Both Tom and Kit have very convincing testimony of SIT as we were taught in twi.
I have no problem with that.
For a group of folks that were taught to lean on the written text as a yardstick of what was correct (i.e. godly) we sure fall back on experience a lot!
Don't get me wrong, I see that as a good thing, but it somewhat undermines the "Christainity is the only way" viewpoint, since if your experience makes something true, then my expereince would do the same.
"Taught in twi" gets my hackles up because it's "twi" (whatever that is) taking credit for what the Holy Spirit is able to teach us. Spiritual matters are only learned by the heart from the Holy Spirit.
twi taught the only mechanics of stuff, and that's why so many were so hurt. We were not introduced to The Teacher -- the Holy Spirit. Truly spiritual matters are not mechanical things to be learned, but a love to be lived (I always liked KJV "charity" because it has the element of kindness in it).
Over in the Prayer forum was this, and it got me laughing because I not only do not know who the poster is outside of the screen name, but certainly I cannot guess at what he needs (poster says it's a "he").
Hi All,
I covet your prayers for a dear friend of mine who is going through a very hard time.
He has been hit in several areas of his life lately - both emotional and financial - and his confidence is way down. This is an amazing man that has helped many many people. I am withholding his name because he would like his privacy respected.
I don't know anything to do except speak in tongues.
Also, I think they were 'amazed' in Acts 2 that the wonderful works of God was spoken in their language and not Hebrew or Aramaic-or whatever the tradition was to hear from God by way of men.
Tom, you make a distinction when you say "I recognize about it in my spirit." That is a distinction I see in Romans 8:26. In my opinion if the verse was indicating something we did it would phrase it like "my spirit intercedes for me." Like in I Corinthians 14:14 "For if I pray in a tongue, myspirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful." I see a distinction in Romans 8:26 - it is not me making the intercession. It says the Spirit [not "my spirit"] makes intercession for us. I don't see us given any credit for doing anything in that verse.
That's a good point & a fine (not fine in small - so what, but fine in perceptive & discriminating) distinction that you've made there, T-Bone (BTW, are you the T-Bone I knew as T-Bone from NY?). I have a few problems accepting that the distinction has any significance in this instance for a few reasons:
Calling something the spirit, my spirit, something else spirit, or just spirit doesn't always indicate the vast difference in significance that Wierwille indicated it did in the hs (neither do the capitals - there were no capitals in the originals - I wish you could see them like I can - just kidding). Context & the desired emphasis of the author can dictate those differences in expression are warranted concerning the same basic meaning.
You know, I was going to list a couple of other reasonable explanations for using "the" or "my" spirit that indicate some distinction other than the one you indicate, but it might take us on a tangent, & the above one reason is strong enough to at least discount your objection as absolute. But, again, you make a good point, not to be discarded - there IS a difference of expression, so there must be a reason for it.
So if Romans 8 is saying that speaking in toungues twi style is the groanings or whatever. Then those that don't speak in toungues don't get this interceding benefit? Naaa, I don't buy it.
I appreciate that you don't buy it, Clay, & you have your very real reasons, but you don't distribute spiritual things; the Holy Spirit does. This interceding benefit that we are speaking of IS a spiritual thing; I trust we agree on that. The Spirit distributes the gifts, the ways they are administered, & their energizings, no? Nevertheless, we see that all are not apostles, all are not prophets, all are not teachers, all are not workers of miracles, all do not have the gifts of healing, all do not speak with tongues, all do not interpret.
Why should we think that all get this benefit of intercession? I know a lot of people who don't seem to have a lot of this intercession going on in their lives, & others who do, & still others, like myself, who have it in spades in certain regards and just not there in others. I'm not going to blow smoke up anybodies you know what by saying, "Oh, yeah, everyone's got it - it's all good. Don't even think about it; any thought to the contrary is ego - TWI-EGO."
Hey, I'm all for going after spiritual things & figuring out what would be really spiritually to the point in any given situation, yet, let's go for the more excellent way - the way of love. Rom. 8: 238 doesn't say that all things work together for everybody because God loves them, but that "we know that all things work together for good to them that love God."
Clay, I regard you highly, but I suspect that you do disregard some valuable insights from the Word because you associate them with TWI. I know you deny that, but you might want to rethink that in certain regards, brother.
In presenting it this way, poses the most compelling case I've heard so far for not dismissing the possibility of "tongues" having been intended or included here.
Thanks, Danny - I really appreciate that you read stuff that usually would be accepted as pro-TWi by anti-TWI mindset constraints with an open mind without giving a rat's a$$ about TWI. Kudos - you are a big person.
Re:"Therein lies the power of speaking in tongues; it gives utterance to the inexpressible groaning we've all been subjected to. It is the expression of the absolutely empathetic intercession of holy spirit - expressing what neither we, nor the rest of all creation can express - although we all groan silently."
Of course it that is true, then it would seem that somehow Almighty God needs some human to give voice to His own desires. That's what always seemed so peculiar to me. Why the hell would God need us to make noises that we don't even understand so as to - do what? So He would get to hear Himself think?
The farther I get away from the whole idea the dumber it seems to me - though it never did make much sense to me even when I practiced it...
"...somehow Almighty God needs some human to give voice to His own desires."
You know, George - I don't understand you. I mean in certain regards I do, but in others, I have no clue. That's not a put down. In the ways I do understand you, I have a lot of respect for you.
"...somehow Almighty God needs some human to give voice to His own desires." Why is that so hard to imagine? What if you were God? What if you did this whole creative thing because it was your desire to do so (why would you create anything if it wasn't your desire)? What if among this whole outrageous creation thing you did, there was nothing among the creation that could even give voice to what you desired to begin with?
"...somehow Almighty God needs some human to give voice to His own desires."
You know, George - I don't understand you. I mean in certain regards I do, but in others, I have no clue. That's not a put down. In the ways I do understand you, I have a lot of respect for you.
