It Is NOT Normal To Sin, But...............?

This is a comment regarding the various threads about the fact that it is NOT normal to sin. No true Christian in his or her right mind can say or would say it is.A Simple Gospel by Ernest O'NeillEven a baby Christian has the power that is stated clearly in 1 John 3:9, if you'd look at it. Even a little one who has just begun to know his position with Jesus or her position with Jesus on the cross is in the same situation as that described in 1 John 3:9, "No one born of God commits sin." In other words, when Paul says, "I do what I do not want," he's saying, I'm not a Christian, because a Christian never does what he doesn't want to do, because that's the word, it's poieo, those of you who know Greek, and it's p-o-i-e-o in English letters. That's the word used in 1 John 3:9. It means "to do," it becomes poet, you know, in English, poetry, you make something, you do something. Poieo is "to do." That's what that verse says. No one born of God does sin. That is, even a little child Christian, even a little one who has just begun to know Jesus has enough power of Jesus' Spirit in his life to hold down what is wrong. At least he can rise to the level of the noble pagans, that's it. That's what that verse says.This is a real eye opener to me. I always believed that I was saved on 14 December 1983. Maybe I wasn’t, for I didn’t get the power of Jesus’ Spirit to stop the rage within me, until I was delivered from the spirit of rage. I am now even more grateful that I didn’t stay in the PAOC church where they assured me that night that I was saved, because they don’t accept the possibility that a Christian can have had that kind of evil influence in his/her life. I wonder what happened three months later, when I was told that I was baptized in the Holy Spirit and received the gift of tongues? I wasn’t delivered of the spirit of rage until three years later. It is strange though, because I got myself a Bible within days after that mighty day in December and started to tell people around me that they needed Jesus. I remember telling my colleagues at work about Jesus and being told that they really didn’t care, and they thought I had flipped my lid, because I wouldn’t go to bars and strip clubs anymore.Or is this what Ernest O’Neil is referring to when he makes the following statement:Loved ones, you have enough of Jesus' Spirit in you to obey outwardly all that he says is right. Now I agree with you, we have to deal later with what, can you be delivered from inward sins, from feeling anger, from the inclination to sin. The truth is you can, but at least the first step in Christianity is not believing that Jesus died instead of you, because the Bible doesn't say that anywhere. The Bible says Jesus died for you. But it means so that you could die with him, to yourself and to all the powers within you that make you do what you don't want to do. If you're willing to identify yourself with Jesus, he through his Spirit can give you enough power and enough grace to live like him.Or, is it possible that there is even more, but that we have decided to diminish that with denominational doctrines, which prevent a good number of real seeking Christians ever experiencing the “being saved FROM sin?”All of us will know the words that the angel spoke to Joseph telling him about the coming birth of His son, "She will bear a son," the angel said, Mary, Mary will bear a son, "and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."I praise and thank God that I am saved FROM my sin. Sadly, my very good friend who went forward five different times to “receive saving from his sins,” and talked to pastors about his struggles, hang himself before he ever found freedom. I was a baby Christian and didn’t know enough to be a real Christian friend to him; neither did the “mature” Christians he talked to.A good friend of my wife also struggled. She had “accepted” the Lord, she participated in Bible studies, wanted to know more about her Savior, yet the voices in her head remained. They told her to burn herself and she would by holding burning candles under her arms. She never found freedom. She can’t have had the “baby Christian power” to withstand the “desire to sin” she had to burn herself. so Lord we would come to you now, and Holy Spirit ask you, is there any way in which we are not entering into Jesus' deathI still wonder why Christians who are reconciled to the Father ask the Holy Spirit for anything, even though we are not told to do this by Jesus or by any of the apostles.Dear brothers and sisters at SI. I didn’t write this to be smart, I wrote this because I meet too many people who want to be real Christians, and they don’t seem to be able to get there. Is it possible that we, as the Church, drop the ball? I really believe this is the case.

