PDA

View Full Version : LIVING WATER - Reviewed By MJS


Benja32one
June 26th, 2005, 04:10 PM
Chuck Smith
LIVING WATER
The Power of the Holy Spirit in Your Life
Miles J. Stanford


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The work of the Lord Jesus now is to occupy me with Himself. It is clear that in spirit I am up There in all His beauty and acceptance, and now I am to live down here, not as a comely and excellent person, but as the Lord Jesus manifested in my body (2 Cor. 4:10).

"And He who sustains me up There in all the brightness of His glory, is the same One who has to do with me in all my weakness and need down here in this scene of darkness and death."

1 August 1996



Dear brother:

Thank you for your informative, albeit sad, letter. And I appreciate your request concerning Smith's 'Calvary Chapels ... especially since I was working on the subject! The Father is always an infinite step ahead of us (Isa. 26:12; Eph. 2:10).

It is a shocking thing to contemplate the level to which the Christian Booksellers, and most other such organizations, have sunk to. And the end is not yet, it all being the harvest of corruptible seed sown a generation or more ago (Gal. 6:7).

In that these organizations, and churches, are composed of individuals, it is astounding to note the great numbers of leaders, and followers--all who should know better--that are slipping down into the Charismatic realm. And now with the onslaught of the Charismatic, so-called Promise Keepers, the worst is yet to come.

So the poor brother you mention is but one of a vast number--sound doctrine, fruitful ministry, and all. How the mighty have fallen--in droves! The scene is much like the flattened, blackened and barren, forests surrounding Mount St. Helens!

I would like to make a suggestion, if I may. I would hesitate to send the enclosed critique to your brother in Christ. You have had an extensive talk with him--I am sure from the heart, and scripturally-based.

He has not stepped down on a doctrinal basis, but rather that of subjective experience. If he comes out of it--which they very seldom do, I am sorry to say--it will more than likely be via the bad experience of coming to realize what he has gotten into. He already has the necessary doctrine for recovery, but he must first find out by crushing experience, by hitting the bottom of the chasm into which he has fallen.

Probably it will have to be via "O, wretched man that I am," before he will be able to say, "I thank God through the glorified Lord Jesus Christ."

This "falling away" that is happening in the Church, many assemblies included, has two primary causes. The one is lack of dispensational distinctions. The result is the lack of establishment in one's heavenly position in the Ascended Lord. Anyone consciously "hidden with Christ in God" would never fall for, and into, the Charismatic craziness.

With you, trusting the Father for His blessed will--on His terms, and in His time.

Resting in Him

Miles



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHUCK SMITH & THE CALVARY CHAPELS
Living Water--The Power of the Holy Spirit in Your Life, by Chuck Smith (Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1996, 297 pages).

Chuck Smith is founder and pastor of Calvary Chapel in Costa Mesa, California; which has spawned a number of Calvary Chapels in different parts of the country. All are Charismatic; all are out of scriptural bounds.

The author has a radio program titled "The Word For Today," and often speaks on TV via the rabidly Charismatic Trinity Broadcasting Network. He has a very personable aspect, his speaking approach is low-key, and he is careful to avoid any untoward Charismatic characteristics.

Hence his ministry is especially dangerous, in that most Christians today tend to evaluate a leader by his personality and appearance, rather than by his doctrine. But this is a fatal practice, especially concerning false teachers, as Dr. Chafer warned:

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits" (Matt. 7:5-20). The [kingdom] warning here is against false prophets who are to be discerned by the quality of their lives.

The warning to the Christian under grace is against false teachers who are to be discerned by their doctrine concerning Christ (2 Pet. 2:1; 2 John 1:7-11), never by their lives; for outwardly, false teachers are said to appear as the "apostles of Christ," and to be under the influence of Satan who himself appears as an "angel of light" (2 Cor. 11:13-15). The attractive personality of the false teacher affords great advantage as a "front" for the appeal he makes for his false doctrine.

Chuck Smith, Charismatic to the core, emphasizes the Holy Spirit in the life of the Christian, rather than the glorified Lord Jesus Christ, "who is our Life" (Col. 3:4). The ascended Lord Jesus Christ is not even secondary in the Charismatic concept, as they, failing to rightly divide the Word of truth, turn back to Jesus in His pre-Cross life on earth, and His earthly Kingdom Gospel to Israel.
The Lord Jesus said to His disciples, "When He, the Spirit of truth, is come... He shall not speak of Himself, but whatever He shall hear, that shall He speak... He shall glorify Me" (John 16:13,14).

