[Roundtable] FW: I love your website

[Jefferis Peterson]

On 1/14/04 11:29 PM, "Jefferis Peterson" <jefferis at petersonsales.net> wrote:

> I did find one thing that confused me for a time I think you can easily fix.
> 
> Jefferis said:
> In fact, Scripture teaches the gifts have particular purposes, and only of
> them is to confirm the apostolic ministry.
> 
> This is a typo?  Supposed to be "ONE" not "only"? Right?


I fixed that typo, thanks.
> tendentious ground
> I didn't get what this meant right away. It's a good word meaning partisan,
> but I wonder if most of your readers will get it.
> I've never heard of this word, so I looked it up in the dictionary.

It not only means partisan, but ground that isn't firmly established, so
that it subject to dispute.
> 
> I'd like to use your articles on our web site and perhaps have your site as a
> link.  (I'll need to talk with our people to clear this with our webmaster,
> but I think he'll go for it as I'm a Sr. Chaplain-Teacher and he as a young
> Sr. Chaplain usually defers to my judgment on matters of teaching and
> doctrine.  Not to say he doesnt check what I say against THE BOOK.)  If we put
> up Jeffris' article I would want permission to use an easier to understand
> word than tendentious.

That's okay by me as long as you give credit and a link to this site.
> Whover wrote What is the Gift of Tongues? on your site said:
> Likewise, counterfeit tongues can appear as people yield themselves to demons
> instead of to God, as Paul also points out with ways to discern this false
> practice [1 Cor. 12;1-4].
> 
> And Jeffris wrote:
> Paul began his instruction on the gift of tongues with a warning that there
> are pagan, demonic tongues, which do not represent the true God or the genuine
> article. There are similarities between the real and the false, but the
> exercise of the counterfeit by pagans does not invalidate the true gift of
> God, administered in believers by the Holy Spirit.
> 
> "Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware.
> You know that when you were pagans, you were led astray to the mute idols,
> however you were led. Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by
> the Spirit of God says, "Jesus is accursed"; and no one can say, "Jesus is
> Lord," except by the Holy Spirit." 1 Corinthians 12:1-3, NAS95.
> 
> Nagy:
> 
> For your further consideration, let me share what I shared with a Baptist
> minister who has trouble with the Charismatic Renewal in general and tongues
> in specific.
> 
> Paul wrote the Corinthians about how those speaking by the Spirit of God would
> never say "Jesus be cursed."  I ask you to think when a Christian would think
> that this would ever be led of the Spirit?  Now look at this passage's
> context.  We believe that Paul was answering a question about tongues.
> 
> Now this is where we differ:
> 
> This is my conjecture, based on what we see in the Bible and the nature of
> tongues as it is described there:
> Since tongue speakers didn't know what they were saying they became concerned
> that they might be saying foul things in another language.  Some outsider may
> have shocked them with the lie that he understood the tongue and they were
> saying all manner of blasphemies against their Lord.  So Paul comes to the
> rescue, saying, "First of all you must know that no one speaking by the Spirit
> of God would ever say 'Jesus be cursed.'"

I think this is possible. But it also might be a way of discerning true from
false enthusiasm. If they realize someone is cursing Christ while ecstatic,
then the congregation would know that it is a false spirit at work in that
person. Have you ever heard demonic tongues? It grates on your Spirit. It
sounds like Paul is also trying to encourage the believers, as you say, if
they fear they might be under the residual experience of counterfeit
tongues. The assurance is that they cannot say Jesus is Lord except that the
Holy Spirit is in them.
> 
> What do you think now in light of my explanation?  For the past 33 years as a
> practicing Charismatic I have used this same argument and never been
> challenged on it before.  Let's pray not parry over this issue. But it appears
> that you like me are always ready to hear another view and learn from further
> discussion.  Let's seek the Lord for his answer on this OK?
> Get back to me, PLEASE.

One thing about Scripture is its depth. And sometimes it is multivalent. It
may not always be possible to determine the ONE meaning because as a Living
Word, it may be applied to different situations with different applications.
For example, when Isaiah prophesied that a maiden shall conceive, it had an
immediate application to the situation he was facing in his time, but it
later became a prophesy of Christ. While scripture is consistent in its
meanings, it isn't always monochromatic.  In different light, a different
facet of the diamond will reflect the glory of God. Since we don't know all
of Paul's intent in the statement, it may not be possible to determine the
one and only meaning of the words. However, what you say is certainly a
possible interpretation and valid.


> May I add I've heard that the form of the Greek has the perfect in the
> masculine form as would be required to speak of the return of the Lord, where
> the perfect manuscript would have to be rendered in the feminine. If you know
> the Greek you could check into this further to see if this is true or not to
> help confirm your exigesis. (Let me know what you find out, I haven't enough
> grasp of the Greek to confirm or deny this, but I'd feel comfortable refering
> to your research on this.)

I checked up on the Greek. Good point. The Perfect in this case is a
masculine tense, while the scriptures or 'Grapha = Greek = the Writings' is
feminine. 

> 
> I think we are of kindred spirits regarding scholarship in Bible study.  I'd
> like to let you see a few things of mine to see if you can use them on your
> site.  (Including a tongue in cheek "scholarly discussion" of the Mudites and
> anti-mudites who based their sects' teaching on how they experienced healing
> from Blindness under the Hand of the Master.  You'll at least get a chuckle or
> two out of it whether you wish to post it or not.)

Send it along. Sounds like it could be fun.
Jeff

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jefferis Peterson, Pres.
Web Design and Marketing
http://www.PetersonSales.com