someone send this to me...someone mull over this

[l.a.providence]

Mull over this for me....

i don't understand all of this:

i was negating 2 different lanuages believing and i still believe there is only one tongues mentioned in scripture...not a tongues people can speak plus a prayer langauge

anyway, comment on this last post for me....  he seems to believe the 'gift' of the spirit is some particular gift, not the holy spirit itself...

he's got some good points and  i know whether or not they are true?
it's 2 different posts....

here they are:
Goldcross,

2:38 and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Let me tell you how I believe this verse is correctly understood from my experiential point of view.

You read the above thinking that it means you receive the Holy Spirit who is the gift. That is incorrect scripturally and grammatically. The word in the Greek for 'gift of the Spirit' is 5120 in Strong's and it means of this person and is possessive in definition: his. In other words those who receive their gift 'from the' Spirit don't receive Him they receive something from Him.

Your second misunderstanding of Acts 2:38,39 is concerning what the promise is. The promise isn't the person of The Spirit it is supernatural power from the Spirit.

Act 2:39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him."

LUK 24:49 And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high."

ACT 1:8 But you shall receive/lambano power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you;


DR

_____________________________

Doctrine learned and not lived is lost, and eyes closed to advice
may still be open to example. 
   

Add a note (optional, 100 characters):


Is this bookmark public?

Report | Post #: 1845 


RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread - 11/14/2007 12:57:21 PM         


Him4all
Regular Member





Posts: 154
Joined: 6/26/2007
From: Kansas
Status: online   Goldcross,

Let me finnish by explaining what I believe are your last two misunderstandings of Acts 2:38,39. The Greek word in vs 38 for receive is lambano and not decomai. The definition of Decomai is a passive reception of something (like your spirit getting saved [made holy] when you are born again). But the word in verse 38 is not decomai but lambano which is defined as a 'self prompted taking' and not a 'passive reception'.

The word that's always used in reference to getting initially saved, or born again, is decomai and the word that's always used in reference to being subsequently baptized in spiritual power is lambano.

An example of both decomai/lambano in scripture dealing with initially'saved' Christians [eg. repented and water baptized (8:12)] but who did not get the gift of spiritual power/tongues from the Holy Spirit's baptizing them is in Acts 8.

ACT 8:14 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received/decomai the word of God (initial salvation), they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive/lambano the Holy Spirit; 16 for it had not yet fallen on any of them,...

They had fulfilled the repent and be baptized requirement of Acts 2:38,39 but they never did receive the gift FROM the Holy Spirit.

Your last misunderstanding of Act 2:39 is where it says who this promise of power/tongues from the Holy Spirit is for. Those present...and their children...and those far off (Corinthians???) and to ALL whom God calls....in my opinion that includes me.

That's my authority for believing that when I speak in tongues I am walking in the truth of God's written word.

I hope this helps you understand why I believe.

DR

_____________________________

Doctrine learned and not lived is lost, and eyes closed to advice
may still be open to example. 
   

Add a note (optional, 100 characters):


Is this bookmark public?

Report | Post #: 1846 


RE: Gift of Tongues - One Stop Thread - 11/14

[Robert Pate]

While in this life we only posses the first fruits of the Spirit, yet in the gospel sense we posses the fulness of the Spirit that can never be transcended or superseded.  This is the message of the book of Colossians.  The Christians at Colosse were troubled by a "higher life" group who were not content to live the normal Christian life of faith and hope. (the problem is still with the church.  Human nature does not want to endure its sense of weakness, sinfulness and finiteness. It does not want to endure the day-to-day reality of dirty dishes, frayed nerves and a persistant fight against the flesh.) Thus some of the Colossians advocated seeking the fulness of the Spirit that would lift them into spiritual Ecstasy that they would soar above their poor, struggling earthly brethren. (How nice! And what Christian has not thought that such a charge of spiritual power might lift him above the tedious conflict of life.)

So this holiness group sought for the fulness of the spirit that transcended a "mere" enjoyment of Christ and a "mere" justification by faith.  Of course their aspirations went beyond the simple "by faith alone" formula they began to practice and impose rules and formulas of their own devising.

The apostle Paul showed the Colossians that this program of making the attainment of a high spiritual experience the center of concern was legalism.  His answer to this "holiness" group was a magnificent exaltation of the person of Christ and the absolute centrality of him in the church's faith.  Paul's key word was fulness.  Meeting the heretics on their own ground he showed the church where that fulness can alone exist-in Jesus Christ and never in another. "for it pleased the Father that in him should all the fulness dwell.'  "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." Colossians 1:19;2:9.