As far as I can remember, the New Testament always puts the blame for the bad behaviour on the spirit and never places responsibility on the PERSON with the spirit, for having the spirit.I once heard this: spirits need to be cast out, but sin needs God's forgiveness. We do not ask forgiveness for spirits, or try to cast out sin. Jesus died for our sins, not for the evil spirits. Yet how do spirits get into people. Is it not through sinful footholds in people's lives? There has to be a condition in a person that makes them open to the entry of a spirit. I would be interested in knowing more about this "spirit of rage" that you share about, Hans. How did it get there? Anger doesn't just "happen to someone". I meet too many people who want to be real Christians, and they don’t seem to be able to get there. I can relate to this problem. The reason I experienced that nagging sense of not being able to get there was because I didn't understand what it meant to be a real Christian. I had no idea of what it meant to let Christ live through us, by the power of his Spirit. Of course we can't get there (the ideal Christian) - esp not when we're still relying on our own strength. It took me years to see that. It took God's miraculous involvemnet in my life to free me from my faulty mindsets (my sin). A physical birth is a process that includes a long process of hidden growth and developement. I have come to believe that similarily our spiritual birth includes a long hidden process of inner development. The Spirit blows where we can't see. So why does the church keep trying to frame God's Spirit into a small box. We end up with a lot of things that don't fit in, and then we have to make more boxes to fit that into. That includes the issues surrounding evil spirits and sin. (The way I see it, anyway)Diane

I would just like to present some food for thought on this whole realm of deliverance from spirits. I think we may give the devil far too much credit for some things and taken to extremes (I'm not saying those here are) everything can be seen to be the result of demons. But that's not what Galatians 5 says. Verse 19 says "the works of the flesh are these..." and it goes on to list a whole bunch of things, wrath and hatred among them. Now we can't cast out the flesh can we? No. So it seems a little ridiculous to reduce everything to that level. Also, I believe there is a danger of taking the focus off of our true responsibility for sin and placing it on demons. That's not where God places the responsibility. I don't fear demon invasion, I fear that I will be disobedient and sinful. My responsibility is to look at my own life and be obedient to God.In Christ,Ron

LetUsPray wrote:This is a comment regarding the various threads about the fact that it is NOT normal to sin. No true Christian in his or her right mind can say or would say it is.A Simple Gospel by Ernest O'NeillEven a baby Christian has the power that is stated clearly in 1 John 3:9, if you'd look at it. Even a little one who has just begun to know his position with Jesus or her position with Jesus on the cross is in the same situation as that described in 1 John 3:9, "No one born of God commits sin." In other words, when Paul says, "I do what I do not want," he's saying, I'm not a Christian, because a Christian never does what he doesn't want to do, because that's the word, it's poieo, those of you who know Greek, and it's p-o-i-e-o in English letters. That's the word used in 1 John 3:9. It means "to do," it becomes poet, you know, in English, poetry, you make something, you do something. Poieo is "to do." That's what that verse says. No one born of God does sin. That is, even a little child Christian, even a little one who has just begun to know Jesus has enough power of Jesus' Spirit in his life to hold down what is wrong. At least he can rise to the level of the noble pagans, that's it. That's what that verse says.This is a real eye opener to me. I always believed that I was saved on 14 December 1983. Maybe I wasn’t, for I didn’t get the power of Jesus’ Spirit to stop the rage within me, until I was delivered from the spirit of rage. I am now even more grateful that I didn’t stay in the PAOC church where they assured me that night that I was saved, because they don’t accept the possibility that a Christian can have had that kind of evil influence in his/her life. I wonder what happened three months later, when I was told that I was baptized in the Holy Spirit and received the gift of tongues? I wasn’t delivered of the spirit of rage until three years later. It is strange though, because I got myself a Bible within days after that mighty day in December and started to tell people around me that they needed Jesus. I remember telling my colleagues at work about Jesus and being told that they really didn’t care, and they thought I had flipped my lid, because I wouldn’t go to bars and strip clubs anymore.Or is this what Ernest O’Neil is referring to when he makes the following statement:Loved ones, you have enough of Jesus' Spirit in you to obey outwardly all that he says is right. Now I agree with you, we have to deal later with what, can you be delivered from inward sins, from feeling anger, from the inclination to sin. The truth is you can, but at least the first step in Christianity is not believing that Jesus died instead of you, because the Bible doesn't say that anywhere. The Bible says Jesus died for you. But it means so that you could die with him, to yourself and to all the powers within you that make you do what you don't want to do. If you're willing to identify yourself with Jesus, he through his Spirit can give you enough power and enough grace to live like him.Or, is it possible that there is even more, but that we have decided to diminish that with denominational doctrines, which prevent a good number of real seeking Christians ever experiencing the “being saved FROM sin?”All of us will know the words that the angel spoke to Joseph telling him about the coming birth of His son, "She will bear a son," the angel said, Mary, Mary will bear a son, "and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."I praise and thank God that I am saved FROM my sin. Sadly, my very good friend who went forward five different times to “receive saving from his sins,” and talked to pastors about his struggles, hang himself before he ever found freedom. I was a baby Christian and didn’t know enough to be a real Christian friend to him; neither did the “mature” Christians he talked to.A good friend of my wife also struggled. She had “accepted” the Lord, she participated in Bible studies, wanted to know more about her Savior, yet the voices in her head remained. They told her to burn herself and she would by holding burning candles under her arms. She never found freedom. She can’t have had the “baby Christian power” to withstand the “desire to sin” she had to burn herself. so Lord we would come to you now, and Holy Spirit ask you, is there any way in which we are not entering into Jesus' deathI still wonder why Christians who are reconciled to the Father ask the Holy Spirit for anything, even though we are not told to do this by Jesus or by any of the apostles.Dear brothers and sisters at SI. I didn’t write this to be smart, I wrote this because I meet too many people who want to be real Christians, and they don’t seem to be able to get there. Is it possible that we, as the Church, drop the ball? I really believe this is the case.

