.

[sunlover1]

Your faith radiates off the screen, and demonstrates that you worship a BIG God!! Love it, and thanks for sharing.

Yes, indeed He is amazing!
Glad you enjoyed it, I sure am.
Welcome to CF, Gwen-is-new!
I had to do a double take with your siggy.
Kind of ironic
Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion.
(Heb 3:15)

 

[Don Maurer]

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever-- John 14

Straw man....No one needs to demonstrate that the advocate will leave. Anyone who believes that special revelation has ceased believes the advocate remains with us. The ministries of the HS involves regeneration, illumination to what was said in the Bible, but not continued revelation. Can you show me in the context of John 14 where anything beyond apostolic revelation is being mentioned?

Someone will have to show me where Jesus didn't really mean "forever" or that the Advocate was going to disappear right after John penned his Revelation.

When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father--the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father--he will testify about me.-- John 15

You begin with the same assumptions as above. You see one word in the text "forever" and then apply that to continued revelation. The text simply does not say that continued revelation will occur "forever" but that the HS will be with the apostles forever.

John and the writer of Hebrews both to speak of this same continuing testimony of the Holy Spirit, not as something that ceases with the writing of their letters. Someone will have to point out to me the scripture where it says "until men have everything written down."

A perfect example of a bad argument from silence. Neither does the word "trinity" occur in the scripture. Although maybe you do not believe in the trinity, I do not know.

And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say, For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say. -- Luke 12
Someone will have to point me to the scripture that says this is now the time that evangelists are no longer brought to authorities so that the Holy Spirit no longer has to tell him "in the same hour" (i.e., "real-time") what he should say.

Do you see any difference in the concepts of the HS guiding an answer and special revelation? We who believe in the end of the cannon and sola scriptura also believe that the Spirit can guide and prompt through Gods providence. Somehow in your minds you think if you show that the Spirit works in any way, that this somehow proves your point that the Spirit must be continuing with special revelation.

Concerning this, I pleaded with the Lord three times to take it away from me. But He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness.” -- 2 Corinthians 12

Someone will have to show me in scripture where this direct quote is not a conversation with the Lord or where Paul said, "I'm the only one who talks to the Lord."

It is painfully obvious that the bible claims that special revelation came to many prophets and apostles. Paul was among them. We would deny that there are apostles and prophets today. So what are you trying to say here? Do you think that if special revelation came to Paul that this proves an open cannon and a denial of sola scriptura? If this is what you are doing, it is a very bad leap of logic.

We accept that the Bible is a special revelation, we accept Paul as an apostle. We do not deny that John, Matthew and many others were apostles. What we deny is that apostolic authority was passed down. Therefore the cannon is closed.

I do have a question.... Please tell me why (if there are modern day people who receive special revelation) why is this special revelation not added in your bibles to the back of the book of Revelation?

 

[Extraneous]

Straw man....No one needs to demonstrate that the advocate will leave. Anyone who believes that special revelation has ceased believes the advocate remains with us. The ministries of the HS involves regeneration, illumination to what was said in the Bible, but not continued revelation. Can you show me in the context of John 14 where anything beyond apostolic revelation is being mentioned?


You begin with the same assumptions as above. You see one word in the text "forever" and then apply that to continued revelation. The text simply does not say that continued revelation will occur "forever" but that the HS will be with the apostles forever.



A perfect example of a bad argument from silence. Neither does the word "trinity" occur in the scripture. Although maybe you do not believe in the trinity, I do not know.


Do you see any difference in the concepts of the HS guiding an answer and special revelation? We who believe in the end of the cannon and sola scriptura also believe that the Spirit can guide and prompt through Gods providence. Somehow in your minds you think if you show that the Spirit works in any way, that this somehow proves your point that the Spirit must be continuing with special revelation.



It is painfully obvious that the bible claims that special revelation came to many prophets and apostles. Paul was among them. We would deny that there are apostles and prophets today. So what are you trying to say here? Do you think that if special revelation came to Paul that this proves an open cannon and a denial of sola scriptura? If this is what you are doing, it is a very bad leap of logic.

We accept that the Bible is a special revelation, we accept Paul as an apostle. We do not deny that John, Matthew and many others were apostles. What we deny is that apostolic authority was passed down. Therefore the cannon is closed.

I do have a question.... Please tell me why (if there are modern day people who receive special revelation) why is this special revelation not added in your bibles to the back of the book of Revelation?

John 14 does say that "anyone" who loves Christ will keep his word, and that the spirit will teach them all things. That however doesn't also mean they will receive new revelation, but could mean that they will grow in knowledge and understanding through what has already been written. Thats why Christ refers to keeping his words, in my opinion.

