xenoglossia.(spontaneously speaking a foreign but known language that you previously never could) That is not the stuff we see in the Pentecostal movement.

That is glossalia,(senseless babble) and that has been debated for many years, as wheher it comes from God or is due to other forces or even dementia.

Kundalini is that not tied to pagan mysticism?

david_munson

09-20-2006, 08:19 PM

Yes,
in a big way.
Shakra Kundalini.
It is a snake within the soul that is tapped into by submission to a spirit that is not of God.
That is the simplest explanation I can give.
It's seriously Demonic.
It's about 80% of what passes for tongues today.

Dave

}

smyrna

09-20-2006, 08:39 PM

The best work I've ever read about mystical phenomena within the Christian spectrum is Mystical Phenomena:Compared with their Human and Diabolical Counterparts by Mgsr. Albert Farges
I believe it recently had a new printing, but originally was written in 1927.

A treatise on Mystical Theology, Monsignor Farges compares various Divine spiritual gifts with manifestations of both human and diabolical natures.

It is a very interesting and thorough treatment of miracles, but much of the first half of the book speaks about prayer, from which, the Msgr. says, is a prerequisite for the impartation of true spiritual gifts.

He wrote about some of the miraculous phenomena known to Christian mysticism, such as supernatural fasts, which were even witnessed to by doctors and non-Catholics.

I don't remember if he covered Stigmata, but I can look if you are interested.

But basically he states that for every spiritual gift,there is a diabolical counterpart, or counterfeit. In certain cases, the counterfeit comes from the human soul, who may choose to act as if he or she is a healer or seer, like Benny Hinn.

david_munson

09-20-2006, 08:53 PM

Please don't get me started in Hinn.It would take up too much space.
As you can imagine.

}

angie0401

09-20-2006, 09:05 PM

smyrna QUOTE:
But basically he states that for every spiritual gift,there is a diabolical counterpart, or counterfeit.

That is such a perfect picture of THE anti(instead of)christ. I wonder if these "diabolical coutnerparts" might be some of the antichrists spoken of? (Not THE antichrist, of course)....

arron

09-20-2006, 09:48 PM

try i cor 14. do you beleive any of that

smyrna

09-21-2006, 01:43 AM

Arron, you may not believe this, but it is easy to check out, even for you. I Cor. 14:2 says, in the KJV "unkown" tongue. However the word "unkown" was not used in the original manuscripts, but inserted by the translators.
Just like chapter 12, the text is speaking of different languages,languages that were in use in the cultures of those times, and not some "unkown" mysterious celestial tongue.
Even if it was, and I say IF, you would not need an interpreter, if it was the miracle described in Acts 2. And everyone would hear the words as if they were being spoken in their own native language. That is the miracle of tongues, as clearly described in Acts 2.

Now I know that no matter what I say, you are going to believe otherwise. You are going to beleive that there is some other miracle, even though it is not mentioned in the Bible.
You certainly are free to do so.

arron

09-21-2006, 04:13 PM

sure am ... and so are you free to believe mans doctrine that you beleive

kimberlyfredrick

09-21-2006, 05:51 PM

There is a disease in our Churches today. and that disease is perptrated by Satan himself.
This Rapture Doctrine and Speaking in Tongues is clearly of the evil one. No doubt about it. And talk about cultish. You ever been in a Church were peolpe are bursting out in "tongues" all around you? it is an unholy abomination. I know it in my heart. Satan has a cult and most people cannot see it.

terluvire

09-21-2006, 05:58 PM

I agree Kim,

I think of the church disease as anorexia. They are literally starving themselves spiritually.

God said there would be a famine in the end times. So what that should say to most is that the majority cannot be right concerning our Father's word. If they were right, it would not be considered a famine. I would rather trust God's word where he says:

Amo 8:11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:

Most should wake up. Either God's word is true or he is a liar. They need to pick one or the other.

david_munson

09-21-2006, 10:56 PM

Tongues are Biblical.
Paul says so and puts limits on thier use.
I would be carefull about attributing "tongues" to Satan.

He has an imitation true but tongues is still given to believers today.(it's just abused)
Just like the gift of helps,prophecy,etc.

Just because satan has to copy what God does isn't good enough reason to throw the baby out with the bath water.

This is where discernment of spirits is usefull in the church.
Everything done decently and in order.

Dave
}

smyrna

09-21-2006, 11:16 PM

I hope Dave, that you can give me one example where a person speaks, and when that person is speaking, anyone within earshot hears it in their own native language. Because anything less than that is not speaking in tongues.

There is absolutely no Biblical evidence that there is a separate phenomena that is referred to as tongues. Any other reference to tongues is merely speaking of different langauges, languages that were known to the cultures of the times.
We know this because of the contect in which refrences to tongues are mentioned.
Simply speaking, the Apostles travelled to different lands, and thus encountered languages (tongues) that were not known to them.
In addition,were tongues legitimate as defined by groups such as the Pentecostals,it would be much more prevalent in the history of Christianity as a whole, and not relegated to small pockets of believers in mainly the Southern United States.

In cases of xenoglossia where a person speaks a language they have never spoken before, or had any training in, I would highly suspect the interference of an unclean spirit.
Simply because a person is converted by another's speaking in a xenoglossic state, does not mean that phenomena, of of the Holy Spirit.
For what does the Bible have to say about those who come in Christ's name, showing signs and wonders, but are antichrists?
Think about the con artist, how he lets someone win at a shell game, only to gain his trust, and then wipe him out after that trust is established.

david_munson

09-22-2006, 04:36 PM

Smyrna,
Satan does not lead people to salvation.
He leads them to destruction.
---
"In cases of xenoglossia where a person speaks a language they have never spoken before, or had any training in, I would highly suspect the interference of an unclean spirit."
---
There is great danger in attributing a work of the Holy Spirit to Satan,great danger.
It is unforgivable to blaspheme the Holy Spirit.
I know that is not what you are trying to do.

This example of tongues that I gave you is the real deal.
I think that Polish is the national language in Poland.
My friend was speaking in this man's own "tongue" giving witness to the saving power of the cross.The man recieved Christ and follows not because of "a sign" but because of the conviction that led him to realise his need for a saviour.
I wouldn't dare call that demonic activity.

I know of all the false tongues that go on all over the place today and I am saddened by the deception of thrill seekers but this is not that.
This is an example of how the Lord can work through us (only one example) to reach out to lost souls and bring them into the kingdom.

It is the same as did happen on Penticost,people of other languages heard the gospel in their own tongue.
My friend doesn't speak Polish.
The Lord wanted to reach this Polish gentleman and brought an interpritor with him so he couls witness to the guy.
The Lord used my friend to speak directly to him in his own tongue and he received the Word of God.
My friend said that while he spoke,to his amasement he understood what he was saying while he was saying it.After that he couldn't speak anything but english.Just like before.

He did not seek after this gift and hasn't had it operate with him since.
If you do not believe it so be it.
That will not change the fact that it happened and it brought glory to the Lord and caused a man to repent and turn to the Lord.