Freecd, thank you for that reference.Dorcas, thank you for your sharing and insight. I write this from my experience in my walk with the Lord, Who I give all the glory for all that He has done in my life. Roadsign, wicked spirits gain access to people and places because of sin. The less a person is able to defend her/himself, the easier the access becomes. That’s why young sexual abuse victims have the greatest struggles to find freedom. Another area has to with curses that parents put on their children by continuously putting them down and telling them that they will never amount to anything, while underscoring this with inordinate amounts of punishment, being physical or mental. They also come in all forms; there are many religious spirits operating in the Body of Christ, because of disobedience in the worship of God. This doesn’t only apply to certain denominations who worship created beings besides God, but also as a result of disobedience in the operation of spiritual gifts.Ezekiel said, "God is going to take away your heart of stone and He is going to give you a new heart, a soft heart and He is going to put a new spirit within you. He is going to take away from you this evil spirit." That is the whole purpose of the new covenant of Christ………….There are thousands of us that will testify to the fact that years after we were born of God we became aware of a need for a deeper work in our hearts and we began to seek it. (The Holy Spirit brings a Clean Heart, by Ernest O’Neill)This is exactly where it is at. When we first taste that initial joy that the Lord puts in our heart at our born-again experience, we soon realize that there is more; that there HAS to be MORE. Every Christian should experience the abundant life that Christ promises for us (John 10:10), and the victory because He came that He might destroy the works of the devil. And, this is also where many Christians fall flat on their face. Many don’t experience the abundant life. They don’t learn to take every thought captive in obedience to Christ, or how to love as Christ loved the Church and laid His life down for Her. This is NOT what I am trying to communicate in this thread. I am talking about unforgiveness and formed judgments by young defenseless children. The survivors are a small minority that is largely ignored by the Church. They struggle and often never find the freedom in Christ.Ernest O’Neill states above, “He is going to take away from you this evil spirit,” This is where the experience I have gone through proves differently, and, the experiences of people who were abused or experienced severe trauma at a young age, I had the privilege to minister to in the Name of Jesus. I realize that this may be a paradigm shift for some of you, but I ask you in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ to bear with me. In my case, which duplicates many others I have met since then, the evil spirit was not taken away by God. I certainly sought the Lord, and only because of that was I led to people who in the Name of Jesus Christ walked with me. Now, I too can declare that Jesus saved ME FROM MY sin. James 5:16, Confess your faults [trespass, offense, sin] one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.Matthew 1833 Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee?34 And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.35 So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.Jesus exhorts us on several occasions to forgive someone’s trespasses, so our heavenly Father will forgive us likewise. If we don’t, we will be handed over to the tormentors. This is where the paradigm shift comes in. Abuse victims are tormented, the only way to stop the torment is to lead them in prayers of forgiveness, i.e., to forgive the perpetrators. For whatever reason, even a little three year old girl abused by her father or grandfather, has to forgive, because she is NOT automatically set free when she “confesses Jesus as her Lord.” In my case, the abuse didn’t come to the surface until four years after I had become a Christian. As I wrote in another post, it happened in a mandatory counseling session with other Christians ministering to me. Only then, could I forgive and was the “legal” stronghold of the spirit of hate broken and did it have to leave in the Name of Jesus.The other thing that has to be done is breaking judgments. The Bible is very clear that if we judge, we will be judged. Again, this applies to little children too. Little children form judgments when they are hurt. When they grow older, the judgments become harder and harder. If God by His Spirit reveals the unforgiveness and judgments, it is possible that one can under the guidance of His Spirit be set free. However, I have never met an abuse victim who shared a testimony like that with me. If there is anyone on this Forum who found freedom after serious abuse or severe trauma as a child without the ministry and support of others, and is willing to share, it would be greatly appreciated and it may help others who read this, but are to ashamed to come forwardSo the first thing is believe that the Holy Spirit is a person in your life and ask Him, "Holy Spirit, will you begin to counsel me about this and will You begin to take me down to the depths of my inner self so that I, at last know myself." (The Holy Spirit brings a Clean Heart, by Ernest O’Neill)I have to be very honest, the witness in my spirit doesn’t agree with the above statement. I will post another thread and address this, since most of us on this Forum agree that OBEDIENCE to God is paramount in living a victorious Christian life. I don’t focus on the devil and certainly don’t give him any credit. However, we make a serious mistake when we don’t attempt to understand his schemes or wiles. Christ came so as to destroy the works of the devil. The only way we will ever have complete victory is when we submit to all Scripture, even in the area of prayer.

