Evidence for God from Science

now this is a really sore subject for most Christians because they either believe in all of them, some, or none for today. now i myself believe that ALL gifts and offices are for today still, which includes the offices of Apostle, and Prophet spoken of in Eph. 4:11-13.

well i was wondering what everyones thoughts were on the subject...

As a former Charismatic who has become Reformed, let me explain my "no" vote.

The main qualification for the office of Apostle is that one must have been an eyewitness to Christ's resurrection. (Acts 1:21-22). I think it's safe to say that no one alive today qualifies. We are to build on the foundation of the Apostle's, not try to be them.

As I pointed out in another post, the gifts of tongues and prophecies today are quite a bit different than the biblical versions. Prophets in the Bible spoke inerrant, infalliable, authoritative words from the mouth of the Living God that were to be obeyed, no exceptions (Deut. 18:18-19). Today's "prophets" speak errant, falliable words that they claim are from God, but obedience is optional. The gift of tongues in the Bible were earthly, foreign languages (Acts 2:5-6, 1 Cor. 14:21 cf. Isaiah 28:11). Today's gift, which has it origins in the early 1900's, is unintelligible gibberish that we are told comes from God and are expected to just accept it. Meanwhile, our Pentecostal missionaries must take language courses before going overseas to preach the gospel. Not sure why this is necessary if they have what they say they have.

Does God heal today? Yes. Can some TV Preacher grab a short leg and lengthen it as some modern apostle? No. (Sorry folks, many of you have been duped by snake oil salesmen.)

Concerning the continuity of special revelation, the Bible is clear that this ceased with the close of the canon. (Rev. 22:18). The Word of the Lord is found only in the canon of Scripture. There are no more Words of God aside from what is already in the Bible. It is the "whole council of God". Nothing has been held back that was profitable.

Therefore I must vote no.

don't forget that Knowledge, wisdom and faith are all gifts from the holy spirit.

1Corinthians 12:1-11 make it clear, that while there are many gifts there is one spirit.

Amazing as it may seem, I actually agree with puritan lad here.

Amazing as it may seem, I actually agree with puritan lad here.

Me too, I'm also suprisingly skeptical of NDEs and other such events.

I think it's good to have a healthy dose of skepticism towards alot of so-called 'Christian' experiences because we can often be mislead into believing lies that can be destructive towards our relationship with God and our walk with him, plus, these things can be just as destructive to others who may believe them but notice an inconsistency in these things, and they'll try and say our religion is 'flawed'.

Ark~Magic wrote:

Amazing as it may seem, I actually agree with puritan lad here.

Me too, I'm also suprisingly skeptical of NDEs and other such events.

I think it's good to have a healthy dose of skepticism towards alot of so-called 'Christian' experiences because we can often be mislead into believing lies that can be destructive towards our relationship with God and our walk with him, plus, these things can be just as destructive to others who may believe them but notice an inconsistency in these things, and they'll try and say our religion is 'flawed'.

Yes - I agree too but differ on gifts. The Gifts and Callings of God are without repentance the bible says. Hold on - I am not speaking about tongues and supra-revelations but rather the gifts of salvation, love, knowledge, etc, promised in the bible as well as the gifts God bestows on His obedient children such as aiding and helping them, etc. These gifts from God are for us today and any supra-revelations should and must be viewed with skepticism and tested as the bible declares. Lesson's from the past should serve as warnings for the future.

I guess we really need to define what we mean by "gifts". Yes, there are permanent gifts that God gives His people, chief among them being salvation. My statement solely refered to the revelatory gifts of the Apostles.

puritan lad, first i would like to point out that Paul was an Apostle, but he didnt see Jesus in the flesh, nor did he even see Jesus, he say a bright light and heard the audible voice of Jesus. and i repeat, he was still an Apostle.

you say that all Prophecy is for scripture, yet in Acts 21:8-11 talks about when Paul, who didnt see Jesus in the flesh and was still an Apostle, he was heading back to Jerusalem and he stays in Caesarea and entered the house of Philip.. how Philip had four daughters that prophesied, yet none of their prophecies were put into scripture, it just says that they prophecied.

and i agree that no man can add or take away from the word, like in Rev. 22:18, but Prophecy today is not adding to scripture.

i also dont understand where you get the idea that God doesnt give us revelation today, the Holy Spirit is supposed to lead us into all truth. 1 Cor. 2:10-16

First, Paul did see a resurrected Christ on the road to Damascus. Even then, he considered himself the "least of the Apostles" as "one born out of due time". (1 Corinthians 15:8-9).