If you choose to call that Demonic activity,
you take the risk.
You cannot recieve training in the speaking of tongues.It is a gift given by the Holy Spirit to some,not all.

Mark 3:22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.

Mark 3:28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

In this chapter the people attributed the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan.
The gifts still operate today though way too many do not understand their purpose and get into sensationalism.
We both know that's off.
We both know that the Holy Spirit is not a con artist.
We both know he still does amasing things and speaks of Christ.
We both know to test the spirits.1JN 4:1-2.
John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me.
This was what took place.

Dave

}

smyrna

09-22-2006, 04:57 PM

I understand, but it still does not equate with the miracle described in Acts 2.

I think you'll probably disavow what I'm about to tell you, because most of not all Catholic bashers are prone to reject anything that comes from the Church, but here it goes:

In cases of claimed miracles, the Chrcuh employs a very strict criteria in making a determination as to whether something is a God given miracle.

They have been "in the business" long before you or me, or anyone.

They would be much more careful than you or I in declaring whther a miracle is genuinely of the Holy Spririt or some other force.

To me, the jury is still out as to your friend.

I have no idea what your friend is into, whether he teaches about a "rapture" or thinks Adam and Eve encountered a talking snake, or any other questionable things. So really the question is what christ was he being led to?

Now don't get all hot and bothered Dave, I put those examples up there for examples, not to incitre another round of who believes what and why.

The point I'm making is that one must be extremely careful judging either way in instances of supernatural manifestations.

And I don't think either of us have been in this case. In other words, I would be much more comfortable employing the standards the Church uses in making a determination, than trying to do so on my own.

david_munson

09-22-2006, 05:14 PM

LOL Smyrna,
I'm not hot and bothered.I'm actually sorta cold and hungry.(I live in Maine)

Anyway,
not to intentionally bash the Catholic church but they do teach the doctrines of devils, "forbidding to marry."

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
1 Timothy 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

My wife was catholic.

I agree that we should be cautious and test the spirits as we are told to.
We must also be carefull not to accuse the holy Spirit out of numbness from all the crap that goes on in the name of Christ.

I have been used to prophecy to others but I could count the times on my two hands.
Every time it came to pass.
I'm not a prophet,just a sinner saved by grace.
I cannot call up the gift of my own accord.
It is not mine to play with.

Many years ago I was used of the Lord to bring healing.Hasn't happened since.
Why?
It's not according to my will or timing but the Lord's.
Eccl.3.

Dave
}

david_munson

09-22-2006, 05:17 PM

I wanted to add something else.
I have really been enjoying our communication lately.
I learn from others things that they may not be aware of.

Thank you for your civility and graciousness.

Dave
}

smyrna

09-22-2006, 05:41 PM

Dave,
In regard to your comments re I Timothy 4:

"Forbidding to marry"...

"This has been taken as indicating the Church of Rome, but that Church only enjoins the celibacy of preists, monks and nuns. Spiritism, or the teachig of of demons, enjoins being united only to the 'spiritual affinity" and has wrecked many homes."

Source: Companion Bible Footnotes to I Timothy 4:3

In addition Dave, we also know the reference is not describing the Catholic Church because the subject truly is Spiritism, as it prefaces verse 3 by giving the subject as "doctines of devils" (demons) and "seducing spirits." (v. 1) i.e. Spiritism.

The footnotes also point to abstaining from meats as not to be confused with theh Church's tradition of meatless Fridays, or Lent, or the few monastic Orders that practice vegetarianism. Rather, it once again cites Spiritism's advocation of vegetarianism as a means to develop mediumistic powers.

In closing, please be reminded that the Companion Bible footnotes were authored by Protestants, who certainly would not have missed a chance to illustrate what they would consider doctrinal errors on the part of the Catholic Church.

smyrna

09-24-2006, 10:46 AM

Kind of blew you away, huh, Dave?

arron

09-24-2006, 01:46 PM

i cor speaks of the gift of interpretation, the gift of tongues.if you do away with one you must do away with them all

angie0401

09-24-2006, 03:11 PM

So you believe in exorcism, snake handling, faith healing and drinking poison, arron?


Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

david_munson

09-24-2006, 03:58 PM

BUT,
he doesn't believe in "tempting the Lord."
---
Smyrna,
"but that Church only enjoins the celibacy of priests, monks and nuns."
---
The scripture doesn't say that priests monks or nuns should be celibate.It is pro marriage.

Nice try but I'm not blown away.Sorry,LOL.
Since they forbid to marry (and it doesn't matter who they forbid,except homosexuals) they are teaching demon doctrine in the process.
The Lord said to "go forth and multiply" which entails marriage.
It is not spiritism that is being addressed simply because it mentions demon spirits.
That is the source of the deceptive doctrines that are spoken of here.
To say that it is spiritism that is the topic of this address is to vear away from the actual topic which is doctrines taught by men that have a spirtual influence to their origin.

You may not agree but that is what how I understand it.

Dave
}

smyrna

09-24-2006, 05:57 PM

Dave, I understand you may disagree, but I did make the point that the Protestants that wrote the Companion footnotes pulled no punches when it came to challenging Catholic doctrine. Now this presents an interesting conundrum.
Do you consider yourself superior to the team of scholars that wrote the footnotes to the Companion Bible? After all, like I said before, they would not have missed an opportunity to bash the Catholics.
You also may consider, that celibacy and vegetarianism is not mandated by the CC for most of it's members.
Furthermore, in addition to that, celibacy for priests and other religious is based on the teachings of Paul, not "doctrines of devils."
You are familiar with Paul's teachings regarding marriage and religious service, are you not Dave?
If not, read:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1Cr/1Cr007.html

I closing, let me remind you also that Priests, nuns and monks voluntarily abstain from meats and choose the unmarried state, and is only mandated in Orders that hold to that tradition, and thus is not a hard teaching by the Church.
In addition, there are Catholic monastic communities where married religious are accepted, such as Little Protion Hermitage in Arkansas:

http://www.littleportion.org/

One more point I'd like to make regarding Paul's mention of abstaining from meats: The word "meats," as defined in Strong's Concordance, is rendered as meat that was acceptable under Jewish Law as it is used in that passage (I Tim. 4:3)v. 4 syas "of God" in reference to those meats, and swine is not of God, it is an abomination, according of Leviticus 11.

If anything, the Catholic Church does not teach abstaining from pork or other Biblically unclean foods, such as shellfish, but probably should, as many other Churches should. It was a health statute, as recorded in Leviticus.

The bottom line: St. Paul's teachings are not "doctrines of devil's." And I Timothy opened up by placing the practices in "latter times," while the Church has practiced celibacy and in some Orders vegtarianism, for centuries.

david_munson

09-24-2006, 07:47 PM

" mandated in Orders that hold to that tradition"
---
I agree that it is a "tradition" and as such is not a Biblical mandate.
I do however hold to the literal meaning of the context pertaining to this particular text where as it concerns withholding that which God says is "good" ,which is contrary to God's Word.

Though there has been significant change and some advancement in this area,it was required in the past that any one entering the ministration remain celibate.
As you yourself have stated,celibacy is a "tradition."
It is not God's commandment but is instead contrary to God's revealed will concerning man and woman.

