.

[jimmyjimmy]

.

 

[JohnRabbit]

Can we expect what was normative for the Apostle Paul, or other prominent figures during the initial stages of building the church to be our personal experience today?

Are we to read historical accounts as prescriptive instruction? In other words, just because something happened in history does that necessarily mean it will continue to happen?

Some examples:

• Peter walked on water, so I can walk on water.
• Tongues of fire came down upon the apostles, so tongues of fire should come down on me.
• People were healed by touching a piece of cloth that Paul had touched, so I can pray over a handkerchief and people will be healed by touching it.

yes, the Christ says so!

John 14:12(NKJV)
12“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

the only exception i would note would be the speaking in tongues because it was necessary at the time to proclaim the gospel.

 

[Albion]

yes, the Christ says so!

John 14:12(NKJV)
12“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

Hmm. I don't see at all how that verse negates Brian's point. He asked if actions done by the Apostles (for example) are prescriptive, to be imitated. Saying that later believers will do "greater works than these" -- or even the "he will do also" (which you didn't highlight) don't address the question Brian raised about them being prescribed.

 

[JohnRabbit]

Hmm. I don't see at all how that verse negates Brian's point. He asked if actions done by the Apostles (for example) are prescriptive, to be imitated. Saying that later believers will do "greater works than these" -- or even the "he will do also" (which you didn't highlight) don't address the question Brian raised about them being prescribed.

Christ was just saying that the "works" are possible according to our faith.

now whether it would be the "normal", even Jesus was suspect of that, (see luke 18:8)!

 

[Albion]

Christ was just saying that the "works" are possible according to our faith.

OK, but that's not what I replied to.

Brian asked if these things were prescriptive and you answered, "yes, the Christ says so!"

 

[Greg J.]

What most affects our personal experience of God is God and us, not what God did with other people in the past or present.

The idea that God will respond the same way as he did in Scripture in a similar situation is not well-founded. In fact, Jesus' ministry shows us that he rarely repeated doing a miracle the same way a second time. However, the idea that he will respond in some way is more than well-founded—God promises it over and over in Scripture. There are passages that support that God will be doing miracles in our modern times, and none that say he's going to stop at some point. I'm not sure why people even think this. All kinds of things mess up our experiences of God. We must fight to believe what God said in spite of our experiences. This is the path of a growing faith.

Recognize the power of mankind, your community, your friends and family, and you to cut off the blessings (and experiences) of God. Joshua 7 describes a single family's sin (that no one knew about) cutting off God's favor for the whole community. This might not seem fair—and of course it isn't fair. That's what sin is like. A single sin is very powerful. (Romans 6:23, 5:14)

You don't need to fake your faith (and it might slow spiritual maturation). If you don't believe something God said, just confess it, and ask the Lord to help you to (understand and) believe it.

Oftentimes, people are interested in this subject because either they want to do miracles, see miracles, or have miracles done to help them. There's nothing wrong with this. This is a part of the human nature God gave us (see Ecclesiastes 3:11 about our hearts for something supernatural).

For those that want healing, read the passages around Then your light will break forth like the dawn, and your healing will quickly appear; (Isaiah 58:8a, 1984 NIV) It is good support for the many places that tell us to be devoted to Jesus with our actions (i.e., be obedient). See Deuteronomy 28 for a general exposition. However, our actions must come from our hearts. Ask God for that, since we can't change our own hearts.

To see miracles, ask the Lord for that. And keep asking. He may first want to use that desire to transform you over time into a person who will be able to appreciate seeing a miracle. He also might answer it at the moment you ask.

We are the Lord's servants and he is the Lord, not the other way around. If you want to do miracles, you must seek to become the Lord's servant (in your heart, a servant of all). If you want power, you must live your life giving up all power to the Lord's will. This is one example of the more general command in Luke 9:34: Then he said to them all: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.” (1984 NIV)

Take good care of your relationship with the Lord. Learn what it means to take good care of any relationship, then apply it to your relationship with the Lord. If you want a successful relationship (including marriage), you must sacrifice and keep sacrificing. The Lord laid down his life for us. The best thing we can do for our relationship with God is to lay down our lives for him—which means always yielding to his will in every way.

 

[ViaCrucis]

What is described as happening at Pentecost is descriptive.
Our Lord saying, "Love your neighbor" is prescriptive.

There is no reason to assume that what happened on Pentecost is something that will happen again, but the command to love our neighbor is most definitely something that is supposed to be normative for the Church because it is Christ's command.

The Apostles laid on hands and conferred the Holy Spirit, and that was sometimes (but not always) accompanied with glossolalia; the act of laying on of hands has been retained, known as Chrismation, and in many churches is part of the baptismal rite. So the act of laying on of hands has been retained, but the act of laying on of hands was never said to necessitate glossolalia; and indeed historically we can look at the historical record and see that glossolalia happened with increasing infrequency in the centuries following the apostles.

So, for example, we can see that glossolalia following laying on of hands is descriptive, there is nothing to indicate for us that it should happen. Even when the Apostles lay on hands glossolalia does not always follow (e.g. Acts 8:14-25). Why glossolalia happens sometimes and not others isn't explained exactly, though the Apostle in 1 Corinthians 14 perhaps offers us some explanation by telling us that the charism of glossolalia was a sign for the unbelieving, not the believing; the Apostle then quotes the prophet Isaiah who said that people of foreign languages would speak but the people would not accept it. Glossolalia, in Paul's understanding anyway, was a sign of God's judgment against unbelieving Israel. Yet the act of laying on of hands, for different purposes, was retained by those ordained by the apostles--bishops and presbyters, i.e. pastors--in various ways. Laying on of hands and anointing for the sick, for example, is taught in the letter of St. James; and the association of Chrismation with Baptism was standard in the ancient Church and retained in the Eastern Churches even when Chrismation typically was separated from Baptism in the Western Churches in the middle ages (though, it is still normative of the baptismal rite in many traditional Western churches today).

