| Author | Message | ||
| Abundantrest Registered user Username: Abundantrest Post Number: 13 Registered: 8-2005 |
OK, so after much thought, I've decided to start my study of the new testament and the true gospel with the book of Romans. Then, last week, I came across something in chapter one that made me think about the gifts of the spirit. Paul mentions that he longs to come to Rome in person, to impart some spiritual gift to the believers there. So, this raises the question in my mind: (1) Why does he have to be there in person? Is he talking about laying hands on people? (2) What spiritual gift is he referring to? Is he talking about one of the gifts of the spirit found in Galatians? I'm especially curious as to your thoughts on this topic. As an Adventist, I claimed that I believed they were all for today, including tongues (mysterious stories of missionaries and Doug Batchelor, etc.) and prophecy (EGW). Being brought up in the charismatic circles, I beleived in this as well, although a bit differently from the adventist perspective (modern tongues movement being called demonic of course by EGW, and prophecy used to refer to a gift that anyone could have (if the holy ghost gave it to them), not just one last day prophet). Anyway, I saw someone on another post (can't find it now) mention speaking in tongues. What are your thoughts on what Paul is saying, and what do YOU believe regarding the gifts of the spirit? | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2507 Registered: 12-2003  |
Good questions, Abuindantrest--ones all of us ( I believe!) struggle with at various times. First, when Paul says he longs to come and impart some spiritual gift, he explains what he means in the very next clause. Verse 11: "I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritul gift to make you strongóthat is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith." He specifically identifies the gift he wishes to impart as the strengthening of their faith brought about by his fellowship with and encouragement of them. The spiritual gifts are mentioned in four places: 1 Corinthians 12, Romans 12, Ephesians 4, and in a general way in 1 John 4. Interestingly, Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12 mention the gifts given to individual believers for the edifying of the church, and Ephesians 4 and 1 John 4 dsicuss the gifts in a context that identifies them as gifts to the corporate church. The spiritual gifts are given by Godóthe entire Trinity. 1 Corinthians 12:4-6 says, "there are different kinds of gifts, but the same SPIRIT. There are different kinds of sevcie but the same LORD. There are different kinds of working, but the same GOD works all of them in all men." So, while the Holy Spirit literally mediates God's gifts by His indwelling us, they are, nevertheless, gifts from the entire Trinity. Further, the gifts are for the "common good"óincluding tongues. In addition, these gifts are given by God according to His sovereign will: "All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines" (1 Corinthians 12:11). Romans 12: 6 says, "We have different gifts, according to the grace given us." In other words, we do not receive the gifts of the Spirit primarily by humans laying hands on each other. God Himself determines who receives which gift according to His will. Paul did write to Timothy in 2 Timothy 1:6, "I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands." In this context, Paul is referring to an event in which he acted as God's instrument in Timothy's life. Paul was Timothy's mentor, and this was likely a moment of blessing/commmissioning of Timothy for the work he was preparing to do. (Timothy and Titus appear to have been the men who succeeded Paul in his particular ministry.) The gifts of the Spirit are timeless; God can give them to His people whenever the body has need of them. Some people believe that the spiritual gifts were for the early church alone. I do not see this restriction in the Bible. (I do think the role of the apostles right after Pentecost has not been repeated; the church was built on them, and even Revelation 21:13 says that the 12 foundations of the Holy City bear the 12 apostles' names.) Spiritual gifts, I believe, are directly from God, sovereignly given through no personal deserving. They are not our natural talents; they are gifts worked out through us by the Holy Spirit and are not things we in our natural state would do. The list in Galatians 5:22-23ólove, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-controlóare not GIFTS of the Spirit. These are the fruit of the Spirit and are the qualities every true Christ-follower can expect to see developing in his/her life as he grows in Jesus. Notice, also, that verse 22 calls these the "fruit"ósingular, not plural. Every one of these qualities develops in a Christ-follower as he learns to live by the Spirit. Counterfeit "fruit" may appear to have a portion of these characteristics but lack others. For example, a person masquerading as a believer but not surrendering to the Spirit may appear loving and kind but may privately lack self-control and be given to rage or irritating impatience and not be growing in those areas. Living by the Spirit is more about surrender and less about attaining spiritual gifts. The gifts come from God when He desires to give them. Our calling is to submit and surrender on a daily, ongoing basis as we "bump into" our own dreams and self-protective wishes. Colleen | ||
| Honestwitness Registered user Username: Honestwitness Post Number: 4 Registered: 7-2005 |
