So far, I confess that the Bible is a full and complete doctrine (And I’m not, at this time, going to get into a discussion of the council of Nicea). I seem to remember a passage in Revelation about not adding to Scripture, etc…but, as I cannot think of the verse, I will not attempt to weild it here.
On the topic of making some sort of "canon of personal experience", I do not deny that many things happen today that happened during the times when the New Testament was being recorded. Miracles, for example, and wars, and rumors of wars, and great abominations, etc. But that does not mean that we can start cataloging our similar personal experiences of such things into "Another Testament of Jesus Christ".
In 1John, we are told to test the spirits to see whether they are from God. I will second the Hearsay posted earlier (and only say that it is hearsay, b/c I have not experienced it personally. However, such an occurance is by no means unimaginable), about those who thought speaking in tongues to be simply an ecstatic utterance, yet it turned out that the practitioners were blaspheming God.
I was under the impression (and someone else can find the Scripture reference) that there should (i.e. must) always be a translator. Because speaking in tongues is primarily an act of public worship and, therefore, not a selfish practice, but for the edification of the body of Christ.
I have found no Biblical evidence for there being an Angelic Language, which is utterably unintelligable to everyone, even, at times, the practitioner…Leaving such spirits untested (unaccountable) is dangerous! If you must speak to God with groans that only the Holy Spirit can translate to the Father, then perhaps you should do so in a way that will not distract other believers in public worship. Consider it an act of love for your brothers and sisters?
"spirit of man"? Bah humbug! The spirit of man, without God, is unholy! That, one should know by experience. Yet, the Bible says so regardless. Therefore, speaking in tongues by the spirit of man, and not of God, is useless psychobabble.
mottie
Jan 29 2007
05:28 pm
So far, I confess that the Bible is a full and complete doctrine (And I’m not, at this time, going to get into a discussion of the council of Nicea). I seem to remember a passage in Revelation about not adding to Scripture, etc…but, as I cannot think of the verse, I will not attempt to weild it here.
On the topic of making some sort of "canon of personal experience", I do not deny that many things happen today that happened during the times when the New Testament was being recorded. Miracles, for example, and wars, and rumors of wars, and great abominations, etc. But that does not mean that we can start cataloging our similar personal experiences of such things into "Another Testament of Jesus Christ".
In 1John, we are told to test the spirits to see whether they are from God. I will second the Hearsay posted earlier (and only say that it is hearsay, b/c I have not experienced it personally. However, such an occurance is by no means unimaginable), about those who thought speaking in tongues to be simply an ecstatic utterance, yet it turned out that the practitioners were blaspheming God.
I was under the impression (and someone else can find the Scripture reference) that there should (i.e. must) always be a translator. Because speaking in tongues is primarily an act of public worship and, therefore, not a selfish practice, but for the edification of the body of Christ.
I have found no Biblical evidence for there being an Angelic Language, which is utterably unintelligable to everyone, even, at times, the practitioner…Leaving such spirits untested (unaccountable) is dangerous! If you must speak to God with groans that only the Holy Spirit can translate to the Father, then perhaps you should do so in a way that will not distract other believers in public worship. Consider it an act of love for your brothers and sisters?
"spirit of man"? Bah humbug! The spirit of man, without God, is unholy! That, one should know by experience. Yet, the Bible says so regardless. Therefore, speaking in tongues by the spirit of man, and not of God, is useless psychobabble.