tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post7497395120423187975..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: The Gift of Hiatus (Hez 9:11) [Part 3]Phil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger38125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-59392007191787110652007-11-05T12:07:00.000-08:002007-11-05T12:07:00.000-08:00After quoting the verse about the Spirit being pou...After quoting the verse about the Spirit being poured out, Peter tells his audience that the gift of the Spirit is for them and their children and as many as are afar off, as many as the Lord our God shall call. He did not say it was just for one day.Linkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00271990233429239770noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-34294134295801560382007-07-23T14:46:00.000-07:002007-07-23T14:46:00.000-07:00David:I am sure that completely changes the meta-n...David:<BR/><BR/>I am sure that completely changes the meta-narrative. Thank you for your faithful witness.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-3467917020595996842007-07-23T11:48:00.000-07:002007-07-23T11:48:00.000-07:00I dropped it until a future time when Dan was read...<I>I dropped it until a future time when Dan was ready, emotionally or spiritually or whatever, to continue without any baggage.<BR/><BR/>Then, Dan came here and started posting criticism again.</I><BR/><BR/>Frank,<BR/><BR/>There is a crucial event here you are skipping in the time line between you "dropped it" and Dan "started posting criticism again."<BR/> <BR/>Here:<BR/><BR/><I>Yeah, OK. My personal blog is on hiatus, but I spent this week <B>trying to talk some sense to Dan Edelen</B>,</I><BR/><BR/>Just pointing it out.David Chohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10635380194329897550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-68492037836296564732007-07-23T08:16:00.000-07:002007-07-23T08:16:00.000-07:00I hesitate to post a comment at this late date, bu...I hesitate to post a comment at this late date, but I feel that I need to articulate my thoughts and if by chance there are any readers still stopping by with words of correction/encouragement for me, so much the better.<BR/><BR/>Growing up in a church built on the charismatic/experiential foundation, I was obviously taught that one must be a continuationist. However, as I read and study more, I clearly see many abuses and errors that were (and are) put forth as truth.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps some of my angst is with the implications of the words used to define the two sides of this debate. When I hear the term continuation, it implies that things have continued as they were with no change. When I hear the term cessation, it implies that things have completely stopped and will never start again (almost akin to extinction). <BR/><BR/>As centuri0n stated ". . .God is God and can do whatever He wants to do." God's sovereignty doesn't appear to be, and shouldn't be an issue in this conversation (note: not meaning to use "conversation" in the emerging church sense). Yet it is rarely mentioned in this argument. Granted, I haven't read everything on both sides, but what I have read doesn't usually focus on sovereignty issues.<BR/><BR/>(So get to the point babbling blog rookie yells the crowd) What I struggle with is the Sovereignty of God and the implications within the words used to categorize this issue. The Spirit gives the gifts as he chooses. If the Spirit chooses, is it not possible for Him to choose to not give miraculous gifts for a time, due to His own choosing? (such as gifts of healing, tongues, miracles, etc. – Yet it still is odd that the gifts of serving, administration, teaching, etc. haven't "ceased", but I shall ramble no more) If that were so, would it not seem like the gifts had ceased? <BR/><BR/>I would venture a guess that, other than the most extreme individuals in either camp, most continuationists would agree that the level/frequency of the miraculous gifts is different than what was recorded in scripture (I believe that was blogged about, but I am too lazy to link to it), and most cessationists would agree that God can do what he wants. That to me is both sides talking about two sides of the same coin. If God can do as he pleases, then perhaps the gifts haven't ceased, (i.e. are not extinct) but are not currently being poured out. If God can do as he pleases, then He may not be pouring the gifts in the same identical manner (if at all), so the gifts may available, but may be different (i.e. are not identical). Ultimately, it comes down to how God pours out His gifts.<BR/><BR/>Yes, there are many abuses in the name of spiritual gifts. Yes, we must examine all teachings to make sure they put forth the truth as set forth in God's word. (There are many abuses in the name of sovereignty as well that must be examined, e.g. hyper-calvanism). We shouldn't let abuses dictate truth. Has it appeared that the miraculous gifts have been absent for some time? I would say yes, although I cannot speak for all cultures everywhere. Does that mean we should say that they never will be seen again? I cannot make that jump. We have not reached the perfect, we do not yet see face-to-face, we have not become fully grown men (i.e. reached our fully sanctified state), and we won't until our blessed Savior returns.