The Cross of Christ Alone Can Save

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

If you don't wish to discuss, I can respect that.

I wish you wouldn't answer inside of my quotes. When I try to respond I lose my text and have to drag yours down.

Acts as a narrative of the beginning of the church does not create a superiority of the book over all other books, nor make it the "standard" by which all others must be interpreted through. The fact is, Acts is a narrative, while many of the Epistles contain didactic and even theological material. They all have their own purpose. All are the Word of God, and inspired. This Acts-centric view is unique to Pentecostalism that has an insecurity complex with the whole of Scripture.

Therefore it's not a "moot point" as you suggest, since the writers didn't check-in with Luke before writing their letters. They were in agreement, that is for sure, but the writings were not reconciled through the specific writings we called the Acts of the Apostles. THAT, my sister, is absolutely ludicrous.

What you concluded with in the paragraph is (almost) true. Though different perspectives and purposes, most of the books in the NT contain reference to the Gospel. I'm not sure about the "promise of the Spirit" part. Many of them do talk about living in Christ (especially Pauline writings, not really Luke's focus).

I never said Acts was the superior book. It still shows how the NT church began. It is a point of reference and all of the Epistles are in agreement with what was written. Most all of the Epistles are addressed "unto the church of" or "called to be saints", etc. - established churches. It's just logical to follow this because of the addressed wording.

Truth, intertwining message? You are hung up on this. Validity was FAR MORE than if they faithfully represented the Gospel. But yes, of course, that would be one criteria to even know if it had the authority of an Apostle. The message is not as "intertwined" to the specificity that you regard it. John and Luke are two completely different writers, two vastly different purposes and perspectives. To read them as one is a hermeneutic 101 failure.

Intertwined to me is tied up together. John and Luke may be vastly different writers but their works agree - they are intertwined!

I'd open that up for a poll. HG with evidentiary tongues only you mean? Most believe in every function of the Spirit: from calling man to God, to faith and the indwelling at New Birth, to empowerment by Baptism in the Spirit, to His role in prayer (Romans 8), to His role in justification (Romans 5), to His role as a Counselor, and on and on.

You can start a poll if you want to. We've already been over all of this here and I still believe what I started out believing on FCF - just like everyone else. I think we just enjoy talking our heads off for no apparent reason. LOL!