Roadsign and Dorcas and others,I am sorry Diane, I didn’t answer your question clearly and this may also address Dorcas’ questions:Yet how do spirits get into people. Is it not through sinful footholds in people's lives? There has to be a condition in a person that makes them open to the entry of a spirit. I would be interested in knowing more about this "spirit of rage" that you share about, Hans. How did it get there? Anger doesn't just "happen to someone".Or all three? Are there more?This is what I wrote in a post on What Kind of Counsel:I was saved in a charismatic church. A few months later, after praying with a pastor received the gift of tongues. Strangely enough some of the difficulties I struggled with prior to my conversion didn’t go away. Sure, I was on cloud nine for several weeks, but I came crashing down when my rage manifested itself again and I experienced very strange things, even physical attacks by unseen beings. I was scared as I had never been before. To make a long story short, through time I was delivered of three demons. The last one was the most difficult, because its root was hidden in something that I had no recollection of. It came to the surface when I attended a compulsory counseling session as part of a course. During that session something started actually to speak through me and at one point I saw myself when I was sexually molested as a small child. This part I did not explain: When the spirit of rage manifested itself by yelling: I hate you; I had a flashback and saw myself in the situation where I was totally powerless in the presence of two women. I couldn’t stop them, I couldn’t change anything and I felt the exact emotions I believe I had at the moment of the incident. I was completely humiliated and powerless and I became extremely angry. I cried and just wanted to kill them. I couldn’t, there was nothing I could do. I was totally helpless and out of control. I believe that spirits enter small children when they are severely traumatized. I have never met abuse survivors that where delivered when they became Christians. I will also explain the first deliverance. Within a week or so after I was “saved,” I became afraid. It was not a normal fear, but a paralyzing fear. I wanted to pray, but I couldn’t close my eyes, I was so scared. That night I woke up to find myself on my stomach with something that felt like hands – quite a number of them – pushing me down on the bed and my face in my pillow as if they were trying to choke me. I cried out to God for help and the hands disappeared. A dear elderly lady of the little prayer group I had joined explained that I had what she called “satanic attacks.” I learned about the name of Jesus and through some dreams – which I believe where led by the Lord – was shown the mighty power of the Name of Jesus. When fear would come, I would command it to leave in Jesus’ Name and it always did. A church from New York City came to Ottawa, where I lived at the time, to give a deliverance seminar. I attended their first meeting and they taught about what they termed “renouncement, confession, and prayers for forgiveness.” They then observed if there were people who would “manifest.” It didn’t take long and I did exactly that. I started to feel oppressed and started to cry. Quite uncontrollably I might add. A group of workers from the church gathered around me and just started calling names of what I found pretty sick things. Out of the blue one of them said “not meeting the expectations of the father.” At that moment everything inside of me recoiled and I wanted to vomit. They commanded this spirit of rejection to leave me. It took what seemed quite a while, but all of a sudden I felt something like sharp nails on the inside of my shoulder blades. It almost seemed like something was trying to hang on for dear life, but was forced up to my throat. All of a sudden it left.My father, for as long as I can remember, always put me down, hit me when my siblings fought (I was the eldest of four children), and continuously reminded me even till I was married and had moved to Canada, that I would never really amount to anything. The worst time was when I was nine years old and got a sinus infection. My mother was always sick or on her way to be sick, so when this happened she had to go for a rest at relatives. I was left alone at home, with bad headaches and regular severe nosebleeds. My father would leave the house at 6 or 6:30am and would usually not come home from work until 7 or 8 o’clock at night. My siblings were also staying at relatives of friends homes. This lasted 6 weeks. Because of the length of the illness I fell way behind in school and did poorly. At one point in grade 6, my father had me tested by an “expert,” who declared that I was low to average intelligence and I should become a carpenter. I did go to high school, but not the “higher” kind that my second brother went to. He was my example. He would succeed in life for he was much smarter than me. My father basically cursed me for most of my life at home, which finally ended when I went to sea at the age of 20. I was quite insecure and fearful; because already when I was four years old my mother would put a little purse around my neck and send me to the grocer to pay the month’s grocery bill. I had a little two wheeler and had to drive for half an hour to and half an hour back along a narrow road with canals on both side. This isn’t what scared me. It was only 3 years after the war and my mother from as young as I can remember always pointed out that we were in debt and that if I would lose the money, we wouldn’t eat for the next month and it would be my fault. When I was seven she showed me for the first time the budget notes my father kept and which showed that we were in debt by twelve thousand guilders. For a seven year old in 1951, that was like a million dollars, and I worried about it.I can give you quite a bit more, but I believe that these conditions in the life of a child open him or her up for the entry of demons. Just in case it wasn’t clear, the marriage of my father and mother was not very good. Also at quite a young age did I learn details that no young person ever should know about the intimate sexual problems of his parents. I think that if one talks about a dysfunctional home, mine would qualify.

