Spiritual Gifts, Are They For Today?

[chessman]

... I was given a very real sense of what the message meant. As I started to stand, I heard the voice of another who was giving the Interpretation of what had been strange to me only a moment before.

That voice did not use the exact words that were given to me, but they did communicate that exact meaning.

Do you recall what the message was? Just generally. Just interested.

I'm glad you understood my humor was in good spirit and did not take offense. I thought about it afterwards, that someone might misunderstand how i meant it.

 

[chessman]

My question is do any of you claim these or know people who do?

I don't know any personnaly. Nor if I did would I find the example of them "handling snake" as any proof of the truthfulness of their message content. Frankly, I'd be sceptical of their intentions.

But I do know that this type of thing still occurs (legally or not).

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news...ake-handlers-pentecostal-tennessee/55354206/1

As i recall, there are also some news reports of deaths having occurred, thus new laws against it. But whether those with no deaths, were true signs, i cannot say.

My take on Mark's original point would be that the "snake handling" signs were specifically for the apostles of the 1st century. I think the test given to us is to test the truth of the message content and/or giver. Do they or the message say Jesus has come in the flesh, or not? Technically speaking, it would be very easy to de-fang or de-venom snakes today and fool a bunch of people ($$$). But we can test the message content, then and now. If they claim the message is give your money to me, I'm sceptical.

 

[Sparkey]

Do you recall what the message was? Just generally. Just interested.

No offense at all. That was funny. I chuckle again at your mention.

About that particular message? I do not say that I could not recall it but it was 40 years ago. I do recall other "messages" that were delivered by Tongues and Interpretation in that assembly. I also recall the Gift of Prophecy and what those messages contained. One of the ladies there also cut my hair and she was used in Prophecy sometimes. She stood and spoke and said something about the church itself. There were other messages with similar content. Some of the "words" were what I call "fluff," where there was not much substance but it wasn't hurting anybody. But the ones that I remember distinctly spoke of the church breaking apart.

I don't talk about this stuff much but I did get a vision from the Lord about that same thing. One day, I'll write about it. But suffice it to say, I did leave that assembly. My best friend and his family stayed and they were hurt with deep hurts (by what was going on there). But I moved to California for unrelated reasons and was staying with my sister back then so the "shrapnel" that went off in the hearts of many missed me.

~Sparrow

 

[Sparkey]

You had family pray and were healed, I believe the Lord heals. However, in the NT Peter and John could say arise in Jesus name and walk and one would get up and walk. There's a difference in the two.

Butch5, do you know about the Feast Days of those times? Will you speak on what is termed the former and the latter rains please? I understand they were associated with two harvest, the initial springtime and then also the one in the fall. My thought goes to a story I wrote about the impatient farmer, but I'd like to hear your thoughts first.

View attachment 3169

 

[Butch5]

Like I said, I've spoken to quite a few people on this subject and none have claimed these two nor know anyone who has.

Well like I said the churches that play with snakes and let them bite them are considered to be extremists. They did used to do this in some of the churches down south I'm surprised you've never heard of it, you must be a lot younger than me. I'm going to see if I can find it there are any still doing it.

Hi Deborah,

I have heard of it. However, that is not what I am suggesting. Those who handle them get bitten by them and some die. Obviously they didn't have the gift. My point in bringing this up is to show that it is the subjective gifts that are claimed, one that are hard to determine whether or not they are true. It's easy for someone to stand up and make some noise and someone else to claim an interpretation. it's also easy to claim to heal someone. It's another thing to get bitten by a rattlesnake and have no ill effects.

 

[Butch5]

My question is do any of you claim these or know people who do?

I don't know any personnaly. Nor if I did would I find the example of them "handling snake" as any proof of the truthfulness of their message content. Frankly, I'd be sceptical of their intentions.

But I do know that this type of thing still occurs (legally or not).

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news...ake-handlers-pentecostal-tennessee/55354206/1

As i recall, there are also some news reports of deaths having occurred, thus new laws against it. But whether those with no deaths, were true signs, i cannot say.

My take on Mark's original point would be that the "snake handling" signs were specifically for the apostles of the 1st century. I think the test given to us is to test the truth of the message content and/or giver. Do they or the message say Jesus has come in the flesh, or not? Technically speaking, it would be very easy to de-fang or de-venom snakes today and fool a bunch of people ($$$). But we can test the message content, then and now. If they claim the message is give your money to me, I'm sceptical.