Prior to His ascension, Jesus prayed, "Father, I will that they also, whom Thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory, which Thou hast given Me" (John 17:24).

Paul says to the Christian, to the Church, "Seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:1,2).

But the Charismatic seeks to emphasize and glorify the Holy Spirit, in spite of the scriptural fact that His purpose is to glorify the Glorified One at the right hand of the Father on high. And they seek to know and follow Jesus in His earthly humiliation, and Kingdom Gospel. Hence we see this in Chuck Smith's book titled Living Water--The Power of the Holy Spirit in Your Life:

The purpose of this book is to help you get to know the Holy Spirit so that you may enjoy a full, rich relationship with Him.

I am praying that by God's grace and through this book the Lord will develop in you an insatiable hunger for and thirsting after the Spirit. He is the person of the Godhead to whom we relate most closely (pp. 7,8).

Wrong way around! Error! It is the Spirit's ministry and purpose to develop in the believer an insatiable hunger and thirst for the glorified Lord Jesus Christ! The fruit of the Spirit consists of aspects, characteristics, of the life of Christ (Gal. 5:22,23).

The purpose of The Book, for the believer, is expressed by Paul: "He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord." "For I determined not to know any thing among you, except Jesus Christ." "Christ shall be magnified in my body ... for to me to live is Christ." "That I may know Him" (1 Cor. 1:31; 2:2; Phil. 1:20,21; 3:10).

The Spirit's ministry is that "the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body" (2 Cor. 4:10). As J.B. Stoney well said:

The work of the Lord Jesus now is to occupy me with Himself. It is clear that in spirit I am up There in all His beauty and acceptance, and now I am to live down here, not as a comely and excellent person, but as the Lord Jesus manifested in my body.

Because the Charismatic does not center in the glorified Lord Jesus Christ, he does not really know God for who He is; and he would attribute sovereignty to Satan. But while Satan may be the "prince of this world," God is King over him, this world, and the universe.

Jesus told us to pray, "Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven" (Matt. 6: 10). Oh, how I long to see the day when God's will instead of Satan's is being done on this earth! (p. 44).

But Chuck Smith is right about one thing; one should not "stick around" Calvary Chapel, or any of the other lesser Chapels, for that matter. He speaks of a letter received, and his answer:

Some time ago I received a letter from a fellow who wrote, "I considered affiliation with the Calvary Chapels, but this aspect was wrong and that doctrine was wrong and I don't know if I really understand what is going on there."

I wrote back and said, "I don't think you do know. And I would suggest you not pursue any further trying to affiliate with Calvary Chapel." He described his shock at one of the issues that was brought up, and I said, "If you stick around, you will probably find a lot more shocking things. So maybe it's better that you do not stick around" (p. 90).

As a Charismatic, Chuck Smith claims that all of the gifts of the Spirit are for today:

When you walk with the Spirit, develop in your relationship with Him, and respond to His work in you, it is very likely that you will begin to have all kinds of glorious, supernatural experiences (emphasis mine) (p. 19).

In exercising the ministry of pastor-teacher, I believe there are three spiritual gifts that operate, especially when we are teaching the word of God: prophecy, the word of knowledge ["the Lord told me"], and the word of wisdom.

This is the word of wisdom: You didn't know the answer before this moment, but even as you speak your heart testifies of its truth and it makes [subjective] sense. The Spirit of God gives you the answer. It is something that you had not learned or studied or thought about, but it is right, so on target, that you recognize it as a word of wisdom (p. 103).

It is as always: "The poor Pentecostals and Charismatics; they do not think, they only feel." That is verified by their quest for, and claims of, tongues, healing, and miracles:

I believe healing faith is related to and associated with what 1 Corinthians 12 calls the gift of faith. The gift of faith is related many times to healing and miracles (p. 122).

I believe that lack of miraculous healing today lies more in the failure of man's faith than in the reluctance of a compassionate God to meet His children's needs. The reason we don't see much miraculous healing today is our general skepticism. The reason why people aren't healed so often today as they seemed to be in the past can be traced to general unbelief. The fault is not God's, but ours (pp. 135,136).

