Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Are you taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
Bible Study Do you believe everything in Acts is doctrinally for today
- Thread starter AVBunyan
- Start date
D
D46
Guest
Just what part do you have a problem with? the 2nd Chapter about tongues and baptism in Jesus name, or perhaps where they're were numerous laying on of hands? Perhaps it was healing power by Paul's handkerchiefs and aprons.(Acts 19:12) Or maybe the belief of healing if one could step into Peter's shadow (Acts 5:15). Are you questioning Peter's vision in Chater 10? You want to pick and choose what you believe? Why don't you just come out and say what you're searching for? :roll:
S
SputnikBoy
Guest
Re: Acts
No. Some things (tongues) were given for a specific purpose for a specific period of time. They served their purpose and are now gone. God, of course, could see fit to allow someone to witness to another in the language of that other person if He had a mind to. Generally speaking, however, that would not happen today. Today we have the canons of scripture available in most languages to do that.
Whatever may benefit (edify) the church would still be applicable for today. And this is, of course, the primary purpose of all of the gifts of the Spirit. Edifying oneself (specifically making oneself feel good) is not scriptural, never has been, and never will be. Much of what is and what is not applicable to the church today is just plain common sense stuff. We often forget that much of what Paul had to say was NOT aimed at us. I realize that Acts is not Paul, per se, but the confusion surrounding some later issues that pertain to Paul begin in Acts.
AVBunyan said:
No. Some things (tongues) were given for a specific purpose for a specific period of time. They served their purpose and are now gone. God, of course, could see fit to allow someone to witness to another in the language of that other person if He had a mind to. Generally speaking, however, that would not happen today. Today we have the canons of scripture available in most languages to do that.
Whatever may benefit (edify) the church would still be applicable for today. And this is, of course, the primary purpose of all of the gifts of the Spirit. Edifying oneself (specifically making oneself feel good) is not scriptural, never has been, and never will be. Much of what is and what is not applicable to the church today is just plain common sense stuff. We often forget that much of what Paul had to say was NOT aimed at us. I realize that Acts is not Paul, per se, but the confusion surrounding some later issues that pertain to Paul begin in Acts.
A
Admiral
Guest
Re: Acts
I am not sure how to answer that....
What about women in leadership positions? Are men and women equal in the sight of God?
What about prophecy? Is it still needed? Why isn't it revealed now?
Someone else has mentioned tongues...but the question is a valid one there as well.
I am pretty sure there are some good things that apply to the church today....But what about somethings that have fallen by the way side....
For example, is the church worshiping today as it did then? Do we need a physical structure that we call a church to worship in? Or do we need to worship in homes? And what about the day of the week? They did worship on Saturday...Do we need to worship on Saturday?
I don't think that this is a question that can easily be settled.
AVBunyan said:
I am not sure how to answer that....
What about women in leadership positions? Are men and women equal in the sight of God?
What about prophecy? Is it still needed? Why isn't it revealed now?
Someone else has mentioned tongues...but the question is a valid one there as well.
I am pretty sure there are some good things that apply to the church today....But what about somethings that have fallen by the way side....
For example, is the church worshiping today as it did then? Do we need a physical structure that we call a church to worship in? Or do we need to worship in homes? And what about the day of the week? They did worship on Saturday...Do we need to worship on Saturday?
I don't think that this is a question that can easily be settled.
Re: Acts
A common teaching among the Pentecostal church of today is that the gift of tongues is a necessity for confirmation of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. What a dilemma this theory delivers as there is no such teaching in the scriptures of this criteria.
Luke records many instances in the book of Acts where those who received the Holy Spirit spoke in other tongues and prophesied as the spirit gave them utterance.
These records are not in question, nor are they up for debate or dispute.
However, would it be right to read of an event, then take the record, establish it as law and inflict it on all for whom it was not meant to be? By doing so is to create a class distinction, and put God to the test, saying, ‘if you have been born of the Spirit, prove it!’ This is dangerous ground and not worthy of consideration.