"...somehow Almighty God needs some human to give voice to His own desires." Why is that so hard to imagine? What if you were God? What if you did this whole creative thing because it was your desire to do so (why would you create anything if it wasn't your desire)? What if among this whole outrageous creation thing you did, there was nothing among the creation that could even give voice to what you desired to begin with?
"Somehow?" Seems essential to me.
Speaking in tongues.
Speaking in tongues does not replace or cloud thinking, but cleans out cobwebs and gives Holy Spirit a chance to show different vantage points of a situation. Like tuning a fiddle. It puts me in better harmony with Him.
The applicable analogy of the Ford trying to explain Henry did not originate with vpw -- I have found found most of vpw's "good stuff" was plagarized.
Speaking in tongues gets me places I cannot go without it. I am thankful for the ride.
It works for me.
Speaking in tongues gives me a way to pray for those things I know not.
It's groanings of the spirit I cannot articulate.
There's been so many tsunami's in my life I'd be lost without speaking in tongues.
Both Tom and Kit have very convincing testimony of SIT as we were taught in twi.
I have no problem with that.
Just a little aside - I don't agree with Kit on a lot of things. Kit and I met as... well, I was going to say adversaries, but...well, let's just say we disagreed on a lot of apparent essentials, but we found out that we could stand together on things we knew were real regardless of what appeared to be foundational differences. If Kit is in your corner, there is the power of God brought to bear and the love that crosses boundries. I'm honored to be associated with her in any regard.
I do however have a problem if it is limited to what we were taught that speaking in tongues is and what it does. There is no place in the bible that I can see where SIT w/Interpretation was practiced as it was and is in twi. Where one SIT's and interprets his own message.
I'm not limiting it to what TWI said about it, Clay. I'm not even convinced they were right about SIT w/interpretation.
That's a good point & a fine (not fine in small - so what, but fine in perceptive & discriminating) distinction that you've made there, T-Bone (BTW, are you the T-Bone I knew as T-Bone from NY?).I have a few problems accepting that the distinction has any significance in this instance for a few reasons:
Calling something the spirit, my spirit, something else spirit, or just spirit doesn't always indicate the vast difference in significance that Wierwille indicated it did in the hs (neither do the capitals- there were no capitals in the originals - I wish you could see them like I can - just kidding). Context & the desired emphasis of the author can dictate those differences in expression are warranted concerning the same basic meaning.
You know, I was going to list a couple of other reasonable explanations for using "the" or "my" spirit that indicate some distinction other than the one you indicate, but it might take us on a tangent, & the above one reason is strong enough to at least discount your objection as absolute. But, again, you make a good point, not to be discarded - there IS a difference of expression, so there must be a reason for it.
Tom - I'm from NY - but was not known as T-Bone there - don't think I ever met you.
I see what you're saying about subtle nuances not always being such a big deal - and I did not assume anything from the capitalization of "spirit" in the text quoted. However, your last point I highlighted in bold red is exactly why I see Romans 8:26 as NOT referring to speaking in tongues [where you mentioned context and the desired emphasis of the author can dictate the differences]. I covered this in my previous post # 186 under point 2:
T-Bone post #186 August 13 2006 1:15 PM
2. What or who is "the Spirit"?
I find it interesting that in the previous chapter 7 when Paul talks of the struggle with sin I counted approximately 48 personal references to himself [i, me, my, myself]. In Romans 8, when he speaks of life through the Spirit, I counted approximately 20 references to the Spirit. I think it's quite a contrast presented here. Chapter 7 reveals the overwhelming frustration of handling life through the impoverished power of our own sinful nature, our efforts always failing because we focus on ourselves [as Paul shows in the usage of "I, me, my, myself"]. Chapter 8 is a change of focus – instead of being self-centered; we're to be Spirit-centered – our focus being on God.
I was looking at the context of BOTH chapter 7 and 8 - and I tend to think the author wanted to emphasize the work of The Holy Spirit rather than something WE do...I think it's a distinction that IS important - to me - I see it as a vast difference between what I do through my faltering human efforts [Romans 7] and what The Holy Spirit does on our behalf [chapter 8].
I was looking at the context of BOTH chapter 7 and 8 - and I tend to think the author wanted to emphasize the work of The Holy Spirit rather than something WE do...I think it's a distinction that IS important - to me - I see it as a vast difference between what I do through my faltering human efforts [Romans 7] and what The Holy Spirit does on our behalf [chapter 8].
"...I think it's a distinction that IS important - to me..." I agree.
"I was looking at the context of BOTH chapter 7 and 8 - and I tend to think the author wanted to emphasize the work of The Holy Spirit rather than something WE do" I also agree with this; however, I think for clarity's sake, I must qualify that agreement - not with regard to the Word I see here, but with regard to conclusions you have made apparently from that.
I agree I don't get any credit for the intercession that occurs when I speak in tongues; nevertheless, it IS my spirit that is praying, that is giving expression to the inexpressible groanings of all creation according to the will of God - not a natural or fleshly ability, but an ability of the (now my) spirit, nonetheless. And because my spirit is praying according to the will of God, God hears it - that's where the power & credit of the intercession (the all things working together for good) comes from. God makes it so. I'm just a kid who gets to cry "Abba - Father" via the (my) spirit when I speak in tongues.
From The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Romans 1-8 by John MacArthur, page 466: "In the same way refers to the groans of the creation and of believers for redemption from the corruption and defilement of sin. Here Paul reveals the immeasurably comforting truth that the Holy Spirit comes alongside us and all creation in groaning for God's ultimate day of restoration and His eternal reign of righteousness.
I think this post overall contributed a lot to the conversation, but I think the above quote from MacArthur needs tweaking, especially in the light of all the discussion we've been having about groanings. Sometimes a little tweak yields a big result.
