Initial Evidence: The Word or Tongues?

[SpiritPsalmist]

It's funny people who don't really understand the movement are always, getting angry about what they think the movement stands for. But like most things, there is usually more to the story.

One of the things that is always missed, is our ephesis on having a relationship with God, specifically, being in Christ.

How can anyone expect to recieve anything without having a relationship with God?

The depth of what we mean when we say relationship is often missed, and our surmons on 'IN Christ', are often miss-understood.

Yes we believe in the power of faith, but faith without love usually ends up being selfishness. That is not what this movement is about. Most people who disagee with WoF think that their measly little salvation experience, their self propelled bible study, and their one-sided prayer time, amounts to a relationship. But how can you have a relationship, unless it involves dynamic two-way conversation? The TV show "Joan of Archadia" paints a more realistic protait of a relationship with God, then do most of these Bible thumpers. When was the last time you heard a honest, but powerful surmon, on relating to God, in a church that doesn't believe in healing for everyone?

Infact, the threads about relationship always seem to die. The WoF haters rearly show up there. And when they do, there posts are missing depth.

The only thing that I can say is that if you don't understand the relational part of WoF, then maybe you should refrain from commenting.

 

[SnuP]

And just what does that mean.

 

[SnuP]

Quaffer,
have you considered editing the poll for this thread to include an answer that is real?!!!!

 

[SnuP]

Oh, and the correct answer would be, the Fruit, and the Gifts of the Spirit (yes, all of them) preasent in the life of the reciever.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

And just what does that mean.

It means I get a kick out of your bluntness

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

 

[rebaa]

Does understanding equal agreement?

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

What do you mean Rebaa? I don't understand the question.

 

[SnuP]

Does understanding equal agreement?

Of course not, but from many of the arguments against WoF, it becomes obvious that most who disagree and even hate WoF beliefs, don't truely understand. Their arguments are based out of miss conceptions and judgements that show ignorance.

If someone thinks that we preach blind faith, then they haven't done their home work. Our message is actually more like, trust God to care for you, but develope that trust by gaining a relationship with Him. A relationship I might add that goes deeper then any relationship man can experience. You should trust God more then your own mother, and not in word only. Abandoned trust. But how can anyone trust someone that they don't interact with on a continual basis. I hope it is obvious that I'm talking about something much deeper then just praying and bible reading.

This is why there is a neccesity for tongues and the baptism.

 

[rebaa]

Quaffer,

It's funny people who don't really understand the movement are always, getting angry about what they think the movement stands for. But like most things, there is usually more to the story

My question came from this post. Often we think that if others dont agree with us they dont understand ,but some times they have a deeper understanding or maybe a life lesson that has given insight.

That help?

 

[hal]

When it come to evidence, may I point out there is both subjective and objecive evidence. Of the subject there is much evidence. Since, by definiton, objective means it can be apprehended by our senses -- seeing and/hearing, etc.
Tongues is objective evidence.