I have a question. Is there any scriptural basis for regarding the behaviour provoked by an evil spirit as 'sin'... by which I mean, sin over which we have control (after new birth/baptism in the Spirit) and can choose not to do according to the fruit of the Spirit temperance?As far as I can remember, the New Testament always puts the blame for the bad behaviour on the spirit and never places responsibility on the PERSON with the spirit, for having the spirit.There is more than one way of understanding this question and I want to make sure I understand what we are talking about.Does the NT ever hold a 'spirit' responsible for 'rage'? Does the NT ever speak of a 'spirit of rage'? A man or woman who submits to 'rage' will certainly become its slave but does that mean he must be 'delivered' before he can repent of his sin? I am always unsettled when I hear people who hold someone else responsible for their own sin. Some blame their parents, or their childhood, or spirits but there is no deliverance from sin until a man speaking to God says 'I have sinned against thee'.I'm not sure either whether O'Neil is referring to a spirit which is an 'entity' or a spirit which is a 'disposition'. Perhaps the original poster can tell me? I can see no Biblical evidence for the idea that a regenerate person can be indwelt by an evil entity while at the same time being indwelt by the Spirit of God. I just can't do the math! Where would the evil entity locate in someone who was 'filled' with the Holy Spirit?

Dear Ron,I'm not sure either whether O'Neil is referring to a spirit which is an 'entity' or a spirit which is a 'disposition'. Perhaps the original poster can tell me? I can see no Biblical evidence for the idea that a regenerate person can be indwelt by an evil entity while at the same time being indwelt by the Spirit of God. I just can't do the math! Where would the evil entity locate in someone who was 'filled' with the Holy Spirit?You put it very well when you say “I just can’t do the math!” It may be a bit more involved than that, I think. It is not a matter of math; it is a matter of walking out one’s salvation by the continuing forming of Christ in you.We have to put our denominational doctrines on God’s altar and start reading His Word again under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and not based on what others have taught us. What does it mean when we are born-again? What does it mean when we are baptized in the Holy Spirit? Jesus told us that being born again meant that we were also born of the Spirit. He also said that if we believed – which means, commit ourselves unto – we would have the ability to see – understand – the Kingdom of Heaven and we would qualify to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. He didn’t say that we were now fully filled with the Holy Spirit. Jesus was fully filled with the Holy Spirit and He saw what was IN man. Most Christians I know, who by denominational definition are “filled” with the Spirit, certainly don’t see what is IN man. Most don’t even admit to what is within themselves, although they are quite able to point out the problems others have.Isn’t it for this reason that Paul asks the Father: “That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: The eyes of your understanding being enlightened;” (Eph.1:17,18), AND,…”That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God” (Eph.3:16-19).Why did Paul write this: My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you (Gal.4:19)? Why didn’t he just baptize them in the Spirit? Wouldn’t that have been a lot quicker and more secure, or is there more to it: we are not completely filled with the Spirit, even though we appear to be displaying gifts of the Spirit by speaking in tongues?How about Colossians 1 where Paul again talks about laboring to present every man perfect in Christ? Why was Paul laboring? Just to set the record straight, I didn’t blame my parents for what I went through. Never did I accuse them for what I did. They also attended a church where the truth of the gospel wasn’t preached. I hated my mother, but when I became a Christian, the very first thing I did was write her and my father a letter in which I asked them to forgive me for all the pain I had caused them. I also forgave them before the Lord. As I pointed out, the sexual abuse incident wasn’t revealed to me until four years after I became a Christian, therefore I wasn't able to forgive the perpetrators untill then and break the right of the tormentor to that area of my life. I know that I was a Christian in spite of my struggles. Why does Paul write:2 Corinthians3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort,4 who comforts us in all our affliction so that we will be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.5 For just as the sufferings of Christ are ours in abundance, so also our comfort is abundant through Christ.With all due respect Ron, if you haven’t been there, you may not understand all the implications. I believe that this is the reason that I cross paths with hurting people all the time, because God sends them to me. Every church has people who suffer and they never find freedom, because we have established rules for God in what we are willing to accept. The God I serve is greater than any man can describe Him, or even understand Him.