I don't believe "In the same way" refers to the groans of the creation and of believers for redemption..." Nor do I believe that the Holy Spirit's (nor the holy spirit's, nor my holy spirit's) groanings "for God's ultimate day of restoration" does justice to what is being presented here.
"In the same way" refers to how the "hope" of "the redemption of our body" will deliver us "from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." In that same way, our groanings and travailings in pain are helped now by that same glory as we "which have the firstfruits of the Spirit" are "conformed to the image of his Son" because it IS now the hope of glory within us. That, I believe, is the intercession - God's all things working together for good in answer to our groanings.
That's why I believe, as Kit said "Speaking in tongues gets me places I cannot go without it. I am thankful for the ride." The hope is our North star, our compass setting; it brings everything on track. That's where the ride is going - that's where speaking in tongues is taking us "that he might be the firstborn among many brethren."
"Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?"
Excuse the slight derail, but this is what a doctrinal discussion should be, IMHO; a reasoned discourse on the subject, rather than...well...other stuff
Excuse the slight derail, but this is what a doctrinal discussion should be, IMHO; a reasoned discourse on the subject, rather than...well...other stuff
Thanks Tom & T-Bone
You're very welcome, Oak. Thank you for the kind words.
BTW, my last two posts above explain what I think is the "Seriously, what's the point?" of the "incomprehensible babbling" question of your original post. Major point!
"Couldn't God have come up with a way of 'building up the inner man' that didn't involve incomprehensible babbling?"
I don't know the answer to that.
But here are some thoughts the question brings to mind:
If I had to understand it, then the content or substance of tongues would be limited to my ability to understand. That would severely, pretty much critically, limit the ability of the intercession involved to overcome my weakness in not even knowing what to pray for as I ought.
In some ways, SIT reminds me of circumcision to the OT believers. Circumcision was supposed to be a sign
that people, like Abraham, believed in God's ability to produce the coming Messiah as their wholeness - that they believed in God's provision, instead of their own abilities. What more significant sign could God have chosen to show that He, God, brings the plan of salvation to pass & not man, than to have man cut off the foreskin of his penis (ouch) - the organ of the continued production of the race? Rank!!!
But man (nationalistic Israeli man, but isn't that man), as his manner is, promoted circumcision (the ultimate sign & act of humility) as a mark that he was better than all other men - when the mark was intended to indicate man's acceptance of his place under God's care, NOT man's superiority to other men. MAN has done the same thing with SIT.
As usual, man says, "Giberash, jump in the Jordan seven times to be made whole!?"
"Cut off the skin on my dick?" "To be made whole?" "Give me a freakin' break." "Couldn't God have done it another way?" "That made sense?"
"incomprehensible babbling?"
Ah, you get the point - please tell me you get the point - that WAS your question. I'm not the answer man, & I'm severely limited in my ability to see this stuff, but what I've posted I think is real - doctinally, experientially, in every way I know "ially." Does it not touch the rock that holds your heart, brother?
1Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
2For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
3But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
I agree the Way is not alone with SIt problem, millions others try doi it . one large church about 2 million members are force to SIt , to become active members of the church. If you cannot do it the tougues man well yell at you. Whats wrong I still find it a great thing to do : just me and God . In a group setting the question is how much of it is real ! Has anyone ever heard some one answer the question . "Woukd you be blessed to SIt " Say NO sorry not today In 14 years 1978-1992. never say it happen. . .You known your in cult when the right to say NO ! , is not allowed
Thank you Oakspear. I always find it enjoyable when discussions get more into discovery than debate. I like it when I learn something about another person, understand a different viewpoint, or even feel challenged to re-examine my own point of view. I think it's mostly that I love the freedom to think!
Tom, I can see your point over the significance of circumcision emphasizing God's ability [not theirs] to provide the Messiah. You see speaking in tongues like that – as a method of prayer that defies our mental abilities. I don't mean to take our discussion all over the map – but I think this is a tangent that may have bearing on our dialog about prayer and speaking in tongues.
I think for Israel - their practice of circumcision could have had some significance like the one you suggest. However, I think it was mainly a symbol of God's covenant with Israel - and Israel's agreement to keep that covenant with God. I tend to think the significance for each male Israelite was more along the lines of a seal - noting a relationship with God – calling man to obedience. Deuteronomy 10:16 "Circumcise then your heart, and stiffen your neck no more." Man was to "cut off" his stubbornness. Along with the physical act of circumcision, Deuteronomy implies that unless it is accompanied by obedience to God from the heart – it is invalid. Even in the New Testament it has this idea – I Corinthians 7:19 "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God." I don't see Israel's circumcision as something that discouraged them from using their abilities – but as a symbol to dedicate their abilities to God. Now what would have made no sense to Hebrew males and really would have shown it was in no way within their power – was if God had them cut the entire penis off! Every man would have been stumped for a way to produce the Messiah for sure!
Here's what I find incomprehensible about prayer in my understanding. I wonder why an all-powerful God, the creator of the heavens and the earth – who "works all things after the counsel of His will" [Ephesians 1:11] – would ask us to pray in matters of concern - and that our prayers can accomplish much [James 5:16].
I don't think God asks us to do things that make no sense. Just thinking out loud here – how often in the Bible do we find verses that ask us to do something senseless – in my opinion much of the Bible appeals to man's reason [A lot of the wisdom of Proverbs is very practical, many of Jesus' parables are drawn from real situations, Paul's frequent use of logical arguments in Romans]… I do see where we are called to do things that defy the five senses: II Corinthians 5:7 "for we walk by faith, not by sight."… Mark 13:7 "And when you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be frightened…"….Romans 10:17 "So faith comes by hearing…" …Mark 5:28 "For she thought, 'If I just touch His garments, I shall get well."