AVBunyan said:
A common teaching among the Pentecostal church of today is that the gift of tongues is a necessity for confirmation of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. What a dilemma this theory delivers as there is no such teaching in the scriptures of this criteria.
Luke records many instances in the book of Acts where those who received the Holy Spirit spoke in other tongues and prophesied as the spirit gave them utterance.
These records are not in question, nor are they up for debate or dispute.
However, would it be right to read of an event, then take the record, establish it as law and inflict it on all for whom it was not meant to be? By doing so is to create a class distinction, and put God to the test, saying, ‘if you have been born of the Spirit, prove it!’ This is dangerous ground and not worthy of consideration.
Acts 3:19
Hey folks - is this doctrinally to you today? Read it closely...
Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
Note the future tenses - is this verse for you today? When were your sins blotted out?
God bless
Hey folks - is this doctrinally to you today? Read it closely...
Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
Note the future tenses - is this verse for you today? When were your sins blotted out?
God bless
Re: Do you believe everything in Acts is doctrinally for tod
Absolutely! If we start to pick and choose what is doctrinal then we are making up our own rules and doctrines. The bible is timeless. Just because we don't like it or understand it doesn't at all mean it doesn't apply to us today. Just think about what our churches would be like if we all just stuck to the bible! We would all be at one church because no one would follow Luther, Calvin, William Miller, Joseph Smith, the pope, etc. We would all only have one teacher and that is the Christ. And since John 1:1-3 tells us that the Word is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, then the word is infallible and apllies for all time.
AVBunyan said:
Absolutely! If we start to pick and choose what is doctrinal then we are making up our own rules and doctrines. The bible is timeless. Just because we don't like it or understand it doesn't at all mean it doesn't apply to us today. Just think about what our churches would be like if we all just stuck to the bible! We would all be at one church because no one would follow Luther, Calvin, William Miller, Joseph Smith, the pope, etc. We would all only have one teacher and that is the Christ. And since John 1:1-3 tells us that the Word is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, then the word is infallible and apllies for all time.
Re: Do you believe everything in Acts is doctrinally for tod
Do you still keep vows? Paul did in Acts.
Are you waiting for your sins to be blotted out at the 2nd advent - Acts 3:19?
Ever called anybody a fool? The Lord said in Matthew you can't and Paul did in Corinthians?
Do you have to get baptized today in order to get the Holy Ghost? They did in Acts 2 but not in Acts 10!!! Things change folks.
Do you have the latest instructions or are you going backwards to get you doctrine?
Gotta be careful before you just take a verse and run or you will run into a brick wall elsewhere.
I don't pick and choose - the Lord picked and "choosed" for me.
God bless
Do you still sacrifice lambs - it is in the Bible?Heidi said:
Do you still keep vows? Paul did in Acts.
Are you waiting for your sins to be blotted out at the 2nd advent - Acts 3:19?
Ever called anybody a fool? The Lord said in Matthew you can't and Paul did in Corinthians?
Do you have to get baptized today in order to get the Holy Ghost? They did in Acts 2 but not in Acts 10!!! Things change folks.
Do you have the latest instructions or are you going backwards to get you doctrine?
Gotta be careful before you just take a verse and run or you will run into a brick wall elsewhere.
I don't pick and choose - the Lord picked and "choosed" for me.
God bless
Re: Do you believe everything in Acts is doctrinally for tod
OK Heidi
Are there people in need where you are? Do you own any land - any real estate? Do you have brothers or sisters in Christ who do . . . and who believe as you?
Put your money where your mouth is. Sell the land and go and lay ALL of the proceeds at the feet of the man you deem to be your apostle.
BTW I think there is a post or two somewhere else I'm waiting for responses to. No rush of course but I wouldn't want them forgotten.
