What Is TWeb's Thoughts on Charismatic Christianity

[Bill the Cat]

So the wedding guest, who believed, unlike the Jews, the relatives of the King, was not a believer?

What?

[footwasher]

Woah.

Double woah. So am I "immature, fake and not alive"? Also Adrift and Bill the Cat??

I was. You can change too.

Others have already addressed this (I think it was Bill)

Not conclusively.

So what's your answer? What is happening when a Christian speaks in tongues? Where is it coming from, what is the source?

This thread is trying to understand the Biblical use of the gift in mutual edification, I think. No edification, no directive from God.

Is it biblical for someone to speak in tongues when on their own?

How about if someone speaks in tongues quietly in a worship service - say while everyone is singing?

Like Hannah? Better do it in private. In the worship service, worship.

[footwasher]

What?

The parables that deal with rejection all have a commonality, and they have to do with decision making.

Making decisions take time and research.

Most times the decision making exercise has a deadline too.

For example, Israel is asked to leave the known environs of Egypt. She takes time and researches God’s record in dependability. She decides to follow God. God teaches her that He is constantly dependable, by with holding water and then providing it when asked. Other training follows. The deadline is reached. When they hear God’s voice, they are asked to throw caution to the wind and actively risk their life by taking on the canaanites. They fail. They are rejected.

The point is that they had been shown God’s ability to provide and had reached such an advanced stage in their training that it was unconscionable to still have no faith, still be quivering and trembling.

They were basket cases. God could find no way to regenerate them:

Hebrews 6:4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. 7For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; 8but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned.

Hebrews 12:17For you know that even afterwards, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance, though he sought for it with tears.

Now for the wedding guest.

He followed God out of the world, unlike the Jews. In the wedding hall, he was shown God’s faithfulness. Decision time came around. He still hadn’t put on his wedding garments!!! He still hadn’t made the commitment!!!

[Zymologist]

footwasher, how would you characterize or describe a "mature, genuine and alive believer?" Do you know any, besides yourself?

[Bill the Cat]

The parables that deal with rejection all have a commonality, and they have to do with decision making.

Making decisions take time and research.

Most times the decision making exercise has a deadline too.

For example, Israel is asked to leave the known environs of Egypt. She takes time and researches God’s record in dependability. She decides to follow God. God teaches her that He is constantly dependable, by with holding water and then providing it when asked. Other training follows. The deadline is reached. When they hear God’s voice, they are asked to throw caution to the wind and actively risk their life by taking on the canaanites. They fail. They are rejected.

No they weren't. They were punished, but the covenant with Israel stood fast.

The point is that they had been shown God’s ability to provide and had reached such an advanced stage in their training that it was unconscionable to still have no faith, still be quivering and trembling.

But they had no faith, meaning they were not saved.

They were basket cases. God could find no way to regenerate them:

Hebrews 6:4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. 7For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; 8but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned.

This is apostasy. God knew them and then they rejected God. Not applicable to the verse in question.

Hebrews 12:17For you know that even afterwards, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance, though he sought for it with tears.

Esau's birthright was under discussion here, and once lost, it can't be regained. Again, not applicable to those God never knew.

Now for the wedding guest.

He followed God out of the world, unlike the Jews. In the wedding hall, he was shown God’s faithfulness. Decision time came around. He still hadn’t put on his wedding garments!!! He still hadn’t made the commitment!!!

Meaning he was never saved, despite the offer being extended to him. He heard the message, came to see what it was all about, but refused to believe. Again, he was never known by God.

[footwasher]

footwasher, how would you characterize or describe a "mature, genuine and alive believer?" Do you know any, besides yourself?