We have to put our denominational doctrines on God’s altar and start reading His Word again under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and not based on what others have taught us. I don't have any denominational doctrines. I doubt that there is a denomination that would have me! :-) With all due respect Ron, if you haven’t been there, you may not understand all the implications. I believe that this is the reason that I cross paths with hurting people all the time, because God sends them to me. Every church has people who suffer and they never find freedom, because we have established rules for God in what we are willing to accept. The God I serve is greater than any man can describe Him, or even understand Him.Why do people presume that because somewhere does not talk about things 'they have not been there'? You would be surprised where I have been and if you were to search this website you would find out. As I pointed out, the sexual abuse incident wasn’t revealed to me until four years after I became a Christian, therefore I wasn't able to forgive the perpetrators untill then and break the right of the tormentor to that area of my life. This is not theology but psychology. Any psychologist who knew my need but did not provide my cure would be regarded as irresponsible. I can't help but wonder whether God should not face the same charge under this way of thinking?

I don't have any denominational doctrines. I doubt that there is a denomination that would have me! Well brother Ron, I am with you on that one. :-) Why do people presume that because somewhere does not talk about things 'they have not been there'? You would be surprised where I have been and if you were to search this website you would find out.You are totally correct; I haven’t been on long enough to really know you. I apologize and will be more careful next time.This is not theology but psychology. Any psychologist who knew my need but did not provide my cure would be regarded as irresponsible. I can't help but wonder whether God should not face the same charge under this way of thinkingRon, I don’t know why you call this psychology? I only do prayer counseling and have never, nor will use psychology or psychiatry for that matter. Some people I know have been helped by psychologists, but I have never personally been involved in this way, because Jesus came to set the captives free. I have no answer why it took four years to expose this “thing,” but that is exactly what happened. It is the only reason I wrote it, because in praying and asking God for insight into a difficulty when I minister to other people, the Lord often provides that. Why didn’t He do that when they were saved? If you know, please tell me, for to date the Lord hasn’t shown me yet. I have seen people who were set free after specific demons were addressed and departed. If they were “filled” with the Holy Spirit, I have no idea, only God knows that. What I can testify to, is when the “rage” left me, I never experienced it again. I felt still the same about God, except that I was much more amazed by His patience and love for me.The reason that I assumed that you had not been delivered from a demon after you were saved was based on the fact that you wrote,I can see no Biblical evidence for the idea that a regenerate person can be indwelt by an evil entity while at the same time being indwelt by the Spirit of God. I just can't do the math! Where would the evil entity locate in someone who was 'filled' with the Holy Spirit?It was not my intention to question your experience or integrity, all I asked was that you could be open to a reality that some have experienced and others not. The “Church” is in general not open to this, and I thank my heavenly Father still today, that I was set free in the mighty Name of Jesus.

This may not be theology but, it is how we are made by God. who says so?

There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear. Are you thinking that Christ himself would have been open to this possibility too?

However, what I WAS thinking, now you ask, is that to suggest the mighty Holy Spirit cannot by-pass the presence of a lesser spirit, to have fellowship with a believer, doesn't make sense. It is to suggest that a demon is strong enough to keep the Holy Spirit out.On the contrary, you seem to be suggesting that the 'mighty Holy Spirit' cannot keep a lesser spirit out.I have yet to be convinced that actions provoked by a renegade spirit, affecting the physical or mental behaviour of the demoniac, are regarded by God as sin - eg the spirit of infirmity. I have yet to be convinced that 'sins' can be committed by renegade spirits through a human being.

