Apostolic Friends Forum
Page 25 of 31 « First 15161718192021222324 25 262728293031
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Apostolic Friends Forum (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)
-   The D.A.'s Office (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=65)
-   -   Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrine? (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=20706)

freeatlast 12-07-2008 04:03 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover (Post 650151)
I won't be so quick to credit these responses as anything other than a lack of commitment to deal with the "BOOKS" Dan has just written.

TR and SE have both shown they can grapple with these arguments in the past.
Big difference in grappling and proving something wrong. :yo

Sam 12-07-2008 05:00 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeatlast (Post 650148)
I have noticed this so often in conversations with 3 step pentecostals.

After finding their doctrine crumbles as a house of cards, they "grow tired" of the conversation and become "weary" in their defense.

Next will be the cry to ban Dan. :snowing
OK, I am a one-stepper, but I don't think that is an accurate statement.

I think both one-steppers and three-steppers get tired of these conversations after a while and just stop posting.

How often can we just keep saying the same things over and over?

Just realize that there are both one-steppers and three-steppers in the Church, or in the Body of Christ, or in the people known as Apostolic, or whatever we want to call ourselves. And both one-steppers and three-steppers need to follow the three "R"s:
Recognize one another,
Respect one another,
Realize we're all in this family together as brothers and sisters

Cindy 12-07-2008 05:10 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeatlast (Post 650153)
Big difference in grappling and proving something wrong. :yo
Yep, and that goes both ways. Sheesh.

Hoovie 12-07-2008 05:10 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Good words, Sam.

Cindy 12-07-2008 05:11 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam (Post 650212)
OK, I am a one-stepper, but I don't think that is an accurate statement.

I think both one-steppers and three-steppers get tired of these conversations after a while and just stop posting.

How often can we just keep saying the same things over and over?

Just realize that there are both one-steppers and three-steppers in the Church, or in the Body of Christ, or in the people known as Apostolic, or whatever we want to call ourselves. And both one-steppers and three-steppers need to follow the three "R"s:
Recognize one another,
Respect one another,
Realize we're all in this family together as brothers and sisters
I agree.

freeatlast 12-07-2008 05:56 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam (Post 650212)
OK, I am a one-stepper, but I don't think that is an accurate statement.

I think both one-steppers and three-steppers get tired of these conversations after a while and just stop posting.

How often can we just keep saying the same things over and over?

Just realize that there are both one-steppers and three-steppers in the Church, or in the Body of Christ, or in the people known as Apostolic, or whatever we want to call ourselves. And both one-steppers and three-steppers need to follow the three "R"s:
Recognize one another,
Respect one another,
Realize we're all in this family together as brothers and sisters
Well Sam...thats why I respect you so much. You made stop and think about my words.

I was a bit sharp in my comment. Both positions of the debate of course feel they are the ones that are right.

It does get old debating what we've debated so long, so many times before.

My apologies. :christmaskiss

Pressing-On 12-07-2008 06:04 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover (Post 650121)
I hear what you are saying but I question whether the distictions are that clear. Paul seems to be saying tongues themselves (if they are not understood or interpreted) are not for the public assembly.

Ecstatic utterances of "other tongues", if heard by the assembly (including unbelievers) are in essence the very same as what you are calling "Prophetic tongues". One might argue the difference is a question of addressing the assembly or not. Were this the case, it would become a matter of volume and perhaps discernment on the part of church leadership. Neither of which changes how an unbeliever would perceive the event.
Stephen,
Are you saying that at no time would a saint, in a church setting, ever utter anything in tongues unless they felt it would be tongues and interpretation or prophesy?

Hoovie 12-07-2008 06:15 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 650318)
Stephen,
Are you saying that at no time would a saint, in a church setting, ever utter anything in tongues unless they felt it would be tongues and interpretation or prophesy?
I believe that is the only way one can read 1 Cor. 14

Pressing-On 12-07-2008 06:31 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover (Post 650334)
I believe that is the only way one can read 1 Cor. 14
Not really, IMO. If the text is discussing the operation of the gifts, Paul is speaking to them of using that gift with order.

I believe it is like a person that continues to speak in tongues when it's not appropriate to do so or they get carried away and elevate the volume when the congregation is not going that way. We've dealt with people who needed teaching on this very thing.

In verse 6 Paul is saying, "Now, brethren, if I come unto speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?"

I believe he is wanting them, by the text together, to mature above where they are - rambling on and not knowing how to "manage", if you will, the Spirit of God.

Saying that we cannot utter tongues outside of tongues and interpretation contradicts someone receiving the Holy Ghost at the initial infilling. You are speaking in tongues at that point.

The men on the day of Pentecost were accused of being drunk. They were speaking in tongues for all to hear. How long did they do that? Long enough to draw a crowd. IMO, if that was what God was speaking of in I Cor 14, he wouldn't have allowed that display in Acts 2. JMO.

I believe I Cor 14 is a discourse on decency and order.

Hoovie 12-07-2008 06:39 PM
Re: Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrin
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 650345)
Not really, IMO. If the text is discussing the operation of the gifts, Paul is speaking to them of using that gift with order.

I believe it is like a person that continues to speak in tongues when it's not appropriate to do so or they get carried away and elevate the volume when the congregation is not going that way. We've dealt with people who needed teaching on this very thing.

In verse 6 Paul is saying, "Now, brethren, if I come unto speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?"

I believe he is wanting them, by the text together, to mature above where they are - rambling on and not knowing how to "manage", if you will, the Spirit of God.

Saying that we cannot utter tongues outside of tongues and interpretation contradicts someone receiving the Holy Ghost at the initial infilling. You are speaking in tongues at that point.

The men on the day of Pentecost were accused of being drunk. They were speaking in tongues for all to hear. How long did they do that? Long enough to draw a crowd. IMO, if that was what God was speaking of in I Cor 14, he wouldn't have allowed that display in Acts 2. JMO.

I believe I Cor 14 is a discourse on decency and order.
Here is the bottom line

27If 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.

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

I would concede Verse 28 may indicate "speaking in tongues" silently or softly (inaudible), but not that others can hear.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:39 PM.
Page 25 of 31 « First 15161718192021222324 25 262728293031
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.