I think a good arguement for the reason behind this verse ,calling the doctrine of celibacy in the minstration "doctrines of Devils" ,can be seen in the many child abuse cases that have surfaced in the last few years.
In all fairness I must state that it is not limited to catholic churches.
Yet that seems to be where most of the cases emminated from.

It is a good reason to refuse the celibacy doctrine since it is evident that there is danger in trying to refuse the natural sex drive that God has given to men and women for marriage.

God saw that His provision for Adam to have a helpmate was "good."
Would that not apply to all mankind regardless of any ministry position?

Dave
}

david_munson

09-24-2006, 08:00 PM

Someone who wants to be a vegetarian is fine as far as I'm concerned.

The command to not eat swine is as we now know a medical issue that God knew of long before we discovered "trichinosis" which can be deadly.

Being a "gentile" I myself am not held to the Laws that where given to the Israelites in the Old Testament.
Paul says to refrain in front of your brother if it is an }offense to him since it might cause him to stumble in his walk.
Yet it is not implied that there is a taboo to partake.

Peter was told not to call common that which God has cleansed.
Acts 11:8 But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth.
Acts 11:9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

smyrna

09-24-2006, 08:45 PM

Davvid wrote: "The command to not eat swine is as we now know a medical issue that God knew of long before we discovered "trichinosis" which can be deadly."

"Being a "gentile" I myself am not held to the Laws that where given to the Israelites in the Old Testament."
*************
There's more wrong with pork besides trichinosis.
And the human body has not changed since Old Testament times. So one would necessarily have to surmise that eating swine even at this time, is not very healthy, and God's wisdom is for all ages, not just one age, and one culture.

As for celibacy, once again, Paul's teachings which you did not mention in your rebuttal, agree that it is better to serve God as an unmarried person, since you don't have to worry about the needs of a wife. But he also said it was not something that would be expected of everybody.

In addition, would you really expect God to allow the disenfranchisment of people who for whatever reason unintentionally have gone through their Christian lives without ever marrying?

You seem to explain that marriage was not optional, but a mandate, when you said God, through the model of Adam and Eve, exepcts everyone to be married.

In the service of God, historically there was practiced even among the semites, such as the Essenes, celibacy, but even in that culture, there is evidence that not all practiced it.

Now tradition is not a teaching,(doctrine) and encouragement to be celibate is not a teaching for laypersons in the CC.

The CC is fully aware of Paul's teachings, and they know that he did say that it "is better to marry,than to burn" (with passion, if it is too difficult abstain)

Once again you seem to mandate that someone would have to have sex because it is so natural to do so, why would one abstain?

Dvaid: "It is a good reason to refuse the celibacy doctrine since it is evident that there is danger in trying to refuse the natural sex drive that God has given to men and women for marriage."

Here you are contradicting what Paul had to say on the subject:

"7:4 The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife.
7:5
Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control."

So even in marriage, restraint is advised, and this contradicts your position, and sorry, I'll have to side with Paul.

Now you contradict yourself when you say that you have no problem with vegetarianism, when both practices were placed in the context of Paul's words on the subject in I Timothy 4.

You cannot pick and choose what to regard as "doctrines of devils," and say it's ok that someone teaches abstinance from meat.

As for the CC, vegtarianism is a little practiced tradition, and the Orders that do are not doing so because they were taught to abstain by the Magisterium.

In closing, you also conveniently ignored the point about I Timothy 4 being fixed on the "latter days" when the CC has practiced celibacy and to a very minor extent vegetariansim, for centuries.

One more factor that just came to mind: It is a little known fact that in certain cases the CC allows married priests,and if my memory serves correctly, it is when an Episcopal or Anglican priest who was already married seeks to enter the Catholic faith he is certainly not ordered to divorce, or rejected because he is married!

In spiritism, neither was considered minor if one was to gain a potent power to summon seducing spirits.

arron

09-24-2006, 09:32 PM

not exorcisim but i do beleive in casting out demons, not snake handling but i do believe if i accidently got bit by a snake GOD would keep me, gifts of healing yes but not faith healing, not drinking poison but if i drank poison accedently i believe GOD would keep me. i dont beleive in doing those things not led of THE SPIRIT OF GOD, and before you ask YES I BELEIVE IN SPEAKING IN TONGUES AS THE SPIRIT GIVES UTTERRENCE ...

angie0401

09-25-2006, 01:57 AM

QUOTE:
arron-->i cor speaks of the gift of interpretation, the gift of tongues.if you do away with one you must do away with them all

and

arron-->not exorcisim but i do beleive in casting out demons, not snake handling but i do believe if i accidently got bit by a snake GOD would keep me, gifts of healing yes but not faith healing, not drinking poison but if i drank poison accedently i believe GOD would keep me.

arron,
Matthew 16 speaks of taking up snakes and drinking deadly things and laying on of hands, so "if you do away with one you must do away with them all".

terluvire

09-25-2006, 02:00 AM

I love your common sense approach Angie!

kimberlyfredrick

09-25-2006, 02:32 AM

No doubt the Holy Spirit is at work today. But I would not go picking up a rattlesnake to prove my point. Though, I do believe that if it serves God and is of HIS will 'miricles' do occur. I doubt that God needs a 3-ring circus like the teleevangelists we see on the tube today. I remember something in the bible were Jesus casts out demons FROM people writhing on the ground, NOT that he cast out demons and the people fall to the ground, you know. Where did that slain in the spirit come from anyway??? And the miracle water and holy cloths. you know, I think God ha s a special punishment for leading his sheep astray like that. I just want to jump through that screen and jerk up those false preachers and tell 'em why THEY need that miricle stuff their selling....ARGGG!!!!(I know this is not my usual post, but this subject, exploiting the Holy Spirit, really gets me fired up)

arron

09-25-2006, 05:01 AM

angie... again i do not beleive in snake handling such as pLAying with sNAkes as certian religious groups do, i do not believe in exociseing demons as the catholic church does. i do believe that if i accidently get bit by a snake GOD will keep me. as far as poison no i do not drink it to prove my faith as some religious groups do.and no where in the bible does it tell us to pick up snakes or to drink poison to show that we have faith. in fact that would be tempting GOD so do not try to say i said something that i didnt. and teliver she isnt useing good sense at all

angie0401

09-25-2006, 05:29 AM

Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. 

Neither does the Bible say that one must speak in some unknown babble to show faith or to show that we are filled with the Holy Spirit.
I just want to know why you can take one verse from Matt 16 [they shall speak with new tongues] and make a requirement of being filled with the Spirit, but not believe in the VERY NEXT VERSE [Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.]

Why can you say in your post #2661:
"arron-->i cor speaks of the gift of interpretation, the gift of tongues.if you do away with one you must do away with them all", but not apply that same standard to Matt 16????
Are you allowed to pick and chose which verses and pieces of verses to believe?

smyrna

09-25-2006, 07:15 AM

Good post Angie,

Arron also wrote: "I do not believe in exorcising demons as the catholic church does."