Getting back to our discussion on Romans 8:26 – I think the crux of the matter revolves around our different viewpoints of "spirit" in the text. Correct me if I'm wrong – your viewpoint is along the lines of the verse referring to the gift of holy spirit in the believer – my take on it is that it refers to The Holy Spirit. And it is at this point that I run out of steam. Doctrine-wise or experience-wise - - I know very little about holy spirit or The Holy Spirit – but like I said earlier I enjoy discovery. Not saying I want to stop the discussion. I just don't want to derail it – although we have made a few detours – perhaps food for thought on another thread. You've brought it back around to Oakspear's initial post – and have made some very strong points about man's weak points [hee hee], and the need for God's help – even in our prayer life.
Getting back to our discussion on Romans 8:26 – I think the crux of the matter revolves around our different viewpoints of "spirit" in the text. Correct me if I'm wrong – your viewpoint is along the lines of the verse referring to the gift of holy spirit in the believer – my take on it is that it refers to The Holy Spirit. And it is at this point that I run out of steam. Doctrine-wise or experience-wise - - I know very little about holy spirit or The Holy Spirit – but like I said earlier I enjoy discovery. Not saying I want to stop the discussion. I just don't want to derail it – although we have made a few detours – perhaps food for thought on another thread. You've brought it back around to Oakspear's initial post – and have made some very strong points about man's weak points [hee hee], and the need for God's help – even in our prayer life.
Here's another possibility outside of "the Giver" and "the Gift" perspective - "The Holy Spirit" may have also been construed as an Angel. Other literature around that time is quite supportive of this interpretation.
Angels were oft invoked in prayer for their aid. All the better if one learned their particular name.
Early Christians were not even in agreement over the the precise name and meaning of "Jesus" ("Isous, Yeshu, Joshua, Isu) or "Christ" ("Krestus") - let alone many not bothering to fret over a distinction between "God", "Father" and "Jesus" ("The Christ-God"). In fact, Jesus was Himself believed among a few to have been a heavenly being directly descended from heaven - in short, an Angel.
There are many elements of angelology at play throughout 1 Corinthians chapters 12 -14 relating to the "Holy Spirit" and the 'gifts", further corroborated by phrases shared between Paul and the hymns among the Dead Sea Scrolls. E. Earle Ellis did a fine study on this years ago (NT Studies, vol.20) as did Otto Everling ("Paulinishen Angelologie und Damonologie"). And of course, angels are not absent from this section of Romans under discussion.
...Getting back to our discussion on Romans 8:26 – I think the crux of the matter revolves around our different viewpoints of "spirit" in the text. Correct me if I'm wrong – your viewpoint is along the lines of the verse referring to the gift of holy spirit in the believer – my take on it is that it refers to The Holy Spirit. And it is at this point that I run out of steam. Doctrine-wise or experience-wise - - I know very little about holy spirit or The Holy Spirit – but like I said earlier I enjoy discovery...
Wow! this sure has been a voyage of discovery! There you go, "forcing" me to address my beliefs with the Word again. "Forcing" in a good way, iron sharpening iron - thank you. I REALLY appreciate it.
I read your post last night, but didn't feel set to answer your thinking about what the crux of the matter revolves around. Although I sort of felt that you were correct about what my viewpoint is (in above quote), I don't think I'd ever quite thought through the ramifications of actually saying so - you know, how deep that rabbit hole actually goes. I looked around for my, or my wife's, holy spirit book to see what that said, but, perhaps providentially, I couldn't find either of them. So, I went to bed thinking about your post.
A little aside here: I really love this section of the Word, Romans, chapter 8, that is. I suppose you can tell. But I haven't done a lot of "research" into it. When TWI & I came to the parting of the ways, it was a pretty rocky time for me mentally. All preconceived conclusions seemed up for grabs. As almost everyone at gs knows, some more, some less, that can be very unsettling. My anchor was Romans ch. 8; I ran it through my mind continually. I didn't research it. I didn't read it or even open a bible for years. But I ran it through my mind over & over again - for all those years. Obviously, I was impressed enough with it to have committed it to memory beforehand, but its significance grew substantially during that time. Also, Romans Ch. 8, SIT, & Jesus Christ all have a very big hook into the experiences of my life. I wouldn't be alive without the, umm, okay here is that word, "intercession," the extraordinary, miraculous, & dramatic intercession of what I perceive to be the reality of all three - detailed exposition of this aside withheld here to keep the tangent little.
When I woke up this morning, my answer to your post was set. You're right, T-Bone, "the crux of the matter revolves around our different viewpoints of 'spirit' in the text" of Rom. 8:26, "Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."
I think that holy spirit is "referring to the gift of holy spirit in the believer" because of the following verse that says, "And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit..." He that searches the hearts is God, &, because he searches the hearts, he knows what is the mind of the spirit because of the gift of holy spirit/heart connection within believers. And I also think that the spirit here refers to the gift within because of the rest of the context of Ch. 8. BUT, to think so, I've had to readjust some of my previous thinking about everything we've been talking about. For THAT, I'll be eternally thankful to you, T-Bone.
I still think that God is the big deal here (that being the true test of truth); He searches the hearts, He knows the mind of the spirit, He makes all things work together for good for those who love Him, He, along with freely giving us Christ, freely gives all things - but the fact that it is the spirit within us that God is listening to that is making the intercession has taken on new & greater significance for me as I've had to think this through further.
I've often wondered why verse 26 says the spirit makes intercession, but verse 34 says Christ, at the right hand of God, makes intercession for us. Now I believe I see the answer. God is still the big deal, but I've vastly underestimated what God has given us in Christ. There is no difference between the spirit within & Christ at the right hand of God. The identification is absolute & complete. As verse 30 says we've already been glorified. As he (Christ) IS, so are we in this world.
So, to carry this through honestly, I have to change where my thinking was going earlier. I realize people will receive this as ego, & it will remind people of TWI who DID make it into ego, but I believe that it is absolutely the ability of the believer, via the spirit within, to make intercession. We speak in tongues, we go forth and cast out spirits, we heal, we make intercession - via the spirit. God gives the increase.
