The indwelling presence

[Guojing]

@Guojing you said.... No one else has showed you Acts 8:1 until now?

Not sure why you would say that to a brother who has been reading scripture for 60 years.

I have no idea who you are and your background.

It could be true that you never really read Acts 8:1 carefully, am I rude to just ask you a question about that?

As of now, you have yet to even explain what Acts 8:1 actually meant to you.

 

[Guojing]

By walking.

Anyway, are you willing to address this question of mine?

So out of curiosity, how would you fit Acts 8:1 into your view that the Phillips in Acts 8 was one of the 12?

How come you can still regard Phillip as one of the 12?

Neither Carl and you seem to want to address this verse head-on.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Like I said, Philip could be transported by the Holy Spirit to do His work as required.

No one really knows.

Does it say how long the Apostles were together ?

I think not.

I am not sure we can create another Philip from one verse.

 

[Guojing]

Like I said, Philip could be transported by the Holy Spirit to do His work as required.

No one really knows.

Does it say how long the Apostles were together ?

I think not.

I am not sure we can create another Philip from one verse.

So if Acts 8:1 tells you "all except the apostles were scattered", and 3 verses later mentioned that those who were scattered included a Phillip in Samaria, would a normal reader try to reason to himself that "This Phillip could somehow still be one of the 12"?

Really, why do you find it necessary to even attempt to reason in that manner?

Is there an underlying doctrine that you want to believe for yourself, in order to come up with that kind of reasoning?

I am genuinely curious and not trying to be rude in any way.

 

[Carl Emerson]

How long between verses ?

I tend to leave matters not triangulated in case unknown meanings apply.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Did the church fathers confirm two Philips ?

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

Anyway, are you willing to address this question of mine?



How come you can still regard Phillip as one of the 12?

Neither Carl and you seem to want to address this verse head-on.

Too many of your posts sound like gibberish. I am out of this thread.

 

[Carl Emerson]

This diversion has little to do with the OP...

 

[Guojing]

Too many of your posts sound like gibberish. I am out of this thread.

Do you realized I actually bothered to take the time to put my reply to you in point form, to make it easy for you to understand?

 

[Guojing]

Did the church fathers confirm two Philips ?

Why do you need anyone else to confirm what acts 8 is literally saying?

 

[Carl Emerson]

Why do you need anyone else to confirm what acts 8 is literally saying?

I need to triangulate what you say Acts 8 is saying.

Can I suggest you open a new thread on this topic as it detracts from the OP.

 

[Guojing]

I need to triangulate what you say Acts 8 is saying.

Can I suggest you open a new thread on this topic as it detracts from the OP.

Its alright, my original reply in this thread was to others anyway.

Thanks for contributing your take though.

You have an interesting choice of word, "triangulate". The only triangulation I know of that happens between people tends to be negative. What Is Triangulation in Psychology?

 

[Carl Emerson]

Its alright, my original reply in this thread was to others anyway.

Thanks for contributing your take though.

You have an interesting choice of word, "triangulate". The only triangulation I know of that happens between people tends to be negative. What Is Triangulation in Psychology?

So the Scripture is negative ?

We are instructed to confirm by two or THREE witnesses - noting negative there...

2 Corinthians 13:1

This is the third time I am coming to you. Every charge must be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.​

 

[Guojing]

So the Scripture is negative ?

We are instructed to confirm by two or THREE witnesses - noting negative there...

2 Corinthians 13:1

This is the third time I am coming to you. Every charge must be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.​

Firstly, that verse has nothing to do with the term "triangulate".

But since you use that verse, here is my take:

There is already Acts 6:5-6 indicating that one of the 7 deacons had the name "Phillip".

There is Acts 8:1 indicating that the 12 apostles stayed in Jerusalem.

There are those 3 verses in Acts 8 indicating why the 12 had to send Peter and John to do something that Phillip could not have done.

Acts 21:8 also indicated that a certain "Phillip the Evangelist" is one of the 7 deacons.

