*1 Corinthians 9:1 / *1 Cor. 9:1 -
(Re: *Paul)
Do you reject the apostle Paul and so reject the books of the Bible written by him? If so, that is a serious mistake, for the basis for Paul's theology is direct revelation to him from Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:11-12). That is why his theology is in accord with what the Old Testament foretold (Acts 26:22-23), with what the New Testament Gospels describe (Matthew 16:21, Matthew 26:28; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and with what the other writings in the New Testament say (2 Peter 3:15-16).
The basis for Paul's authority, his being an apostle of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 9:1), is his being an eyewitness of Jesus (1 Corinthians 9:1) and receiving his ministry directly from Jesus (Acts 26:16-18, Acts 9:10-22). When the other apostles saw how greatly Jesus worked through Paul, they accepted him as a fellow apostle (Galatians 2:9, Acts 14:14). Peter even expressly wrote to Christians confirming that all of Paul's epistles are from God, are scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). There is no reason to reject Paul's apostolic authority (1 Corinthians 14:36-37). His faithful work on behalf of Jesus proves that he is not a false apostle (Matthew 7:16-18). And Paul fulfilled many of the signs spoken of by Jesus regarding true Christians (Mark 16:17-18, Acts 19:11-12; 1 Corinthians 14:18, Acts 28:3-5, Acts 28:8).
Also, because of the wonderful example of Saul the persecutor becoming Paul the apostle (1 Timothy 1:12-17; Acts 7:58 to Acts 13:9), Christians should never give up on any non-Christians, no matter how hostile they are to Christians and the Christian faith. Instead, Christians should keep praying for them that God would miraculously save their souls (2 Timothy 2:25, Ephesians 2:8, Colossians 1:21-23). And because of the example of Saul becoming Paul, those who have persecuted Christians and reviled the Christian faith in the past, but now feel God's gifts of repentance and faith (2 Timothy 2:25, Ephesians 2:8) moving within them, should not think that what they have done against Christians and the Christian faith (whether in word or in deed) in the past disqualifies them now from being able to repent, to ask God's forgiveness, and to receive His salvation through their faith in Jesus Christ (Colossians 1:21-22).
~
(Re: If you were somehow correct that Paul taught against the keeping of the commandments of God, I would have no use for him at all)
The apostle Paul taught only against the keeping of the letter of the commandments of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Romans 7:6, Galatians 2:11-21, Galatians 4:21 to 5:8, Galatians 3:2-25), which was abolished on Jesus Christ's Cross (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18).
Paul never taught against the keeping of Jesus Christ's New Covenant/New Testament commandments (John 14:15, Hebrews 7:12, Galatians 6:2; 1 Corinthians 14:37), or the spirit of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Romans 7:6, Galatians 5:14, Romans 13:8-10, Matthew 7:12).
(See the "Law" section of Ephesians 2:15 below)
~
(Re: Are Paul's epistles merely commentaries?)
No, they are scriptures (2 Peter 3:16), and so their source is divine inspiration (2 Timothy 3:16, Galatians 1:11-12). If we think that we know anything about the Word of God, the Holy Bible, then we must acknowledge this (1 Corinthians 14:36-37).
~
(Re: Are Paul's epistles Christ-centric?)
Yes, very much so, for in the apostle Paul's epistles (assuming that the book of Hebrews was written by Silas/Silvanus), Paul refers to "Christ" or "Jesus" or the "Lord" almost 900 times. His Gospel message is always centered on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 26:22-23; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4).
--
*1 Corinthians 9:20 / *1 Cor. 9:20 -
When the apostle Paul was among only Jews who mistakenly thought that they were still under the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, his merely acting like he also was still under it (1 Corinthians 9:20, Acts 21:26) was to maintain his credibility among those Jews, in the hope that this would give him sufficient continued access to them (cf. Acts 16:3), give him enough more time with them to where he might be able to gradually persuade them to accept his correct point of view (1 Corinthians 9:20) that the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law was abolished for both Jews and Gentiles on Jesus Christ's Cross (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19, Hebrews 10:9b, Galatians 3:2-25, Galatians 2:11-21, Galatians 4:21 to 5:8).
~
(Re: But it says that they were actually under the law)
In 1 Corinthians 9:20, only some Jews were under the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law. And not because it was still in effect for people as far as God was concerned (it was not), but because they were willingly and mistakenly continuing to place themselves under it (cf. Galatians 4:21 to 5:1).
--
*1 Corinthians 9:27 / *1 Cor. 9:27 -
This refers to how Christians can end up being cut off (Romans 11:22), cast away, and burned (John 15:6), how they can end up losing their salvation because of unrepentant sin (Hebrews 10:26-29, Luke 12:45-46; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10), even after they have preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ to others (1 Corinthians 9:27, Matthew 7:22-23).
--
*1 Corinthians 10:1-14 / *1 Cor. 10:1 -
This means that the Old Testament contains precedents of disobedience applicable by type to Christians.
~
(Our fathers)
1 Corinthians 10:1 can be referring to all Christians' spiritual forefathers (e.g. Romans 4:16-25), not to their genetic forefathers.
(See the "Tribes" section of Romans 11:17 above)
--
*1 Corinthians 10:3-4 / *1 Cor. 10:3 -
In 1 Corinthians 10:3 the spiritual meat which all of the Israelites ate during the Exodus (1 Corinthians 10:1-3) was the literal manna in Exodus 16:15 and Nehemiah 9:15. The original Greek word (broma: G1033) in 1 Corinthians 10:3 translated as "meat" can simply refer to any "food" (Strong's Greek Dictionary). It is translated as "victuals" in Matthew 14:15, the English word "victuals" meaning any "food usable by man" (Webster's).
The manna of Exodus 16:15 was "spiritual" food (1 Corinthians 10:3) in the sense that it is the literal food which is eaten in heaven (Psalms 78:24b), and was sent down from heaven miraculously by God to the Israelites (Nehemiah 9:15, Psalms 78:24). Manna is "spiritual" also in the sense that it is the literal food of angels (Psalms 78:25), who are called spirits (Hebrews 1:7). But manna is not a food of immortality (John 6:49).
(See John 6:53 above, and Revelation 2:7 below)
In 1 Corinthians 10:4 the spiritual drink which all of the Israelites drank during the Exodus (1 Corinthians 10:1-4) was the literal water in Exodus 17:6 and Nehemiah 9:15. This water was "spiritual" in the sense that it was provided by God via miraculous means, out of solid rock (Psalms 114:8, Deuteronomy 8:15).