 

[RDKirk]

Maybe so, but we are not the apostle paul. I believe God has already given us all we need to know in scripture.

Scripture, please. I provided written scripture showing that God continues to communicate with believers--do you have written scripture showing that He has stopped and depends solely on the written scripture?

 

[Extraneous]

Trinity is in scripture too. Im bowing out of this thread, i feel its going down hill.

 

[RDKirk]

True, but i see that not one person chose option which
reads, "God has spoken to me in an audible voice".

So is that what this entire topic hinges on? Whether God has produced atmospheric sound pressure waves for anyone?

 

[Extraneous]

Scripture, please.

Nope, im not going there. I believe scripture is enough, and i dont follow modern day prophets. Bowing out now.

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[RDKirk]

Straw man....No one needs to demonstrate that the advocate will leave. Anyone who believes that special revelation has ceased believes the advocate remains with us. The ministries of the HS involves regeneration, illumination to what was said in the Bible, but not continued revelation. Can you show me in the context of John 14 where anything beyond apostolic revelation is being mentioned?


You begin with the same assumptions as above. You see one word in the text "forever" and then apply that to continued revelation. The text simply does not say that continued revelation will occur "forever" but that the HS will be with the apostles forever.



A perfect example of a bad argument from silence. Neither does the word "trinity" occur in the scripture. Although maybe you do not believe in the trinity, I do not know.


Do you see any difference in the concepts of the HS guiding an answer and special revelation? We who believe in the end of the cannon and sola scriptura also believe that the Spirit can guide and prompt through Gods providence. Somehow in your minds you think if you show that the Spirit works in any way, that this somehow proves your point that the Spirit must be continuing with special revelation.



It is painfully obvious that the bible claims that special revelation came to many prophets and apostles. Paul was among them. We would deny that there are apostles and prophets today. So what are you trying to say here? Do you think that if special revelation came to Paul that this proves an open cannon and a denial of sola scriptura? If this is what you are doing, it is a very bad leap of logic.

We accept that the Bible is a special revelation, we accept Paul as an apostle. We do not deny that John, Matthew and many others were apostles. What we deny is that apostolic authority was passed down. Therefore the cannon is closed.

I do have a question.... Please tell me why (if there are modern day people who receive special revelation) why is this special revelation not added in your bibles to the back of the book of Revelation?

First, I can show you scripture for each person of the Trinity and the scriptural sources of "three Persons of one substance."

Second, no, I provided scripture and you can respond with nothing but your own thoughts.

People demand "sola scriptura" but can't respond with it...and start scattering.

 

[Don Maurer]

John 14 does say that "anyone" who loves Christ will keep his word, and that the spirit will teach them all things. That however doesn't also mean they will receive new revelation, but could mean that they will grow in knowledge and understanding through what has already been written. Thats why Christ refers to keeping his words, in my opinion.

Extraneous, I am not totally sure which text in John 14 you are referring to. I think it is John 14:25-26. First, let me quote it.
"These things have I spoken unto you, while yet abiding with you. But the Comforter, even the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you"
I would apply this directly to the apostles. I bolded certain things in the text which we might be reading differently. The pronoun "you" refers to the apostles who were the witnesses of the words and deed of Christ. The concept of "bring to rememberance" is referring to the apostles remembering the spoken word of Christ.

Also, these verses are in the context of the statement by Judas (not Iscariot) in verse 22. The question of Judas is asking how Christ will disclose himself to the apostles and not to the world. Christ's means of disclosing himself to the apostles is to have the Holy Spirit cause the apostles to remember the words that Jesus spoke during his earthly ministry.

Also, if I can add, this is definitional to what the apostolic office involved. If you go forward to Acts 1:22 you can see that one of the criteria to choose Matthias as the 12th apostle was for him to be a witness to the earthly ministry of Jesus.
"beginning from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us, of these must one become a witness with us of his resurrection"

If I can add some thoughts from another text... John 17, the High priestly prayer of our Lord.
He prays for the apostles.
Verse 8 reads... "for the words which thou gavest me I have given unto them."
Christ is the word in John 1 (logos). In the process of his earthly ministry, Christ gives to the future apostles the words the Father gave to Christ. In the context you can see that he is referring to the 12 in verse 12. "and not one of them perished, but the son of perdition;" This of course refers to Judas Iscariot, who fell.
We, the Church, do not receive the word of God until verse 20. "Neither for these only do I pray, but for them also that believe on me through their word" Christ is the word in John 1, he trains the future apostles and gives them the word in his earthly ministry (Acts 1) and then he sends the Holy Spirit to cause the apostles to remember the word (John 14), and then the word is given to the Church (John 17). Of course that word was given orally before the close of the cannon, but now the word of God is the Bible. The bible is the written record of the memories of the apostles as the Holy Spirit cause the apostles to remember the words of Christ. None apostolic writers like Luke are still Biblical, not because the Spirit causes Luke to remember the word of God given to Christ, but Luke writes because he could consult the original eyewitnesses, the apostles who had the inspired memories of Christ's words. Notice what Luke says in Luke 1:2. "even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word." In this text, the apostles "delivered" what Luke is writing unto "us" (this is the Church).