We do have our limitations, and I confess I'm in that group. I could not in faith believe that God would give a person a new arm. I just couldn't do that. It is not that I don't believe God could do it; I just don't believe God would do it.

Don't misunderstand--that's a confession of my lack of faith. I'm not proud about it. I wish I did have the kind of faith that could pray, believing that God would give a person a new arm (p. 145).

To these people, faith is the factor, rather than the sovereign will of God.

I encourage you to covet earnestly the work of miracles [new arms?]. It would take quite a bit of preparation to possess, but I don't believe it is out of reach or out of the question. I would love to see the hand of God at work among His children in a greater measure. And I believe God desires to do it. So what hinders Him? I think we are the stumbling blocks; we are the ones who have clogged the flow of the Spirit in that realm (p. 149).

And then there is the Charismatic "tongues" error:

How is the gift of tongues to be used in the life of the believer? Tongues are exciting! It builds you up in your walk with God, and invigorates your relationship with Him (p. 178).

Tongues is the only gift of God that edifies you personally and individually. All the other gifts serve to edify the church and to build up the body. But this one gift was given to build you up, to strengthen you. Speaking in tongues strengthens your walk, your relationships, and gives you the power to commune with God on a deep spiritual level (p. 180).

Speaking in tongues is a powerful, God-given tool. It brings an intimacy and communion and fellowship with God that can be achieved in no other way (p. 182).

Such misplaced reliance is the reason for the general Charismatic craziness. And yet another key error concerning the Holy Spirit:

Peter said we should receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Jesus also called the Holy Spirit a gift. And the only way to possess a gift is to receive it. The gift of the Holy Spirit must be received by faith. Receiving the Spirit is like believing on Jesus for salvation.

You must ask for the Holy Spirit. God is not going to force on you something that you do not want. You must desire what He has to give. God will not violate your free will. You must ask the Lord in faith for the gift of the Holy Spirit (p. 276).

The Charismatic movement is not characteristic of the work of the Holy Spirit; as Sir Robert Anderson warned long ago:

In proportion as mind and heart are fixed upon the glorified Lord Jesus Christ, we may count on the Holy Spirit's enabling. But if we make the Spirit Himself the object of our aspirations and worship, some false spirit may counterfeit the true and take us for a prey.
A final word from Dr. Arno Gaebelein concerning the Holy Spirit:

What is it to "walk in the Spirit?" It is not self-occupation, nor even occupation with the Spirit. Walking according to the Spirit is occupation with the Lord Jesus Christ in glory. If the believer ever looks to the Lord Jesus, depends upon Him, draws all he needs from Him, if He is his All in all--then the believer walks according to the Spirit of Christ.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MJStanford

withchrist.org/MJS/smith.htm

70thWeek
June 26th, 2005, 04:31 PM
The author is free to express his own views, but I am very close to CC in my beliefs and agree with Smith's views on the charismatic aspect of the faith.

Resting In Him
June 26th, 2005, 05:33 PM
The author is free to express his own views, but I am very close to CC in my beliefs and agree with Smith's views on the charismatic aspect of the faith.

70thWeek, tell me, do you agree with the following statements by CS?:

"The purpose of this book is to help you get to know the Holy Spirit so that you may enjoy a full, rich relationship with Him.

I am praying that by God's grace and through this book the Lord will develop in you an insatiable hunger for and thirsting after the Spirit. He is the person of the Godhead to whom we relate most closely (pp. 7,8)."

That statement is totally wrong in that the Holy Spirit NEVER draws attention to himself but rather to Jesus Christ.

CountryBumpkin
June 26th, 2005, 05:43 PM
I do not agree with what Chuck Smith says in this book.
I know that many go to a Calvary Chapel church. Is this what they teach or are they all individual and separate in their teaching and don't necessarily follow what Chuck Smith believes? :confused

blitzkreig
June 26th, 2005, 06:28 PM
Miles always tells it like he sees it doesn't he? I don't know Calvary Chapel nor Smith apart from a few of his quite well written articles I have read.

I didn't know that he promoted the "charismatic". Interesting ...