In 1972 I received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, with the gift of speaking in tongues. I was attending a Charismatic church at the time. Since then, the Lord has moved me from the Charismatic church into the SDA church, albeit somewhat reluctantly, due to my marrying the most wonderful man I've ever known, who is a dyed-in-the-wool SDA. I consider myself an "off-white" Adventist. <smile> For the past 16 years, I've had a tremendous inner struggle over the differences between what I believe deep down in my heart and what that SDA church teaches. Every week I sit in church and cringe inside as I listen to the litany of SDA cliches repeated again and again. And yet, I can't bring myself to leave the church, because I really do love my precious husband and don't want to cause him any grief. Anyway, back to the topic of tongues. My experience has been that the Lord gave me tongues to use as a private prayer language that helps me stay connected to His Spirit. In my studies, I find the only person in the Bible who gives a first-person account of what it's like to speak in tongues is Paul, in I Corinthians 14. My experience is exactly as he describes. "When I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my understanding is unfruitful." I've discovered it's impossible to describe the experience of praying in the spirit in a way that fully conveys the preciousness of it. It sounds so shallow to one who hasn't had the experience, especially to one who believes it's of the devil. I remember learning that folks once believed tomatoes were poisonous. I imagine the first person who actually tried them and enjoyed them had a really difficult time convincing the doubters of their safety, and even their benefit. I have the same experience regarding speaking in tongues. No matter what I say, the doubters continue to doubt that I have the real gift of the Holy Spirit and believe I have a counterfeit. I will just continue to enjoy my experience privately and feel sorry for them that they're in a prison of unbelief. After 16 years in the SDA church, if I was going to be convinced that my tongues experience is of the devil, it surely would have happened by now. But just the opposit has happened. I'm more convinced than ever that I received the very thing I asked for back in 1972 -- the baptism into the Holy Spirit. In fact, I believe the Lord has put me into this "crucible" (the SDA church) for the very purpose of refining my confession about His work in my life. Thank you all for your faithfulness to this forum. Your words mean more to me than I can ever say. Honest Witness | ||
| Violet Registered user Username: Violet Post Number: 258 Registered: 2-2001 |
Honest Witness, I admire your dedication to your husband and willingness to stand by his side. My husband stood by me for 10 years before I came to relize that I needed to be free of the SDA way. The Lord can bless us in many ways and if speaking in tounges is the way you feel close to Him more power to you. V | ||
| Lydell Registered user Username: Lydell Post Number: 721 Registered: 7-2000 |
The gifts of the Spirit are for today. They are still in operation. I'd have to say that I believed that before we began attending a more charismatic type church, yet my belief, I can see now, was truly more that these gifts actually being manifest was extremely rare or something that only other people could have. I have been repeately challenged by God, since attending our church, to actually believe and expect to see the gifts operating, including through myself. And that means that I should expect to see supernatural things happen quite often ("supernatural" because it is all God, not man). And they do. I say that because I sat in on a Sunday School class at my moms church where the "gifts of the Spirit" were boiled down to be no more than some benign powerless bit of information. It was recognized that a pastor or teacher has a gift. But the other gifts were just a mystery to them. The attitude seemed to be that only in very rare cases does God give Spiritual gifts to only a few people. I see the gifts in Romans 12 as having to do with the basic motivations God the Father has given individuals, like how we are wired. We can learn and grow, I think, to have more than our basic gifts there. Heard an excellent illustration of this. Someone walks into a room where a group of people are having a dinner. The person's tray tilts and their dessert smashes onto the floor. The person whose gift is mercy immediately goes to the person saying, "oh don't be embarrassed it could have happened to anyone." The teacher observes, "you know, if you balance out where the weight is on the tray, that isn't likely to happen again". One whose gift is ministry or service immediately heads for the kitchen saying, "I'll get you another dessert". The leader begins giving out directions, "Bill how about seeing if you can find a mop, Tom why don't you go get another dessert for her, Joe how about putting another chair at this table for her." No ones reaction is more right or wrong than another, they are just different. The gifts of I Corinthians I see as being those things that are gifted by the Holy Spirit to profit the body. They are available to every individual believer for use in ministry. We could expect to operate in any of these at some time as the need arises. The gifts the Son gives in Ephesians 4 I think are more likely to be given to specific individuals to fill a role in leading the body and seeing that the other gifts are actually encouraged and used. | ||
| Lydell Registered user Username: Lydell Post Number: 722 Registered: 7-2000 |
Colleen, after Paul has listed the gifts in Ephesians (apostles, prophet, evangelist, pastor, teacher) he says that these are "till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ". The church hasn't yet reached that place of full maturity and unity. I don't see that Paul seperated "apostle" from the others as an office that would only be needed temporarily, but the other 4 would continue to be needed. By the way, Barnabas is referred to as an apostle in Acts 14.14 I seem to remember looking this up at one time and finding that James, Timothy, Andronicus and Junias were as well. | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 800 Registered: 3-2005 |