Of all the miracles Jesus worked among men, casting out unclean spirits was one of them. Unless Arron is really off the wall here, he would have to remember the account in Mark 5:13 when the unclean spirits came out of the man and went into the swine, and they all ran off a "steep place" (cliff/) and into the sea.

Jesus gave the power over unlean spirits to the Apostles, Acts 5:16, 8:7 and that power over our enemy was carried forth through the Church for centuries unto this day.

Arron certainly does pick and choose what he wants to believe in Scripture. And it is a shame that the somer Churches hate the Catholic Church so much that they refuse to acknowledge that exorcisms occur even today.

If anyone with more tolerance than Arron wants a good reference work on actual exorcisms, try Hostage To The Devil, by Fr. Malachi Martin as well as various writings by Fr. Gabriele Amorth
who was the senior exorcist at the Vatican.

Exorcism is a very real rite, one that is indicative of the power Christ gave the Disciples and there are many cases on record one can examine.

It is not wise and very dangerous for individuals not trained (and thus not ordained) to challenge a malignant spirit, as recoreded in the account of the sons of Sceva in Acts 19:11-20.

I will also have you know that not all Churches have abandoned the necessity of exorcism.

The Lutheran Church also has exorcists but not a specific rite anymore, and other Churches practice the "laying on of hands" and in many groups Baptism is regarded as a form of exorcism, as when initially given in the early Church it included admonitions to unclean spirits to leave, (if they are present) and invite the Holy Spirit into the child to keep him or her safe.

arron

09-25-2006, 03:19 PM

AGAIN... I BELEIVE IN CASTING OUT DEMONS, HEALING, TONGUES, MIRACLES . NOW HWERE DOES IT SAQY TO HANDLE SNAKES OR DRINK POISON.. PROVE IT THAT IT SAYS THAT. YOU ARE ALWAYS TAKING WHAT ONE SAYS AND TWISTING IT TO SUIT YOUR DOCTRINE. AS I SAID IF... AND I SAY IF I WERE TO DRINK DEADLY POISON .. ACCCIDENTLY.. OR IF I WAS BIT MY A SNAKE ACCIDENTLY.. THEN I WOULD BE KEPT BY THE POWER OF GOD. and tongues in i cor is different from the ones that is spoken of in mark as the ones in i cor is a gift from GOD.

david_munson

09-25-2006, 03:33 PM

Smyrna,
"You seem to explain that marriage was not optional, but a mandate, when you said God, through the model of Adam and Eve, expects everyone to be married."
---
Not exactly what I was stating.
It is true that not every one is going to marry but it should not be disallowed.
---
Here you are contradicting what Paul had to say on the subject:

"7:4 The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife.
7:5 Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control."
---
This is not an example that measures up to "forbidding to marry."It is for the purpose of having your attention on the Lord when you pray.It is "for a time" only.Forbidding to marry was for all time.
---
"Now you contradict yourself when you say that you have no problem with vegetarianism, when both practices were placed in the context of Paul's words on the subject in I Timothy 4."
---
I didn't imply that to be a vegetarian was a command.I just said I had no problem with it.
It's a personal choice.
My problem is with the tradition of commanding people not to eat meat and to refrain from marriage.

It was once a common practice to deny those in the ministration from marrying ,which is not upheld in scripture.(commanding them not to)
It's a matter of personal choice that no priest,pastor,layperson or anyone else should be denying another the right to do.

It is not God's will for teachers of the Word to teach that there is a taboo on marriage for people in positions in ministration.
This used to be the way that things where done.
I know that things have changed a great deal since this was a common practice.

Do they still give their "sermons" in Latin?
I remember attending a CC and understanding none of what was said.
I saw no benefit in that but that has probably changed,yes?

}

terluvire

09-25-2006, 03:41 PM

Arron said:
NOW HWERE DOES IT SAQY TO HANDLE SNAKES OR DRINK POISON

Arron, it says it right here:

Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Deadly thing in the Greek is:

thanasimos
than-as'-ee-mos
From G2288; fatal, that is, poisonous: - deadly.

What Angie is asking, is if you take the verse right before, (about speaking in a new tongue), as being literal, don't you have to take the next verse literally also? Or do you pick and choose randomly which verses you take literal?

angie0401

09-25-2006, 03:41 PM

QUOTE:
-->arron
NOW HWERE DOES IT SAQY TO HANDLE SNAKES OR DRINK POISON.. PROVE IT THAT IT SAYS THAT.

Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. 

Those aren't my words, but God's Word.

terluvire

09-25-2006, 03:43 PM

LOL Angie, you must have posted the same time I did!

Yes Angie, those are God's words and not ours. Hopefully Arron will realize that.

arron

09-25-2006, 07:40 PM

it does not say to handle snakes or to just drink deadly poison....
enough of tongues... i want to ask a question of you (angie, smyrna, terluvire) what about the role of women in the church. ( i am not being smart alec ) do you all believe in women partisipating in church in any of the roles of pastor, preaching teaching or any thing like that? just a question

david_munson

09-25-2006, 10:24 PM

Just a quick "jab".
Some of those spelling errors make me feel better about mine.
(you miss most of them because I "usally" spell check,LOL)

Now I have just set myself up,hey?

Worthy is the Lamb.
Dave
}

smyrna

09-25-2006, 11:12 PM

Dave, no one commands anyone not to marry or become strictly vegetarian. Priests monks or nuns volunteeer to take those roles, thus they abstain from marriage and are vegetarians by choice. That is the role they choose to take in the Church. It would be different if everyone would be subject.

It is so free, this choice, and there are so many options in what the Church calls consecrated life, that to say the Church "forbids" marriage or mandates vegetarianism is too strong a word to place in the context of only certain roles in the Church that are optional.

In addition, even in the cases where marriage is freely given up or vegetarianism is a rule in certain orders, that does not make these practices by-products of "doctrines of devils", that is preposterous.

david_munson

09-26-2006, 12:38 AM

I understand that individual choice is no problem as far as doctrine is concerned,I'm just saying that to make rules manditory (which I gather you are saying is not now the case) is against the scriptures in question.

I would commend any one that is able to eat a healthy and balanced diet.
Especially in this country.

What about prayer to deceased humans that are sainted by the CC?
Mary for instance.
Isn't that idolotry?
Or have they ceased the practice?
Dave

}

plow_deep

09-26-2006, 01:00 AM

Has anyone seen this video that spreading out over blog sites? My soundcard has gone out and I found it pretty sad to watch even without sound.

Poor kids. So this is what Pentecostal Jesus camps are like?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co1_9lR9EpM
By DAN HARRIS (ABC News)

Sept. 17, 2006 -- An in-your-face documentary out this weekend is raising eyebrows, raising hackles and raising questions about evangelizing to young people.

Speaking in tongues, weeping for salvation, praying for an end to abortion and worshipping a picture of President Bush -- these are some of the activities at Pastor Becky Fischer's Bible camp in North Dakota, "Kids on Fire," subject of the provocative new documentary, "Jesus Camp."

"I want to see them as radically laying down their lives for the gospel as they are in Palestine, Pakistan and all those different places," Fisher said. "Because, excuse me, we have the truth."