4fish
June 26th, 2005, 06:54 PM
I have been associated with 2 Calvary Chapels. I can honestly say that I have never witnessed "tounges" in either church.

In fact, 1 pastor outright spoke against "tounges" as being a gift for today.

I've also visited charismatic churches - there is absolutely no comparison.

If this is the way MJS sees it, maybe he needs new glasses. :pound

Also,

I am praying that by God's grace and through this book the Lord will develop in you an insatiable hunger for and thirsting after the Spirit. He is the person of the Godhead to whom we relate most closely (pp. 7,8)."

That statement is totally wrong in that the Holy Spirit NEVER draws attention to himself but rather to Jesus Christ.

I don't see how that statement says that the HS is drawing attention to himself. :confused

onsolidrock
June 26th, 2005, 07:44 PM
Tongues is the only gift of God that edifies you personally and individually. All the other gifts serve to edify the church and to build up the body. But this one gift was given to build you up, to strengthen you.

This is not what the Bible says. As all of the gifts tongues were to edify the church. They were for the common good. Using tongues for individual edification is how the Corinthians were misusing tongues.


Speaking in tongues strengthens your walk, your relationships, and gives you the power to commune with God on a deep spiritual level (p. 180).

Speaking in tongues is a powerful, God-given tool. It brings an intimacy and communion and fellowship with God that can be achieved in no other way (p. 182).

Hogwash! This is probably the greatest deception that Satan has given the tongues speakers.

blitzkreig
June 26th, 2005, 08:05 PM
I have been associated with 2 Calvary Chapels. I can honestly say that I have never witnessed "tounges" in either church.I think the review was of Smith's book, not the entire CC organization ...

.

Resting In Him
June 26th, 2005, 08:10 PM
I don't see how that statement says that the HS is drawing attention to himself. :confused

Well, here is the rest of his statement which leaves no doubt as to who he is stating we should get to know:

"I am praying that by God's grace and through this book the Lord will develop in you an insatiable hunger for and thirsting after the Spirit. He is the person of the Godhead to whom we relate most closely (pp. 7,8)."

4fish
June 26th, 2005, 09:05 PM
Well, here is the rest of his statement which leaves no doubt as to who he is stating we should get to know:

"I am praying that by God's grace and through this book the Lord will develop in you an insatiable hunger for and thirsting after the Spirit. He is the person of the Godhead to whom we relate most closely (pp. 7,8)."

Nope. Sorry. It leaves doubt ....... I still don't see how you get that the HS is drawing attention to himself out of that statement.

And, what's wrong with getting to know the HS?

4fish
June 26th, 2005, 09:09 PM
I think the review was of Smith's book, not the entire CC organization ...

.

Yeah. I got that Blitz. But other posters were questioning if this was applicable to all CCs or to individual CCs.

Benja32one
June 26th, 2005, 09:22 PM
I have been associated with 2 Calvary Chapels. I can honestly say that I have never witnessed "tounges" in either church.

In fact, 1 pastor outright spoke against "tounges" as being a gift for today.

I've also visited charismatic churches - there is absolutely no comparison.

If this is the way MJS sees it, maybe he needs new glasses. :pound

Also,



I don't see how that statement says that the HS is drawing attention to himself. :confused

:faint
Did you read the post, fish? Maybe you need glasses, MJS doesn't 'cause he's in heaven now, I think.
:pound

Resting In Him
June 26th, 2005, 09:38 PM
Yes, MS is in heaven.

blitzkreig
June 26th, 2005, 09:41 PM
MJS doesn't 'cause he's in heaven now, I think.
Miles died in '99.

.

Benja32one
June 26th, 2005, 09:51 PM
Miles died in '99.

.
:wave
Christians don't die, they depart to be with Christ! Only their bodies die.
:clap

4fish
June 26th, 2005, 10:36 PM
:faint
Did you read the post, fish? Maybe you need glasses, MJS doesn't 'cause he's in heaven now, I think.
:pound

I see no need for another personal attack.

That's a :nono

Benja32one
June 26th, 2005, 10:43 PM
I see no need for another personal attack.