When 1 Corinthians 10:4 says: "that Rock was Christ", it means that the literal striking of the rock in Exodus 17:6, resulting in the outpouring of literal water, typified God the Father's literal striking of Jesus Christ the "rock" (Romans 9:33) on the Cross. For "we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God" (Isaiah 53:4). But Jesus' suffering and death on the Cross for our sins and His rising physically from the dead on the third day provided the way for us to be saved from hell (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and for us to receive Christ into our hearts (Ephesians 3:17) and the resulting outpouring of God's Holy Spirit like water from within us (John 7:38-39).
(See also paragraphs 2-3 of section 2 of Matthew 16:18 above)
~
(Re: Did the apostle Paul mean that they ate and drank the same spiritual meat and drink as us Christians?)
No, 1 Corinthians 10:3-4 does not mean that believers during Old Testament times obtained the same thing as Christians, "God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect" (Hebrews 11:40).
Instead, in 1 Corinthians 10:3-4 the apostle Paul means that all of the Israelites during the Exodus ate the same literal manna of Exodus 16:15 and drank the same literal water of Exodus 17:6, just as the Israelites during the Exodus "were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Corinthians 10:2). But this did not mean that all of them would obtain ultimate salvation, for "with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness" (1 Corinthians 10:5).
And this loss of their salvation was an example of how Christians can ultimately lose their salvation, for "these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things" (1 Corinthians 10:6); "Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall" (1 Corinthians 10:12). That is, even after Christians have partaken of the literal flesh and blood of Communion (John 6:53-55, Matthew 26:26-28) and have been water-immersion (burial) baptized (Romans 6:3-11, Colossians 2:12), they can still ultimately lose their salvation (e.g. Hebrews 10:26-29).
(See, for example, Hebrews 10:26 below)
~
(Re: A spirit hath not flesh and bones)
See section 2 of Luke 24:39 above.
~
(Re: Does the word "spiritual" used in 1 Corinthians 10 means non-physical?)
No, for note that obedient, physical Christians are called "spiritual" (Galatians 6:1).
--
*1 Corinthians 10:6-11 / *1 Cor. 10:6 -
(Re: Means that the Church will return to the Promised Land like Israel did: without Jesus' physical presence?)
No, for just as the Church is under a different covenant than Israel was during the Exodus (2 Corinthians 3:6-18), so the Church can be gathered together to the Promised Land in a different manner, at Jesus Christ's future, Second Coming (Mark 13:26-27). 1 Corinthians 10:6-11 means that what happened to some Israelites during the Exodus is a warning to Christians not to backslide.
--
*1 Corinthians 10:11 / *1 Cor. 10:11 -
(The ends of the world are come)
See the "End" section of Hebrews 9:26 below.
--
*1 Corinthians 10:13 / *1 Cor. 10:13 -
This does not mean once-saved-always-saved, for Christians can still wrongly employ their free will to return to unrepentant sin, to the ultimate loss of their salvation (Hebrews 10:26-29; 1 Corinthians 9:27, Luke 12:45-46).
(See Hebrews 10:26 below)
--
*1 Corinthians 10:21 / *1 Cor. 10:21 -
See Revelation 2:14b below.
--
*1 Corinthians 10:25-30 / *1 Cor. 10:25 -
This shows that under the New Covenant, all foods are in themselves okay for all Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, to eat. For it shows that Christians can eat whatever is sold in the meat markets or is set before them at a dinner.
(See Romans 14:14 above)
--
*1 Corinthians 10:32 / *1 Cor. 10:32 -
This does not contradict that Gentile Christians are part of Israel (Romans 11:17,24, Ephesians 2:12,19, Galatians 3:29). Also, 1 Corinthians 10:32 refers only to non-Christian Jews and Gentiles, who are not part of the Church. It does not contradict that the Church consists of both Jewish and Gentile Christians (1 Corinthians 12:13, Acts 22:3, Romans 16:4b).
--
*1 Corinthians 11:10 / *1 Cor. 11:10 -
The original Greek word (exousia: G1849) translated as "power" can mean "authority" (1 Corinthians 15:24). So the woman having authority (symbolized by a head covering) on her head while praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5,13) could represent her being "under authority" (cf. Matthew 8:9a) of the man (1 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:11-15).
Regarding 1 Corinthians 11:10b, compare 1 Peter 3:22, which refers to angels being under the authority of Jesus Christ. The head covering can serve as a reminder to them of this.
Regarding 1 Corinthians 11:4, in cold climates where wearing a warm hat can be necessary not to get sick, 1 Corinthians 11:4 could be applied while a man is praying or prophesying out loud in a church meeting or in another public setting. It might not apply to a man praying silently or in private, as for some men this is almost a continuous activity, as God is in all their thoughts (contrast Psalms 10:4b, KJV).
--
*1 Corinthians 11:16 / *1 Cor. 11:16 -
This means that neither the other apostles nor the rest of the Church had any custom contentious to what the apostle Paul had just affirmed in 1 Corinthians 11:3-15.
--
*1 Corinthians 11:19 / *1 Cor. 11:19 -
(Heresies)
See 2 Peter 2:1 below.
--
*1 Corinthians 11:29 / *1 Cor. 11:29 -
"Discerning the Lord's body" means that when Christians partake of Communion (1 Corinthians 11:23-29), they must discern that the bread and wine are the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (John 6:53-56) in some spiritual manner (John 6:63), or they may suffer the consequences (1 Corinthians 11:30).
~
(Re: Jesus died once)
Amen (Hebrews 7:27b), and Communion is a partaking of Jesus Christ's one-time sacrifice (1 Corinthians 11:26).
~
(Re: Is not it true that neither the bread nor the wine become the body and blood? For are not the bread and wine declared to already be the body and blood even before they are consumed?)
But not before the declaration, which involves intent and faith.
~
(Re: Is not it true that no genetic analysis has ever shown the DNA of human flesh or blood to be present in the bread or wine of Communion, so that the elements must exclusively be spiritual metaphors?)
There need be no such dichotomy. For the bread and wine of Communion become Christ's flesh and blood by faith, which is not seen (Hebrews 11:1), that is, which is something which God purposely designed so that it cannot be scientifically proven (1 Corinthians 2:11-16), just as Christ's very death and resurrection themselves, the very heart of the Gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), cannot be scientifically proven.
~
(Re: Doesn't "discerning the Lord's body" have nothing to do with believing that the bread and wine of Communion are the actual body and blood of Christ; first, because the body alone and not the blood is specified? . . .)
Both need not be specified every time that either is referred to, just as both the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ need not be specified every time that either is referred to (e.g. Romans 10:9). That is, allow for synecdoche.
(Re: . . . second, because the expression is associated with eating and drinking unworthily as a result of not first examining oneself?)