Sure:

1Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. 2And after He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He then became hungry.3And the tempter came and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.” 4But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE, BUT ON EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDS OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOD.’”
5Then the devil took Him into the holy city and had Him stand on the pinnacle of the temple,
6and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down; for it is written,
‘HE WILL COMMAND HIS ANGELS CONCERNING YOU’;
and
‘ON their HANDS THEY WILL BEAR YOU UP,
SO THAT YOU WILL NOT STRIKE YOUR FOOT AGAINST A STONE.’”
7Jesus said to him, “On the other hand, it is written, ‘YOU SHALL NOT PUT THE LORD YOURGOD TO THE TEST.’”
8Again, the devil took Him to a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory; 9and he said to Him, “All these things I will give You, if You fall down and worship me.” 10Then Jesus said to him, “Go, Satan! For it is written, ‘YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD, AND SERVE HIM ONLY.’” 11Then the devil left Him; and behold, angels came and began to minister to Him.


Jesus Begins His Ministry

12Now when Jesus heard that John had been taken into custody, He withdrew into Galilee; 13and leaving Nazareth, He came and settled in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali. 14This was to fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet:
15“THE LAND OF ZEBULUN AND THE LAND OF NAPHTALI,
BY THE WAY OF THE SEA, BEYOND THE JORDAN, GALILEE OF THE GENTILES—
16“THE PEOPLE WHO WERE SITTING IN DARKNESS SAW A GREAT LIGHT,
AND THOSE WHO WERE SITTING IN THE LAND AND SHADOW OF DEATH,
UPON THEM A LIGHT DAWNED.”
17From that time Jesus began to preach and say, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

http://biblehub.com/nasb/matthew/4.htm

Sure

Following God out of the world: Check

Passing training: Check

Not being a quiverer and a trembler: Check

Not testing God (being overconfident of their birthright, like Israel venturing without God into the battlefield, and Esau, believing he really wouldn’t lose his birthright) : Check

[One Bad Pig]

Yet there is a difference between 'signs faith' and genuine belief (though one may develop into the other). Craig Keener talks about this in his commentary on John's gospel. Did some see miracles and come to true belief? Sure. There were also many who just followed Jesus for a time for what He could do for them. (John 6:26-7; 6:66).

[footwasher]

Yet there is a difference between 'signs faith' and genuine belief (though one may develop into the other). Craig Keener talks about this in his commentary on John's gospel. Did some see miracles and come to true belief? Sure. There were also many who just followed Jesus for a time f or what He could do for them. (John 6:26-7; 6:66).

[Pentecost]

So there are a few points being contested.

1. Tongues is meant to be understood by the speaker, yes or no? (I think obviously not.)

2 Charismatics by definition are immature, ungenuine, and dead, yes or no? (The church in Corinth wasn't very mature, but it was alive and had signs, how I would describe certain segments of the charismatic church, but not a majority.)

3. The "perfect" is the coming of Jesus, yes or no? (I see claims about the canon of Scripture and the Apostolic age to be obviously anachronistic, and the logical reading of Scripture must then refer to Jesus.)

4. Whether anyone actually believes prayer meetings are necessary for healing, yes or no? (No one believes this.)

5. Who was it that Jesus never knew. (People who called upon His name but didn't really know Him, such as Mormons)

And for charismatics

Can the Baptism be subsequent from salvation? (Yes, and I think it is the usual manner, and is often accompanied by tongues but not always.)

[Cow Poke]

I've shared this before, but here it is again.

We were sponsoring several South American (and Mexican) nationals to Rio Grande Bible Institute, and it was too costly and far for them to "go home" during Christmas and Thanksgiving break, so we would drive down to the valley and pick them up, and have them stay with us for those few days to a week.

One night, Araceli (my "favorite Mexican daughter") had a serious theological question, and at that point she spoke very little English, and my Spanish is mostly "agricultural". With difficulty, she began to explain her problem, but as we talked, a remarkable thing happened. I began to understand her almost perfectly, and she had no difficulty understanding me. We spoke like that for over 2 and a half hours, and it was downright amazing.

It was more like "hearing in ears" than "speaking in tongues", but I believe that's what happened at Pentecost -- not so much that the apostles "spoke in tongues", but that the listeners were "hearing in ears". Regardless, it was a miracle, and the Gospel was conveyed.

[mossrose]

I've shared this before, but here it is again.