Lydell, Are you saying there are apostles today? If you think so, then can you give me examples of who would be apostles today? Thanks, Stan | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2559 Registered: 12-2003 |
Lydell, I've thought about that, too. And there were a few apostles named who were not eye witnesses of Jesus that we know of. Barnabas comes to mind... I remember asking about this very issue when someone who was claiming apostolic gifts (or at least strongly hinting he had them) came to our group several years ago and atually tried to elicit a following for himself. When I asked our pastor about the fact that there were a few apostles named who were not the 12 or Paul and about whom we know nothing, he responded with an answer that I thought nmade a lot of sense. First, Paul stresses that his apostleship was valid because He was an eyewitness to the risen Christ. In general, being an eye-witness is considered a requirement for apostleship. Second (and this was what I thought was a compelling thought), if there were to be true apostles, their gift would not only be self-proclaimed or proclaimed by a few followers; the chruch at large would also recognize and acknowledge the gift in said person. I am not ruling out the possibility of an apostle--I can theorize situations that might benefit from a true apostle. But I do see that if there were to be one, he/she would be recognized by the body, not just proclaimed by a few. In Ephesians 2:19-20 Paul asserts that we are members of God's household, "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone." In general, apostolic authority is connected to the formation and founding of the church. Revelation 21:14 also says that the New Jerusalem will have twelve foundations on which are written the names of the "twelve apostles of the Lamb". (I know that doesn't account for the 12 and Paul...) So yes, I do see that there might be apostles other than the twelve and Paul--but I believe that if there are, they will be called by God, and the church will recognize His appointment and authority in them. I don't believe that people who claim to have the authority to lead a movement or who have great charisma and apparent gifting are necessarily apostles, even if they claim to have that gift! I'm personally skeptical of "modern apostles"--but again, I'm not completely dogmatic about it. Colleen | ||
| Seekr777 Registered user Username: Seekr777 Post Number: 272 Registered: 1-2003  |
Colleen, anyone who proclaims himself an apostle is immediately suspect in my mind. I have met a few who appear to move in an apostolic gifting, They exhibit the mind and love of Christ in their ministry and God is using them to raise up in some cases 100s of churches and work powerfully in His name. The couple I have in mind are not self proclaimed and in fact I don't believe I've ever hear them say anything themselves. For me the main evidence is a Christlike ministry and spiritual leadership that shows the gifting and power of God in a broad and wide area of influence. I do not include those in TV ministry who beg for money and live comfortable life styles. I'm purposefully not naming names because I don't feel we should get drawn into personalities. Richard PS: I know I'm probably in trouble for this comment.  (particularly if I was to say this in my parents church. ) | ||
| Lydell Registered user Username: Lydell Post Number: 723 Registered: 7-2000 |
Stan, I was thinking along the same lines as what Richard has said, "For me the main evidence is a Christlike ministry and spiritual leadership that shows the gifting and power of God in a broad and wide area of influence." Again, if the apostoli and prophetic were only needed until the canon was complete, then there should also be no need for pastor or teachers. | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 809 Registered: 3-2005 |
Lydell, Please, with your definition then a lot of great pastors would be apostles. Was John Wimber an apostle in your opinion? I was hoping you would give some examples. Because, if we can't name names and identify them as per Richard's comment above, then what good is it to make the unfounded assumption that there are apostles today? It has been well understood for 2000 years of church history that the church was built on the prophets of old, and the apostles. Here is a quote from Wayne Grudem (who does attend a Vineyard fellowship Lydell) on page 911 of his systematic theology "In order to qualify as an apostle, someone (1) had to have seen Christ with his own eyes after He rose from the dead, and (2) had to have been specifically appointed by Christ as an apostle....It seems that no more apostles were appointed after Paul" Barnabas, James, Jude, were also apostles. Grudem's point is that we can only go by who the New Testament clearly calls apostles. In this whole area of spiritual gifts, I believe we have to be extremely careful. It is in the area of the human spirit that Satan can deceive as an angel of light. The reason I can be confident that much--not all-- of what claims to be gifts such as tongues, visions, and uncontrollable laughing in the Spirit, slain in the spirit, is false, is because of the theology that comes out of the pentecostal movement. The doctrines that evolve from this movement are contrary to the Bible--examples Benny Hinn, Copeland, and the entire word-faith movement, and I don't have time to list so much more. If anyone today comes along and claims to be an apostle, I would have to be dogmatic and say that they were a false apostle. My wife and I have been in churches where total "gibberish" is spoken that claims to be tongues. My wife, who is very personal and quiet about religious matters, said "I felt like Satan was present there". I might be slightly more charitable and say that it probably was ginned up as being purely emotional. Anyway, now I am probably in trouble again since I've just offended the charismatics of the world. But, actually I am open to the possibility of gifts on a limited basis, such as the prayer tongue that Paul speaks about, and I've seen Lydell mention. There is actually a very sensible and reasoned section on spiritual gifts in Grudem's theology that is fair and balanced, but as you can see, this subject really strikes a nerve in me. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 968 Registered: 10-2004  |