Hi Chessman,

I agree that those signs would follow those who believed the "apostle's" message. However, many claim this gifts today but as I said these never seem to be claimed.

 

[Butch5]

You had family pray and were healed, I believe the Lord heals. However, in the NT Peter and John could say arise in Jesus name and walk and one would get up and walk. There's a difference in the two.

Butch5, do you know about the Feast Days of those times? Will you speak on what is termed the former and the latter rains please? I understand they were associated with two harvest, the initial springtime and then also the one in the fall. My thought goes to a story I wrote about the impatient farmer, but I'd like to hear your thoughts first.

View attachment 4171

I'm not sure what this has to do with the subject at hand.

 

[Butch5]

Like I said, I've spoken to quite a few people on this subject and none have claimed these two nor know anyone who has.

Well there are still churches in the states and Canada doing the snake handling, some used to drink poison as well. BUT most states have outlawed it.

Hi Deborah,

My point isn't these two gifts, it's the point that these two are easily tested, the others are not.

 

[Deborah13]

Obviously they didn't have the gift.

This was my first post to you, "I don't believe they are listed as the Gifts of the Spirit. There were many signs and wonders but not all are the gifts spoken of in 1 Corinthians 12."

I entertained your post about snakes because you said no one would address it. Snakes "bitten, handled, etc. in anyway shape or form was NEVER a GIFT. If you think it was you can post a scripture that says it is a gift, please do.
I get your point about people using the scripture in Mark to support Spiritual Gifts. I think it does.

Others feel that this discussion is not relevant to this thread so I will say nothing more.

 

[Sparkey]

I'm not sure what this has to do with the subject at hand.

That's okay. Still curious. No need to reply.

 

[Sparkey]

My point isn't these two gifts, it's the point that these two are easily tested, the others are not.

So you're interested in expressing your established opinion about Believers? I'm not sure what that has to do with the subject under discussion. That being "Spiritual Gifts" and if they are "for today" or not. I am convinced that you are certain about it, but as we have previously learned, this does not necessarily constitute what the Word of God says. Would we like to consult an expert? I'm thinking Peter. He witnessed a number of things that may be relevant.

 

[Butch5]

Obviously they didn't have the gift.

This was my first post to you, "I don't believe they are listed as the Gifts of the Spirit. There were many signs and wonders but not all are the gifts spoken of in 1 Corinthians 12."

I entertained your post about snakes because you said no one would address it. Snakes "bitten, handled, etc. in anyway shape or form was NEVER a GIFT. If you think it was you can post a scripture that says it is a gift, please do.
I get your point about people using the scripture in Mark to support Spiritual Gifts. I think it does.

Others feel that this discussion is not relevant to this thread so I will say nothing more.

Hi Deborah,

In Mark 16 healing is also mentioned with the other two a signs and wonders, it would seem they are the same thing. We can see from the Scriptures that the giving of the gifts you spoke of in 1 Cor 12 were given by the apostles. There are not instances (that I'm a ware of) in the NT where someone received the gifts apart from the presence of an apostle. We can see evidence of this in Acts 8 where the Samaritans didn't receive the Spirit until the apostles came from Jerusalem and in the Church at Rome where all of the gifts listed in Romans 12 are natural gifts with the exception of prophecy which would likely have been the gift of the person founding the Church.

 

[Butch5]

My point isn't these two gifts, it's the point that these two are easily tested, the others are not.

So you're interested in expressing your established opinion about Believers? I'm not sure what that has to do with the subject under discussion. That being "Spiritual Gifts" and if they are "for today" or not. I am convinced that you are certain about it, but as we have previously learned, this does not necessarily constitute what the Word of God says. Would we like to consult an expert? I'm thinking Peter. He witnessed a number of things that may be relevant.

I'm not sure what you're getting at, could you elaborate?

 

[Sparkey]

I'm not sure what you're getting at, could you elaborate?

No. The attempt to say that there are two specific gifts that are given by the Holy Spirit and that they show that no gifts are given today is yours. The burden of proof is yours. I've pointed out that these "signs" are given to Believers. You've countered with your belief and have yet to speak to the 9 Gifts of the Holy Spirit that are specifically listed by Paul. Not trying to say that the Holy Spirit is limited to nine but we have seen examples of the two signs you mention following after believers. The conclusion that you bring, is the part where others (not just me) are unsure at what you are getting at. That also forms the basis of this thread.

I've asked if you were willing to consider what Peter has stated about the whole matter. But I have no need to elaborate, especially if there is no interest. I'll let you continue carrying your belief if you'd rather. That's not gonna be a big problem to me.

