• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Mark, the long and short of it...

I see no theological reason for the 'miraculous' to have stopped. And I've seen snatches of it at work here and there. But MOST of what I see, or at least most of what is pushed out in the public eye and in common religious experience, looks fake or outright demonic.

Which puts me in a weird situation. I intellectually know that prophecy or healing should be at work today. But I have no clue what that would look like in reality. How to live it out. I mostly only know the fake.
 
Soldier's Psalm said:
Ephesian's 4:11 isn't effected by the Granville Sharp's rule because all the words are plural.
Copied this off of a site explaining the Rule.

Now, what about Ephesians 4:11? This also shows the structure “The+Noun+and+Noun,” doesn’t it. The problem is, just as I gave a very imprecise version of the rule, it has not been disseminated with the care it should have. Specifically the rule only applies as long as neither noun (or substantive) is (1) impersonal, (2) a proper noun, or (3) plural (Wallace, ibid.). In other words, it doesn’t apply to thing A and thing B, to Bob and Tom, or to these and those. What about “pastors” and “teachers?” We have two plural nouns. Clearly the Granville Sharp rule does not apply to them.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for this SP. Sorry for the late response but I'm travelling at the moment and have only been able to use my phone up till now.

I don't think my Greek prof had the benefit of the internet 30+ years ago and he used Greek grammars that failed to mention what you've pointed out re the application of the Granville Sharp's rule. I, like most people, have used those same tools for teaching my students over the years and ignorantly taught the same thing. What's interesting for me is that one example we were given as proof of the Granville Sharp's rule was Eph. 4:11 and I still have the notes on file.

I would point out tho that, as you have quite rightly said, there is the definite article preceding each of the first four nouns but not the fifth - teachers. Although the Granville Sharp's rule doesn't apply here because these are plural nouns, there is still a difficulty with the passage in question in that the final word does not have the definite article and is therefore a deviation from the construction the writer has specifically used with the other nouns. If the intent of the writer was to identify each of these nouns as individual giftings/ministries, the use of the definite article with the fifth would have ensured there was no misunderstanding. So I would suggest here there is a reason for the absence of the definite article by the author and it may be to present the understanding that shepherds and teachers are one and the same man(?)

I'll leave that discussion here and not derail the discussion further. Thanks once again and shalom.
 
Soldier's Psalm said:
Why should I change? Because someone faked using a gift? I don't know if you know this or not but the pews are full of fakes and hypocrites. If I took your approach I wouldn't go back to Church at all. That is the kind of reasoning that killed Christ. Its religion. If it doesn't look like what I know or what I am comfortable with, destroy it. I mean this thread is started because of a statement about taking out the words of Christ because they didn't fit your doctrine. Your reasoning just doesn't make sense and you try to apply it to everyone else but yourself.
Click to expand...

Yes, agreed, the ecclesia is filled with tares. The tares shouldn’t have any effect on our doctrine, because our doctrine should be derived from scripture alone.

Soldier's Psalm said:
Don't be afraid to roll up your sleeves next to someone in process. People don't get saved and immediately have a walk like Paul and Silas. People in the Charismatic movement see others walking in signs and they want to do it too so they fake it. Just like people in dry Churches have all their issues but they set there piously and fake it.
Click to expand...

When young believers are being fake, those who are older in the faith should kindly and lovingly take them aside and explain what the scriptures say about whatever the issue. I don’t think it’s loving to let them blunder on in confusion.


Soldier's Psalm said:
The thing is Jesus constantly rebuked the religious crowd and what worries me about it is that not one of them was converted. Religion has sent more people to hell than anything. And a side note that religious spirit was the same one that criticized all of the miracles. They could quote scripture and new the law better than anyone but they were threatened by someone walking in power. They seemed to be righteous but they weren't.
Click to expand...

Well, I don’t think that’s quite right, although I get where you’re coming from. Paul was a pharisee and he was saved, so there is at least one. The Pharisees did attack Yeshua in regard to his miracles, but they weren’t saying his miracles were fake, because the miracles Yeshua did were undeniable. That’s when many of them blasphemed the Holy Spirit. They were not skeptical or unsure if the miracles were real, they knew they were real, the miracles were undeniable, and that it proved Yeshua was God and they still hated Him. The reason they hated Him is because He didn’t give them respect for their self righteousness. The pharisees weren’t stodgy old babtist sola scriptura folks, clinging to their Bibles, they believed their extra biblical revelations trumped the written word of God. Yeshua called them out on that specifically. See Mark 7:9 and surrounding verses.