It is not the energy box model of holy spirit that became the practice in TWI, where we tell God what to do. It is where we get to move according to the will of God, Him working within us to will & do of His good pleasure.
T-Bone, it wasn't only rethinking the ramifications of verse 26 that got me here, it was also your discussion of the significance of circumcision, bringing it more into line with God's main purposes:
I don't see Israel's circumcision as something that discouraged them from using their abilities – but as a symbol to dedicate their abilities to God.
Here's what I find incomprehensible about prayer in my understanding. I wonder why an all-powerful God, the creator of the heavens and the earth – who "works all things after the counsel of His will" [Ephesians 1:11] – would ask us to pray in matters of concern - and that our prayers can accomplish much [James 5:16].
Because God "works all things after the counsel of His will" IN US! WE ARE the ones who need redeemed. We are where His will - our redemption - takes place. Goes back to the crux of the matter again, T-Bone. It all makes sense if we see God's purposes in Jesus Christ. Matthew 9:8 Â But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men. God got the glory for giving men the power - in this case, Jesus.
Acts 3:12  ¶And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people, Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?
Peter & John made the man to walk. They had the ability, the power, & the holiness to make the man walk, but it wasn't their own fleshly ability. It was the faith that came by the risen Jesus.
In Romans 8:29, we learn that we, "...whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son..."
That's God's purpose. That's redemption. Its not just redemption from sin; we get to be like Christ. Now! That's the crux of the matter. I think that's Romans 8:26, the groanings and the glorious liberty of the children of God.
Indeed, there is speaking in tongues outside of twi. And Holy Spirit is teaching the good usage and benefits of speaking in tongues outside of twi.
vpw plagarized what others said about speaking in tongues and acted like he was the only one Holy Spirit could speak to about such things, but this is not so.
:)RHST, as mentioned above, is plagarized from JE Stiles. He did not author that work.
My copy does not have a publish date, but gives a date in the forward of 1/21/48. Maybe it could be put on the Greasespot archives if it's in the public domain?
My copy gives an address of Mrs. JE Stiles, PO Box 3147, Burbank, California, if anyone wants to pursue that angle.
Just a few days ago I watched Kenneth and Gloria Copeland's daughter, Kelly, give a wonderful teaching on speaking in tongues in the church that was delivered with the essence of speaking in tongues needs to be translated when used in the church, meeting needs to be with decorum etc. etc. No arrogance. No foaming at the mouth insulting Christians other than those in her group. Just nice: "This is what the Bible says, and we need to do it."
Many other Christian ministries also teach about speaking in tongues because it is a powerful tool the Lord has given us for our work and a weapon for our warfare, and speaking in tongues is true.
And I doubt these ministries are getting on the bandwagon that twi started. I am just very sorry that twi's bandwagon dumped the charity that should be foundational to using all the blessings from the Lord.
Speaking in tongues was before twi and outside of twi, and speaking in tongues will continue until the cows come home, so to speak.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
45
26
26
69
Popular Days
Jun 26
28
Jul 3
20
Jun 27
18
Aug 12
17
Top Posters In This Topic
Tom 45 posts
Oakspear 26 posts
T-Bone 26 posts
dancing 69 posts
Popular Days
Jun 26 2006
28 posts
Jul 3 2006
20 posts
Jun 27 2006
18 posts
Aug 12 2006
17 posts
Oakspear
Don't get me wrong, I see that as a good thing, but it somewhat undermines the "Christainity is the only way" viewpoint, since if your experience makes something true, then my expereince would do the same.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
And the view of the truth, Oaks.
as you know
It certainly isn't christianity is the only way.
And this 'truth' that is sought will be found.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bliss
I was a dispensationalist futurist.
I think I am leaning towards orthodox preterist.................:
http://www.preteristsite.com/docs/maurotongues.html
:blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kit Sober
"Taught in twi" gets my hackles up because it's "twi" (whatever that is) taking credit for what the Holy Spirit is able to teach us. Spiritual matters are only learned by the heart from the Holy Spirit.
twi taught the only mechanics of stuff, and that's why so many were so hurt. We were not introduced to The Teacher -- the Holy Spirit. Truly spiritual matters are not mechanical things to be learned, but a love to be lived (I always liked KJV "charity" because it has the element of kindness in it).
Over in the Prayer forum was this, and it got me laughing because I not only do not know who the poster is outside of the screen name, but certainly I cannot guess at what he needs (poster says it's a "he").
I don't know anything to do except speak in tongues.Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
Kit, I don't mean to offend. for whatever we learned from the holy spirit is still there,
I used that phrase because this is how I came across speaking in tongues.
Since then i've seen a much broader and bigger and practical tongue of the Spirit.
And that is not to put down the benifits anyone receives in any other spiritual matter.
But it brings it along with it also for the spiritual minded to see more.
Edited by dancingLink to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
Also, I think they were 'amazed' in Acts 2 that the wonderful works of God was spoken in their language and not Hebrew or Aramaic-or whatever the tradition was to hear from God by way of men.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
That's a good point & a fine (not fine in small - so what, but fine in perceptive & discriminating) distinction that you've made there, T-Bone (BTW, are you the T-Bone I knew as T-Bone from NY?). I have a few problems accepting that the distinction has any significance in this instance for a few reasons:
You know, I was going to list a couple of other reasonable explanations for using "the" or "my" spirit that indicate some distinction other than the one you indicate, but it might take us on a tangent, & the above one reason is strong enough to at least discount your objection as absolute. But, again, you make a good point, not to be discarded - there IS a difference of expression, so there must be a reason for it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
I appreciate that you don't buy it, Clay, & you have your very real reasons, but you don't distribute spiritual things; the Holy Spirit does. This interceding benefit that we are speaking of IS a spiritual thing; I trust we agree on that. The Spirit distributes the gifts, the ways they are administered, & their energizings, no? Nevertheless, we see that all are not apostles, all are not prophets, all are not teachers, all are not workers of miracles, all do not have the gifts of healing, all do not speak with tongues, all do not interpret.