Again, there is no need for a dichotomy. For it can true that both self-examination (1 Corinthians 11:28) and the recognition of transubstantiation (1 Corinthians 11:29c) are required during Communion. Otherwise, how could a Christian become "guilty of the body and blood of the Lord" (1 Corinthians 11:27) simply by eating a piece of bread and taking a sip of wine?
Also, how could Galatians 3:1b have been true apart from transubstantiation?
Let us follow what the Lord Jesus Christ says:
[John 6:53-57]
~
(Re: In 1 Corinthians 11:29, does not the original Greek word translated as "discerning" mean "honoring", so that it has nothing to do with making the elements "become Christ's flesh and blood"?)
Note that they do become Christ's flesh and blood (Matthew 26:26-28).
And in 1 Corinthians 11:29 the original Greek word (diakrino: G1252) translated as "discerning" can mean just that (Matthew 16:3).
~
(Re: Someone vehemently against closed communion, saying that the Bible requires universal communion)
How do you define "universal communion"? Do you mean that even non-Christians should be able to partake of Communion? If so, what do you do with Matthew 7:6?
Or, if by universal communion you mean that any Christian should be able to partake of Communion, then how do you define a Christian?
For example, would you offer Communion to a Christian who believes in Christ, but denies that He is in the flesh? If so, note 2 John 1:7-11.
And if you would not offer Communion to a Christian who denies that Christ is in the flesh, then why would you lambaste Christians who deny Communion to Christians who deny that Christ is in the flesh in Communion, as is shown in Matthew 26:26-28, John 6:53-57, 1 Corinthians 11:27-30, and Galatians 3:1?
~
(Re: How could churches teach and practice "unworthy" Communion for hundreds of years without dying off?)
Note that nothing in the Bible says that Christian congregations who deny transubstantiation will die off. The Bible simply says that some Christians can become sick, or even die, due to their not discerning that the bread and wine of Communion are the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 11:27-30; cf. John 6:53-57, Matthew 26:26-28, Galatians 3:1).
~
(Re: Are not you lacking in any understanding of why the apostle Paul corrected the abuse of the Lord's Supper with these simple words: "Eat at home"?)
Eating at home related only to one way of abusing the Lord's Supper, through gluttony and selfishness (1 Corinthians 11:21).
For the Lord's Supper can also be abused by not discerning that the bread and wine of Communion are the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 11:27-30; cf. John 6:53-57, Matthew 26:26-28, Galatians 3:1).
Also, regarding "Eat at home", Christians who deny that Christ is in the flesh are not even to be brought into our homes:
[2 John 1:7-11, emphasis 10b]
--
*1 Corinthians 11:31 / *1 Cor. 11:31 -
This refers only to the present, temporal judgment of chastening for unrepentant sin (1 Corinthians 11:32, Revelation 3:19, Hebrews 12:5-11), not to the future, final judgment of everyone in the Church.
(See Matthew 24:48 above)
--
*1 Corinthians 11:32 / *1 Cor. 11:32 -
(Chastened)
See Revelation 3:19 below.
--
*1 Corinthians chapters 12 to 14 / *1 Cor. chs. 12-14 -
(Re: Are not tongues mentioned only here, in an early letter of the apostle Paul, but not in his later letters?)
The book of Romans could have been written a few years after 1 Corinthians, and it refers to the Roman Christians also operating in the Spiritual gifts (Romans 12:6, cf. 1 Corinthians 12:4-11). Also, nothing in the apostle Paul's other epistles requires that any of the other churches he wrote to were not also operating in the Spiritual gifts, or that God would cause the gifts to lessen or cease before Jesus Christ's (still future) Second Coming, when all obedient Christians will become perfect, like Jesus, when they see Him face to face (1 Corinthians 13:8-12; 1 John 3:2). The great amount of detail and instruction in 1 Corinthians chapters 12 to 14 regarding Spiritual gifts was probably due to an unusual lack of understanding and discipline on the part of the Corinthian church in its use of the gifts in its church meetings.
(See 1 Corinthians 12:8 below)
--
*1 Corinthians 12:3a / *1 Cor. 12:3a -
This refers only to those who are speaking a miraculous message by the Spiritual gift of prophecy (1 Corinthians 12:10). It is not contradicting that Christians can wrongly employ their free will to deny Jesus Christ, such as to avoid suffering and death during a persecution against Christians (Mark 8:35-38). Such a denial, or apostasy, will ultimately result in the loss of salvation (2 Timothy 2:12, John 15:6, Hebrews 6:4-8).
(See Mark 13:9 above, and Hebrews 6:4 below)
--
*1 Corinthians 12:8-10 / *1 Cor. 12:8 -
(Re: Spiritual *gifts / *Tongues)
The Holy Spirit's gifts (1 Corinthians 12:8-10) which operate in Christians who have received Holy Spirit baptism (Acts 19:6, Acts 11:15-16, Acts 10:44-46) will not cease operating until Jesus Christ's future, Second Coming. For 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 means that just as only when children become adults do they put away childish things, so only when Christians become perfect when they see Jesus face to face at His Second Coming (1 John 3:2) will they no longer need Spiritual gifts such as prophecy, tongues, and the word of knowledge (1 Corinthians 12:8,10). During the future Tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24 which will just precede Jesus' Second Coming (Matthew 24:29-31), are some in the Church going to reject the ministry of God's Two Witnesses because it will involve them prophesying and performing miracles (Revelation 11:3,6)?
Because Jesus Christ's Second Coming, like the preceding Tribulation, has not happened yet, all of the Holy Spirit's gifts are still operating in the Church today, in Pentecostal congregations, and in charismatic congregations, which can be of almost any denomination. God's Word commands Christians to operate in the Spiritual gifts when Christians come together (1 Corinthians 14:26-31). So congregations today should be careful not to quench the Holy Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:19) by despising prophesyings (1 Thessalonians 5:20) or forbidding all speaking in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:39). Tongues are one of the Spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:8-10) through which Christians can be regularly edified (1 Corinthians 14:4-5,12,26). Not all Holy Spirit-baptized Christians will speak in tongues (1 Corinthians 12:30), but almost all will (cf. Acts 19:6, Acts 10:45-46), for tongues are one of the Holy Spirit's lesser gifts (1 Corinthians 12:28; 1 Corinthians 14:5).