Soldier's Psalm said:
You sound just like the Independent Baptist I came out of or a John McArthur type. Real quick to want to judge every other part of the body but the part they are responsible for is running rampant in sin. Are you a Calvinist? Reason I ask is this seems like Calvinist fruit?
Click to expand...
You got me bro, I sin on the daily. Not a calvinist though.
 
rockfox said:
I don't wonder, I know they are. But I wouldn't go so far as to say that someone who lacks miracles in their life has not heard the true Gospel.

That's weird, it didn't used to be this way but now that you say it, it does seem like seeker friendly churches have become the majority in the last 10 to 15 years.
Click to expand...
The birth of the seeker friendly church is fascinating and a bit scary when you really dig down into it’ Underlying premise. The concept came from Peter Drucker, who to my knowledge, didn’t claim to be a believer. He was fascinated with the concept of the mega church as means of social change, not as the body of Christ who makes disciples.


rockfox said:
You said..."Miracles are no longer being done by God to bear witness to specific men."

That passage speaks of what had occurred to them in their past, it made no mention of that ceasing, of it no longer being the case in the future.
Click to expand...
Indeed, but if it’s not specific, how is it a sign? If the same thing happening today, what gives the apostles’ writings any more credibility or weight than anyone else claiming to have seen the risen Christ. Indeed newer revelation would seem to have the preeminence. According to Jude, The Gospel was once delivered to the saints.
Jude 1:3 KJV
[3] Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.



rockfox said:
What is a soul tie?
Click to expand...
Oh, I’ve been trying to find it in Scripture. I heard Someone do a teaching on it a month or so ago.
 
steve said:
@Asforme&myhouse, every road has two ditches.
I am totally with you in avoiding the excess of the Charismaniacs, but I will not join you in the ditch on the opposite side of the road in an attempt to get as far away from them as possible. Redefine power in any way that you want, you position is still relatively powerless.
Here’s what life looks like in real-time for me:
One of my wives, Karin, has much knee damage from old accidents. A couple of years ago she was standing on flimsy chair changing a lightbulb for a neighbor and the chair broke. She fell on her knee and has been limping ever since. Just as it starts getting better, something happens and she re-injures it. Lately the pain has gotten worse and she hasn’t been able to sleep at night. That was before a neighbor sprayed her with cheap perfume because “I thought you would like the scent!” Karin has horrible asthma and that could have been a life-ending event. She dropped onto her knees as if she had been pole-axed and really messed them up.
Karin doesn’t do pain drugs, but I had to convince her to try something in order to be able to sleep at night. Morphine drops were working at night, but she couldn’t take them during the day because of how spaced-out they made her. In the meantime the dr told her that her knees were deteriorating and if they couldn’t turn it around holistically surgery was going to be required. The continual pain was even causing her to throw up food, so nutrition wasn’t going to help.
So with her headed towards becoming an invalid, we were facing a situation in which she was needed to minister to a couple of older people (she is 66) and I was getting the realization that the only way forward was that she receive healing. No other plan was really working for us.
Now I have long believed in healing, but haven’t personally been involved with much success. I have believed that we, as a family, will be walking in greater spiritual authority in the future and that healing will become commonplace for us, but, for whatever reason, we were not yet in the place where YHWH has chosen to trust us with it. Including lack of virtue. (see my previous post)
Well, this past Sunday things were coming to a head and I started getting the feeling that the underlying problem might be more of a more spiritual nature. I mean, she had 100% physical reasons for being decreasingly ambulatory, but I was feeling hints in my spirit that the enemy was taking advantage of the natural and attempting to destroy her ability to do the ministry that I believe that she is called to do.
So in a conference call in our family fellowship (I am on the road, as usual) I started telling her to ask YHWH what this might be attached to. The upshot was that she needed to forgive herself for something that she had become involved in as a young person.
Can Christians have demons? I don’t care whether they are on the outside hiding under your left buttcheek or on the inside of your esophagus, they will stand on whatever ground you give them and attack you from that position. Evidently there were spirits that had attached to that unforgiveness and attacking her from that position.
The minute that she expressed her forgiveness, the pain disappeared. So much so that I had to chide her for jumping up and down in her exuberance yesterday. I had to tell that we have no assurance that her knees are healed, so it’s best not to do anything to further damage them. In fact, her kneecap has not returned to its allotted position, so it’s looks to be simply pain relief at this point. She hasn’t thrown up since Sunday am, either.
A word came from YHWH yesterday about the fact that He has given us dominion over this earth and that as her owner I should of course be calling things into being in her body. So I , over the phone, proceeded to command asthma from her. An hour later the cheap perfume neighbor came over stinking heavily and she had nary a cough. That is totally miraculous, as she normally starts coughing and reacting when someone is smoking on the next property over.