"A lot of people die for God," one camper said, "and they're not afraid."

"We're kinda being trained to be warriors," said another, "only in a funner way."

smyrna

09-26-2006, 11:13 AM

Dave, first, let us address one issue at a time. Bombarding someone with questions, on related subjects is a known tactic. Let's just stick to the issues already raised. I am prepared to discuss the other issues you raised, but after we settle the two that are at hand. (Maybe we should go to the Catholic threads?)

I think it would be wise to go back to I Timothy 4 to gain greater insight.

First, the time is fixed. Paul states in the "latter times" "some will depart from the faith."

Like I said before, abstinance from marriage, and vegtarianism withing the Church has been practiced for centuries, not just in the "latter times"

This is one indication that Paul is not talking about the Church at all. He also said some will depart from the faith. "That faith" has been carried and taught by the Church, also for centuries.

Next, in order for you to argue that you believe the text is speaking about the CC, you have to make the accusation that the Church "gives heed to seducing spirits,and doctrines of demons."

The Church does not give heed to seducing spirits, it exists for the glory of God, it was established by Christ, and the "gets of hell shall not prevail against it."

The Church pays heed to the teachings of Christ, and rails against "doctrines of devils."

Spiritism, on the other hand, does pay heed to seducing spirits, and the doctrine that encourages
communicating with them.

The same with vegtarisnism. Vegetarianism in the two monsatic orders that practice it, the Trappists (aka Cistercians) and Carthusians, was born during times when it was considered a luxury to eat meat, and they volunteered to abstain, so they could use more of their resources to help the poor, and not pamper themselves.

Spiritism, on the other hand, teaches that vegetarianism is a means to gain spiritual power, to be an effective medium.

So for you to say that the CC is giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils, is like saying the gates of hell have prevailed against it, and therefore Jesus was wrong.

(In verse 3, by the way, in the KJV I'm using, the word "commanding" is in italics, and thus was inserted by the translators)

In addition, Paul continues his teaching, saying to "refuse profane and old wives tales."

Profane in this case means Godless, as in mythology, which directly was influenced by the fallen angels, who certainly are seducing spirits and devils.

Mythology, as you know, not only was popular in Paul's time, but in ours as well.(UFO cults, and the pagan religions, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc)

I don't have to explain much about old wive's tales. No matter how you want to characterize the CC, it does not give any thought to old wive's tales.

david_munson

09-26-2006, 03:58 PM

The CC is not "the church."
Neither is protestant,baptist etc.,etc..

The church is not an organised heirarchy.
It is a body of believers that live throughout this world composing the building that is made without hands.

Do you believe that Peter was the foundation of the CC?
I do not.
Peter was described as a small stone.4074. Petros
Search for G4074 in KJVSL
petroV Petros pet'-ros

apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than 3037); as a name, Petrus, an apostle:--Peter, rock. Compare 2786.

See Greek 3037
See Greek 2786

While Jesus said upon this ROCK ( which is Christ Himself)
Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

4073. petra
Search for G4073 in KJVSL
petra petra pet'-ra

feminine of the same as 4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively):--rock.

See Greek 4074

Dave
}

arron

09-26-2006, 04:11 PM

way to go david... keep up the good work. i am sure that tongues are not demonic, not the real tongues of the bible. now there are those who practice witch craft and voodoo i have heard that speak in some kind of strange lanquage but it is not of GOD . anyway i have enough of this talk about tongues. it seems that one or two here want to condemn everybody that does speak in tongues. they do not know what they are talking about. i have THE SPIRIT OF GOD and i speak in tongues and that is of THE LORD JESUS. i thank HIM for it

kimberlyfredrick

09-26-2006, 04:26 PM

Arron, What language have you spoken in tongues with? When it was interpreted, what did you say in tongues? Really, I have always wanted to ask someone this.

And know, I do not think that speaking in tongues is demonic, just what I have witnessed.

arron

09-26-2006, 04:37 PM

i do not know what lanquage i spoke in as i do not know any forieeng lanquages . when i speak in tomngues it is OF THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD and is unknown untill the gift of interpertation is given and it is interpreted. i thank GOD for it.

smyrna

09-26-2006, 05:01 PM

Well Dave, based upon your explanation, then I guess all Christians should approve of anything that anybody declares as Christian, based upon any and everybody's interpretations of Scripture.

That is interesting, your "anything goes" theology.

You have effectively described your vision of Christianity as a modern version of the crumpled ruins of the tower of babble.

kimberlyfredrick

09-26-2006, 05:22 PM

Arron, would you please tell me what the interpreter said you said? Thank you in advance

smyrna

09-26-2006, 05:22 PM

Dave,

You also wrote:

"Do you believe that Peter was the foundation of the CC?"

No I believe that Christ was. But I also believe that Peter was one of the disciples He sent into the world to share the Gospel. He, as well as the others, were given power over satan, as expressed in Acts.

With that being said, there had to be a hierarchy, and you may remember that James, the brother of Jesus, was head of the Church in Jerusalem.

As Christianity took hold, there had to be a structure in place to protect against what the Apostles taught. Otherwise,you would have ended up with thousands of Churches following millions of different ideas that often oppsed each other.

And guess what? Christianity has gone that way, but in violation of what was originally intended.

A Kingdom divided? Mark 3:24.

However, the violators were those who chose to break away from the original whole, and therefore the gates of hell have yet to prevail against that one whole, of which others chose to break away from, thus creating the body of babble the denominations are today.

arron

09-26-2006, 06:10 PM

kimberly.. it was a word for that time then and there, it was for the ones gathered there. it was not a prophecy as such to the whole world but something to help those who were there at that service. this may not be the expalination you wanted, but it is what happened. if you had been there something would have been included for you to i suppose

david_munson

09-27-2006, 03:40 AM

Smyrna,
some of those that broke away did so because they wanted the "laity" or congregant , to have the scriptures to read for themsleves instead of only hearing it in Latin ,which they did not understand.

That was at least one reason for what I guess we would call a "split."
---
100% chance of bracket/s showing up here-->}

kimberlyfredrick

09-27-2006, 04:46 AM

Arron,

Thanks for responding. O.K. buddy, If you feel strongly that it was indeed the Holy Spirit speaking through you, who am I to judge. I believe you. I wish I had have been there with you to have experienced it.

smyrna

09-27-2006, 02:53 PM

Dave,

I can see your history of the Catholic Church is not very extensive, and that's ok. Because really the issues we had been discussing is whether
I Timothy 4 was speaking of the Catholic Church.

You are starting to leave many questions open, while you ask more and more of them. I have no problem agreeing to disagree.

david_munson

09-27-2006, 04:10 PM

Thank you Smyrna,
I agree with you to disagree like brethren.

I think that we both will agree that there are many wonderful Christians who attend the RCC and put thier trust in the Lord Jesus Christ.