That's a :nono

:lol
What's the diff in you saying he needs glasses and me saying you need 'em?
If the admins think this is a personal attack, I will apologize. I think it is silly.
:nod

4fish
June 26th, 2005, 10:57 PM
:lol
What's the diff in you saying he needs glasses and me saying you need 'em?
If the admins think this is a personal attack, I will apologize. I think it is silly.
:nod

So you're saying if you HAVE to apologize, it will not be sincere? Unfortunately, that's just what I expect of you, Ben.

Resting In Him
June 27th, 2005, 12:09 AM
Is being antagonistic against the rules? :(:

Edited to add:

Ben I just want to say a special thank you for all the wonderful, insightful and good teaching articles you have posted for us. I've really appreciated it and I know others have too. :thumb

Benja32one
June 27th, 2005, 06:27 AM
So you're saying if you HAVE to apologize, it will not be sincere? Unfortunately, that's just what I expect of you, Ben.
:wave
What I am saying is your remark about glasses being needed by Standford
was an attempt at wit. So my saying you need 'em is also an attempt at wit. If I apologize to another believer it is sincere, fish.
:nod

onsolidrock
June 27th, 2005, 08:55 AM
I have been associated with 2 Calvary Chapels. I can honestly say that I have never witnessed "tounges" in either church.

Calvary Chapels put their emphasis on studying the Bible verse by verse, and don't put the emphasis on speaking in tongues. That's why you won't find it as often. Some Calvary Chapels relegate speaking in tongues to a mid-week service. Some don't practice it at all.

70thWeek
June 27th, 2005, 08:56 AM
70thWeek, tell me, do you agree with the following statements by CS?:

"The purpose of this book is to help you get to know the Holy Spirit so that you may enjoy a full, rich relationship with Him.

I am praying that by God's grace and through this book the Lord will develop in you an insatiable hunger for and thirsting after the Spirit. He is the person of the Godhead to whom we relate most closely (pp. 7,8)."

That statement is totally wrong in that the Holy Spirit NEVER draws attention to himself but rather to Jesus Christ.

As a full and equal member of the Trinity, there is nothing wrong with welcoming the presence of the Holy Spirit. Frankly, the Holy Spirit is probably the least known member of the Trinity. And, to ease your fears, even in CCs I see a subliminal modalism being adopted, both in word and song. Sometimes we need reminders.

70thWeek
June 27th, 2005, 09:02 AM
This is not what the Bible says. As all of the gifts tongues were to edify the church. They were for the common good. Using tongues for individual edification is how the Corinthians were misusing tongues.




Hogwash! This is probably the greatest deception that Satan has given the tongues speakers.

I hardly think that I have been deceived by Satan.

onsolidrock
June 27th, 2005, 09:18 AM
I hardly think that I have been deceived by Satan.

The Bible is very clear that not everyone can NOT speak in tongues. To claim that those speaking in tongues recieve more power or have a closer walk with God as a result of speaking in tongues than those who do not recieve the gift has to be a deception. Of course you would not think that or believe that if you have that type of experience. Most people would say that the experience is so powerful that it just has to come from God. The problem with that is that it puts the experience as more important than the Word of God. It should be the other way around.


1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
1Co 12:30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

If everyone can speak or pray in tongues then everyone is an Apostle, a Prophet, a Teacher, a Worker of Miracles,and a Healer.

Benja32one
June 27th, 2005, 09:32 AM
The Bible is very clear that not everyone can NOT speak in tongues. To claim that those speaking in tongues recieve more power or have a closer walk with God as a result of speaking in tongues than those who do not recieve the gift has to be a deception. Of course you would not think that or believe that if you have that type of experience. Most people would say that the experience is so powerful that it just has to come from God. The problem with that is that it puts the experience as more important than the Word of God. It should be the other way around.


1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
1Co 12:30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

If everyone can speak or pray in tongues then everyone is an Apostle, a Prophet, a Teacher, a Worker of Miracles,and a Healer.


:thumb :nod

70thWeek
June 27th, 2005, 09:36 AM
I don't use it as some sort of spiritual litmus test, but I must admit that I am grateful for the gift of tongues. It does draw me closer to God.

onsolidrock
June 27th, 2005, 11:14 AM
If it draws you closer to God, why isn't it available to everyone?

70thWeek
June 27th, 2005, 03:35 PM
I think that it can be available to everyone. However, you are creating a false bifurcation here. Certainly martydom isn't available to everyone. One could say that singleness is available, but not all participate. Frankly, there are many means of grace. Choose those that you like.