We were sponsoring several South American (and Mexican) nationals to Rio Grande Bible Institute, and it was too costly and far for them to "go home" during Christmas and Thanksgiving break, so we would drive down to the valley and pick them up, and have them stay with us for those few days to a week.

One night, Araceli (my "favorite Mexican daughter") had a serious theological question, and at that point she spoke very little English, and my Spanish is mostly "agricultural". With difficulty, she began to explain her problem, but as we talked, a remarkable thing happened. I began to understand her almost perfectly, and she had no difficulty understanding me. We spoke like that for over 2 and a half hours, and it was downright amazing.

It was more like "hearing in ears" than "speaking in tongues", but I believe that's what happened at Pentecost -- not so much that the apostles "spoke in tongues", but that the listeners were "hearing in ears". Regardless, it was a miracle, and the Gospel was conveyed.

I have thought the very same thing, that the miracle was in the hearing, not the speaking!

[Cow Poke]

I have thought the very same thing, that the miracle was in the hearing, not the speaking!

In the case of Pentecost especially, otherwise, people from each language group would need to have been standing within earshot of the particular apostle who was speaking in their tongue.

[37818]

The problems of course are that 'the perfect' is actually a noun. The idea of a noun actually being an adjective is beyond the scale of the grammar

No. The Greek word is an adjective, being used as a the subject in that sentence, acting as a pronoun, meaning "it." But the context 8-9 shows that it refers to the two nouns, "prophecies" and "knowledge" v.8. V9, two verbs, "we prophesy" and "we know" regarding being the noun, being "part." In verse 10, "that which is perfect is come, that which is in part is done away." What is done away is "prophecies" and "knowledge" the actions do to speaking, which was "in part." Now that is how I understand this.

No doubt it has always been scripture, but again the closing of the canon (or 'last written prophecy') is not within the scope of Paul's writing here to the Corinthian church. It is an idea that must be brought in after the fact. Since I wholeheartedly believe that Scripture cannot mean something different today than it did when it is written, the ideas of the perfect relating to the 'last written prophecy' or 'apostolic age' must be crossed off the list of plausible interpretations.

That is your view. The word of God is the word of God, when spoken. When written it is holy scripture, when written. (see Matthew 4:4.)

I also agree that 'face to face' is when we see the Lord face to face -- whether in heaven or upon His return. It, however, seems that even your interpretation ties the time of the 'perfect' with that of being with the Lord .

It is, I believe, historically what it was for the Apostle Paul. Whether Paul realized it at his writing or not. And I also am, persuaded that the Revelation of Jesus Christ as given to John ended, the two spoken gifts, prophesying and word of knowledge. Causing tongues to cease (1 Corinthians 13:8, 14:6).

[37818]

The problem is that you are assuming that Paul's words here are meant to be 'exhaustive' without basis to do so. It seems clear to me that Paul is dealing with a contextual issue within the church, as he is in all his letters. The point here is not the closing of scripture but rather the supremacy of love.

This interpretation I think can be regarded as valid (1 Corinthians 13:1-13; 1 John 4:18).

I have explained my understanding.

[mossrose]

In the case of Pentecost especially, otherwise, people from each language group would need to have been standing within earshot of the particular apostle who was speaking in their tongue.

Exactly!

It is also important to note that at Pentecost, as well as those instances following, that tongues was not a sign for believers, but for unbelievers. Paul makes that clear in 1 Cor. 14:22.

So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers;

If this is the case, and if tongues still exist today within the body, then those who speak in tongues should be out speaking the gospel in our streets and be heard by everyone in their own language. I don't see that happening. I see it occurring only within churches. And it is not the NT model for tongues given to us.

I would like to be very clear, and I have stated this previously in this thread, that I DO NOT discount situations such as you have described. To me, this is a manifestation of the true gift of tongues, and was for a one-time purpose. It was a known language, and had no need for interpretation.

But I believe that tongues as it came to be known in the Corinthian church, which Paul addresses, and as we know it today in the charismatic movement, has been done away with.