}

abiyah

09-27-2006, 05:21 PM

Aaron WROTE:
http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/talker.gifQUOTE: " i do not know what lanquage i spoke in as i do not know any forieeng lanquages . when i speak in tomngues it is OF THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD and is unknown untill the gift of interpertation is given and it is interpreted. i thank GOD for it. "

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/triangle_right.gif 'tongues' as it appears here in I Corinthians chapter 14, is the Greek word ' Glossa ' and it means languages or dialects. Of course we all know that there are many differnt ' languages ' throughout the world, example Spanish, English, French, German, Russian, Chinese, etc. Now the word
'unknown' as it appears in I Corinthians 14, is in an italic font, when you see this in the king James than you are to know that the king James translators added it, to help the reader. The word 'unknown' does not appear in the Manuscripts. And in sharing these Truths with you my fellow brothers and sister in Christ The Lord, let us look together at what is actually written by our Father through His chosen vessel Paul.

I Corinthians 14:5
" I would that ye all spake with tongues
[with multiple languages, today we call it multi-lingual, bi-lingual, etc. ], but RATHER that ye prophesied [ teach God's Word ]; for greater IS he that prophesieth [ that teacheth The Word of Truth ] than he that speaketh with tongues [ various or multiple languages ], except he interpret [ except the 'teacher' of God's Word bring an interpreter, so that all can understand what he is saying ], [ WHY SHOULD an English speaking teacher bring an interpreter to a congregation that only speaks and understands Spanish or German, or French ? ] THAT THE CHURCH MAY RECEIVE EDIFYING [= that they may receive instruction and knowledge of God's Word, be enlightened and informed of His Truth, to build them up in The Word of God ]. "

Paul could speak in a number of different laguages, but its not going to profit anyone IF Paul taught in another lanuguage or 'tongue' than what the church spoke and understood. Know and understand that our God is Awesome, and when His Spirit, that being The Holy Spirit speaks through one of His servants, that it comes forth in EVERY LANGUAGE of the world ALL AT ONE TIME, read AGAIN Acts 2:6-8, and THEN after you read, know and understand that when The Holy Spirit speaks through someone it needs NO interpretur, it needs absolutely NO interpretation for the hearer, for ALL that hear SHALL HEAR it in their own language/tongue right down to the dialect of the town in which they were born. IT IS WRITTEN ! Anything other than that is just 'babel' = 'confusion ', have NO part of it, for it is NOT of God. God bless your Studies of His Word, which indeed IS Truth.

Abiyah

arron

09-27-2006, 05:40 PM

abiyah.. the tongues in 1 cor did need an interpreter for the gift of interpretation was there.... no further comment on this.

arron

09-27-2006, 05:47 PM

kimberly.. you are one it seems that i can talk to with out your raiseing a fuss or argument. i enjoy talking with you so far. i have a question , not to start anything but just a question, how do you feel about the role of women in the church. do you feel they can or cant do somethings in the church? as you know there are far more women in the church than men most of the time so churches would be in bad shape with them. i ask you for you are not like some on this thread who argue with a sign post

kimberlyfredrick

09-27-2006, 06:21 PM

Thank you Arron. I will try to answer you as best I can.

{1 Corinthians 14:34-35

Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says.

And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.

I think Paul was referring to the fact that women before the birth of Christianity were not allowed to worship with the men so this was all new for them. Exciting if you will. Naturally, they would have had much questions on teachings of Old Testement as well as the new. This new found freedom would have felt liberating to the women of the day while it brought with it many questions. As a result, I imagine Women were disrupting many a meeting with their questioning.

I can also imagine the menfolk might have been just a little embarrassed with all of the chatter of their wives. There would have been some women who would have known more than the other women because they had received more private instruction from their husbands at home. This could have reflected negatively on the egos of the men and women.

kimberlyfredrick

09-27-2006, 06:35 PM

Arron,

I think it is fine for women to minister in churches today. But, I think that if she is the 'top dog', she should be a woman who has the full support of her husband, and has already finished raising her children. A woman's biblical obligation to God is to raise Godly children and to let her husband be head of the family. This maintains order in a Christian home.

terluvire

09-27-2006, 06:48 PM

Arron,
Quote:
abiyah.. the tongues in 1 cor did need an interpreter for the gift of interpretation was there.... no further comment on this.

The Apostles job were to spread the Gospel. They were to go into other areas and countries where they did not speak the languages. How else could they spread the Good News if no one understood them. The subject is about them speaking languages which are not native to them. If they went to another area where there was a different language being spoken, how could they spread God's word if no one understood what they were saying?

So if they went to a country and the inhabitants of that country spoke a language which they themselves did not, they were to take an interpretor. Otherwise no one would know what they were saying except for themselves, God and the angels. It would be confusion to everyone else.

terluvire

09-27-2006, 07:12 PM

I want to add as Abiyah said, Paul spoke many languages. So he was very well capable of going into other areas and being able to speak their language. But if you do not speak their language, take an interpretor so that the people will understand what is being said.

By the way, Good post Abiyah

smyrna

09-27-2006, 07:37 PM

Hello David and everyone,

Yes, David, some incredibly wonderful people and Christian brothers and sisters who belong to the RCC.

I know for a fact that Pope John Paul II, was loved by many more people than Catholics. He just had that charisma. I can really get into the stories about him. But I suspect the CC will not have another Pope like him for many years. Benedict looks like a tough guy, and he is in many respects.
But those who know him see a much softer side. He likes to play classical piano and loves cats, though I don't know if he has any in his small apartment at the Vatican.
Anyway, many of my friends are monks, believe it or not. I founded a lay group that embraces the spirituality of one of the orders in the Church, and know some of the monks from that Order.
And I tell you, they don't get involved in theology much. They just live quiet lives of prayer and work. 'Ora et Labora', Latin for "Prayer and Work" is the motto of all monks and nuns.
Their lives are difficult at times, but the reward is peace. Historically, it hasn't been all that peaceful. Some were literally dragged out of their monasteries,tortured and killed. Recently a nun was killed in Italy in retaliation for the Popes comments on Islam. That is very sad.
Those who criticize the CC make me very uneasy, just as much as those who criticize the Chapel make me uneasy.
Were it not for the CC, it is doubful that Christianity would have survived the Muslim onslaught that brought about the Crusades.
(Pope Benedict was right!)
That is one of the reasons why I do not agree with you that Christianity should not have had a hierarchal structure, from Peter onward. The word Bishop is in the NT, check out I Tim 3:1. Paul calls it an office, this means he recognized this structure, and that it was in place even during his time.

terluvire

09-27-2006, 07:51 PM

There are many places in the Bible where women are used of God.

Judges 4:4 “And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.” Take notice that she was a Judge and a prophet. So yes, God will choose women to be prophets and rulers. Skip to verse 6, it reads:
:6 “And she sent and called Barak the son of Abinoam out of Kedesh-naph-ta-li, and said unto him, Hath not the Lord God of Israel commanded, saying, Go and draw toward mount Tabor, and take with thee ten thousand men of the children of Naph-ta-li and of the children of Ze-bu-lun?
:7 And I will draw unto thee to the river Kishon Sisera, the captain of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his multitude; and I will deliver him into thine hand.
:8 And Barak said unto her, If thou wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not go.
:9 And she said, I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding the journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the Lord shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman. And Deborah arose, and went with Barak to Kedesh.”
Deborah was a “can do” type woman of God. She wasn’t one bit afraid to go into battle. God commanded Barak to go into battle, but Barak wouldn’t go unless Deborah went with him. Deborah didn’t hesitate to say yes. But because Barak would not go into battle without Deborah, when they won the battle Barak did not receive the honor for the win. It was a woman who killed Sisera; she won the battle for them.