Benja32one
June 27th, 2005, 03:44 PM
I think that it can be available to everyone. However, you are creating a false bifurcation here. Certainly martydom isn't available to everyone. One could say that singleness is available, but not all participate. Frankly, there are many means of grace. Choose those that you like.

:confused
There is only one 'means of grace', if you accept what the Bible says about it. The (term is one of a misleading nature), that is through the Word of God. Romans 10.17 The only means is the Holy Spirit using the witness and the Word of God as the instrumentality to bring about the new birth. It doesn't stop there.........

John 16.......
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you
into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but what things
soever he shall hear, these shall he speak: and he shall declare unto
you the things that are to come.
14 He shall glorify me: for he shall take of mine, and shall declare it
unto you.
15 All things whatsoever the Father hath are mine: therefore said I,
that he taketh of mine, and shall declare it unto you.

Marriage partners partake of the 'grace of life', I know of no other grace that can be bestowed through any sacrament, it is the Holy Spirit who enables a christian to live in fellowship with the Lord, nothing else.

:nod

70thWeek
June 27th, 2005, 03:45 PM
A means of grace is any way of coming into contact with God, including prayer, fasting, communion, etc.

Benja32one
June 28th, 2005, 03:33 PM
A means of grace is any way of coming into contact with God, including prayer, fasting, communion, etc.

:wave
The ORIGINAL QUESTION was Chuck Smith's Book. What do you think of MJS's
review?
:confused

ChopinFan
June 28th, 2005, 03:46 PM
:wave
The ORIGINAL QUESTION was Chuck Smith's Book. What do you think of MJS's
review?
:confused

I think it's the same tripe I've heard a thousand times before from cessational "theologians"

Of course that's just my humble opinion..

:laugh

Benja32one
June 28th, 2005, 04:39 PM
I think it's the same tripe I've heard a thousand times before from cessational "theologians"

Of course that's just my humble opinion..

:laugh

:wave
Do you really play?...Then back to your keyboard!
:pound

onsolidrock
June 28th, 2005, 09:50 PM
I think it's the same tripe I've heard a thousand times before from cessational "theologians"

Of course that's just my humble opinion..

:laugh

If the cessationist view is tripe why not post a Scriptural response that makes sense. I haven't seen one yet.

Benja32one
June 29th, 2005, 01:25 PM
If the cessationist view is tripe why not post a Scriptural response that makes sense. I haven't seen one yet.
:thumb
DITTO here.
:nod

ChopinFan
June 29th, 2005, 02:57 PM
The burden of proof is on those who say God doesn't do "this or that" anymore.

But just out of curiosity- do you still see through a glass darkly, or do you have perfect knowledge?

I Corinthians 13:12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. (NASB)

IMHO it is a myopic view that states the gifts of the Spirit are strictly for evangelism or inspiration of scripture. There is no indication that those believers in Corinth ever penned a word of the canon (I challenge you to prove otherwise) so what purpose would a cessation of those gifts serve? There also was no need to use tongues simply to "preach the gospel" on the day of Pentecost because most of the folks assembled there would have spoken Koine Greek. (remember Peter didn't need an interpreter when he preached and 3,000 people got saved) In addition, it is ridiculous to say that tongues (I just singled out tongues because that seems to be the hobby horse around here) are only "for a sign." That is but one example of the multi-faceted use of tongues. Let me illustrate:

I Corinthians 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries. (NASB)

This clearly shows that this use of tongues was not "for a sign"-nor for inspiration of the canon- as a matter of fact it says that it isn't even intended for the ears of man...

I Corinthians 14:4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church. (NASB)

Again we see that this use of tongues has nothing to do with anyone else other than the one praying (and the One he/she is praying to of course)

I Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. (NASB)

Again we see that this has nothing to do with furtherance of the canon or evangelism to those around-but personal prayer.

Now, see the distinction that Paul makes:

I Corinthians 14:18 I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; (NASB)

**side not here...I think it's funny that people always try to paint Paul as being opposed to tongues and he was the biggest "tongue-speaker" that ever lived- LOL ****

14:19 however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue. (NASB)

Now-Paul switches gears and shows another aspect of tongues- this is one which includes those around him (remember previously that he said those who pray in tongues are not "speaking unto men, but God" ).