According to your understanding, the Holy Spirit cannot get in, unless all other spirits have been removed. I'm disputing that because if a person wanted to receive the Holy Spirit, you are implying all lesser spirits will automatically leave to enable the Holy Spirit to enter. It may be true that some lesser spirits leave when the Holy Spirit enters but, where there is a need for healing (of many different sorts of trauma - possibly some self-inflicted but not necessarily so), there is need for specific ministry to the requirement for healing. Further, there may be a need to cast the spirit out before healing can take place. For sure, healing will not take place while the spirit is there but, the soul who follows after righteousness will receive a certain amount of deliverance from demons (if they have any). It is worth noting that no person can follow after righteousness without the help of the Holy Spirit, or, it is called 'works'.Where do you get these notions from? This is why I called it psychology and not theology. I distrust psychology, but not as much as I distrust psychology with Bible labels.

Where do you get these notions from? This is why I called it psychology and not theology. I distrust psychology, but not as much as I distrust psychology with Bible labels.The debate is not about what we understand about the spiritual realm or the spiritual condition of man, but what God tells us through what some call discernment. This too is a spiritual matter.I don't think that we should be debating whether a demon and the Holy Spirit dwell somehow in the same vessel. What is it that allows some Christians to understand certain things and others not? May be it is "Christ in them?"John 224 But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men,25 And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.Matthew 22and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.Galatians 419 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,Colossians 127 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:Acts 53 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?Even though the Bible doesn’t clearly states it, some of the things that Peter did and “knew” may give us the understanding that Peter had “Christ in him.”As Jesus knew what was in man, so by the account in Acts 5, it would appear that Peter having Christ in him, also “knew what was in man,” and could declare that Ananias had lied to the Holy Ghost.If Christians today would have Christ in them too, they too would – because of the witness of the Holy Spirit – know “what was in man.”I wouldn’t dare calling that psychology, not even with a “Christian” label.

I wouldn’t dare calling that psychology, not even with a “Christian” label.What I meant by that phrase was my discomfort with counselling techniques which are really based in secular psychology but which use the language of the Bible. Some counsellors use 'regression' to trace the residual problems. This has become a major industry in some quarters with seminars and extension courses. I can see no evidence of this kind of counselling in the New Testament.

Some counsellors use 'regression' to trace the residual problems. This has become a major industry in some quarters with seminars and extension courses. I can see no evidence of this kind of counselling in the New Testament.I wholeheartedly agree with you Ron. Yet, with Christians in an environment of prayer and seeking God, I was taken back to the exact time and location of the incident of the “assault” against me. We didn’t ask God for this; in no way did we even attempt to do this, for neither I nor they knew this when we met that morning. I didn’t know about this incident until that exact moment in time. When I saw myself in that situation, I knew and physically felt the assault and the incredible psychological injury that it caused me. This was a supernatural event. There are only two sources for the supernatural: God and the devil. Since I was taken back into that situation and understood what happened and I yelled, I hate you, was I able to forgive the people who caused the pain. This would not have been initiated by the devil. The devil – to what I understand about his wiles - doesn’t want people free. After the Christians who were with me commanded the spirit of rage to leave me, it came out with a very loud scream that was heard by the various other small groups who were behind closed doors in the same part of the building. My throat hurt for several days after. The only definite “proof” I have of this is that when a baby or small child cries uncontrollably, I want to pick it up and comfort it. Prior to this, I wanted to hit it. Since I became a Christian, I never did, but I still had kicked and hit a puppy. Unless you have done this, you will not understand what an enormous guilt to produces in a person who “claims” and believes that he or she is a Christian, and is told that when you sin you are a child of the devil.Was Christ fully formed in me? No, HE WASN’T. Had I been born-again? Yes, I had because I knew that Jesus had died for my sins. I publicly confessed it to people who didn’t want to hear it. Within a week of being “saved,” I bought an English Bible and began to read it every morning before I went to work. I joined a prayer group within two weeks. Even the most staunch critic had to admit that Prang had become “weird.” Did I know that God loved me? Yes, I did, otherwise I wouldn’t have bothered to tell people about Jesus. According to the people who “had baptized” me in the Spirit, so I spoke in tongues, I was filled with the Spirit. I don’t believe that anymore. The Holy Spirit certainly was present in me; because He bore witness that I belonged to Christ, in spite of my “difficulties.” I thank my Lord that He is more accepting than many Christians. Even when I still struggled with some issues, did the Holy Spirit talk to me. If He was on the inside or the outside and how much He occupied the physical space of my body, and how much space was taken up by the spirit of rage, I leave to God. This we will never be able to explain, nor do we have to. It is because we do attempt to explain in our human finite frailty and don’t allow God to work fully in the lives of people WHO REALLY SEEK HIM, many are left struggling. This then - I'd be inclined to say - becomes psychology or psychiatry, because the spiritual man is humanly explained.