Can you agree that your premise about the two signs mentioned does not mean that the Gifts are not for today?

For instance. If I promised to make some dinner rolls and to give my kids some ice cream after supper if they were good, and if I also promised to provide shelter, transport the to and from school, prepare 3 square meals a day and to raise them up in the Admonition of the Lord...

Then true to my word I did make dinner rolls and sure enough, that day they also had ice cream for desert. Well, does this mean that the other "gifts" have been done away with? The two "signs" of my affection toward my children have (and could still) "follow them". The two "signs" that follow believers continue to follow all believers. Just because we had dinner rolls once, that day, it does not mean that I may never, never treat my children to them again.

I don't see yet how you have dealt with this simple line of reasoning to the degree that others have jumped in and said, "That is indeed a satisfactory answer," and would like to give you the opportunity to do so.

 

[Butch5]

I'm not sure what you're getting at, could you elaborate?

No. The attempt to say that there are two specific gifts that are given by the Holy Spirit and that they show that no gifts are given today is yours. The burden of proof is yours. I've pointed out that these "signs" are given to Believers. You've countered with your belief and have yet to speak to the 9 Gifts of the Holy Spirit that are specifically listed by Paul. Not trying to say that the Holy Spirit is limited to nine but we have seen examples of the two signs you mention following after believers. The conclusion that you bring, is the part where others (not just me) are unsure at what you are getting at. That also forms the basis of this thread.

I've asked if you were willing to consider what Peter has stated about the whole matter. But I have no need to elaborate, especially if there is no interest. I'll let you continue carrying your belief if you'd rather. That's not gonna be a big problem to me.

Can you agree that your premise about the two signs mentioned does not mean that the Gifts are not for today?

For instance. If I promised to make some dinner rolls and to give my kids some ice cream after supper if they were good, and if I also promised to provide shelter, transport the to and from school, prepare 3 square meals a day and to raise them up in the Admonition of the Lord...

Then true to my word I did make dinner rolls and sure enough, that day they also had ice cream for desert. Well, does this mean that the other "gifts" have been done away with? The two "signs" of my affection toward my children have (and could still) "follow them". The two "signs" that follow believers continue to follow all believers. Just because we had dinner rolls once, that day, it does not mean that I may never, never treat my children to them again.

I don't see yet how you have dealt with this simple line of reasoning to the degree that others have jumped in and said, "That is indeed a satisfactory answer," and would like to give you the opportunity to do so.

Have you read my article that I linked to in this thread? In it have addressed this and the other questions/concerns that have been raised. So, I have dealt with it, if no one has taken the time to read it it cannot help that. However, to ignore it and then say I didn't address it seems a little disingenuous. Now, I' m not saying you are as you may have over looked it, but if you are interested in my reply to your questions I believe you'll find the answers there. I'll link it here also, "Spiritual Gifts and Their Purpose".

 

[Sparkey]

to ignore it and then say I didn't address it seems a little disingenuous.

Have you read my 5,000+ posts on this forum where many of them have discussed this? Pardon me for putting it that way but trying to transfer your burden to defend your statements made here to me so that I must go there or I am seen as "disingenuous" is not acceptable to me. If you have a response, please give it. I will look at your link but that will not likely satisfy your burden to prove or at least support your allegations that are made in the minds of others who read and question what is said. That's your choice. Not mine.

Have you read my article that I linked to in this thread?

I take it that you are Harry Farrell, the author?

 

[chessman]

I'm not sure what you're getting at, could you elaborate?

That’s a good point for this thread that I’d expand a little here with my observation:

It’s always important (especially when discussing these deep OP topics) to define our terms, agree on them and stick to them within any particular conversation/discussion/debate. For example, I think there's a meaningful difference between a “sign†and a “giftâ€, as the Scriptures use them. However, not everyone would agree with me. Therefore, it’s hard to have discussion without stipulating to the definition of the terms, first.

Admittedly, there is some conflation or "intermixing" with these two words' definitions (Gifts/Signs). Secularly from dictionary.com:

I'd say Gift is: something bestowed or acquired without any particular effort by the recipient or without its being earned: "Those extra points he got in the game were a total gift."

but I can see that there's some conflation with its definition for a “Signâ€: a token; indication.

because another/similar meaning for “gift†is: a special ability or capacity; natural endowment; talent: “the gift of saying the right thing at the right time.â€

But my point here as it relates to the OP topic/question is that the ten “Gifts†listed should not, in my opinion, include the “signs†of successful snake handling. There’s a difference in how the Biblical author intended for them to be understood. That’s pretty clear from Scripture, in my opinion. I wouldn’t see the point/blessing for the “ability†to handle snakes, unless it was specifically for a sign to people that the person was indeed telling the truth (or not).