It's then also worthwhile to ask if laying on of hands (e.g. Chrismation) is itself prescriptive, and while I am unaware of any Scripture that says so, it was clearly something which the Church continued to do--as such it may be something which not written so in Scripture was nevertheless taught by the Apostles to their immediate successors--considering its sheer antiquity and scope in Christian practice.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Extraneous]

Tongues of fire-

Christ has eyes of fire (he sees all, the word discerns the intent of the heart, God writes his law on the heart)

He baptizes in fire (holy spirit, indwelling teacher)

Pentecost is referring to the spirit teaching us as individuals, in my opinion. The tongues of fire represent the Lords voice that his sheep hear and follow. In my opinion.

 

[Steeno7]

Can we expect what was normative for the Apostle Paul, or other prominent figures during the initial stages of building the church to be our personal experience today?

Are we to read historical accounts as prescriptive instruction? In other words, just because something happened in history does that necessarily mean it will continue to happen, and happen to us? Are we to read this as history, or are we to write ourselves into the texts?

Some examples:

• Peter walked on water, so I can walk on water.
• Tongues of fire came down upon the apostles, so tongues of fire should come down on me.
• People were healed by touching a piece of cloth that Paul had touched, so I can pray over a handkerchief and people will be healed by touching it.

Is not the same Christ who worked in and through Paul available to us today? Doesn't He still work in and through His people?

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Is not the same Christ who worked in and through Paul available to us today? Doesn't He still work in and through His people?

That's the question. Care to answer?

 

[Steeno7]

That's the question. Care to answer?

Is there more than one correct answer?

 

[Hieronymus]

Tongues of fire-

Christ has eyes of fire (he sees all, the word discerns the intent of the heart, God writes his law on the heart)

He baptizes in fire (holy spirit, indwelling teacher)

Pentecost is referring to the spirit teaching us as individuals, in my opinion. The tongues of fire represent the Lords voice that his sheep hear and follow. In my opinion.

Why assume itś something else than it says?
Itś not written as an allegory.

 

[Extraneous]

Why assume itś something else than it says?
Itś not written as an allegory.

I believe it was actually as it is written, im not contradicting that, im just saying i believe its more than that. Just my opinion, like i said. It changes nothing really, i just see it as a symbol for something greater.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Is there more than one correct answer?

You tell me.

Have you seen anyone walk on water?

Have you seen any healed by touching a piece of cloth that an apostle touched?

Have you seen visible tongues of fire come down out of Heaven onto anyone?

If you answer no to all of the above, would you agree that God did such things during a brief period in history, or do expect any or all of these things to happen next week?

 

[jimmyjimmy]

It's then also worthwhile to ask if laying on of hands (e.g. Chrismation) is itself prescriptive, and while I am unaware of any Scripture that says so,

Good question. I'm not either.

 

[Steeno7]

You tell me.

Have you seen anyone walk on water?

Have you seen any healed by touching a piece of cloth that an apostle touched?

Have you seen visible tongues of fire come down out of Heaven onto anyone?

If you answer no to all of the above, would you agree that God did such things during a brief period in history, or do expect any or all of these things to happen next week?

That's not the question......

 

[JohnRabbit]

OK, but that's not what I replied to.

Brian asked if these things were prescriptive and you answered, "yes, the Christ says so!"

maybe not prescribed but possible.

i don't think they are prescriptive because everyone is endowed with his own talent.

 

[Shane R]

Tongues of fire-

Christ has eyes of fire (he sees all, the word discerns the intent of the heart, God writes his law on the heart)

He baptizes in fire (holy spirit, indwelling teacher)

Pentecost is referring to the spirit teaching us as individuals, in my opinion. The tongues of fire represent the Lords voice that his sheep hear and follow. In my opinion.

The baptism of fire is one subject on which there was not an early consensus. Gregory of Nazianzen, among others, equated the baptism of fire to hell-fire. That is to say that in the texts where John the Baptist ascribes the baptism of the Spirit and of fire to Jesus' authority, there is an implied divide - some in the audience would receive one and some the other.

Your comments on Pentecost need further elaboration because as they are laid out above they are rather anomalous. Pentecost represented the apostles being empowered to teach the masses, not an individual revelation to believers by the Spirit.

 

[sunlover1]

Hmm. I don't see at all how that verse negates Brian's point. He asked if actions done by the Apostles (for example) are prescriptive, to be imitated. Saying that later believers will do "greater works than these" -- or even the "he will do also" (which you didn't highlight) don't address the question Brian raised about them being prescribed.

Seems like if God says we WILL do it, would mean that's His Will?
And His Will is what we are indeed prescribed to do?
Sound right? If not, I have more! Because I really do think that yes,
we're supposed to be doing ALL we can, as He leads us by His Spirit.
I didn't have much sleep and just had a couple of sips of cabernet while
cleaning the kitchen. Hope i'm making sense! lol LMK

 

[sunlover1]

That's not the question......

Amen.
I LOVE IT!
We can NOT go by what WE see.
Just because we're not acting LOVING
doesn't mean that it's what we SHOULD look like.
(not yelling, just punctuating )