<BR/><BR/>To me the bigger issue is whether we are seeking the gift or the giver. The gifts, whether ceased or not, were given to build the body and glorify Christ. Period. They weren’t given for self-serving reasons or pride. They weren't given to establish a who's who of Christianity. Whether the gifts are alive, dead, extinct, or on hiatus (not like centuri0n's hiatus) is, and should always be, a secondary issue. Am I seeking my Savior, treasuring Him above all else, loving others in His name, His way, with His strength, is of primary importance. In short, the Gospel must remain central. We must not desire the gifts at the expense of desiring the Giver.<BR/><BR/>So, I babble on to say this. There are intelligent men who hold dearly to the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture on both sides of this issue; I don't know who is right (MacArthur, Pyromanicas, et al. or Piper, Grudem, et al.). Perhaps some day I will be an fraction as learned as those men. For now, I am continuing to study and will rest in God's sovereignty. If the gifts are for today, then I ask for His gifts so I can edify His church and bring glory to His name. If the gifts have ceased (i.e. extinct), then I rest in Him and ask for His strength to edify His church and bring glory to His name.Arichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04559641241257829676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-90325663279479241842007-07-22T20:48:00.000-07:002007-07-22T20:48:00.000-07:00Bam!... and bingo.<I>Bam!</I><BR/><BR/>... and bingo.Habitans in Siccohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13666311435942322569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-70697310717760490282007-07-22T12:41:00.001-07:002007-07-22T12:41:00.001-07:00[QUOTE]"I think what you need is to take a dose of...[QUOTE]<BR/><I>"I think what you need is to take a dose of your own medicine"</I> <BR/><BR/>A couple of us were guessing what sort of predictable response I'd get and one guy nailed it. He'll be glad to know how easy that was to call. I guess its not too hard to anticipate the standard script after reading the same old act time and again. <BR/>[/QUOTE]<BR/><BR/>Which means what? See: what it is intended to mean is that if you're going to throw a rock over here, you shouldn't complain about rock-throwing. It's simply having as much self-awareness as the average person does. <BR/><BR/>Anyway, any reasonable person can read your comments as sarcastic humor. And somehow, you have already classed sarcastic humor as "pugnacious, arrogant, and graceless" ...<BR/><BR/>... for everyone else, I guess, and not you. <BR/><BR/>This is still an opportunity for you to offer a correction to me which I can do something about. The comment Phil posted by me was traded between two friends, and while I don't keep e-mails in a vault someplace as if I say things I am ashamed of frequently, it's important to consider <B>context</B> in a statement like that. It was cracking-wise between two friends in an e-mail. Phil shared it because, frankly, it's funny. I realize there are no classes in humor-writing at DTS, but I'll bet there's one on reading in context.<BR/><BR/>To be clear: the medicine here for you is "read things the way you expect people to read what you have written." <BR/><BR/>[QUOTE] <BR/><I>"what sort of jokes are acceptable"</I> <BR/><BR/>Oooooh, that was joke. Well, its all good then. <BR/>[/QUOTE]<BR/><BR/>This round of charismatic quibbling started when Phil, as we do here, posted a criticism of charismatic enthusiam, and Dan replied with a not-very-useful criticism in reply. Over there, the dialog got cut short when Dan received a "tsunami" in his life, complained I was being somewhat mean for not giving him some space, and over there I apologized for not reading his whole blog but rather staying focus on this one issue. I dropped it until a future time when Dan was ready, emotionally or spiritually or whatever, to continue without any baggage.<BR/><BR/>Then, <B>Dan came here and started posting criticism again</B>. Think about that -- Dan came here looking for a little interaction, and not hardly in the spirit of Zwigli meeting with Calvin. So I posted my response to his last round of charismatic defense, <I>because he opened the door</I>. And I got a field of crickets -- nothing substantive, and nothing from Dan, for sure.<BR/><BR/>That is: Dan, after he came here spoiling for a little joust in spite of his previous plea that he was not emotionally or spiritually ready for that kind of thing.<BR/><BR/>So to field a <I>joke</I> in that context -- especially a joke that was not baudy, not personal, and not a violation of Christian ethics in any way -- seems, at worst, funny. You may call it "ungracious", but perhaps we should ask what it is when someone uses his personal life as a shield to avoid answering criticism, but then ditches that excuse when he thinks he's got something critical and meaningful to say about someone else.