There are other women God used. There is Rahab, who God used to protect the two Israelite spies. Jesus used the samaritan woman, who was at the well, to convert the whole town into Christianity. At that time, it was not acceptable for a man to be speaking with a woman alone. This was man’s idea, not God’s, for Jesus spoke to her alone. There is the account after Jesus’ resurrection. He appeared to Mary first. This is hugely significant. Christ was showing us that women are just as important to his ministry as the disciples, or men, are important to his ministry. At Christ’s crucifixion, the women were nearby but almost all the disciples ran. God made sure to mention this in his word to show us that he counted the women as being brave and important too.

continued

terluvire

09-27-2006, 07:53 PM

Continued:

Women can be Deacons also. Read Romans 16:1, it reads, “I commend unto you Phe-be our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cen-chre-a.”
The word “servant” in the Greek is “diakonos” and it means a deacon. She was a deaconess. God does use women to help carry out his work. Paul thanks women many times, in the New Testament, for their help in doing the Lord’s work.

And this is interesting, Go to Eccl.7:27
:27 Behold, this have I found, saith the preacher, counting one by one, to find out the account:
The word “preacher” in the Hebrew is “qoheleth”, it means- [a (female) assembler (i.e. lecturer); abstr. preaching, preacher.] This is a female preacher
:28 Which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: one man among a thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found.”
It seems to be saying that there are no righteous women, but at least there is one righteous man among a thousand men. But what God is saying is that the only really righteous person is Jesus Christ. Out of all human beings, men and women, Jesus is the one and only true upright man to ever have walked on the earth.

God will also use women to prophesy. You can read this in Acts 2:15-:18, (The twelve Apostles were gather together on the day of Pentecost. The Holy Spirit came upon them and they were all speaking in cloven tongues. Some people who witnessed this thought that the Apostles were drunk. Peter stood up and addressed these people and said: “For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. :16 But this is that which was spoken by the Prophet Joel; :17 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: :18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy.”
God will use both male and female. He will use whomever he chooses. God says that in his eyes, there is neither Greek or Jew, neither free or slave, and neither male of female, (Galatians 4:26-:28). We are all the same in God’s eyes.

kimberlyfredrick

09-27-2006, 08:56 PM

Excellent post Terluvire!

One of the very best I've read so far. But of course, being female, I am biased...(big smile)

Joel 2:28-29, One of my favorites

terluvire

09-27-2006, 09:00 PM

Women get a bad rap from many pastors. I don’t know why. If anything, they should know better than anyone else
that God uses women as well as men. I don’t know why they will not teach this. But I know God’s word says this. And yes, I know there are many places in the Bible where it seems God is speaking of women in a demeaning sense, but this is not the case. Many times when women are used this way in the Bible, God is not speaking of women per se, He is using women as an analogy. When Christ speaks to the church or churches, he refers to them in a feminine sense. Christians are considered to be the bride of Christ. Many times the term “women” are used in the sense of speaking to the church, religion, or the body of Christ.

Read:
1 Corinthians 14:33-:35, “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. (God likes order not disorder).
:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak:
The word speak means to speak in a manner which would cause disruptions or discord. And spiritually Christians are the bride of Christ. No one should openly chatter in church and disrupt the teaching. Many use this verse to show that women are not allowed to be preachers. This is not what the verse is talking about.

1 Timothy 2:12 reads: “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”
In this chapter, Paul is discussing the instructions on worshipping the Lord in church. What Paul is saying is that he will not suffer the women to teach, meaning that she doesn’t have to teach if she doesn’t want to. There was much persecution going on at this time. It would have been very dangerous for a woman to teach. They could have suffered public humiliation in a way that men would not of had to suffer. They would have been stripped naked in front of everyone in order to embarrass themselves. Also a pastor is not the head of the church. The church has Elders that are in charge. They are over the pastor. So if a woman teaches, or becomes a pastor, they are not the head of the church. She would have Elders over her. And again, to be in silence means not to chatter during a service. It does not mean that she cannot be a teacher in the church.

Paul is saying to women in 1Tim.2:12 "I give you the liberty and the authority to not do it, to not teach and preach, and cause you to be placed is such danger." This was a dangerous time to teach the Word of God, and Paul's intent was that the men should take the stand, have the backbone and preach the Word with all the risks that were present.

terluvire

09-27-2006, 09:02 PM

Thank you Kimberly, God's word is awesome!

arron

09-27-2006, 09:36 PM

i agree..my wife was aminister/ of course she had been taught the right way and did not take away any authority over me.she would however when i was away take care of the church. she would never let anyone get up and "take over" who had no right to do so. yes women have a place in the work of GOD. I THANK GOD FOR ALL THE WOMEN that do so. thanks for what you both beleive.

(Message edited by arron on September 27, 2006)

smyrna

09-27-2006, 09:44 PM

Hello All,

I have much to say about women in the Church. When I say Church here, I mean the entire body of Christ. Scripture of course, is our most revered source for information on the role of women in Biblical history.
My beloved Catholic Church, points out that Luke 1:48 records the angel prophesied that "generations shall call thee blessed."
Many people always criticize the Chruch for recognizing Saints, so in that tradition, there are so many absolutely wonderful stories of heroic women in the history of the Church.
One that comes to mind, because this is an SC related forum, is Abbess Hildegard of Bingen , who correctly interpreted the account of Genesis to include a "rape" of Eve, a literal seduction against her will, and satan using lies to deceive her and Adam.

arron

09-27-2006, 09:46 PM

let me ask another question of you (kimberly and teluvire) what do you feel about children who say they are called to preach. i mean at a young age of 8-twelve? i have known some who turned out all right but i think some of the others were "parent called " or "pastor called" for they did not work out like they should. one little boy of twelve near here preached and went around he was , well a fanatic in that he would lamblast people on the streets and at school. well this went for about ayear then he quit and is now living a differnt lifem than what he had preached. he is living just like the people he condemned. i dont think he was GOD called. if he had been he would have stayed. just want to know what you think ( not to argue )

kimberlyfredrick

09-27-2006, 10:23 PM

Well,Arron, that 12 year old could really have been called by God to preach and then fell away just as easily as we adults do. The teenage years are awfully hard times for our youth. Adjusting to peer pressure and physical/emotional issues which begin to present themselves new at that time is a boatload for sure. It would be a pretty hard call on my part to 'judge' this youth without first knowing him.

terluvire

09-28-2006, 05:21 AM

Hi Arron,

First I want to say, I'm glad we have seemed to have found some common ground.http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

As far as someone determining who is called of God and who is not, that is for God to say. We can only tell by a persons fruit, how well they teach.