Why should we think that all get this benefit of intercession? I know a lot of people who don't seem to have a lot of this intercession going on in their lives, & others who do, & still others, like myself, who have it in spades in certain regards and just not there in others. I'm not going to blow smoke up anybodies you know what by saying, "Oh, yeah, everyone's got it - it's all good. Don't even think about it; any thought to the contrary is ego - TWI-EGO."
Hey, I'm all for going after spiritual things & figuring out what would be really spiritually to the point in any given situation, yet, let's go for the more excellent way - the way of love. Rom. 8: 238 doesn't say that all things work together for everybody because God loves them, but that "we know that all things work together for good to them that love God."
Clay, I regard you highly, but I suspect that you do disregard some valuable insights from the Word because you associate them with TWI. I know you deny that, but you might want to rethink that in certain regards, brother.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
Thanks, Danny - I really appreciate that you read stuff that usually would be accepted as pro-TWi by anti-TWI mindset constraints with an open mind without giving a rat's a$$ about TWI. Kudos - you are a big person.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
"...somehow Almighty God needs some human to give voice to His own desires."
You know, George - I don't understand you. I mean in certain regards I do, but in others, I have no clue. That's not a put down. In the ways I do understand you, I have a lot of respect for you.
"...somehow Almighty God needs some human to give voice to His own desires." Why is that so hard to imagine? What if you were God? What if you did this whole creative thing because it was your desire to do so (why would you create anything if it wasn't your desire)? What if among this whole outrageous creation thing you did, there was nothing among the creation that could even give voice to what you desired to begin with?
"Somehow?" Seems essential to me.
Thank you Kit
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
Just a little aside - I don't agree with Kit on a lot of things. Kit and I met as... well, I was going to say adversaries, but...well, let's just say we disagreed on a lot of apparent essentials, but we found out that we could stand together on things we knew were real regardless of what appeared to be foundational differences. If Kit is in your corner, there is the power of God brought to bear and the love that crosses boundries. I'm honored to be associated with her in any regard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
Just because a thing is not seen or realized does not make it not so.
Herein lies the struggle to see and understand with all wisdom.
To the only wise God...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Tom - I'm from NY - but was not known as T-Bone there - don't think I ever met you.
I see what you're saying about subtle nuances not always being such a big deal - and I did not assume anything from the capitalization of "spirit" in the text quoted. However, your last point I highlighted in bold red is exactly why I see Romans 8:26 as NOT referring to speaking in tongues [where you mentioned context and the desired emphasis of the author can dictate the differences]. I covered this in my previous post # 186 under point 2:
I was looking at the context of BOTH chapter 7 and 8 - and I tend to think the author wanted to emphasize the work of The Holy Spirit rather than something WE do...I think it's a distinction that IS important - to me - I see it as a vast difference between what I do through my faltering human efforts [Romans 7] and what The Holy Spirit does on our behalf [chapter 8].
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
"...I think it's a distinction that IS important - to me..." I agree.
"I was looking at the context of BOTH chapter 7 and 8 - and I tend to think the author wanted to emphasize the work of The Holy Spirit rather than something WE do" I also agree with this; however, I think for clarity's sake, I must qualify that agreement - not with regard to the Word I see here, but with regard to conclusions you have made apparently from that.
I agree I don't get any credit for the intercession that occurs when I speak in tongues; nevertheless, it IS my spirit that is praying, that is giving expression to the inexpressible groanings of all creation according to the will of God - not a natural or fleshly ability, but an ability of the (now my) spirit, nonetheless. And because my spirit is praying according to the will of God, God hears it - that's where the power & credit of the intercession (the all things working together for good) comes from. God makes it so. I'm just a kid who gets to cry "Abba - Father" via the (my) spirit when I speak in tongues.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
I think this post overall contributed a lot to the conversation, but I think the above quote from MacArthur needs tweaking, especially in the light of all the discussion we've been having about groanings. Sometimes a little tweak yields a big result.
I don't believe "In the same way" refers to the groans of the creation and of believers for redemption..." Nor do I believe that the Holy Spirit's (nor the holy spirit's, nor my holy spirit's) groanings "for God's ultimate day of restoration" does justice to what is being presented here.
"In the same way" refers to how the "hope" of "the redemption of our body" will deliver us "from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." In that same way, our groanings and travailings in pain are helped now by that same glory as we "which have the firstfruits of the Spirit" are "conformed to the image of his Son" because it IS now the hope of glory within us. That, I believe, is the intercession - God's all things working together for good in answer to our groanings.
That's why I believe, as Kit said "Speaking in tongues gets me places I cannot go without it. I am thankful for the ride." The hope is our North star, our compass setting; it brings everything on track. That's where the ride is going - that's where speaking in tongues is taking us "that he might be the firstborn among many brethren."
"Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Excuse the slight derail, but this is what a doctrinal discussion should be, IMHO; a reasoned discourse on the subject, rather than...well...other stuff
Thanks Tom & T-Bone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
You're very welcome, Oak. Thank you for the kind words.
BTW, my last two posts above explain what I think is the "Seriously, what's the point?" of the "incomprehensible babbling" question of your original post. Major point!
"Couldn't God have come up with a way of 'building up the inner man' that didn't involve incomprehensible babbling?"
I don't know the answer to that.
But here are some thoughts the question brings to mind:
If I had to understand it, then the content or substance of tongues would be limited to my ability to understand. That would severely, pretty much critically, limit the ability of the intercession involved to overcome my weakness in not even knowing what to pray for as I ought.