<BR/><BR/>Is that gracious, or is that something else? How would you rate it, Jeff, if Dan started opening up a can of exegesis on me, and my first response was, "Dude, I just had a personal tragedy," and then 24 hours later I came to Dan's blog and started berating him about a -different- subject? Heroic and irenic, or something else?<BR/><BR/>Rather than berate Dan for being in the "something else" category, I cracked a joke to Phil.<BR/><BR/>I am sure that you have never done anything so outlandish in your life.<BR/><BR/>[QUOTE] <BR/><I>"I'd be willing to make my sense of humor come in line with what Scripture teaches us -- if you will make the same commitment." </I> <BR/><BR/>You want to take it to Scripture? Alright, does Scripture say anything about "pugnacious, arrogant, and graceless" jabs at other brothers like Dan Edelen? Oh, that's right. You played it off as a joke so nevermind. I'll try to explain to Dan that he should be laughing right now.<BR/><BR/>Obviously you can do no wrong, man. I submit so you've vanquished another unbiblical rube. And Dan won't reply here so put a little notch in your heresy hunter belt. You won, man! That's what its all about.<BR/>[QUOTE]<BR/><BR/>Well, I'd suggest, first, that Scripture doesn't call the kind of thing I did here "pugnacious, arrogant, and graceless". You disagree -- but you haven't done much to help me see your point.<BR/><BR/>This is actually a great example, Jeff, of again you missing the point by about 170 degrees. You have made it clear that my joke is somehow "pugnacious, arrogant, and graceless".<BR/><BR/>Rather than tell you why you're wrong, I sat down in your school of Christian ethics and asked you to open the Bible for me. Explain what kind of jokes are acceptable in Christian life -- and then explain whether the joke I told fit inside that paradigm. I could be wrong. In fact, I have a track record of posting public apologies when I am wrong. Not so much from you and Dan.<BR/><BR/>In that, for a guy who apparently abhors sarcasm so much, you tend to use it like a steam-roller rather than like a bow and arrow. That is, you just run it over everything and hope you get the target rather than first figuring out your target and hitting <I>just that</I>. That, I think, is "pugnacious, arrogant, and graceless". It also demonstrates an ineffective understanding of how to measure criticism.<BR/><BR/>[QUOTE] <BR/>Your comments tend to make Pyromaniacs a noxious place which is a shame because Dan P. usually has some good posts. I'll just go straight to his blog from now on because its not really worth my time to come here anymore. Keep your shtick going though cause the fanboys here obviously love it.<BR/>[/QUOTE]<BR/><BR/>Which, of course, as far as criticism go, is wholly-irenic and humble. Thanks for being such a great witness to what you think is right, Jeff. I'm sure that nobody thinks you've been in the least bit self-refuting this morning.<BR/><BR/>Take a deep breath, re-read my comment to you from 7:58 PM, July 21, 2007, and ask yourself: is it really so wrong to ask for an explanation? Maybe I'm flabbergasted rather than pugnacious and sort-of aghast rather than arrogant.<BR/><BR/>Help me out, Jeff: if you can heap on sarcasm like this and not be guilty of the things you have accused me of, then maybe there's something I'm missing. I admit it: I have no idea what else to say as it all gets read in the paradigm of me being "pugnacious, arrogant, and graceless" and "noxious".FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-2264555919297878542007-07-22T11:22:00.000-07:002007-07-22T11:22:00.000-07:00"Your comments tend to make Pyromaniacs a noxious ..."Your comments tend to make Pyromaniacs a noxious place..."<BR/><BR/>Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.<BR/><BR/>"Keep your shtick going though cause the fanboys here obviously love it."<BR/><BR/>The phrases "same old act" and ""pugnacious, arrogant, and graceless" immediately come to mind...threegirldadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10514416693800430357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-67146754414548221542007-07-22T06:59:00.000-07:002007-07-22T06:59:00.000-07:00If its something kind, post it for Dan Edelen, not...If its something kind, post it for Dan Edelen, not me. And if it truly is kind then I'm sure I'll take it in the straightforward manner it will be given in. But if its some sort of rebuke or putdown guised as loving biblical smackdown, don't bother. I suspect it will be the latter though since the fanboys won't benefit from it. I would think that words of kindness would benefit everyone. I'll be glad to have you prove me wrong on this. Maybe you truly do have some actual kind words for us. And hopefully they address your own insulting comments toward others rather than trying to shift the attention to someone else.Jeff Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06658996385948373287noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-10852150437702360982007-07-22T06:15:00.000-07:002007-07-22T06:15:00.000-07:00Jeff -- Enjoy your Sunday morning in church.I have...Jeff -- Enjoy your Sunday morning in church.