The bottom line is that I would see the phrase in John 14:26, "he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you" as a part of ministry of the Holy Spirit to cause the apostles to receieve the apostolic logos and hand it down int he written word of God and oral apostolic testimony.

It is obvious that my understanding leads strait to concepts like the close of the cannon and sola scriptura. There are no more apostles who hear the words of Christ while he was on earth. NT special revelation ceased with the death of the last apostle.

 

[Extraneous]

Extraneous, I am not totally sure which text in John 14 you are referring to. I think it is John 14:25-26. First, let me quote it.
"These things have I spoken unto you, while yet abiding with you. But the Comforter, even the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you"
I would apply this directly to the apostles. I bolded certain things in the text which we might be reading differently. The pronoun "you" refers to the apostles who were the witnesses of the words and deed of Christ. The concept of "bring to rememberance" is referring to the apostles remembering the spoken word of Christ.

Also, these verses are in the context of the statement by Judas (not Iscariot) in verse 22. The question of Judas is asking how Christ will disclose himself to the apostles and not to the world. Christ's means of disclosing himself to the apostles is to have the Holy Spirit cause the apostles to remember the words that Jesus spoke during his earthly ministry.

Also, if I can add, this is definitional to what the apostolic office involved. If you go forward to Acts 1:22 you can see that one of the criteria to choose Matthias as the 12th apostle was for him to be a witness to the earthly ministry of Jesus.
"beginning from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us, of these must one become a witness with us of his resurrection"

If I can add some thoughts from another text... John 17, the High priestly prayer of our Lord.
He prays for the apostles.
Verse 8 reads... "for the words which thou gavest me I have given unto them."
Christ is the word in John 1 (logos). In the process of his earthly ministry, Christ gives to the future apostles the words the Father gave to Christ. In the context you can see that he is referring to the 12 in verse 12. "and not one of them perished, but the son of perdition;" This of course refers to Judas Iscariot, who fell.
We, the Church, do not receive the word of God until verse 20. "Neither for these only do I pray, but for them also that believe on me through their word" Christ is the word in John 1, he trains the future apostles and gives them the word in his earthly ministry (Acts 1) and then he sends the Holy Spirit to cause the apostles to remember the word (John 14), and then the word is given to the Church (John 17). Of course that word was given orally before the close of the cannon, but now the word of God is the Bible. The bible is the written record of the memories of the apostles as the Holy Spirit cause the apostles to remember the words of Christ. None apostolic writers like Luke are still Biblical, not because the Spirit causes Luke to remember the word of God given to Christ, but Luke writes because he could consult the original eyewitnesses, the apostles who had the inspired memories of Christ's words. Notice what Luke says in Luke 1:2. "even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word." In this text, the apostles "delivered" what Luke is writing unto "us" (this is the Church).

The bottom line is that I would see the phrase in John 14:26, "he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you" as a part of ministry of the Holy Spirit to cause the apostles to receieve the apostolic logos and hand it down int he written word of God and oral apostolic testimony.

It is obvious that my understanding leads strait to concepts like the close of the cannon and sola scriptura. There are no more apostles who hear the words of Christ while he was on earth. NT special revelation ceased with the death of the last apostle.

I dont follow modern day apostles or prophets, nor am i looking for new revelation. I follow only those apostles in the bible. Furthermore, i believe that the spirit of truth mentioned in John 14, and the spirit teacher, is a promise made to all followers of Christ, not just the apostles. This is what God meant when he promised to write his laws on our minds and hearts. Its by the teaching of Christ and His apostles that the spirit leads us. All scripture leads me to believe that the holy spirit leads us in all truth, as individuals, and that the spirit uses all scripture for that purpose. As Paul old timothy. all scripture is profitable for instruction and correction. If you want to argue against anything i have said here, then find someone else to debate, cause im not interested brother.

 

[TillICollapse]

Sounds like you've drunk too much Postmodern tea.