If you view that as still insufficient, and want to appeal to "church fathers", whoever they are, alright then.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Seriously... you are just repeating yourself and this issue dies not directly relate to the OP.

 

[Guojing]

Seriously... you are just repeating yourself and this issue dies not directly relate to the OP.

I was replying to your question directed to me, and providing to you the various witnesses that support the point that Phillip in Acts 8 is the deacon, and not the apostle.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I have been "dwelling" with a few verses lately:

John 14:10
Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own. The Father who dwells in me is doing his works.

John 14:12
Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes in me will do the works that I do, and will do greater ones than these, because I am going to the Father.

John14:23
Jesus answered and said to him, “Whoever loves me will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him.


I am sure there is a lot of indwelling and working that we do not fully recognize.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

You have an interesting choice of word, "triangulate". The only triangulation I know of that happens between people tends to be negative. What Is Triangulation in Psychology?

Triangulating was a traditional means of navigating and surveying in a landscape LOL

The article you reference is interesting.

I look at that issue like this (and we can apply it to the OP as to any other affair in life).

Codependent people working for other codependent people - e.g in religious bodies - want to make us codependent by contriving and interfering. The good way to live is freely putting our own intuition, reason and judgment to use (leave them out of the loop once we are off the radar of the flying monkeys, strengthened in prayer).

We'll see the dynamic in the system is bad for our wishes. So, circumvent the system. Perhaps they'll put their lives right when they run out of clients because their clients were too clever like us and evaded them.

"Triangulate" means what and who someone has in their sights and can be neutral or good, as well as bad, that depends on their pupose and intent (including half-baked intent).

 

[OldAbramBrown]

To suggest we receive only part of the Holy Spirit is the issue.

We can receive in accordance with belief and we can believe distinctly in accordance with distinct teaching we heard. Some people say Jesus indwells, and Holy Spirit endows gifts unvetoed. Others say it is Holy Spirit Who is the "two trick pony". Either way there are three expressions:

- inbreathing / indwelling (a Scriptural anchor is before Ascension)
- bestowing of gifts unvetoed immediately after Ascension (Pentecost being simply a re-infilling)
- gift singular of Holy Spirit always was meant as the norm, to group the two distinct acts of God together.

The church began at Ascension and was not mainly an elite. They were supplicating as equals and this is our main and effective ministry.

Pentecost was simply a public epiphany of those more significant things the believers had already been doing interpersonally, communally and jointly. Many re-infillings are not meant to be copies of it nor ceremonies.

In instances where teaching had been incomplete / indistinct (as it largely has been) regarding the true beginning of the Church, the apostles themselves, or in recent times the more sound "pentecostals", completed or supplemented teachings to fill out belief with or without mention of whatever "manifestations".

Augustine (whom I haven't read) is not a good source on most spiritual matters, he was an organisational finagler.

Organisational power preoccupations led to functional cessationism (even among self styled "charismatics") and nit picking about what Philip was and what he couldn't do.

Apostle is one five ministry areas we all participate in about three of *, as well as a more intense personal gift.

{ * I'm not an evangelist but I've seen it done without church support through no fault of the evangeliser. I believe I am sent to the churches and the people in the churches. I am interested in how teaching teaches and how the appying of Scriptures is explained (some people call that simple prophesying which was also one of St Paul's various usages). These are crucial to our looking after each other. It's odd that others still feel "cosy" in churches / parachurches where I felt uneasy about what didn't add up in "teachings": it's like their nerves aren't connected up. }

I'm working my way backwards through this thread and hope to catch up & join in usefully . . .

I fancy I fit your bill of a person eager to explore the basis for belief . . .

I'm a big picture and small picture person. Did I mention I'm a big picture person?

The young Mozart composed in notes that liked each other. Schumann endorsed many pieces "markirt" which meant don't run the notes together.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

... But seeing that the sending of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost was such a pivotal moment whereby the promise of the Gospel that all who belong to Christ receive the Holy Spirit who indwells those who believe is solidified; ...

My last post refers; Ascension was the more pivotal moment.