But I will say, anyone called of God into the ministry needs to study God's word first. Look at the disciples, they were taught by Jesus for 3years before they were sent out to spread the Good News.

2Ti 2:15 Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

arron

09-28-2006, 02:18 PM

yes i think that anyone who is called needs first of all to be taught GODS WORD and methods of doing what is to be done. they perhaps dont have to go to college or sem. but they need to study THE WORD OF GOD and then go and preach GODS WORD. they can even do this while they are preaching/ THANKS both of you. it is good to talk civil ( which is hard for me to remember to do sometimes )

abiyah

09-28-2006, 02:42 PM

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gifGood Morning to you Terluvire & ALL !

Terluvire..... EXCELLANT posts above here ! Indeed you are blessed of God our Father, for He has certainly given you understanding of His Word, and has given you a gift to bring it forth in its simplicty, for indeed God is NOT The Author of confusion. And while reading down through your above posts I see and know just how very, very much I love 'HEARING' The Word of God, for all that you have put forth was DIRECTLY FROM THE WORD OF GOD ! And taking words from the KJV Bible back to their original Greek and Hebrew meanings helps do give a far better understanding of actually what is being said FROM God's Word; And indeed that is the ' Good Fruit ' which comes FROM The Tree of Life, our Lord & Saviour Christ Jesus ! So I thank God for a servant such as you Terluvire ! Again, God Bless each and everyone's Studies of our Father's Word. IF we stay in His Word... IF we LISTEN to HIM, then we will not be ashamed, nor confused.

Abiyah

david_munson

09-28-2006, 02:58 PM

Hi Smyrna,
I think that I have need to clarify what I am trying to say a little better.

I see the pastor as a conductor.
A mature believer who is called to keep order in the ministrations to and within the congregation.
Though he may be used to bring forth a teaching or meassage,he is but one member of the body equal to other members but with the task of keeping things "decently and in order."

I speak in opposition to the heirarchy in the sense that it is not as it should be today because of certaion abuses.
(some let it go to their head and get puffed up)

In all fairness this is not the case in all instances but is taking place enough to interfere with some believers walks.
In many churches ( denominations unimportant )
there is a mindset that the "pastor" cannot be questioned as to the validity of his message because he is God's "anointed".

This old testament verse deals with Priests, Prophets and Kings of the old system,not to todays pastors and also deals with not physcally doing harm to them.
Some have taken it upon themselves to apply this to themsleves so as not to be discovered in their error and contrary way of life to the scriptures that lay down the qualifications.

There are good and terrible things in the church's history but that has to do with error and the sin nature.

I was once at a penticostle type catholic church and the fellowship was wonderful.
There was a couple of odd things that took place but nothing that would have bothered me.
Nothing that would have taken away from scripture.

I actually enjoyed the experience very much and it served to give me a little more understanding of the body universal.
(before this I was extremely critical of most churches)The Lord's faithfulness opened my eyes to see His body.

That is why I have continually stated that no matter what differences in some doctrines,Christ being the central focus is our common ground.
We live and breathe and have our life in Him.
Amen?

}

abiyah

09-28-2006, 03:46 PM

Aaron WROTE:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
QUOTE: " abiyah.. the tongues in 1 cor did need an interpreter for the gift of interpretation was there.... no further comment on this. " END
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/wink.gifHi There Aaron... I'm sorry to hear that you feel that I am in error with my post no. 470. : ( And when you say " no further comment on this " do you mean that you have no further comment on this, as in that is that and no more need be said, or do you mean that you would rather that I not further comment on this matter ? Not real, real sure what you meant.

Aaron WROTE:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
QUOTE: " kimberly.. you are one it seems that i can talk to WITH OUT your RAISEING A FUSS OR ARGUMENT.................... i ask you for you are NOT LIKE SOME ON THIS THREAD WHO ARGUE WITH A SIGN POST. " END QUOTES
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A sign post ? Not sure what you mean by that either ? Aaron... did you feel that my post no. 470 was being ' argumentive ' ? Again. I'm truly sorry that you feel that way, and my heart is heavy to know that you feel this way. : ( Because the truth of the matter is, and God KNOWS I LIE NOT, is that I simply wanted to share The Truth with you brother regarding speaking in multiple languages, which are tongues, and tongues means languages and/or dialect, as it is documented in I Corinthians Chapter 14. And indeed I have done as The Lord has commanded me in sharing that Truth from God's Word, to edify you brother, to give you understanding of what exactly Paul was speaking of, and I did so with a kind heart; Yet it seems your post in which you'd addressed to Kimberly, that perhaps you'd rather I be SILENT, and not share the Truth in which I know with you at all. For it seems by your words that you wish not to hear from me ? But indeed you are free to listen and believe who ever you will, certainly the choice is yours to whether or not you believe The Word of God in which I had put forth, or you can believe in the traditions of men/man's teachings regarding speaking foriegn languages, or tongues [ as they call it ], or you can believe what Kimberly teaches you regarding the matter. Your choice. : )

And well ... if I may speak from the heart here with you Aaron, the thing that bothers me the most is that yesterday, I had absolutely no time to post here, yet I STILL took the time, I made time to put that Truth forth for you, and all that may read here. Why ? Because its important to our Father that you know and understand His Truth. Yet, instead of treating me as a fellow labourer in Christ The Lord, and instead of thinking in your heart that perhaps Abiyah means real well by me, you treat me as an enemy. And the sad thing is you can not even discern a true, sincere labourer of Christ, who wishes to only give you The Truth of God's Word. And well God KNOWS my heart and my good intentions towards you, for you are my brother in Christ. And God hears even those prayers that I have sent up to The Father for you on numerous occassions Aaron, now you would not know that..... but God does. " ) And I find comfort in knowing and understanding that The LORD knows my heart, and from Above, He looks down and sees who it is that does find pleasure in keeping His Commandments.

Matthew 12:31
" And the second [ Christ teaching of the second Commandment here, and indeed the second here aligns with the last five of the Ten Commandments ] is like, namely this, thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other Commandment greater than THESE. "

godchild

09-28-2006, 05:22 PM

I don't see arron misusing what he considers a God given gift to him. He has not said only tongue speakers are Christian. He has said some pentecostal churches are fanatical but his is orderly, it does not happen all the time, there is an interpreter, people speak one by one, and that what is said is for the edification of one or more believers. He has never said he has received new revelation from the Lord through it, or that it has changed the basic Christian doctrines taught in the Bible.

Arron and I had long discussions about this on the 'speaking in tongues' thread. At first I was totally against it, I do not speak in tongues myself and believe it was a gift for its time, as all are. As David stated, God gives gifts for His purposes and this doesn't mean once we have one it is forever, unless God wills it. Arron has shown by his fruits here that he is a Christian and loves the Lord. He doesn't go around saying 'be a pentecostal'. He accepts others as brothers and sisters and their beliefs as long as they conform with the Word. I refuse to believe his 'speaking in tongues' in any way makes him demonic. Jesus said he who is for Him cannot be against Him. It would be charitable to give arron the benefit of the doubt about this. This is just a suggestion for those who want to reach out their hand in Christian love.