Stan, Paul also allows for tongues to be used in a worship service if there is an interpretation given--otherwise, he says, the gift of tongues is for self-edification. But where does he say that this is only to be on a "limited basis"?? Jeremy | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 814 Registered: 3-2005 |
The problem Jeremy is that there are no interpretations most of the time to gibberish in these services. And if there is an interpretation then it would have to be perfectly in line with scripture. When the canon of the Bible was completed, John , in Revelation 22 was warning about adding to the book. What is dangerous about tongues, and then there supposed interpretation, is the possibility of having another authority over the Bible alone. Then along with these phenomena are visions (and we know where that can lead.) Solid Bible teaching churches do not need any other messages than the Bible alone. I just believe that the Corinthian church was a unique situation, and never in any other setting or book did Paul talk about the importance of the gift of tongues. Now, there is another legitimate use of the gift of tongues besides private prayer language, and that is where a supernatural gift in speaking an actual known language, when the speaker had no prior knowledge of that language, and from what I understand this has happened in mission fields. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 969 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stan, I fully agree that it is unBiblical to speak in tongues in church without an interpretation. I also agree that the interpretation needs to line up with Scripture. But how is it any more "dangerous" than other gifts of the Spirit, such as preaching and teaching? Wouldn't those gifts be just as "dangerous" in the possibility of being "another authority" besides the Bible alone? But, for any of those gifts--we aren't talking about coming up with new doctrines, or anything like that. And I don't think it is fair to group visions and tongues together as if they must/always go hand in hand. (By the way, I'm not trying to say that God can't give visions to people!) And tongues was not just for the Corinthian church--Paul said that he spoke in tongues more than all of the Corinthians. This gift is also mentioned in the book of Acts (and not just the speaking of other known languages that is mentioned in chapter 2). Colleen, You wrote:
I would also think that would apply to Ellen White! Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on September 18, 2005) | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2562 Registered: 12-2003 |
Do you mean in the sense that she is acknowledged by the church? (Sorry for being a bit dense here...) Actually, she isn't acknowledged by the church--the true body of Christ. She's acknowledged by a denomination. Only those disappointed Millerites who refused to repent and return to their churches bought her messages as from God. The church in general--I don't think so! Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 970 Registered: 10-2004 |
I wasn't clear enough in my statement! That's what I meant--that she was only proclaimed by herself and a small group, and was NOT recognized by the Body of Christ! That is good evidence that she was NOT a true "messenger of God" and that her "revelations" which were suppposedly to the "church" were false and not of God. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on September 18, 2005) | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 816 Registered: 3-2005 |
Jeremy, There is just no purpose for "gibberish" type of tongues today. We don't worship a God of confusion. He has given us His clear word in the Bible. There is no way to equate the clear preaching and teaching of God's word with unintelligible talk. Just my opinion. Stan | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 817 Registered: 3-2005 |
I just saw a post by Gmatt on the Vineyard thread about attending a Vineyard which is very New Covenant, and he stated that at that Vineyard they don't have people speaking in unintelligible speech. I am finding that even those charismatic churches are recognizing the confusion that results from allowing this practice. Jeremy, Lydell, or anyone else, Have you ever been in a service where someone gets a message from God in the form of unintelligible speech, then, in an orderly fashion someone gets up and interprets it, and you can be absolutely confident that it is from God? Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 971 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stan, I have never been in a service with tongues period. I've already agreed that if it is not done according to God's Word, then yes it is confusion, and not in accordance with God's instructions. That is exactly what Paul said--but he did tell them exactly how to do it decently and orderly. Any church that does not follow that is in the wrong, just as the church in Corinth was. But that doesn't mean that the correct usage of the gift does not happen or should not happen. Jeremy | ||
| Seekr777 Registered user Username: Seekr777 Post Number: 273 Registered: 1-2003 |
The question of dreams and visions has been mentioned several times. Some have expressed a belief that God no longer uses this way to communicate with His people. I disagree. Acts clearly mentions this as one of the ways He will pour out His spirit on all flesh. Acts 2:17 " 'In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams." NIV Richard rtruitt@mac.com |