<BR/><BR/>I have a few kind words for you which I will post this afternoon -- for the fan boys, if not for your benefit, anyway. You will take it in whatever way you see fit, as usual.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-77241684630133951512007-07-21T21:21:00.000-07:002007-07-21T21:21:00.000-07:00"I think what you need is to take a dose of your o...<I>"I think what you need is to take a dose of your own medicine"</I><BR/><BR/>A couple of us were guessing what sort of predictable response I'd get and one guy nailed it. He'll be glad to know how easy that was to call. I guess its not too hard to anticipate the standard script after reading the same old act time and again. <BR/><BR/><I>"what sort of jokes are acceptable"</I><BR/><BR/>Oooooh, that was joke. Well, its all good then. <BR/><BR/><I>"I'd be willing to make my sense of humor come in line with what Scripture teaches us -- if you will make the same commitment."</I> <BR/><BR/>You want to take it to Scripture? Alright, does Scripture say anything about "pugnacious, arrogant, and graceless" jabs at other brothers like Dan Edelen? Oh, that's right. You played it off as a joke so nevermind. I'll try to explain to Dan that he should be laughing right now. <BR/><BR/>Obviously you can do no wrong, man. I submit so you've vanquished another unbiblical rube. And Dan won't reply here so put a little notch in your heresy hunter belt. You won, man! That's what its all about.<BR/><BR/>Your comments tend to make Pyromaniacs a noxious place which is a shame because Dan P. usually has some good posts. I'll just go straight to his blog from now on because its not really worth my time to come here anymore. Keep your shtick going though cause the fanboys here obviously love it.Jeff Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06658996385948373287noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-65622345113155833612007-07-21T19:58:00.000-07:002007-07-21T19:58:00.000-07:00Jeff:I think what you need is to take a dose of yo...Jeff:<BR/><BR/>I think what you need is to take a dose of your own medicine, whatever it is you think you're prescribing.<BR/><BR/>However, I'm a willing patient: what sort of jokes are acceptable, given your view of the Christian life? Any? I'd be willing to make my sense of humor come in line with what Scripture teaches us -- if you will make the same commitment.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-5490783285261554072007-07-21T12:48:00.000-07:002007-07-21T12:48:00.000-07:00"My opinion is that the Bible speaks to a church w...<I>"My opinion is that the Bible speaks to a church which does attest to a miracle: the miracle of salvation, through the miracles of the incarnation and resurrection, by the miracle of regeneration. This is plenty miraculous. These things in and of themselves are frankly incredible."</I><BR/><BR/>A great reminder like the statement above is ruined for me by yet another pugnacious, arrogant, and graceless comment like this:<BR/><BR/><I>"Yeah, whatever. Who knew people with the gift of tongues had so little to say?"</I><BR/><BR/>Lemme guess, I just need to lighten up. <BR/><BR/>I'm not suprised that Dan hasn't been responding to these posts. He's a pretty classy guy.Jeff Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06658996385948373287noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-31627423207427032122007-07-21T05:54:00.000-07:002007-07-21T05:54:00.000-07:00For those seeking a "more excellent way" to read t...For those seeking a "more excellent way" to read this post or share it with a friend, <A HREF="http://kingdomboundbooks.com/pyro_widgets/daGifts_today.pdf" REL="nofollow">this is the 280K .pdf file</A>, which is formatted for easiest reading.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for asking.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-56732843984204904552007-07-20T21:50:00.000-07:002007-07-20T21:50:00.000-07:00Now Frank, surely there are more noteworthy miracl...Now Frank, surely there are more noteworthy miracles than <B>Regeneration, Adoption, Justification, Imputation, Sanctification, Reconciliation, Propitiation and Redemption</B>.<BR/><BR/>Come now, admit it: glossolalia is <I>pretty cool</I>. At least when Jim Carey does it, it is.<BR/><BR/>But then, he's probably just faking it.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://ibcarlos.com" REL="nofollow">ibcarlos</A>IB Dubbyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14110161040854928853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-17552870990834584262007-07-20T17:41:00.000-07:002007-07-20T17:41:00.000-07:00EP:For some reason, when this discussion comes up,...EP:<BR/><BR/>For some reason, when this discussion comes up, there is always significant confusion between the question, "Does God still produce miracles?" and the question, "Does God gift the church specifically with Tongues, Prophecy, and miraculous gifts like that as He did, for example, at Pentecost?"