Heidi said:AVBunyan said:
Absolutely! If we start to pick and choose what is doctrinal then we are making up our own rules and doctrines. The bible is timeless. Just because we don't like it or understand it doesn't at all mean it doesn't apply to us today. Just think about what our churches would be like if we all just stuck to the bible! We would all be at one church because no one would follow Luther, Calvin, William Miller, Joseph Smith, the pope, etc. We would all only have one teacher and that is the Christ. And since John 1:1-3 tells us that the Word is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, then the word is infallible and apllies for all time.
OK Heidi
Are there people in need where you are? Do you own any land - any real estate? Do you have brothers or sisters in Christ who do . . . and who believe as you?
Put your money where your mouth is. Sell the land and go and lay ALL of the proceeds at the feet of the man you deem to be your apostle.
BTW I think there is a post or two somewhere else I'm waiting for responses to. No rush of course but I wouldn't want them forgotten.
Which has yet to be proven by anyone in these forums.Sput said:
Assumptions never really do anyone any good.Sput said:
1Co 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.Sput said:
1Co 14:4 The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church.
1Co 14:5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up.
1Co 14:28 But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God.
Taking this argument to its logical conclusion, virtually everything Paul said could be torn out of the Bible. If I was a betting man, I'd bet you a million dollars you can't, and don't, consistently believe this. I'd also bet that you employ this argument only with the parts of Scripture you disagree with.Sput said:
Yes this verse is for everyone today. It is the gospel message.AV said:
So then you must not believe 1 Cor. 14:34:AV said:
1Co 14:34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.
Which is precisely what you have been doing in attempting to show that tongues are not for today. You have one verse, just one, and have made a whole doctrine out of it.AV said:
Just what is your point? That she may not sell things she has and give the money away, or the fact that there is no "Apostle" at whose feet she should lay the money?mutzrein said:
Free said:
The point my friend is this.
The question posed by this thread is: "Do you believe everything in Acts is doctrinally for today"
Now the answer given was:
You see - such a definitive answer. There has to be a challenge to it.
The issue is whether a person really believes what is written in Acts is doctrine that should be adhered to. It is not specifically to do with what a person has to sell or whether they have an apostle.
To me it is dangerous ground to take the record of an event and then try to inflict it as law or doctrine.
So if you want to, then by all means do it. But if you can't keep it in one point then you can't keep it in any.
Free Acts 3:19 is not the gospel for today - the gospel for today is I Cor. 15:1-5 where the saints sins have been dealt with and put away at Calvary.Free said:
Acts 3:19 specifically and clearly states someone’s sins will be blotted out when the times of refreshing shall come. Shall come is future tense. Israel will be forgiven as a nation at the second advent.
Acts 3:21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
Question Free - when were your sins blotted out? Do you believe your sins are blotted out? Or are you Israel waiting for your sins to be blotted out? You do not believe all your sins were blotted out at Calvary for you believe you can still lose your salvation.
God deals with Israel as a nation differently and it appears you do not accept this truth so therefore you see no difference and this is one of the reasons you are so fouled up in your doctrine and can't get the gifts right along with justification by the faith of Jesus Christ.
You know Free – we don’t agree on much – never have.
1. You do not believe justification by faith alone for you believe (if I remember) that one can loose it – so therefore you believe a works, self-reliance salvation – just like 99% world believes.
2. You do not believe the King James Bible is the pure word of God or any bible today is the pure word of God – just like 99% of the world believes.
3. You believe the gifts are for today – just like all the fake TV preachers and healers do and most of apostate Christianity do.
You know what Free – you are resting comfortably with the world in your doctrinal beliefs – gives you a warm fuzzy doesn’t it to be in such good company – the bible says be ye not conformed to this world and you are in agreement with the world on two of the most essential doctrines of the faith.
You said nobody proved what Sput stated, “Some things (tongues) were given for a specific purpose for a specific period of time.†– Been proven and shown for the past three years – where have you been? You just have rejected it or just cannot see it – I believe you just can’t see it – just like you can’t see justification by faith alone. And until God shows you justification you might as well forget about the rest.