In some ways, SIT reminds me of circumcision to the OT believers. Circumcision was supposed to be a sign
that people, like Abraham, believed in God's ability to produce the coming Messiah as their wholeness - that they believed in God's provision, instead of their own abilities. What more significant sign could God have chosen to show that He, God, brings the plan of salvation to pass & not man, than to have man cut off the foreskin of his penis (ouch) - the organ of the continued production of the race? Rank!!!
But man (nationalistic Israeli man, but isn't that man), as his manner is, promoted circumcision (the ultimate sign & act of humility) as a mark that he was better than all other men - when the mark was intended to indicate man's acceptance of his place under God's care, NOT man's superiority to other men. MAN has done the same thing with SIT.
As usual, man says, "Giberash, jump in the Jordan seven times to be made whole!?"
"Cut off the skin on my dick?" "To be made whole?" "Give me a freakin' break." "Couldn't God have done it another way?" "That made sense?"
"incomprehensible babbling?"
Ah, you get the point - please tell me you get the point - that WAS your question. I'm not the answer man, & I'm severely limited in my ability to see this stuff, but what I've posted I think is real - doctinally, experientially, in every way I know "ially." Does it not touch the rock that holds your heart, brother?
Edited by TomLink to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
I get your point :B)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
1 Corinthians 14
1Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
2For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
3But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
Secrets in other bible versions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
andy Bear
Newbee Questions
I agree the Way is not alone with SIt problem, millions others try doi it . one large church about 2 million members are force to SIt , to become active members of the church. If you cannot do it the tougues man well yell at you. Whats wrong I still find it a great thing to do : just me and God . In a group setting the question is how much of it is real ! Has anyone ever heard some one answer the question . "Woukd you be blessed to SIt " Say NO sorry not today In 14 years 1978-1992. never say it happen. . .You known your in cult when the right to say NO ! , is not allowed
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Thank you Oakspear. I always find it enjoyable when discussions get more into discovery than debate. I like it when I learn something about another person, understand a different viewpoint, or even feel challenged to re-examine my own point of view. I think it's mostly that I love the freedom to think!
Tom, I can see your point over the significance of circumcision emphasizing God's ability [not theirs] to provide the Messiah. You see speaking in tongues like that – as a method of prayer that defies our mental abilities. I don't mean to take our discussion all over the map – but I think this is a tangent that may have bearing on our dialog about prayer and speaking in tongues.
I think for Israel - their practice of circumcision could have had some significance like the one you suggest. However, I think it was mainly a symbol of God's covenant with Israel - and Israel's agreement to keep that covenant with God. I tend to think the significance for each male Israelite was more along the lines of a seal - noting a relationship with God – calling man to obedience. Deuteronomy 10:16 "Circumcise then your heart, and stiffen your neck no more." Man was to "cut off" his stubbornness. Along with the physical act of circumcision, Deuteronomy implies that unless it is accompanied by obedience to God from the heart – it is invalid. Even in the New Testament it has this idea – I Corinthians 7:19 "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God." I don't see Israel's circumcision as something that discouraged them from using their abilities – but as a symbol to dedicate their abilities to God. Now what would have made no sense to Hebrew males and really would have shown it was in no way within their power – was if God had them cut the entire penis off! Every man would have been stumped for a way to produce the Messiah for sure!
Here's what I find incomprehensible about prayer in my understanding. I wonder why an all-powerful God, the creator of the heavens and the earth – who "works all things after the counsel of His will" [Ephesians 1:11] – would ask us to pray in matters of concern - and that our prayers can accomplish much [James 5:16].
I don't think God asks us to do things that make no sense. Just thinking out loud here – how often in the Bible do we find verses that ask us to do something senseless – in my opinion much of the Bible appeals to man's reason [A lot of the wisdom of Proverbs is very practical, many of Jesus' parables are drawn from real situations, Paul's frequent use of logical arguments in Romans]… I do see where we are called to do things that defy the five senses: II Corinthians 5:7 "for we walk by faith, not by sight."… Mark 13:7 "And when you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be frightened…"….Romans 10:17 "So faith comes by hearing…" …Mark 5:28 "For she thought, 'If I just touch His garments, I shall get well."
Getting back to our discussion on Romans 8:26 – I think the crux of the matter revolves around our different viewpoints of "spirit" in the text. Correct me if I'm wrong – your viewpoint is along the lines of the verse referring to the gift of holy spirit in the believer – my take on it is that it refers to The Holy Spirit. And it is at this point that I run out of steam. Doctrine-wise or experience-wise - - I know very little about holy spirit or The Holy Spirit – but like I said earlier I enjoy discovery. Not saying I want to stop the discussion. I just don't want to derail it – although we have made a few detours – perhaps food for thought on another thread. You've brought it back around to Oakspear's initial post – and have made some very strong points about man's weak points [hee hee], and the need for God's help – even in our prayer life.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Here's another possibility outside of "the Giver" and "the Gift" perspective - "The Holy Spirit" may have also been construed as an Angel. Other literature around that time is quite supportive of this interpretation.
Angels were oft invoked in prayer for their aid. All the better if one learned their particular name.
Early Christians were not even in agreement over the the precise name and meaning of "Jesus" ("Isous, Yeshu, Joshua, Isu) or "Christ" ("Krestus") - let alone many not bothering to fret over a distinction between "God", "Father" and "Jesus" ("The Christ-God"). In fact, Jesus was Himself believed among a few to have been a heavenly being directly descended from heaven - in short, an Angel.
There are many elements of angelology at play throughout 1 Corinthians chapters 12 -14 relating to the "Holy Spirit" and the 'gifts", further corroborated by phrases shared between Paul and the hymns among the Dead Sea Scrolls. E. Earle Ellis did a fine study on this years ago (NT Studies, vol.20) as did Otto Everling ("Paulinishen Angelologie und Damonologie"). And of course, angels are not absent from this section of Romans under discussion.