Different Christians receive different kinds of tongues (1 Corinthians 12:10). Some tongues are languages which people can understand (Acts 2:4,8) while other tongues are languages which people cannot understand (1 Corinthians 14:2), not even the speakers (1 Corinthians 14:14). Unintelligible tongues could include ancient human languages which are unknown to history, ancient human languages which are known to history but are not understood, and angelic languages (1 Corinthians 13:1). Unintelligible tongues are not useless, however, for when they are prayed or sung privately to God without interpretation (1 Corinthians 14:2,28), they edify the spirits of those who speak or sing them (1 Corinthians 14:4,14-15, Jude 1:20) to bless and thank God (1 Corinthians 14:16). And when unintelligible tongues are prayed or sung out loud in a congregation and then Spiritually interpreted (1 Corinthians 12:10b-11), their interpretation edifies the whole congregation (1 Corinthians 14:5b,12-13,26). And when Christians sing in tongues to God, they are singing the "spiritual songs" which the Bible distinguishes from psalms and hymns (Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16).
The Bible sets no restrictions on how much Christians can pray and sing to God in tongues out loud at home or silently in church (1 Corinthians 14:28) (just as regular praying can be done silently: 1 Samuel 1:13,17, Nehemiah 2:4b). Indeed, the apostle Paul prayed and sung to God in tongues in private more than anyone (1 Corinthians 14:18-19). But regarding church meetings, the Bible sets strict rules on speaking tongues out loud: They are not to be spoken out loud in church meetings unless there is someone present who can Spiritually interpret them to the whole congregation (1 Corinthians 14:28). And even when a tongues-interpreter is present, at the most only three people should in turn speak out loud in unknown tongues, which should then be interpreted to the whole congregation (1 Corinthians 14:27). Everyone who has received the gift of tongues should be praying for the separate gift of the interpretation of tongues so that he or she can edify others (1 Corinthians 14:12-13; 1 Corinthians 12:10b).
(See also paragraphs 2-3 of Mark 16:16 above)
~
(Re: Were tongues just a temporary sign to non-Christian Jews in the first century AD?)
No, for tongues still serve today as a sign to those, whether Jews or Gentiles, who would scorn the refreshing of God's Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19) in their desire to have only parts of the Bible instead (Isaiah 28:11-13). And tongues still serve today as a sign to non-Christians (and to Spiritually-"unlearned" Christians who reject the present operation of the Spiritual gifts), whether Jews or Gentiles, of their inability to understand all of the things of God (1 Corinthians 14:22-23).
~
(Re: Are tongues today just *emotion-based frenzy / *ecstatic utterances?)
While only some Pentecostal and charismatic congregations like to work themselves up emotionally (just as some football fans and rock concert-goers like to, because it is fun and a release), no Pentecostal or charismatic congregation is able to operate in its Spiritual gifts only when it has worked itself up emotionally. For working oneself up emotionally has nothing to do with the ability to operate in the Spiritual gifts. For they are miraculous abilities which only God's Holy Spirit can give to Christians (1 Corinthians 12:8-10). Also, working oneself up emotionally is not a good idea when operating in the Spiritual gifts, for they are to be employed in a sober, controlled way, according to the rules of 1 Corinthians 14:26-40.
In order for Christians to look honestly at all of the evidence regarding the operation of the Spiritual gifts in the Church today, and not just give heed to cherry-picked extreme examples which they might hear about or find on the internet which they think support their anti-tongues view, Christians need to actually go out and attend faithfully for a few months a wide variety of congregations and home groups which operate in the Spiritual gifts, until they find one which operates in the gifts with discipline (1 Corinthians 14:26-40), and also has sound Biblical preaching (2 Timothy 4:2-4), and whose members also live holy lives (2 Corinthians 7:1).
~
(Re: Was not the Azusa Street revival a madhouse?)
"Madhouse" claims can be based on the misuse of the valid gift of tongues (1 Corinthians 14:23). And even when tongues-speakers employ their gift properly, they can still be mistakenly mocked (Acts 2:13). Also, what happened to some people at the Azusa Street revival was tame compared with what the Bible shows can happen to some people when God's Holy Spirit comes upon them with great power (1 Samuel 19:23-24).
~
(Re: Wasn't I just *faking tongues?)
Why do you think that you were faking? For speaking or singing in tongues does take some effort. For when God's Holy Spirit gives Christians the gift of tongues, He does not turn them into sock puppets. They still have to open their own mouths and make the effort to speak or sing something forth. Tongues are not spoken or sung out of some sort of Spiritual or emotional euphoria, but can be spoken or sung in no less a sober manner than praying or singing in one's natural language. So long as Christians are not purposely trying to mentally control, alter, or add to what they are saying or singing in tongues, but are simply letting their spirit pray or sing in tongues with no mental input on their part (1 Corinthians 14:14-15), then they should simply accept by faith that they have truly received the gift of tongues.
Another misconception regarding tongues is that they cannot ever be just a simple phrase, but must always be some long and elaborate discourse. But why should it be surprising to us that when our spirit is first given the ability to speak (1 Corinthians 14:14), it can use only simple phrases, just as when we were toddlers and our mind first learned to speak, it started out with only simple phrases?
A Christian can think that he is being objective in denying the validity of tongues today, when in fact he is not; just as an atheist who used to be a Christian can think that he is being objective in denying the validity of Christian faith, when in fact he is not. Does every instance of someone without Spiritual gifts (or without faith in gifts which he has received) witnessing their use throughout the world today have to objectively be like the fable of the child seeing the emperor with no clothes, rather than like the fable of the fox with no grapes?
~
(Re: Isn't it no secret why tongues are the most commonly claimed gift, in that all of the other gifts are a lot harder, if not impossible, to fake?)
The gift of tongues can be the most common gift simply because it is the least of the gifts (1 Corinthians 12:28).
~
(Re: What if I had a bad experience?)
A Christian must not let any bad experience which he may have had at an awful, Spiritually-gifted congregation or home group keep him from believing and obeying God's Word the Holy Bible regarding the Spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:8-10) and how Christians are to operate in them (1 Corinthians 14:4-5,26-40). For that would be like a non-Spiritually gifted Christian having the bad luck of going to an awful, non-Spiritually gifted congregation or home group, and then deciding to give up on remaining a Christian, or ever going to any other non-Spiritually gifted congregation or home group, because of his mistaken extrapolation from his one bad experience that every non-Spiritually gifted congregation or home group in the world must be awful.
~
(Re: What if there is a lack of miraculous *healing in a congregation?)
Any lack of miraculous healing does not negate the validity of the Spiritual gifts per se, for God does not give the gift of miraculous healing to everyone (1 Corinthians 12:8-10), and He does not choose to miraculously heal in every instance (2 Corinthians 12:8-10). Also, people can keep themselves from being miraculously healed by a lack of faith on their part (Luke 8:48, Acts 14:9).