Standards of being a Christian are typically agreement with a creed. On CF it's the Nicene Creed:

The Nicene Creed
I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

If you can't say yes and amen to the about, CF says that you may not participate in "Christian Only" subforums, and I would ask you where you disagree with the creed.

If you would like, I will cease participating in your thread. I'm not going to address these things for the reason I gave. It's a game I almost never choose to play, again, for the reasons I gave. If I wanted to discuss my beliefs or stance on any of the issues you just brought up, I would find a thread and do so.

 

[Winter_Rose]

So, to be clear, it not an audible voice you hear, correct?

It's not like someone sitting beside me talking, but I can still hear him. If that makes sense.

 

[Don Maurer]

First, I can show you scripture for each person of the Trinity and the scriptural sources of "three Persons of one substance."

This completely misses the point of what I had said. The point was about an argument from silence. However, I am glad you are a trinitarian. Many who believe in continued revelation are not trinitarians. Nevertheless, RDKirk, you need to follow what is being said.

Second, no, I provided scripture and you can respond with nothing but your own thoughts.

LOL, my purpose in writing to you was not to go to other scriptures, but to respond to the scriptures you quoted and demonstrate that you are not reading them in context. So then, I was referring to the scriptures you posted.

People demand "sola scriptura" but can't respond with it...and start scattering.

LOL, what does this mean? We cower in intimidation and scatter?

You are drawing my attention to one thing (that I should have though about long ago). Probably few on this thread grasp the idea of sola scriptura. I did not think about that. Few also grasp the concept of a closed cannon. I can understand that when I mention sola scriptura it would fall upon deaf ears if no one knows what the term means.

Possibly you are saying that I cannot respond with a positive scriptural statement of my own. Well, I will let others decide that.

 

[sunlover1]

So is that what this entire topic hinges on? Whether God has produced atmospheric sound pressure waves for anyone?

*shrugs
Seems many have their own idea of what is of God and what is not,
while claiming to use Scripture as their plumb line yet apparently disregarding the
glaring passages that say that God speaks to us. IMO.
In my opinion, if they would simply use some LOGIC, they would conclude
that the Father created us with fellowship in mind and since communication
is the basis for fellowship, well.. you get where I'm going with this.
Seems pretty simple, plus it's Scritural, plus we're all experiencing it.
Heck, I even posted an article from a Presbyterian website that it's
biblical.
Not sure what else can be done.

 

[sunlover1]

It's not like someone sitting beside me talking, but I can still hear him. If that makes sense.

It makes sense to all of those of us who hear His voice.
If you don't hear His voice, I guess it would be difficult to understand the concept maybe?

 

[Winter_Rose]

It makes sense to all of those of us who hear His voice.
If you don't hear His voice, I guess it would be difficult to understand the concept maybe?

That's true.

 

[sunlover1]

This completely misses the point of what I had said. The point was about an argument from silence. However, I am glad you are a trinitarian. Many who believe in continued revelation are not trinitarians. Nevertheless, RDKirk, you need to follow what is being said.


LOL, my purpose in writing to you was not to go to other scriptures, but to respond to the scriptures you quoted and demonstrate that you are not reading them in context. So then, I was referring to the scriptures you posted.


LOL, what does this mean? We cower in intimidation and scatter?

You are drawing my attention to one thing (that I should have though about long ago). Probably few on this thread grasp the idea of sola scriptura. I did not think about that. Few also grasp the concept of a closed cannon. I can understand that when I mention sola scriptura it would fall upon deaf ears if no one knows what the term means.

Possibly you are saying that I cannot respond with a positive scriptural statement of my own. Well, I will let others decide that.

We 'grasp' the idea of SS, some of us have been fighting for SS for over 10 years here.
I see your new so you couldn't possibly know that.
SS does not negate hearing God's voice.
JUST the opposite.
Scripture, just like he posted, shows that we CAN.
You just don't happen to hear Him and so you need
to now move on to our 'interpretation' of said
passages.
As he mentioned, there seems to be no end...

 

[faroukfarouk]

What would you like to ask?

The prayer that the Lord taught His disciples has very help content and guides to prayer.

 

[Don Maurer]

We 'grasp' the idea of SS, some of us have been fighting for SS for over 10 years here.
I see your new so you couldn't possibly know that.
SS does not negate hearing God's voice.
JUST the opposite.
Scripture, just like he posted, shows that we CAN.
You just don't happen to hear Him and so you need
to now move on to our 'interpretation' of said
passages.
As he mentioned, there seems to be no end...

Really, can you give me a coherent definition of sola scriptura?

SS does negate hearing God's voice depending on how you define the term "hearing God's voice."