You also have addressed the biggest problem I have with the modern "prophecy" movement. You suggest that "Prophecy today is not adding to scripture.". I then have to ask, "what is it doing?" Is prophecy a Word from the Lord or not? It most certainly was in the Bible.

For this reason, most modern Pentecostals claim that their gift is some lesser sort of prophecy. It is usually vague and meaningless, and certainly doesn't carry the weight of authority that Prophets in the Bible carried (Deut. 18:18-19).

This is the Pentecostal dilemna. If prophecy is a "Word from the Lord", then it is clearly adding to THE Word of the Lord (Scripture). If it isn't a Word from the Lord, then it isn't prophecy.

first of all, i need to read that he saw the Christ after ressurection, and before assention. please provide some to varify your statement.

well, i dont go to and have been to a pentacostal church, i go to a non denomonant congregation.

well yes the prophecy today is a word from the LORD, yet it doesnt add to the Word of God in scripture because it is God talking to his people.

for example, we got a word from the LORD by a man that i know to be a prophet, and not because he says it. i have never heard him say he was God just revealed that to me. the word that he gave was to the church about sanctifying ourselves before the LORD. you know, setting ourselves apart, anyway, he had scripture to back it up.

i somewhat agree, prophecy is different, but in no way less. just because it is doesnt add to scripture, that doesnt mean that it is any less important. if it is from God, then it is as authoritative as God would make it...the difference in prophecy from now from then. the scripture in Deut. is talking about a prophet, and a world that was under the law, and now we are under the covenant of grace. that is probably the biggest difference there is.

Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words
Prophet

one who speaks forth or openly" (see PROPHECY, A), "a proclaimer of an inspired message," denoted among the Greeks an interpreter of the oracles of the gods. In the Sept. it is the translation of the word roeh, "a seer;" 1Sa 9:9, indicating that the "prophet" was one who had immediate intercourse with God. It also translates the word nabhi, meaning "either one in whom the message from God springs forth" or "one to whom anything is secretly communicated." Hence, in general, "the prophet" was one upon whom the Spirit of God rested, Num 11:17-29, one, to whom and through whom God speaks, Num 12:2; Amo 3:7,8.

God speaks through prophets, not as scripture, but with it. i am a little saddened that the 'prophets' that you met were most likely 'false prophets'

but you seem to say that God does speak to us today, i want to know how
he does that if he doesnt 'speak'

i recomend that you go to http://www.kimclement.com or wwww.morningstarministries.org

I would only disagree with PL in one aspect of what he said, that is tongues. By Paul's time tongues was no longer actual existing languages, interpretation of tongues was a corollary of speaking in tongues. I agree that it is severely abused nowadays, but I don't agree that it is always false. I basically accept the present existence of all the gifts of the spirit but I think that they occurr far less frequently than is commonly supposed and I do not believe that they can be exhibited at will.

I also think that apostleship is closed by definition.

j316 said: I would only disagree with PL in one aspect of what he said, that is tongues. By Paul's time tongues was no longer actual existing languages, interpretation of tongues was a corollary of speaking in tongues. I agree that it is severely abused nowadays, but I don't agree that it is always false. I basically accept the present existence of all the gifts of the spirit but I think that they occurr far less frequently than is commonly supposed and I do not believe that they can be exhibited at will.

this i agree with.

In some letter in the NT is states that they spoke in tongues and others understood these tongues in their own languages.
Anyone else remember reading something like that, if so where ?

Deborah wrote:In some letter in the NT is states that they spoke in tongues and others understood these tongues in their own languages.
Anyone else remember reading something like that, if so where ?

The passage you are thinking of is Acts 2. It doesn't actually say that the apostles spoke in some strange 'tongue language' and the listeners heard in their own language. It says that the apostles spoke in different languages, which is why the listeners heard their own languages.

If the miracle had been on the listenters not the apostles, it wouldn't be the Holy Spirit gift of tongues, it would be the Holy Spirit gift of ears.

Fortigurn wrote:

Deborah wrote:In some letter in the NT is states that they spoke in tongues and others understood these tongues in their own languages.
Anyone else remember reading something like that, if so where ?

The passage you are thinking of is Acts 2. It doesn't actually say that the apostles spoke in some strange 'tongue language' and the listeners heard in their own language. It says that the apostles spoke in different languages, which is why the listeners heard their own languages.

If the miracle had been on the listenters not the apostles, it wouldn't be the Holy Spirit gift of tongues, it would be the Holy Spirit gift of ears.

I beg to differ., but ty been looking everywhere for that

Acts 2:1-12
The Holy Spirit Comes at Pentecost
1When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them.
5Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? 9Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11(both Jews and converts to Judaism Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!" 12Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, "What does this mean?"