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
Wow! this sure has been a voyage of discovery! There you go, "forcing" me to address my beliefs with the Word again. "Forcing" in a good way, iron sharpening iron - thank you. I REALLY appreciate it.
I read your post last night, but didn't feel set to answer your thinking about what the crux of the matter revolves around. Although I sort of felt that you were correct about what my viewpoint is (in above quote), I don't think I'd ever quite thought through the ramifications of actually saying so - you know, how deep that rabbit hole actually goes. I looked around for my, or my wife's, holy spirit book to see what that said, but, perhaps providentially, I couldn't find either of them. So, I went to bed thinking about your post.
A little aside here: I really love this section of the Word, Romans, chapter 8, that is. I suppose you can tell. But I haven't done a lot of "research" into it. When TWI & I came to the parting of the ways, it was a pretty rocky time for me mentally. All preconceived conclusions seemed up for grabs. As almost everyone at gs knows, some more, some less, that can be very unsettling. My anchor was Romans ch. 8; I ran it through my mind continually. I didn't research it. I didn't read it or even open a bible for years. But I ran it through my mind over & over again - for all those years. Obviously, I was impressed enough with it to have committed it to memory beforehand, but its significance grew substantially during that time. Also, Romans Ch. 8, SIT, & Jesus Christ all have a very big hook into the experiences of my life. I wouldn't be alive without the, umm, okay here is that word, "intercession," the extraordinary, miraculous, & dramatic intercession of what I perceive to be the reality of all three - detailed exposition of this aside withheld here to keep the tangent little.
When I woke up this morning, my answer to your post was set. You're right, T-Bone, "the crux of the matter revolves around our different viewpoints of 'spirit' in the text" of Rom. 8:26, "Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."
I think that holy spirit is "referring to the gift of holy spirit in the believer" because of the following verse that says, "And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit..." He that searches the hearts is God, &, because he searches the hearts, he knows what is the mind of the spirit because of the gift of holy spirit/heart connection within believers. And I also think that the spirit here refers to the gift within because of the rest of the context of Ch. 8. BUT, to think so, I've had to readjust some of my previous thinking about everything we've been talking about. For THAT, I'll be eternally thankful to you, T-Bone.
I still think that God is the big deal here (that being the true test of truth); He searches the hearts, He knows the mind of the spirit, He makes all things work together for good for those who love Him, He, along with freely giving us Christ, freely gives all things - but the fact that it is the spirit within us that God is listening to that is making the intercession has taken on new & greater significance for me as I've had to think this through further.
I've often wondered why verse 26 says the spirit makes intercession, but verse 34 says Christ, at the right hand of God, makes intercession for us. Now I believe I see the answer. God is still the big deal, but I've vastly underestimated what God has given us in Christ. There is no difference between the spirit within & Christ at the right hand of God. The identification is absolute & complete. As verse 30 says we've already been glorified. As he (Christ) IS, so are we in this world.
So, to carry this through honestly, I have to change where my thinking was going earlier. I realize people will receive this as ego, & it will remind people of TWI who DID make it into ego, but I believe that it is absolutely the ability of the believer, via the spirit within, to make intercession. We speak in tongues, we go forth and cast out spirits, we heal, we make intercession - via the spirit. God gives the increase.
It is not the energy box model of holy spirit that became the practice in TWI, where we tell God what to do. It is where we get to move according to the will of God, Him working within us to will & do of His good pleasure.
T-Bone, it wasn't only rethinking the ramifications of verse 26 that got me here, it was also your discussion of the significance of circumcision, bringing it more into line with God's main purposes:
Because God "works all things after the counsel of His will" IN US! WE ARE the ones who need redeemed. We are where His will - our redemption - takes place. Goes back to the crux of the matter again, T-Bone. It all makes sense if we see God's purposes in Jesus Christ. Matthew 9:8 Â But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men. God got the glory for giving men the power - in this case, Jesus.
Acts 3:12  ¶And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people, Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?
Peter & John made the man to walk. They had the ability, the power, & the holiness to make the man walk, but it wasn't their own fleshly ability. It was the faith that came by the risen Jesus.
In Romans 8:29, we learn that we, "...whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son..."
That's God's purpose. That's redemption. Its not just redemption from sin; we get to be like Christ. Now! That's the crux of the matter. I think that's Romans 8:26, the groanings and the glorious liberty of the children of God.
Edited by TomLink to comment
Share on other sites
Kit Sober
Oldiesman previously,
Indeed, there is speaking in tongues outside of twi. And Holy Spirit is teaching the good usage and benefits of speaking in tongues outside of twi.vpw plagarized what others said about speaking in tongues and acted like he was the only one Holy Spirit could speak to about such things, but this is not so.
:)RHST, as mentioned above, is plagarized from JE Stiles. He did not author that work.
My copy does not have a publish date, but gives a date in the forward of 1/21/48. Maybe it could be put on the Greasespot archives if it's in the public domain?
My copy gives an address of Mrs. JE Stiles, PO Box 3147, Burbank, California, if anyone wants to pursue that angle.
Just a few days ago I watched Kenneth and Gloria Copeland's daughter, Kelly, give a wonderful teaching on speaking in tongues in the church that was delivered with the essence of speaking in tongues needs to be translated when used in the church, meeting needs to be with decorum etc. etc. No arrogance. No foaming at the mouth insulting Christians other than those in her group. Just nice: "This is what the Bible says, and we need to do it."
Many other Christian ministries also teach about speaking in tongues because it is a powerful tool the Lord has given us for our work and a weapon for our warfare, and speaking in tongues is true.
And I doubt these ministries are getting on the bandwagon that twi started. I am just very sorry that twi's bandwagon dumped the charity that should be foundational to using all the blessings from the Lord.
Speaking in tongues was before twi and outside of twi, and speaking in tongues will continue until the cows come home, so to speak.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.