(See also the "healing" sections of 2 Corinthians 5:8 below, and Luke 13:16 above)
-
Next entry / Prior / Table of Contents
Dec 15, 2018
(Re: *Paul)
Do you reject the apostle Paul and so reject the books of the Bible written by him? If so, that is a serious mistake, for the basis for Paul's theology is direct revelation to him from Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:11-12). That is why his theology is in accord with what the Old Testament foretold (Acts 26:22-23), with what the New Testament Gospels describe (Matthew 16:21, Matthew 26:28; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and with what the other writings in the New Testament say (2 Peter 3:15-16).
The basis for Paul's authority, his being an apostle of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 9:1), is his being an eyewitness of Jesus (1 Corinthians 9:1) and receiving his ministry directly from Jesus (Acts 26:16-18, Acts 9:10-22). When the other apostles saw how greatly Jesus worked through Paul, they accepted him as a fellow apostle (Galatians 2:9, Acts 14:14). Peter even expressly wrote to Christians confirming that all of Paul's epistles are from God, are scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). There is no reason to reject Paul's apostolic authority (1 Corinthians 14:36-37). His faithful work on behalf of Jesus proves that he is not a false apostle (Matthew 7:16-18). And Paul fulfilled many of the signs spoken of by Jesus regarding true Christians (Mark 16:17-18, Acts 19:11-12; 1 Corinthians 14:18, Acts 28:3-5, Acts 28:8).
Also, because of the wonderful example of Saul the persecutor becoming Paul the apostle (1 Timothy 1:12-17; Acts 7:58 to Acts 13:9), Christians should never give up on any non-Christians, no matter how hostile they are to Christians and the Christian faith. Instead, Christians should keep praying for them that God would miraculously save their souls (2 Timothy 2:25, Ephesians 2:8, Colossians 1:21-23). And because of the example of Saul becoming Paul, those who have persecuted Christians and reviled the Christian faith in the past, but now feel God's gifts of repentance and faith (2 Timothy 2:25, Ephesians 2:8) moving within them, should not think that what they have done against Christians and the Christian faith (whether in word or in deed) in the past disqualifies them now from being able to repent, to ask God's forgiveness, and to receive His salvation through their faith in Jesus Christ (Colossians 1:21-22).
~
(Re: If you were somehow correct that Paul taught against the keeping of the commandments of God, I would have no use for him at all)
The apostle Paul taught only against the keeping of the letter of the commandments of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Romans 7:6, Galatians 2:11-21, Galatians 4:21 to 5:8, Galatians 3:2-25), which was abolished on Jesus Christ's Cross (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18).
Paul never taught against the keeping of Jesus Christ's New Covenant/New Testament commandments (John 14:15, Hebrews 7:12, Galatians 6:2; 1 Corinthians 14:37), or the spirit of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Romans 7:6, Galatians 5:14, Romans 13:8-10, Matthew 7:12).
(See the "Law" section of Ephesians 2:15 below)
~
(Re: Are Paul's epistles merely commentaries?)
No, they are scriptures (2 Peter 3:16), and so their source is divine inspiration (2 Timothy 3:16, Galatians 1:11-12). If we think that we know anything about the Word of God, the Holy Bible, then we must acknowledge this (1 Corinthians 14:36-37).
~
(Re: Are Paul's epistles Christ-centric?)
Yes, very much so, for in the apostle Paul's epistles (assuming that the book of Hebrews was written by Silas/Silvanus), Paul refers to "Christ" or "Jesus" or the "Lord" almost 900 times. His Gospel message is always centered on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 26:22-23; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4).
--
*1 Corinthians 9:20 / *1 Cor. 9:20 -
When the apostle Paul was among only Jews who mistakenly thought that they were still under the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, his merely acting like he also was still under it (1 Corinthians 9:20, Acts 21:26) was to maintain his credibility among those Jews, in the hope that this would give him sufficient continued access to them (cf. Acts 16:3), give him enough more time with them to where he might be able to gradually persuade them to accept his correct point of view (1 Corinthians 9:20) that the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law was abolished for both Jews and Gentiles on Jesus Christ's Cross (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19, Hebrews 10:9b, Galatians 3:2-25, Galatians 2:11-21, Galatians 4:21 to 5:8).
~
(Re: But it says that they were actually under the law)
In 1 Corinthians 9:20, only some Jews were under the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law. And not because it was still in effect for people as far as God was concerned (it was not), but because they were willingly and mistakenly continuing to place themselves under it (cf. Galatians 4:21 to 5:1).
--
*1 Corinthians 9:27 / *1 Cor. 9:27 -
This refers to how Christians can end up being cut off (Romans 11:22), cast away, and burned (John 15:6), how they can end up losing their salvation because of unrepentant sin (Hebrews 10:26-29, Luke 12:45-46; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10), even after they have preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ to others (1 Corinthians 9:27, Matthew 7:22-23).
--
*1 Corinthians 10:1-14 / *1 Cor. 10:1 -
This means that the Old Testament contains precedents of disobedience applicable by type to Christians.
~
(Our fathers)
1 Corinthians 10:1 can be referring to all Christians' spiritual forefathers (e.g. Romans 4:16-25), not to their genetic forefathers.
(See the "Tribes" section of Romans 11:17 above)
--
*1 Corinthians 10:3-4 / *1 Cor. 10:3 -
In 1 Corinthians 10:3 the spiritual meat which all of the Israelites ate during the Exodus (1 Corinthians 10:1-3) was the literal manna in Exodus 16:15 and Nehemiah 9:15. The original Greek word (broma: G1033) in 1 Corinthians 10:3 translated as "meat" can simply refer to any "food" (Strong's Greek Dictionary). It is translated as "victuals" in Matthew 14:15, the English word "victuals" meaning any "food usable by man" (Webster's).
The manna of Exodus 16:15 was "spiritual" food (1 Corinthians 10:3) in the sense that it is the literal food which is eaten in heaven (Psalms 78:24b), and was sent down from heaven miraculously by God to the Israelites (Nehemiah 9:15, Psalms 78:24). Manna is "spiritual" also in the sense that it is the literal food of angels (Psalms 78:25), who are called spirits (Hebrews 1:7). But manna is not a food of immortality (John 6:49).
(See John 6:53 above, and Revelation 2:7 below)
In 1 Corinthians 10:4 the spiritual drink which all of the Israelites drank during the Exodus (1 Corinthians 10:1-4) was the literal water in Exodus 17:6 and Nehemiah 9:15. This water was "spiritual" in the sense that it was provided by God via miraculous means, out of solid rock (Psalms 114:8, Deuteronomy 8:15).