<BR/><BR/>These are two different questions, and I am usually very vexed that people do not recognize this. What I am saying -- what I would go so far to say that TeamPyro would say together -- is that God is God and can do whatever He wants to do. God, for example, is free to answer prayers. God is free to divert weather, bring weather, heal, change financial fortunes, raise up kings and bring them down, etc. God is God.<BR/><BR/>But the question in this series of posts is, "Does God establish the church to be a body which is always expressing miraculous signs like speaking in foreign languages, shattering pulpits, and in particular gifting men with His own words not found in Scripture or enabling them to heal with a word or with the laying on of hands as a sign of their authority?"<BR/><BR/>My opinion is that the Bible speaks to a church which does attest to a miracle: the miracle of salvation, through the miracles of the incarnation and resurrection, by the miracle of regeneration. This is <I>plenty miraculous</I>. These things in and of themselves are frankly incredible. That someone chattering in an indecipherable language is seen as a better or more useful miracle is frankly baffling. That someone can speak a "prophecy" with an at-best 50/50 chance of coming true can be seen as more practical or spirit-demonstrating than the preaching of the Gospel, is frankly astounding.<BR/><BR/>God is God. What He has already done is way greater than these paltry tricks and self-deceptions. And His word <I>points us to the greater miracles of love and truth</I>.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for asking.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-14098875809116650562007-07-20T13:17:00.000-07:002007-07-20T13:17:00.000-07:00Frank (or someone who feels they could accurately ...Frank (or someone who feels they could accurately respond for Frank), how broad or how narrow is your cessationsim? Are you denying a more narrow cessationsim such as denying for today certain miraculous gifts only, such as prophecy, healing, tongues or (as in the circle I grew up in) a denial of the miraculous in general. Thus: is it conceivable that prayers of Christians that a person be healed from a terminal illness be answered? That is, would you say the gift of healing has ceased, but that God may still do miraculous things using the prayers of his people, as He wills? Would you deny in today's world any supernatural phenomena at all, such as, demonic affliction? Would all such cases be explained through mental illness or other physical means? I've met career missionaries (non-charismatic guys by the way and members of the Evangelical Covenant Church) who have had to deal with exorcism of demons. These were both men whom I deeply respected. I believe them. Is this also out of bounds? How narrow or how broad is your cessationism?Eclectic Pietisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00406401732112222244noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-24415762255748145882007-07-20T11:41:00.000-07:002007-07-20T11:41:00.000-07:00In Acts 2, the Pentecostal interpretation misses a...In Acts 2, the Pentecostal interpretation misses a number of things by focusing on "tongues" and not what was actually going on.<BR/><BR/>This event in the Upper Room spilled out into the Temple courtyard, where Peter preached his first sermon. The people were hearing God glorified <I>in their own languages</I>.<BR/><BR/>We need to ask ourselves this question: Within the trajectory of Acts, why is this important? What is happening here?<BR/><BR/>A. First the table of nations in this chapter corresponds to the table of nations scattered @ Babel in Genesis. So, the people gathered there are all from these nations. They are also Jews in Jerusalem for Pentecost.<BR/><BR/>B. So, what we have here is a reversal of the curse of Babel. The many languages are made one. Instead of cursing God, they are blessing God. Instead of elevating man in building the tower, they are a tower built by God for His own glory.<BR/><BR/>C. This in turn tacks on to the opening of Acts, where Jesus promises the Spirit and tells them that they will take the gospel to Jerusalem, Samaria, and to the ends of the Earth.<BR/><BR/>D. The people here are Jewish. They represent the Jews of the Diaspora. The Diaspora was <I>also</I> a curse, remember. It went back to the days of the Divided Kingdom and Babylon. God now begins drawing the scattered Jews together.<BR/><BR/>E. This, in turn, looks forward to the creation of one people, the Church, from both Jew and Gentile, for the gospel will go to those peoples too.