So you can have your well thought out theology that denies the power that I have chosen to live in.
It is also available to you if you change your mind. YHWH is a gentleman, He won’t force it on you.
Click to expand...
Steve, I’m sorry to hear of this. I will be praying that God will heal her and give all of you strength and peace.
 
andrew said:
I hate to be Captain Obvious here, but everybody understands that when John in Revelation says "whoever adds or takes away" from "the prophecy of this book" (or "the book of this prophecy") he's talking about his Revelation, right? Not the "66 books"? That there is no internal reference within the 66 that says which individual texts are infallible, and if anything what we do have acknowledges the validity of other writings that some dead white guys didn't see fit to include in the 66?

We each make a decision on our own re how we can claim to "know" what the right answer is (you can't know this answer, you can only choose to believe, if the words "know" and "believe" are to have any useful meaning), and that's largely a matter of trusting someone else to tell you what to believe the right answer is. Either that or doing the work necessary to rely on your own scholarship to give you a well-founded opinion on the matter (which is what I believe I see @Verifyveritas76 doing).

The debate over the "infallibiilty" of the "canon" is a red herring. Spend as much time as you will on it, but ultimately our Life is in the Spirit, and he who has not the Spirit of Christ is none of His. They will know we are His disciples by our love for one another, not by our conformity to creeds and the shibboleths of tradition....
Click to expand...
Yeah that’s not what I was referring to. Most seem to think Revelation or one of John’s other writings was the last book written that was included in the canon. I wasn’t saying that the end of Revelation was speaking of the rest of the canon.
 
rockfox said:
I hate to be captain obvious but "66"? What an interesting number. Was it me, I don't think I'd have broken apart Ezra-Nehemiah and left it at 65.
Click to expand...
Thanks for illustrating my point!
 
Asforme&myhouse said:
Yeah that’s not what I was referring to. Most seem to think Revelation or one of John’s other writings was the last book written that was included in the canon. I wasn’t saying that the end of Revelation was speaking of the rest of the canon.
Click to expand...
Yeah, what about the rest of it?...
 
Asforme&myhouse said:
The birth of the seeker friendly church is fascinating and a bit scary when you really dig down into it’ Underlying premise. The concept came from Peter Drucker, who to my knowledge, didn’t claim to be a believer. He was fascinated with the concept of the mega church as means of social change, not as the body of Christ who makes disciples.
Click to expand...

Ok now that is a fascinating tidbit because although Peter Drucker is famous for being a business management guru, basically the Augustine of Corporate America, well, lets just say surreptitious social change is right up his ally. You see the fruit of that all about today.

You can also easily see how the seeker friendly church thing is motivated by business theories and not Christian ones. Nor is this the only time that's happened, the seeker friendly movement found well tilled ground as the churches had been adopting business and marketing strategies for their work for nigh on 100 years by that point. Some of those earlier changes came from shading places as well.

Asforme&myhouse said:
Indeed, but if it’s not specific, how is it a sign? If the same thing happening today, what gives the apostles’ writings any more credibility or weight than anyone else claiming to have seen the risen Christ. Indeed newer revelation would seem to have the preeminence. According to Jude, The Gospel was once delivered to the saints.
Jude 1:3 KJV
[3] Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
Click to expand...

The message was once delivered to mankind. But just because it was confirmed in Christ by signs and wonders didn't stop that from happening again when Paul preached it to the Greeks. Why not again after that to new peoples? From the perspective of an unbeliever, what weight does the words of your book have over the words of another man's holy book or even of any other book? Why should they believe yours? From that perspective, signs and wonders still is useful. Especially when the message first reaches a people.

Why must newer revelation have preeminence? If anything I'd think it the opposite, the older having been proved in the faith and blood of the believers.
 