When 1 Corinthians 10:4 says: "that Rock was Christ", it means that the literal striking of the rock in Exodus 17:6, resulting in the outpouring of literal water, typified God the Father's literal striking of Jesus Christ the "rock" (Romans 9:33) on the Cross. For "we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God" (Isaiah 53:4). But Jesus' suffering and death on the Cross for our sins and His rising physically from the dead on the third day provided the way for us to be saved from hell (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and for us to receive Christ into our hearts (Ephesians 3:17) and the resulting outpouring of God's Holy Spirit like water from within us (John 7:38-39).
(See also paragraphs 2-3 of section 2 of Matthew 16:18 above)
~
(Re: Did the apostle Paul mean that they ate and drank the same spiritual meat and drink as us Christians?)
No, 1 Corinthians 10:3-4 does not mean that believers during Old Testament times obtained the same thing as Christians, "God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect" (Hebrews 11:40).
Instead, in 1 Corinthians 10:3-4 the apostle Paul means that all of the Israelites during the Exodus ate the same literal manna of Exodus 16:15 and drank the same literal water of Exodus 17:6, just as the Israelites during the Exodus "were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Corinthians 10:2). But this did not mean that all of them would obtain ultimate salvation, for "with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness" (1 Corinthians 10:5).
And this loss of their salvation was an example of how Christians can ultimately lose their salvation, for "these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things" (1 Corinthians 10:6); "Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall" (1 Corinthians 10:12). That is, even after Christians have partaken of the literal flesh and blood of Communion (John 6:53-55, Matthew 26:26-28) and have been water-immersion (burial) baptized (Romans 6:3-11, Colossians 2:12), they can still ultimately lose their salvation (e.g. Hebrews 10:26-29).
(See, for example, Hebrews 10:26 below)
~
(Re: A spirit hath not flesh and bones)
See section 2 of Luke 24:39 above.
~
(Re: Does the word "spiritual" used in 1 Corinthians 10 means non-physical?)
No, for note that obedient, physical Christians are called "spiritual" (Galatians 6:1).
--
*1 Corinthians 10:6-11 / *1 Cor. 10:6 -
(Re: Means that the Church will return to the Promised Land like Israel did: without Jesus' physical presence?)
No, for just as the Church is under a different covenant than Israel was during the Exodus (2 Corinthians 3:6-18), so the Church can be gathered together to the Promised Land in a different manner, at Jesus Christ's future, Second Coming (Mark 13:26-27). 1 Corinthians 10:6-11 means that what happened to some Israelites during the Exodus is a warning to Christians not to backslide.
--
*1 Corinthians 10:11 / *1 Cor. 10:11 -
(The ends of the world are come)
See the "End" section of Hebrews 9:26 below.
--
*1 Corinthians 10:13 / *1 Cor. 10:13 -
This does not mean once-saved-always-saved, for Christians can still wrongly employ their free will to return to unrepentant sin, to the ultimate loss of their salvation (Hebrews 10:26-29; 1 Corinthians 9:27, Luke 12:45-46).
(See Hebrews 10:26 below)
--
*1 Corinthians 10:21 / *1 Cor. 10:21 -
See Revelation 2:14b below.
--
*1 Corinthians 10:25-30 / *1 Cor. 10:25 -
This shows that under the New Covenant, all foods are in themselves okay for all Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, to eat. For it shows that Christians can eat whatever is sold in the meat markets or is set before them at a dinner.
(See Romans 14:14 above)
--
*1 Corinthians 10:32 / *1 Cor. 10:32 -
This does not contradict that Gentile Christians are part of Israel (Romans 11:17,24, Ephesians 2:12,19, Galatians 3:29). Also, 1 Corinthians 10:32 refers only to non-Christian Jews and Gentiles, who are not part of the Church. It does not contradict that the Church consists of both Jewish and Gentile Christians (1 Corinthians 12:13, Acts 22:3, Romans 16:4b).
--
*1 Corinthians 11:10 / *1 Cor. 11:10 -
The original Greek word (exousia: G1849) translated as "power" can mean "authority" (1 Corinthians 15:24). So the woman having authority (symbolized by a head covering) on her head while praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5,13) could represent her being "under authority" (cf. Matthew 8:9a) of the man (1 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:11-15).
Regarding 1 Corinthians 11:10b, compare 1 Peter 3:22, which refers to angels being under the authority of Jesus Christ. The head covering can serve as a reminder to them of this.
Regarding 1 Corinthians 11:4, in cold climates where wearing a warm hat can be necessary not to get sick, 1 Corinthians 11:4 could be applied while a man is praying or prophesying out loud in a church meeting or in another public setting. It might not apply to a man praying silently or in private, as for some men this is almost a continuous activity, as God is in all their thoughts (contrast Psalms 10:4b, KJV).
--
*1 Corinthians 11:16 / *1 Cor. 11:16 -
This means that neither the other apostles nor the rest of the Church had any custom contentious to what the apostle Paul had just affirmed in 1 Corinthians 11:3-15.
--
*1 Corinthians 11:19 / *1 Cor. 11:19 -
(Heresies)
See 2 Peter 2:1 below.
--
*1 Corinthians 11:29 / *1 Cor. 11:29 -
"Discerning the Lord's body" means that when Christians partake of Communion (1 Corinthians 11:23-29), they must discern that the bread and wine are the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ (John 6:53-56) in some spiritual manner (John 6:63), or they may suffer the consequences (1 Corinthians 11:30).
~
(Re: Jesus died once)
Amen (Hebrews 7:27b), and Communion is a partaking of Jesus Christ's one-time sacrifice (1 Corinthians 11:26).
~
(Re: Is not it true that neither the bread nor the wine become the body and blood? For are not the bread and wine declared to already be the body and blood even before they are consumed?)
But not before the declaration, which involves intent and faith.
~
(Re: Is not it true that no genetic analysis has ever shown the DNA of human flesh or blood to be present in the bread or wine of Communion, so that the elements must exclusively be spiritual metaphors?)
There need be no such dichotomy. For the bread and wine of Communion become Christ's flesh and blood by faith, which is not seen (Hebrews 11:1), that is, which is something which God purposely designed so that it cannot be scientifically proven (1 Corinthians 2:11-16), just as Christ's very death and resurrection themselves, the very heart of the Gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), cannot be scientifically proven.
~
(Re: Doesn't "discerning the Lord's body" have nothing to do with believing that the bread and wine of Communion are the actual body and blood of Christ; first, because the body alone and not the blood is specified? . . .)
Both need not be specified every time that either is referred to, just as both the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ need not be specified every time that either is referred to (e.g. Romans 10:9). That is, allow for synecdoche.
(Re: . . . second, because the expression is associated with eating and drinking unworthily as a result of not first examining oneself?)