<BR/><BR/>F. It's also Pentecost, the celebration of the giving of the Law. The Spirit comes and writes the New Covenant on "Tablets of Flesh," beginning the fulfillment of the words of the prophet Jeremiah. <BR/><BR/>G. The event spills over into the Temple Courts. This sacred space in the OT was where the people gathered to pray. The Temple was also the place where the Spirit of God was said to dwell. Now, God answers the prayers of the pious Jews of ages past. Now, the Spirit of God visibly leaves the Temple of Stone for Temples of Flesh and to dwell in a non-spatial Temple, the Church. Gifts and callings once given to prophets alone and a few others are given broadly and generously to every member of the Church in some fashion.<BR/><BR/>H. And from here, the gospel goes to Samaria and to all over the known world. Today it has circled the globe.<BR/><BR/>So, the work of the Spirit here is not defined by "tongues" but by what this event actually means. Is the Spirit not doing this today? <BR/><BR/>The Pentecostal, by arguing for "tongues" as a "sign gift," by using Acts 2 misses all of this. The focus is not on the "sign gift" as a gift for all Christians in every generation but the meaning of the sign and the work of the Spirit of God through the spread of the gospel, including the reversal of curses, the taming and civilizing of the land (ala Eden), the casting out of demons who have lost their power because the serpent (Satan) has finally been defeated, a time of mercy (vs. destruction) for both Jews and Gentiles who were both complicit, remember, in Jesus, Son of God's, crucifixion - "the" most capital crime of all time, and the spread of the gospel not only to that generation but to their children and children's children for many generations to come.GeneMBridgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504383610477532374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-43526071929478742992007-07-20T11:27:00.000-07:002007-07-20T11:27:00.000-07:00The way I see it is this: The doctrine of continu...The way I see it is this: The doctrine of continuing charismata is not “expressly set down in Scripture,” nor can it “by good and necessary consequence” be deduced from Scripture.<BR/><BR/>Anyone claiming otherwise has a huge burden of proof to overcome, DE's musings notwithstanding.wordsmithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13694767852556204886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-82971062094113866472007-07-20T09:33:00.000-07:002007-07-20T09:33:00.000-07:00LawerenceWhat djp said, andSo - your a cessecianoi...Lawerence<BR/><BR/>What djp said, and<BR/><BR/>So - your a cessecianoist(sp, i know)- <BR/><BR/>Acts 2 contains the full monty Holy Spirit. Full bore, both barrels, the H.S. is engaged.<BR/><BR/>Yet it NEVER happens that way today. <BR/><BR/>So you agree, the HS has ceased to act in a way that once happened.David A. Carlsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00465387359523299616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-67191128181330425052007-07-20T08:49:00.000-07:002007-07-20T08:49:00.000-07:00Fantastic, much needed, will reference this over, ...Fantastic, much needed, will reference this over, and over, and over...<BR/><BR/>Hope you can see now how valuable your hiatus has been!! LOL! :-)Conniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16388126339087271102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-14967568892943475312007-07-20T06:56:00.000-07:002007-07-20T06:56:00.000-07:00Sorry, I checked and I can't find your email addre...Sorry, I checked and I can't find your email address on your profile. Here is mine:<BR/><BR/>david at wolfcreekridge.com<BR/><BR/>Sorry to take up comment space for this!David Kylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17709270641017787218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-59581539757545634382007-07-20T06:51:00.000-07:002007-07-20T06:51:00.000-07:00My e-mail is in my blogger profile.My e-mail is in my blogger profile.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-50347833650153796142007-07-20T06:46:00.000-07:002007-07-20T06:46:00.000-07:00Wow! Well said! Frank (can I call you Frank?) wher...Wow! Well said! Frank (can I call you Frank?) where can I get your email address to ask for a copy of the document you wrote?David Kylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17709270641017787218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-50363807657403634892007-07-20T06:34:00.000-07:002007-07-20T06:34:00.000-07:00Cent- you said, "Show me the hammers"See, I DIG th...Cent- you said, "Show me the hammers"<BR/><BR/>See, I DIG that about you man!philnesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04393311811604119321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-57922495462294287272007-07-20T03:55:00.000-07:002007-07-20T03:55:00.000-07:00Lawrence — "tongues of men and angels" doesn't mea...<B>Lawrence</B> — "tongues of men and angels" <A HREF="http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2006/07/red-herrings-tongues-of-angels.html" REL="nofollow">doesn't mean what you think</A>.<BR/><BR/><B>peachfuzz</B>—you were given some misinformation about tongues. Here's <A HREF="http://www.bibchr.com/tongue_summary.html" REL="nofollow">a different perspective</A>, which Scripture.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.com