Pitfalls in Solely Relying on Acts for doctrine?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

We should all practice what we preach.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that.
Have I ever stated in any of my posts that three-steppers are not saved or not Apostolic or not part of the Body of Christ?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by freeatlast

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.

Giving up and quitting and becoming tired of the same old, same old is not the same thing. You give yourself too much credit!

[Hoovie]

Good words, Sam.

[mizpeh]

part 2

No concrete examples to prove it's normative ... no persuasive authority to show this in the didactic teachings of the epistles. Nothing.

I will agree with you that teaching tongues as the initial evidence of the infilling of the Spirit is "here a little and there a little" with the normative expection set as a benchmark in Acts 2 as experienced by the 120 disciples on the day of Pentecost. If I was one of the 3000 converts that day, I would have expected to speak in tongues as well. I would have wanted what they had and known for a surety that I had the Spirit considering Peter was accusing me of murdering the Messiah!

I think Acts 10 is a concrete example that the sign of tongues was enough to persuade Peter who preached the gospel to Gentiles for the first time.

How can we make it (tongues) on the par with repentance?

The baptism of the Holy Spirit is NEW to the new convenant. Tongues are a NEW thing as well. They go together. We must have the Spirit of Christ to be saved and part of the body of Christ. That reason in and of itself is enough to make it on par with repentance.

Again I believe it is evidence. I believe it's real. I believe that a believer should seek this experience. I even believe it's part of some's prayer language ... IT'S PART OF MINE. Paul speaks of it's benefits as well as the benifits other gifts of the Spirit.

What exactly would you call this "EXPERIENCE", Dan? A second blessing? And why do some folks only speak in tongues once or twice and not again?

But I will not base this on experiential hermeneutic which seems to be the foundation of your belief on the topic of tongues and pneumatology (what you personally experienced) ... nor can I state through Scripture that it is normative ... nor can I teach ... definitely that it is necessary for salvation. Doctrine is important ... it must be supported in all contexts ... and simply stating I feel ... or because it happened to me ... does not make it so.

I agree that scripture trumps experience. Matthew 17:1-9, 2 Peter 1:16-21 How many witnesses in the scripture do you need before you will accept something as normative? Obviously three is not enough. I would like to know why you believe the events in Acts 2:1-4 were only a one time event.

I too would like to see it explicitly stated in scripture that tongues is the sign that a believer has been filled with the Spirit. And sure it would be great to see it in the epistles but like one poster stated, "When things are common knowledge and written to Christians who've already had the experience, there's no point. There was no disagreement about tongues being evidence of God's Spirit. In some ways, Paul's letters only responded to PROBLEMS in the church." post 121. If there was any question that tongues was not the norm, we would expect it to be addressed in the epistles.

[freeatlast]

How about this scenario.

I recall a minister who rarely made it thru a sermon of bible study without speaking in tongues in the mic.

Anybody could repeat "his tongues". it was always the same "hondamoshia- oh hondamoshia

I have always felt this violiated Pauls teaching on tongues in the church

[Sam]

Originally Posted by freeatlast

How about this scenario.

I recall a minister who rarely made it thru a sermon of bible study without speaking in tongues in the mic.

Anybody could repeat "his tongues". it was always the same "hondamoshia- oh hondamoshia

I have always felt this violiated Pauls teaching on tongues in the church

Have you heard Sis. Freeman or seen her on DVD?
She often rejoices and speaks with tongues several times in her sermons.
But, who would try to silence her and say she's out of order?

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Sam

Have you heard Sis. Freeman or seen her on DVD?
She often rejoices and speaks with tongues several times in her sermons.
But, who would try to silence her and say she's out of order?

Paul not only would, he already did!

[freeatlast]

Originally Posted by Sam

Have you heard Sis. Freeman or seen her on DVD?
She often rejoices and speaks with tongues several times in her sermons.
But, who would try to silence her and say she's out of order?

Not sure Sam, that we should let our personal experiences or preferences outwiegh the word of God.

[mizpeh]

Dan,

The apostle Paul used narrative accounts to teach doctrine/for didactics. To teach justification by faith, he used the narrative accounts of Abraham. He used an analogy from a narrative to explain the two covenants and Israel after the flesh and Israel after the promise in Galatians 4. He used OT prophecy to support God's choice to save the Gentiles. He made numerous allusions to the OT in support of NT salvation. 2 Cor 3, 1 Cor 10:1-11, Roman 2:28-29, etc Even Peter used the Noah's ark narrative to compare to water baptism and salvation.

I'm sure there are a plethora of examples I am leaving out but the most direct answer to your initial post is found in 2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness which Dave so aptly expounded on in post 181and which I don't believe you responded to yet. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...&postcount=181


Dan, when does someone receive the initial infilling/baptism of the Holy Spirit? Is it at faith? at repentance? and can you provide scriptural support? What do you make of those three instances where believers were baptized with the Spirit and spoke in tongues? Should there be some type of "gift" sign like tongues or prophecy, a word of wisdom, a word knowledge whenever someone is filled with the Spirit for the first time? Or what scriptures would you use to teach a "second blessing"?

[stmatthew]

Don't know if I posted on this thread or not, but this is my contribution to it.



2Ti 3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.


Is Acts scripture or not??