I am not necessarily saying that it should be "law", but shouldn't the acts in Acts be an example of how we ought to live our lives as Christians, as followers of Christ? I sure can see from a "Western," materialistic mindset how we would not want to sell things we have and give the money to those in need. We think a few bucks here and there will help the poor, which it does to an extent, but how many of us really sacrifice? I really wonder if the West understands what Christianity is really about.mutzrein said:
Although I won't say without thoroughly studying or putting more thought into it than I have that we should follow all that Acts says doctrinally, the problem is that with your view Acts becomes "Evangelicalized," that is, it becomes a book from which one can pick and choose on a whim what is doctrine or what is not. As I stated earlier, to relegate Acts to merely a "transitional book" is to be able to do away with doctrine that one does not, for whatever reason, agree with.
There is doctrine in Acts which is reflected in the acts of the earliest followers of Christ.
A
Admiral
Guest
[/quote]Free said:
As "examples" of how we lived - yes
As "Law" - NO!
As Doctrine- Absolutely NOT!.
Mutzrein is correct in identifying an event and transforming into a law or more of society is a dangerous precident. Setting a standard for all to live up to based upon EXACTLY what happened in the past is to ignore the foybles of the past itself.
No, if you are looking for an example of how to live, we already have one and Peter told us of Him.
1 Peter 2:21 (The Message)
21This is the kind of life you've been invited into, the kind of life Christ lived. He suffered everything that came his way so you would know that it could be done, and also know how to do it, step-by-step.
Why is the Acts of the Apostles and the early church to be made into doctrine? If one is a follower of Jesus, the follower is moved by the HS to give and share as He sees fit. There book of Acts is nothing more than a relaying of history and what ihas happened.
If you want to doctrinalized the book of Acts, what happens after 40 days of prayer in your church, no tongues of fire come forth? Is this evidence of Apostacy? Lack of faith? Perhaps God has a different manifestation for His church....
No, there is only a record of what the disciples did as moved by the Holy Spirit. And yes, there are records of doctrines in the book of acts...
Let's look at another very plausible and perhaps better interpretation of this verse.AVBunyan said:
Firstly, you assume that Peter is speaking of Israel as a nation instead of to the men to whom he is directly addressing. I find that to be quite the leap. Secondly, in Acts 3:19 Peter is speaking in future tense simply because these are Jews who have not yet believed. Thirdly, using your assumption, one can then conclude that a Jew won't be forgiven if they accept Christ until Christ returns. This would mean then that a Jew who has accepted Christ as Savior but dies before he returns cannot possibly be saved.
Is it not the gospel message that when we repent and accept Christ that our sins are blotted out and we are refreshed by Christ in us?
Don't assume and make my position out to be something it is not.AV said:
You should watch what you say especially since most everything you say is based on unsupported assumptions. Do you not believe that we as Gentiles are grafted onto the olive tree? So far all you have shown is that you think Jews won't be saved until Christ's second coming or are saved some other way.AV said:
I wasn't going to bother responding to this post, but your ignorance and outright twisting of my position in this point is the only reason I bothered. I most certainly believe in justification by faith alone. But that is not at all inconsistent with being able to lose one's salvation, which the NT clearly states.AV said:
I believe that the originals alone would be the "pure" word of God since there are clearly errors in every Bible we have, as any Bible scholar would tell you. This does not diminish inerrancy or infallibility, properly defined of course. What we do have are Scriptures that are very close to the originals and will not mislead any as to the means of salvation.AV said:
Nothing like using fallacies and presumption to try and make a point, eh? I believe the gifts are for today because the Bible clearly does not say otherwise. Is everyone who disagrees with you "apostate"?AV said:
Firstly, as I have pointed out, I most certainly am not "comfortably with the world in [my] doctrinal beliefs". Secondly, just because my mind isn't so narrow that I can adjust my beliefs to the truth as it is revealed to me and I can actually think for myself doesn't mean that I am conformed to this world. At least in my mind there is room for God to work.AV said:
I've been here. I have not heard one, single good argument or passage from Scripture to justify changing my beliefs, not one.AV said:
Why don't you look past the end of your nose for a moment and see that you just might not be right. Is it too hard for you to accept the possibility that you just might be wrong regarding a doctrine?AV said:
BTW, your sig speaks volumes about why you are the way you are. If you really thought about it, it is very anti-Christ and anti-biblical.