To me, all these “gifts†listed are worth discussing and studying within either Bible Study or A&T. However, they seem to be beyond elementary study (Salvation 101) and are “graduate level†courses, so to speak.

CF.NET may not be the best environment for this level of graduate, doctrinal study as I’m learning.

 

[Sparkey]

CF.NET may not be the best environment for this level of graduate, doctrinal study as I’m learning.

I would agree but with a sorry-about-that added. There is a principle that is supported here. It's not implemented perfectly but it is good in my sight to follow it. So many various and different Christian boards on the internet have a "+ Rep" function where Members may "vote" for others and give their opinions more weight than the new or the ones who are seen to be "outside". The benefit of attaching weight to people who post may work toward allowing a "graduate" level discussion but in practice what happens is that we have a popularity contest that waters down the thoughts of others.

Chessman, I do appreciate your thoughts here, and would like to invite you to share them with the Staff.

 

[WIP]

I'm not sure what you're getting at, could you elaborate?

That’s a good point for this thread that I’d expand a little here with my observation:

It’s always important (especially when discussing these deep OP topics) to define our terms, agree on them and stick to them within any particular conversation/discussion/debate. For example, I think there's a meaningful difference between a “sign” and a “gift”, as the Scriptures use them. However, not everyone would agree with me. Therefore, it’s hard to have discussion without stipulating to the definition of the terms, first.

Admittedly, there is some conflation or "intermixing" with these two words' definitions (Gifts/Signs). Secularly from dictionary.com:

I'd say Gift is: something bestowed or acquired without any particular effort by the recipient or without its being earned: "Those extra points he got in the game were a total gift."

but I can see that there's some conflation with its definition for a “Sign”: a token; indication.

because another/similar meaning for “gift” is: a special ability or capacity; natural endowment; talent: “the gift of saying the right thing at the right time.”

But my point here as it relates to the OP topic/question is that the ten “Gifts” listed should not, in my opinion, include the “signs” of successful snake handling. There’s a difference in how the Biblical author intended for them to be understood. That’s pretty clear from Scripture, in my opinion. I wouldn’t see the point/blessing for the “ability” to handle snakes, unless it was specifically for a sign to people that the person was indeed telling the truth (or not).

To me, all these “gifts” listed are worth discussing and studying within either Bible Study or A&T. However, they seem to be beyond elementary study (Salvation 101) and are “graduate level” courses, so to speak.

CF.NET may not be the best environment for this level of graduate, doctrinal study as I’m learning.

I would like to address the last statement in this post. For as long as I have been viewing and posting at CFnet, the one thing that caught my attention and helped me feel comfortable was that, for the most part, members are respectful of other members' spiritual walk. It was this level of comfort and freedom to express my thoughts without fear of rejection and condescension by other members that prompted me to become a member after viewing for a time. It was also this sense of genuine Christian report that seemed to support what it truly is to be Christian.

There are over 6,000 registered members with over 1,700 active members and up to 650 members and guests online here at CFnet at any given time from a variety of backgrounds and religious persuasion. I think it goes without saying that we can expect that there will be members with many various levels of intellect and learned study. We do not screen members to be sure that those who post meet some minimum guidelines. Some are meek, some are arrogant, some are timid, some are bold, some are shy, some are gutsy, some hold a Ph.D in theology and some of us are babies in our walk. We can all learn from each other and for those who are more mature in their walk, imagine what the rest of us could learn.

It would behoove us all to remember, "Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:4

Let's remember to treat each other as the Christians we claim to be with humble hearts, love, and understanding. Respect the opinions of others.

 

[Butch5]

to ignore it and then say I didn't address it seems a little disingenuous.

Have you read my 5,000+ posts on this forum where many of them have discussed this? Pardon me for putting it that way but trying to transfer your burden to defend your statements made here to me so that I must go there or I am seen as "disingenuous" is not acceptable to me. If you have a response, please give it. I will look at your link but that will not likely satisfy your burden to prove or at least support your allegations that are made in the minds of others who read and question what is said. That's your choice. Not mine.

Have you read my article that I linked to in this thread?

I take it that you are Harry Farrell, the author?

Yes, I am. If you're not interested in what I have to say whether it is in individual posts or an article why did you respond to my posts?