@Asforme&myhouse we actually agree on a lot more than we disagree on. The Charismatic movement just like any other has huge flaws. A large portion of the Pentecostal churches has a form, just no power. It just has a different form than traditional protestant churches, but still a form. It needs help like the Church as a whole does. I tend to think the Pentecostal movement has reserved a lot of its zeal but has lost a lot of its wisdom as the older generation isn't taking up the reigns and fathering the next generation like they should which you pointed out. The other side of the coin is a Church that has Wisdom but no zeal, a pocket full of seeds and no fruit. The enemy has separated the 2 and set them at odds with each other. Divide and conquer. Its an old trick but it still works. Paul warned the Church in Ephesians 4 about this and reiterated it in the picture of the Church Body. When the Church is unified and of one mind it is added to daily just like in Acts. Instead the Church now is dying. We see the enemy attacking the Church's unity which must mean it is worth something to him. If I learned anything in the military it is that you don't fight for something that either doesn't help ensure your victory, or keep your rival from ensuring theirs. So judging from how hard the enemy is coming for our unity I would say we need it to win. That being said miracles or no miracles really don't make a huge difference when compared to the impact of a unified Church. I think with that I am going to let this thread be.
 
rockfox said:
From the perspective of an unbeliever, what weight does the words of your book have over the words of another man's holy book or even of any other book? Why should they believe yours?
Click to expand...

First of all, my book is authenticated by signs and wonders.

Second, The words of my book are “...quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” “...it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.”

God proved at Antioch that new signs and wonders are not necessary for conversion. Why aren’t they necessary? Because the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation.

Why would anyone believe my Book without fresh signs and wonders? We haven’t seen anyone walking in signs and wonders like Yeshua or the Apostles in almost 2000 years, and yet there are still christians today... how is that possible?

You’re tacitly “denying the power there of” with that question.
 
rockfox said:
Ok now that is a fascinating tidbit because although Peter Drucker is famous for being a business management guru, basically the Augustine of Corporate America, well, lets just say surreptitious social change is right up his ally. You see the fruit of that all about today.

You can also easily see how the seeker friendly church thing is motivated by business theories and not Christian ones. Nor is this the only time that's happened, the seeker friendly movement found well tilled ground as the churches had been adopting business and marketing strategies for their work for nigh on 100 years by that point. Some of those earlier changes came from shading places as well.
.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It’s where the concept of the vision casting leader, rather than elders, came from.

On a side note, I just noticed the church we recently started fellowshiping with has a pastor that teaches most Sundays, but he isn’t listed as “The Pastor” in the bulletin, he’s just listed as one of the elders and he’s like second or third on the list. I’ve never seen that in any church I’ve attended before and I thought that was kind of cool.
 
Asforme&myhouse said:
Exactly. It’s where the concept of the vision casting leader, rather than elders, came from.

On a side note, I just noticed the church we recently started fellowshiping with has a pastor that teaches most Sundays, but he isn’t listed as “The Pastor” in the bulletin, he’s just listed as one of the elders and he’s like second or third on the list. I’ve never seen that in any church I’ve attended before and I thought that was kind of cool.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the church leadership are putting in to practice the instruction of Yeshua regarding all being brethren (Matt. 23:8-12)(?)
 
andrew said:
I hate to be Captain Obvious here, but everybody understands that when John in Revelation says "whoever adds or takes away" from "the prophecy of this book" (or "the book of this prophecy") he's talking about his Revelation, right? Not the "66 books"? That there is no internal reference within the 66 that says which individual texts are infallible, and if anything what we do have acknowledges the validity of other writings that some dead white guys didn't see fit to include in the 66?
Click to expand...

You have some kind of problem with white guys? :eek::D

Someone on here said something to the effect of 66 books being a bad omen. Who said that? Was it @rockfox ?

andrew said:
We each make a decision on our own re how we can claim to "know" what the right answer is (you can't know this answer, you can only choose to believe, if the words "know" and "believe" are to have any useful meaning), and that's largely a matter of trusting someone else to tell you what to believe the right answer is. Either that or doing the work necessary to rely on your own scholarship to give you a well-founded opinion on the matter (which is what I believe I see @Verifyveritas76 doing).
Click to expand...
Are you saying that truth is unknowable?

andrew said:
The debate over the "infallibiilty" of the "canon" is a red herring. Spend as much time as you will on it, but ultimately our Life is in the Spirit, and he who has not the Spirit of Christ is none of His. They will know we are His disciples by our love for one another, not by our conformity to creeds and the shibboleths of tradition....
Click to expand...
The divisive man, in Scripture, is the heretic. So, part of showing love is to earnestly contend for the Faith, the Gospel, and sound doctrine.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top