Nowhere in those passages does it say the gospel of the kingdom is " ALWAYS" accompanied by signs and wonders.
you made that up
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Nowhere in those passages does it say the gospel of the kingdom is " ALWAYS" accompanied by signs and wonders.My point was that the gospel of the kingdom is always accompanied by signs and wonders, Jesus made that pretty clear in Matthew 10:7-8, and other passages like Matthew 24:14-24.
If one claims to be preaching that now, but lack the signs and wonders, people can legitimately claim that they are not preaching the true gospel of the kingdom.
If you don't see a problem with your doctrine, I am of course fine too. Cheers.
again no gospel mentioned just those who already BELIEVE
Marks ending is in brackets for a good reason.Isn't Mark 16:16 part of the gospel of the kingdom?
Do signs still accompany those who believed in the "gospel of the kingdom" that you are preaching now?
They don't right? So what makes you think you are still preaching that gospel?
They don't even have serpents north of the Arctic Circle.Mark 16:17-18 is another passage.
That's not really a doctrine as such. The rest of scripture doesn't say, "That part is illegitimate". It is just good reasoning, knowing the background, the originals, the style, etc. Good hermeneutics won't build doctrine on that portion.Ahh, I see you hold on to the doctrine that the last part of Mark is not a legitimate part of Scripture.
Alright then.
That's not really a doctrine as such. The rest of scripture doesn't say, "That part is illegitimate". It is just good reasoning, knowing the background, the originals, the style, etc. Good hermeneutics won't build doctrine on that portion.
I have enjoyed reading your reply. I still don't understand the reluctance to say choice. If you take away man's free will (choice) then I understand why many would argue it isn't their fault but God caused me to do it. Are you old enough to remember Flip Wilson? The devil made me do it, was his signature line.=====================
*You* I get your point but I would add that God creates and we react.
Agreed. Of course we do; I meant no differently. However, that does not imply that our reaction is uncaused.
==================
*You* All Israel was welcome to accept Jesus.
Agreed, again. Just as all sinners are welcome to repent and accept the Gospel of Christ, which yes, is offered to them. The cold fact, though, is that they cannot, and they cannot because they are slaves to sin; they WILL not, unless God changes their heart: regeneration.
=====================
*You* I still see a creation/response relationship.
Of course. Predestination does not imply otherwise. In fact, that is almost ALWAYS the way God accomplishes what he set out to do. Even in the "moment" of salvation, the willed choice of the new believer to turn to Christ is the work of God.
===================
*You* Still I see God creates, circumstance gives the opportunity and we choose what God knew we would. But to say God caused it is a bridge too far for me.
My Atheist antagonists gleefully yell, "God cannot be both Omnipotent and Omnibenevolent." If they knew the power and goodness of God, they would not quickly try to judge his deeds, but.... they do have a logical point there, which they also put words to: "If God knew ahead that what would happen to (with, by) his creation/creatures/humanity in particular, but he went ahead and created it anyway, then yes, he caused it." This logic is sound, yet the blame for evil cannot be placed at his feet, though they wish to, as if he is the sole causer. We too are causers, but we are also caused. As I have said elsewhere, there is only one First Cause, and that is God. There are no little first causes walking about the earth.
(The Chain of Causality is pervasive. I always smile when I think of the poetic way Atheist cosmologist like to put it when they say, "The 'seeds' of everything precisely as it exists today, were sown in the Big Bang." The logic is sound: Absolutely EVERYTHING is caused, except First Cause. And that being so, First Cause caused EVERYTHING in particular. (Whether one wants to argue as to whether God (First Cause) MEANT to cause every particular thing, is another debate (though intimately related), but I expect you can guess my answer.) I like to say, "Of course God has Foreknowledge -- because he Forecauses!).
======================
*You* The same gospel is available to all mankind.... "Whosoever will may come".
Agreed, but like you said, who is that? --only the Elect will come, and that, not until they are changed.
==================
*You* Rom 9:20 "...why hast thou made me thus?" Is the cry of the lgbtq community is it not? Why did God make ME with desires I can't control? But I choose my own response. Is that inconsistent with Calvin?