Again, there is no need for a dichotomy. For it can true that both self-examination (1 Corinthians 11:28) and the recognition of transubstantiation (1 Corinthians 11:29c) are required during Communion. Otherwise, how could a Christian become "guilty of the body and blood of the Lord" (1 Corinthians 11:27) simply by eating a piece of bread and taking a sip of wine?
Also, how could Galatians 3:1b have been true apart from transubstantiation?
Let us follow what the Lord Jesus Christ says:
[John 6:53-57]
~
(Re: In 1 Corinthians 11:29, does not the original Greek word translated as "discerning" mean "honoring", so that it has nothing to do with making the elements "become Christ's flesh and blood"?)
Note that they do become Christ's flesh and blood (Matthew 26:26-28).
And in 1 Corinthians 11:29 the original Greek word (diakrino: G1252) translated as "discerning" can mean just that (Matthew 16:3).
~
(Re: Someone vehemently against closed communion, saying that the Bible requires universal communion)
How do you define "universal communion"? Do you mean that even non-Christians should be able to partake of Communion? If so, what do you do with Matthew 7:6?
Or, if by universal communion you mean that any Christian should be able to partake of Communion, then how do you define a Christian?
For example, would you offer Communion to a Christian who believes in Christ, but denies that He is in the flesh? If so, note 2 John 1:7-11.
And if you would not offer Communion to a Christian who denies that Christ is in the flesh, then why would you lambaste Christians who deny Communion to Christians who deny that Christ is in the flesh in Communion, as is shown in Matthew 26:26-28, John 6:53-57, 1 Corinthians 11:27-30, and Galatians 3:1?
~
(Re: How could churches teach and practice "unworthy" Communion for hundreds of years without dying off?)
Note that nothing in the Bible says that Christian congregations who deny transubstantiation will die off. The Bible simply says that some Christians can become sick, or even die, due to their not discerning that the bread and wine of Communion are the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 11:27-30; cf. John 6:53-57, Matthew 26:26-28, Galatians 3:1).
~
(Re: Are not you lacking in any understanding of why the apostle Paul corrected the abuse of the Lord's Supper with these simple words: "Eat at home"?)
Eating at home related only to one way of abusing the Lord's Supper, through gluttony and selfishness (1 Corinthians 11:21).
For the Lord's Supper can also be abused by not discerning that the bread and wine of Communion are the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 11:27-30; cf. John 6:53-57, Matthew 26:26-28, Galatians 3:1).
Also, regarding "Eat at home", Christians who deny that Christ is in the flesh are not even to be brought into our homes:
[2 John 1:7-11, emphasis 10b]
--
*1 Corinthians 11:31 / *1 Cor. 11:31 -
This refers only to the present, temporal judgment of chastening for unrepentant sin (1 Corinthians 11:32, Revelation 3:19, Hebrews 12:5-11), not to the future, final judgment of everyone in the Church.
(See Matthew 24:48 above)
--
*1 Corinthians 11:32 / *1 Cor. 11:32 -
(Chastened)
See Revelation 3:19 below.
--
*1 Corinthians chapters 12 to 14 / *1 Cor. chs. 12-14 -
(Re: Are not tongues mentioned only here, in an early letter of the apostle Paul, but not in his later letters?)
The book of Romans could have been written a few years after 1 Corinthians, and it refers to the Roman Christians also operating in the Spiritual gifts (Romans 12:6, cf. 1 Corinthians 12:4-11). Also, nothing in the apostle Paul's other epistles requires that any of the other churches he wrote to were not also operating in the Spiritual gifts, or that God would cause the gifts to lessen or cease before Jesus Christ's (still future) Second Coming, when all obedient Christians will become perfect, like Jesus, when they see Him face to face (1 Corinthians 13:8-12; 1 John 3:2). The great amount of detail and instruction in 1 Corinthians chapters 12 to 14 regarding Spiritual gifts was probably due to an unusual lack of understanding and discipline on the part of the Corinthian church in its use of the gifts in its church meetings.
(See 1 Corinthians 12:8 below)
--
*1 Corinthians 12:3a / *1 Cor. 12:3a -
This refers only to those who are speaking a miraculous message by the Spiritual gift of prophecy (1 Corinthians 12:10). It is not contradicting that Christians can wrongly employ their free will to deny Jesus Christ, such as to avoid suffering and death during a persecution against Christians (Mark 8:35-38). Such a denial, or apostasy, will ultimately result in the loss of salvation (2 Timothy 2:12, John 15:6, Hebrews 6:4-8).
(See Mark 13:9 above, and Hebrews 6:4 below)
--
*1 Corinthians 12:8-10 / *1 Cor. 12:8 -
(Re: Spiritual *gifts / *Tongues)
The Holy Spirit's gifts (1 Corinthians 12:8-10) which operate in Christians who have received Holy Spirit baptism (Acts 19:6, Acts 11:15-16, Acts 10:44-46) will not cease operating until Jesus Christ's future, Second Coming. For 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 means that just as only when children become adults do they put away childish things, so only when Christians become perfect when they see Jesus face to face at His Second Coming (1 John 3:2) will they no longer need Spiritual gifts such as prophecy, tongues, and the word of knowledge (1 Corinthians 12:8,10). During the future Tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24 which will just precede Jesus' Second Coming (Matthew 24:29-31), are some in the Church going to reject the ministry of God's Two Witnesses because it will involve them prophesying and performing miracles (Revelation 11:3,6)?
Because Jesus Christ's Second Coming, like the preceding Tribulation, has not happened yet, all of the Holy Spirit's gifts are still operating in the Church today, in Pentecostal congregations, and in charismatic congregations, which can be of almost any denomination. God's Word commands Christians to operate in the Spiritual gifts when Christians come together (1 Corinthians 14:26-31). So congregations today should be careful not to quench the Holy Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:19) by despising prophesyings (1 Thessalonians 5:20) or forbidding all speaking in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:39). Tongues are one of the Spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:8-10) through which Christians can be regularly edified (1 Corinthians 14:4-5,12,26). Not all Holy Spirit-baptized Christians will speak in tongues (1 Corinthians 12:30), but almost all will (cf. Acts 19:6, Acts 10:45-46), for tongues are one of the Holy Spirit's lesser gifts (1 Corinthians 12:28; 1 Corinthians 14:5).