Free said:
1. I don’t assume – been reading your views for about three years now.
2. I showed you from scripture that Israel’s sins will be blotted out at the second advent. You couldn’t find a “Christian†in Acts 3 if you stayed up all night with an electron microscope – the whole context is Israel as a nation with the message being the earthly kingdom promised to Israel from Gen. 12 and Exodus where they were told they would be a priestly nation in an earthly kingdom – that is not God’s plan for the body of Christ!. My kingdom is a heavenly kingdom not earthly. Big difference Free between the future earthly kingdom promised to Israel and the heavenly kingdom (high calling) promised to the body of Christ. You and others better learn the difference or should I say ask God to give you the desire to learn the difference.
3. See #1
4. You do not or anybody else who believes that a saint can “fall away†or “lose it†or whatever terminology you choose to use. One who believes he can lose it cannot believe in justification by faith alone for once you say you can lose it you are saying you have a part in your salvation and that is not justification by the faith of Christ alone. So, I am correct – you do not believe in justification by faith alone. Now Free – if you believe in eternal security then I stand corrected but it “appears†you do not so I stand by my assessment of your stand against justification by faith alone – you don’t even understand what you believe here. You believe faith plus your enduring faith. So I am correct that you stand in agreement with the majority of the world on this issue.
5. Again - So I am correct that you stand in agreement with the majority of the world on this issue also. The world does not believe the King James Bible and you do not either. The “Christian†world only believes the originals are the ‘real thing†and that is even fading. Take the modern “bible scholars†and flush them down the sewer – they are bible critics and will answer for their causing saints to stumble. Are modern bible “scholars†your final authority? It appears they are! You do not believe there is a bible without error and that is exactly what the world believes so how am I misrepresenting you here in regards to you being in agreement with the world?
6. Again - I am correct that you stand in agreement with the majority of the world and modern “Christianity†on this issue also. How come the greatest writers, preachers, missionaries, and evangelists from the 1600’s to the 1880’s (and God used these folks!!!) did not hold to your position? How did these men miss such “great truthsâ€Â? I’ll listen to these men before I listen to Oral Roberts, Benny Hinn and the rest of t he modern “giftersâ€Â.
7. No – only when I agree with the bible and they disagree - then they are apostate – when I am wrong then I am wrong. I never said I was infallible – why be so foolish here?
8. In the context I was speaking in regarding the authority of scriptures, justification and the gifts – re-read my post – look at context. I know you are sound in other areas – don’t lump it all together Free.
9. You do not know what I used to believe and how I’ve had to change my doctrinal views over the past 22 years. At one time I also believed in the gifts, one could lose it, was not a dispensationalist and was not KJV only. I was against election and I used to believe that I Cor.1 5 and I Thess. 4 were rapture verses. Once I was shown from scripture that I was wrong I had to bite my lip and change my “precious†views and line up with the scriptures and separate from much of modern christianity. Don’t tell me I am not afraid to adjust my beliefs!
10. And you probably never will because you might be too narrow-minded. You see if you can call me narrow-minded then I can call you narrow-minded though I believe it goes deeper than that.
11. Please re-read #9.
12. And you are very judgmental and ignorant of why I put that sig there. It is there because I believe even many of the Independent Baptists (whom I love and respect) are going the way of all flesh and I will even separate from them over the major doctrines of the faith if I have to. If I am willing to separae from my own kin-folk then I’m certainly not afraid to separate myself from the rest of Christianity. When “Christianity†– even Independents move towards anti-christ and away from the bible then I separate! It appears you would rather stick with the majority.
Bottom line – I believe I represented your views accurately and was right on target.
God bless 8-)