I Corinthians 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; 28 but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God. (NASB)

Benja32one
June 29th, 2005, 05:00 PM
The burden of proof is on those who say God doesn't do "this or that" anymore.

But just out of curiosity- do you still see through a glass darkly, or do you have perfect knowledge?

I Corinthians 13:12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. (NASB)

IMHO it is a myopic view that states the gifts of the Spirit are strictly for evangelism or inspiration of scripture. There is no indication that those believers in Corinth ever penned a word of the canon (I challenge you to prove otherwise) so what purpose would a cessation of those gifts serve? There also was no need to use tongues simply to "preach the gospel" on the day of Pentecost because most of the folks assembled there would have spoken Koine Greek. (remember Peter didn't need an interpreter when he preached and 3,000 people got saved) In addition, it is ridiculous to say that tongues (I just singled out tongues because that seems to be the hobby horse around here) are only "for a sign." That is but one example of the multi-faceted use of tongues. Let me illustrate:

I Corinthians 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries. (NASB)

This clearly shows that this use of tongues was not "for a sign"-nor for inspiration of the canon- as a matter of fact it says that it isn't even intended for the ears of man...

I Corinthians 14:4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church. (NASB)

Again we see that this use of tongues has nothing to do with anyone else other than the one praying (and the One he/she is praying to of course)

I Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. (NASB)

Again we see that this has nothing to do with furtherance of the canon or evangelism to those around-but personal prayer.

Now, see the distinction that Paul makes:

I Corinthians 14:18 I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; (NASB)

**side not here...I think it's funny that people always try to paint Paul as being opposed to tongues and he was the biggest "tongue-speaker" that ever lived- LOL ****

14:19 however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue. (NASB)

Now-Paul switches gears and shows another aspect of tongues- this is one which includes those around him (remember previously that he said those who pray in tongues are not "speaking unto men, but God" ).

I Corinthians 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; 28 but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God. (NASB)

:doh
I have been in meetings where "tongues" were used, and it always was gobbledegook. I speak four languages and recognized none of them in evidence in these meetings among pentecostals. Tongues were for communication of the gospel, not personal 'edification'. As to gifts being the interim method before scriptures were authenticated, this is a fact, historically, outside the scriptures themselves. If you want to talk in tongues, no one will stop you, but those I have observed didn't seem to be in their right minds while 'under the influence of the 'spirit'. If they were, it was not the Spirit of God, and it was not decently or in order. It was selfish
and in my opinion, 'spiritual grandstanding' in the church. I have been around pentecostals in my family, and most of them are still babes in the study of God's Word, some after years in the WOF movement.
:doh :(:

ChopinFan
June 29th, 2005, 05:16 PM
:doh
I have been in meetings where "tongues" were used, and it always was gobbledegook. I speak four languages and recognized none of them in evidence in these meetings among pentecostals. Tongues were for communication of the gospel, not personal 'edification'. As to gifts being the interim method before scriptures were authenticated, this is a fact, historically, outside the scriptures themselves. If you want to talk in tongues, no one will stop you, but those I have observed didn't seem to be in their right minds while 'under the influence of the 'spirit'. If they were, it was not the Spirit of God, and it was not decently or in order. It was selfish
and in my opinion, 'spiritual grandstanding' in the church. I have been around pentecostals in my family, and most of them are still babes in the study of God's Word, some after years in the WOF movement.
:doh :(:

And there you have it- instead of letting scripture be the "trump card" we rely on our personal experiences (and outside sources you cite as irrefutable evidence as I underlined above). I just showed you (scripturally) that tongues were for edification and not only for communication of the gospel. Instead you result to generalizations and inflammatory remarks (highlighted in your post above).

I'll see ya around
:wave

Benja32one
June 29th, 2005, 06:28 PM
And there you have it- instead of letting scripture be the "trump card" we rely on our personal experiences (and outside sources you cite as irrefutable evidence as I underlined above). I just showed you (scripturally) that tongues were for edification and not only for communication of the gospel. Instead you result to generalizations and inflammatory remarks (highlighted in your post above).