Different Christians receive different kinds of tongues (1 Corinthians 12:10). Some tongues are languages which people can understand (Acts 2:4,8) while other tongues are languages which people cannot understand (1 Corinthians 14:2), not even the speakers (1 Corinthians 14:14). Unintelligible tongues could include ancient human languages which are unknown to history, ancient human languages which are known to history but are not understood, and angelic languages (1 Corinthians 13:1). Unintelligible tongues are not useless, however, for when they are prayed or sung privately to God without interpretation (1 Corinthians 14:2,28), they edify the spirits of those who speak or sing them (1 Corinthians 14:4,14-15, Jude 1:20) to bless and thank God (1 Corinthians 14:16). And when unintelligible tongues are prayed or sung out loud in a congregation and then Spiritually interpreted (1 Corinthians 12:10b-11), their interpretation edifies the whole congregation (1 Corinthians 14:5b,12-13,26). And when Christians sing in tongues to God, they are singing the "spiritual songs" which the Bible distinguishes from psalms and hymns (Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16).
The Bible sets no restrictions on how much Christians can pray and sing to God in tongues out loud at home or silently in church (1 Corinthians 14:28) (just as regular praying can be done silently: 1 Samuel 1:13,17, Nehemiah 2:4b). Indeed, the apostle Paul prayed and sung to God in tongues in private more than anyone (1 Corinthians 14:18-19). But regarding church meetings, the Bible sets strict rules on speaking tongues out loud: They are not to be spoken out loud in church meetings unless there is someone present who can Spiritually interpret them to the whole congregation (1 Corinthians 14:28). And even when a tongues-interpreter is present, at the most only three people should in turn speak out loud in unknown tongues, which should then be interpreted to the whole congregation (1 Corinthians 14:27). Everyone who has received the gift of tongues should be praying for the separate gift of the interpretation of tongues so that he or she can edify others (1 Corinthians 14:12-13; 1 Corinthians 12:10b).
(See also paragraphs 2-3 of Mark 16:16 above)
~
(Re: Were tongues just a temporary sign to non-Christian Jews in the first century AD?)
No, for tongues still serve today as a sign to those, whether Jews or Gentiles, who would scorn the refreshing of God's Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19) in their desire to have only parts of the Bible instead (Isaiah 28:11-13). And tongues still serve today as a sign to non-Christians (and to Spiritually-"unlearned" Christians who reject the present operation of the Spiritual gifts), whether Jews or Gentiles, of their inability to understand all of the things of God (1 Corinthians 14:22-23).
~
(Re: Are tongues today just *emotion-based frenzy / *ecstatic utterances?)
While only some Pentecostal and charismatic congregations like to work themselves up emotionally (just as some football fans and rock concert-goers like to, because it is fun and a release), no Pentecostal or charismatic congregation is able to operate in its Spiritual gifts only when it has worked itself up emotionally. For working oneself up emotionally has nothing to do with the ability to operate in the Spiritual gifts. For they are miraculous abilities which only God's Holy Spirit can give to Christians (1 Corinthians 12:8-10). Also, working oneself up emotionally is not a good idea when operating in the Spiritual gifts, for they are to be employed in a sober, controlled way, according to the rules of 1 Corinthians 14:26-40.
In order for Christians to look honestly at all of the evidence regarding the operation of the Spiritual gifts in the Church today, and not just give heed to cherry-picked extreme examples which they might hear about or find on the internet which they think support their anti-tongues view, Christians need to actually go out and attend faithfully for a few months a wide variety of congregations and home groups which operate in the Spiritual gifts, until they find one which operates in the gifts with discipline (1 Corinthians 14:26-40), and also has sound Biblical preaching (2 Timothy 4:2-4), and whose members also live holy lives (2 Corinthians 7:1).
~
(Re: Was not the Azusa Street revival a madhouse?)
"Madhouse" claims can be based on the misuse of the valid gift of tongues (1 Corinthians 14:23). And even when tongues-speakers employ their gift properly, they can still be mistakenly mocked (Acts 2:13). Also, what happened to some people at the Azusa Street revival was tame compared with what the Bible shows can happen to some people when God's Holy Spirit comes upon them with great power (1 Samuel 19:23-24).
~
(Re: Wasn't I just *faking tongues?)
Why do you think that you were faking? For speaking or singing in tongues does take some effort. For when God's Holy Spirit gives Christians the gift of tongues, He does not turn them into sock puppets. They still have to open their own mouths and make the effort to speak or sing something forth. Tongues are not spoken or sung out of some sort of Spiritual or emotional euphoria, but can be spoken or sung in no less a sober manner than praying or singing in one's natural language. So long as Christians are not purposely trying to mentally control, alter, or add to what they are saying or singing in tongues, but are simply letting their spirit pray or sing in tongues with no mental input on their part (1 Corinthians 14:14-15), then they should simply accept by faith that they have truly received the gift of tongues.
Another misconception regarding tongues is that they cannot ever be just a simple phrase, but must always be some long and elaborate discourse. But why should it be surprising to us that when our spirit is first given the ability to speak (1 Corinthians 14:14), it can use only simple phrases, just as when we were toddlers and our mind first learned to speak, it started out with only simple phrases?
A Christian can think that he is being objective in denying the validity of tongues today, when in fact he is not; just as an atheist who used to be a Christian can think that he is being objective in denying the validity of Christian faith, when in fact he is not. Does every instance of someone without Spiritual gifts (or without faith in gifts which he has received) witnessing their use throughout the world today have to objectively be like the fable of the child seeing the emperor with no clothes, rather than like the fable of the fox with no grapes?
~
(Re: Isn't it no secret why tongues are the most commonly claimed gift, in that all of the other gifts are a lot harder, if not impossible, to fake?)
The gift of tongues can be the most common gift simply because it is the least of the gifts (1 Corinthians 12:28).
~
(Re: What if I had a bad experience?)
A Christian must not let any bad experience which he may have had at an awful, Spiritually-gifted congregation or home group keep him from believing and obeying God's Word the Holy Bible regarding the Spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:8-10) and how Christians are to operate in them (1 Corinthians 14:4-5,26-40). For that would be like a non-Spiritually gifted Christian having the bad luck of going to an awful, non-Spiritually gifted congregation or home group, and then deciding to give up on remaining a Christian, or ever going to any other non-Spiritually gifted congregation or home group, because of his mistaken extrapolation from his one bad experience that every non-Spiritually gifted congregation or home group in the world must be awful.
~
(Re: What if there is a lack of miraculous *healing in a congregation?)
Any lack of miraculous healing does not negate the validity of the Spiritual gifts per se, for God does not give the gift of miraculous healing to everyone (1 Corinthians 12:8-10), and He does not choose to miraculously heal in every instance (2 Corinthians 12:8-10). Also, people can keep themselves from being miraculously healed by a lack of faith on their part (Luke 8:48, Acts 14:9).
(See also the "healing" sections of 2 Corinthians 5:8 below, and Luke 13:16 above)
-
Next entry / Prior / Table of Contents
Dec 15, 2018