[Sherman Nobles]

Mull over this for me....

i don't understand all of this:

i was negating 2 different lanuages believing and i still believe there is only one tongues mentioned in scripture...not a tongues people can speak plus a prayer langauge

anyway, comment on this last post for me....  he seems to believe the 'gift' of the spirit is some particular gift, not the holy spirit itself...

he's got some good points and  i know whether or not they are true?
it's 2 different posts....

here they are:
_______________________
Goldcross,

2:38 and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Let me tell you how I believe this verse is correctly understood from my experiential point of view.

You read the above thinking that it means you receive the Holy Spirit who is the gift. That is incorrect scripturally and grammatically. The word in the Greek for 'gift of the Spirit' is 5120 in Strong's and it means of this person and is possessive in definition: his. In other words those who receive their gift 'from the' Spirit don't receive Him they receive something from Him.

Your second misunderstanding of Acts 2:38,39 is concerning what the promise is. The promise isn't the person of The Spirit it is supernatural power from the Spirit.

Act 2:39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him."

LUK 24:49 And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high."

ACT 1:8 But you shall receive/lambano power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you;

DR ____________________________
Posts: 154
Joined: 6/26/2007
From: Kansas
Status: online   Goldcross,

Let me finnish by explaining what I believe are your last two misunderstandings of Acts 2:38,39. The Greek word in vs 38 for receive is lambano and not decomai. The definition of Decomai is a passive reception of something (like your spirit getting saved [made holy] when you are born again). But the word in verse 38 is not decomai but lambano which is defined as a 'self prompted taking' and not a 'passive reception'.

The word that's always used in reference to getting initially saved, or born again, is decomai and the word that's always used in reference to being subsequently baptized in spiritual power is lambano.

An example of both decomai/lambano in scripture dealing with initially'saved' Christians [eg. repented and water baptized (8:12)] but who did not get the gift of spiritual power/tongues from the Holy Spirit's baptizing them is in Acts 8.

ACT 8:14 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received/decomai the word of God (initial salvation), they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive/lambano the Holy Spirit; 16 for it had not yet fallen on any of them,...

They had fulfilled the repent and be baptized requirement of Acts 2:38,39 but they never did receive the gift FROM the Holy Spirit.

Your last misunderstanding of Act 2:39 is where it says who this promise of power/tongues from the Holy Spirit is for. Those present...and their children...and those far off (Corinthians???) and to ALL whom God calls....in my opinion that includes me.

That's my authority for believing that when I speak in tongues I am walking in the truth of God's written word.

I hope this helps you understand why I believe.

DR

Well, a.providence,

As far as helping you refute this, I can't because it is the way I understand Acts 2.38.  I have not noticed the difference between dechomai and lambano, but I do agree with his observations concerning Acts 8.  The Samaritans did receive/dechomai salvation (born of the Spirit) and subsequently received/lambano the gift of the Spirit evidenced by some outward manifestation that could be seen (likely tongues, prophecy, and/or ecstatic praise).

Concerning your attempt to negate what is commonly called having a prayer language, or praying in tongues, I too disagree with your beliefs.  I believe the word bears out that tongues was a multifacited gift that includes a private personal prayer language (typically without interpretation or understanding), public tongues with interpretation, tongues with others understanding in their mother tongue, and even speaking in your mother tongue with others understanding in their mother tongue though it is a different mother tongue from yours.

These still happen today.  Just this summer, one of the young ladies in my church went on a short-term missions trip.  She had an interpreter with her as she ministered.  On one occasion, as she prayed for one of the locals, the interpreter began interpreting her prayer so the local could understand (he did not speak or understand English).  However, the local interrupted the interpreter and asked why he was repeating everything the minister was praying.  Though she was praying in English, the local heard her praying in his mother tongue.  (It was in South America, but I don't remember off hand what country or what language was spoken by the natives.)  Anyhow, kinda sounds like Acts 2 to me.

But then the various cases in Acts, most do not evidence this occuring or the need for it because all spoke the same language.  And Paul speaks of praying without understanding but in the Spirit and with one's own spirit.  Of course, we discussed this extensively on the other thread "the gift", if you're interested in reading more of what I believe and why I believe it.