I'll see ya around
:wave

Oh, I figure you'll be back.....
Since you believe all you say is true, where were the tongues before Oral Roberts, Dad Hagin and those other pentecostals who rose up in protestantism in the 1950's?
:spit

onsolidrock
June 29th, 2005, 08:08 PM
The burden of proof is on those who say God doesn't do "this or that" anymore.

The burden of proof is on those who claim that the tongues today are the same as tongues in the early church, when all of the evidence says otherwise.

But just out of curiosity- do you still see through a glass darkly, or do you have perfect knowledge?

I Corinthians 13:12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. (NASB)

These are simple contrasts. The mirrors in Paul's day were polished metal. The image was quite dim compared to today's mirrors. The contrast is between the dim image in the metal mirror compared to seeing someone face to face. Just like the contrast between having only a part of the N.t. compared to having all of it.

IMHO it is a myopic view that states the gifts of the Spirit are strictly for evangelism or inspiration of scripture. There is no indication that those believers in Corinth ever penned a word of the canon (I challenge you to prove otherwise) so what purpose would a cessation of those gifts serve?

The purpose of the gifts was not to write Canon. They were to provide temporary guidance to the churches until the canon was finished. After the canon of the N.T. was finished then there was no more need of the sign gifts.

There also was no need to use tongues simply to "preach the gospel" on the day of Pentecost because most of the folks assembled there would have spoken Koine Greek.

Tongues on the Day of Pentecost along with the tongues of fire and the sound of a roaring wind were signs of the coming of the Holy Spirit as promised to the Disciples by Jesus.

I Corinthians 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries. (NASB)

This clearly shows that this use of tongues was not "for a sign"-nor for inspiration of the canon- as a matter of fact it says that it isn't even intended for the ears of man...

This was the Corinthians speaking in tongues without interpretation. The wrong way to do it. That was the mistake that they were making. The word mysteries is the same word used in 1 Cor 2;7. It means things which were previously not revealed.

One who speaks in tongues without interpretation speaks only to God because only God understands him.

I Corinthians 14:4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church. (NASB)

One who speaks in tongues without interpretation edifies only himself. The purpose of tongues was to edify the church. That is why it should be interpreted,. and why Paul said that if there was no interpretation they were to remain silent.

I Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. (NASB)

To pray in tongues without interpretation bears no fruit. So what good is it?

1Co 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

It is the interpretation that provides the understanding. Paul is saying that he will speak in tongues with interpretation and by implication he is saying that he will not speak in tongues without interpretation.


Now, see the distinction that Paul makes:

I Corinthians 14:18 I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; (NASB)

**side not here...I think it's funny that people always try to paint Paul as being opposed to tongues and he was the biggest "tongue-speaker" that ever lived- LOL ****

Remember that Paul was an Apostle and had the special gift of tongues.
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

Paul was given the ability to preach the gospel message in languages that he did not know.

14:19 however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue. (NASB)

Paul would rather speak five words with interpretation than ten thousand words without interpretation. The ten thousand words without interpretation can't have much value.

Now-Paul switches gears and shows another aspect of tongues- this is one which includes those around him (remember previously that he said those who pray in tongues are not "speaking unto men, but God" ).

I Corinthians 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; 28 but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God. (NASB)

This shows the way that it should be done. One at a time with an interpreter, otherwise they are not to speak out loud in church, whether speaking, singing, or praying.

The purpose of tongues was for the common good of the church, to edify them. It was not intended for the individual.

onsolidrock
June 29th, 2005, 08:12 PM
Oh, I figure you'll be back.....
Since you believe all you say is true, where were the tongues before Oral Roberts, Dad Hagin and those other pentecostals who rose up in protestantism in the 1950's?
:spit

Where were tongues before 1900? There is no mention of them in church history for centuries. Surely God would not have allowed a spiritual gift to be absent for so long especially when all of the gifts that were available were necessary for the operation of the body.

pilgrimian
June 29th, 2005, 09:48 PM
Miles always tells it like he sees it doesn't he? I don't know Calvary Chapel nor Smith apart from a few of his quite well written articles I have read.

I didn't know that he promoted the "charismatic". Interesting ...

Yes, I'm sure I'll hear part of the Wednesday evening service on my way home tonight from work. If there is one thing Chuck doesn't do too well...it's sing (and they usually have his microphone on during the time of singing). Maybe I'll practice my Hebrew....