Not sure what you are referring to by "that", but if you meant: is it consistent with Calvinism that "I choose my own response" even if God made me "with desires I can't control", I would say yes, if you mean what I do by "choose", haha. Sorry --I had to add that, because many many people claim that if God causes our choices, and causes us to choose, they are not choices at all, and we are but robots. With that I vehemently disagree.
Do you believe that the Holy Spirit imparts on us gifts of prophecy, wisdom and knowledge, discerning of tongues, and healing? Or do you believe that those gifts were only given to the early church?again no gospel mentioned just those who already BELIEVE
the sign gifts upon individuals left with the Apostles.Do you believe that the Holy Spirit imparts on us gifts of prophecy, wisdom and knowledge, discerning of tongues, and healing? Or do you believe that those gifts were only given to the early church?
well finally there is something that we disagree about lol.the sign gifts upon individuals left with the Apostles.
there are a couple threads on that topic but this thread is not about those gifts.
neither in a non denomination.well finally there is something that we disagree about lol.
I just read the OP and the last few pages to see where the conversation was going and you were discussing "signs following" with someone else. So I jumped in the conversation at its current point, these "signs". But it's cool we dont have to discuss it.
So if you dont mind me asking are you Baptist or church of Christ?
I have enjoyed reading your reply. I still don't understand the reluctance to say choice. If you take away man's free will (choice) then I understand why many would argue it isn't their fault but God caused me to do it. Are you old enough to remember Flip Wilson? The devil made me do it, was his signature line.
We (mankind and our world) were a very good creation. We apparently were meant to commune with God in a perfect place forever. He knew sin would come in before He created...sure....but His purpose (man communing with Him in a perfect place forever) is still the goal.
I choose faith. Wouldn't know faith without the word of God, but the acceptance is mine and yours. Being lost is caused by rejecting that same Word. My choice, your choice.
It feels like a cop out to say God made me do it. "If God hadn't talked to us, none of this would have happened" God has done nothing but good for us. Man is stupid to reject Him. It's our fault.
Never heard of Dutch reformed or Christian missionary Alliance. And it is rare to see someone in the nondenominational denomination who does not believe in the gifts of the spirit. I don't know if it's about staying to the OP or just don't want to talk about this subject, but if you are cool with it maybe we could start a conversation and discuss it there?neither in a non denomination.
in my early days as a believer in the 80's- 90's I was in a dutch reformed church then a Christian Missionary Alliance.
My experience with CMA is that they pretty much all concentrate on the gifts and the working of the Spirit during the meetings, and try to maintain that attitude outside of the meetings, doing things like anointing the sick and so on. They are usually a very friendly and accepting group. But like most loosely knit denominations/ organizations there is a lot of difference between the different churches. My favorite that I have any experience with was the one where the Pastor was not at all convinced of the need for that focus, but merely pursued biblical teaching. For example, if somebody began to speak in tongues, he preferred translation or silence to allowing the oohs and aahs and exhuberant babbling.Never heard of Dutch reformed or Christian missionary Alliance. And it is rare to see someone in the nondenominational denomination who does not believe in the gifts of the spirit. I don't know if it's about staying to the OP or just don't want to talk about this subject, but if you are cool with it maybe we could start a conversation and discuss it there?
Well Paul does say that tongues in church require an interpretation or it's not beneficial to the church. So at one point you did believe in the gifts? Was changing your belief on this topic the reason for leaving that denomination or did it change after leaving and being influenced by different views?My experience with CMA is that they pretty much all concentrate on the gifts and the working of the Spirit during the meetings, and try to maintain that attitude outside of the meetings, doing things like anointing the sick and so on. They are usually a very friendly and accepting group. But like most loosely knit denominations/ organizations there is a lot of difference between the different churches. My favorite that I have any experience with was the one where the Pastor was not at all convinced of the need for that focus, but merely pursued biblical teaching. For example, if somebody began to speak in tongues, he preferred translation or silence to allowing the oohs and aahs and exhuberant babbling.
It's ok. Yeah, I wasn't a member and no, I don't believe in the sign gifts as taught, though I am not going to say that God can't use them. But the teaching I have seen concerning them doesn't generally add up, to my mind.Well Paul does say that tongues in church require an interpretation or it's not beneficial to the church. So at one point you did believe in the gifts? Was changing your belief on this topic the reason for leaving that denomination or did it change after leaving and being influenced by different views?
Never mind thought I was replying to a different person.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?