When I saw myself in that situation, I knew and physically felt the assault and the incredible psychological injury that it caused me. This was a supernatural event. There are only two sources for the supernatural: God and the devil. What, using biblical terms, would be your definition of 'psychological injury'?

Yet, with Christians in an environment of prayer and seeking God, I was taken back to the exact time and location of the incident of the “assault” against me. We didn’t ask God for this; in no way did we even attempt to do this, for neither I nor they knew this when we met that morning. I didn’t know about this incident until that exact moment in time. When I saw myself in that situation, I knew and physically felt the assault and the incredible psychological injury that it caused me. This was a supernatural event. There are only two sources for the supernatural: God and the devil. Since I was taken back into that situation and understood what happened and I yelled, I hate you, was I able to forgive the people who caused the pain. This would not have been initiated by the devil. The devil – to what I understand about his wiles - doesn’t want people free.I'm curious, was this under some Theophostic Ministry? What you are describing sounds alot like what I have read from that type of ministry. For example they might say... "If I try to resolve my present conflict without finding healing for my past wounds (memories with embedded lies), I will only find temporary relief. However, if I heal my past, I will redeem my present." My question to that notion would be, are we trying to heal our past or are we trusting that God has made us a new creation ala 2 Corinthians 5:17.Theophostic ministry would say that the emotions must be felt in order to rightly identify the lies I believe. The emotions I feel will match the lies I believe. But we don't have to go back and face something that the Bible says is gone when we become a new creation in Christ. Yes some pain is still there but wouldn't God help us deal with it without making us go back and experience it again? Jesus always dealt with people where they were then and how they should live from then on. He never made one of them go back and deal with the past to be saved or healed. What causes people to sin, is it historical wounds or is it our own evil lusts?In Christ,Ron

Dear Brothers Ron,What, using biblical terms, would be your definition of 'psychological injury'? First brother Ron, I knew you would come back with that word. Any person – even those who are Christians – as a rule form judgments when serious wrongs are inflicted. Most Christians today, don’t display the Praising the Lord that our brothers in the book of Acts displayed when they were beaten and imprisoned. Real Christians deal with that quickly, and if you are really walking with the Lord you will pray a great hurt through and forgive whoever has hurt you very quickly. The only way to overcome real abuse is immediate forgiveness of the offender and praising God, for the Joy of the Lord is your strength. Why, and I repeat this, why little children are not “delivered” entirely, and have not become total new creations when they initially are saved at a later point in their lives, I don’t know. I have even a bigger question, why is it that these “new creations” still sin at all? If you don’t sin anymore, Praise the Lord. I haven’t arrived yet. And, to date, having been a Christian – I know that I am a Christian – for 23 years, haven’t met one single other Christian who can declare that they live a sinless life.I'm curious, was this under some Theophostic Ministry? What you are describing sounds alot like what I have read from that type of ministry. For example they might say... "If I try to resolve my present conflict without finding healing for my past wounds (memories with embedded lies), I will only find temporary relief. However, if I heal my past, I will redeem my present." My question to that notion would be, are we trying to heal our past or are we trusting that God has made us a new creation ala 2 Corinthians 5:17.Second brother Ron,I had to go on Google to find out what you were referring to. No it was certainly NOT Theophosy. I had never heard of that before. I thought that I was clear that I did not go back to the past on purpose. I hadn’t even raised the occasional bout of rage where I actually lost control. My children had grown up and the grand-children hadn’t been born yet. This problem wasn’t even on my mind. The easiest way to describe this ministry is that it was a charismatic form of the Neil Anderson steps to Freedom. I don’t even know if it still exists. They insisted that every one who wanted to follow the course had to go through a mandatory prayer counseling session. This basically meant that you had to confess all your sins in front of other Christians. The premise being that, if one had unconfessed sin in their life, they could not be a good counselor, which in itself I didn’t object to. When we came to forgive all people that we could remember had ever hurt us – I had done this already, but since I was new to them they didn’t accept that – I went through the list of people I remembered. It was at this point that I declared publicly that I forgave a certain individual in the name of Jesus, asked God to forgive me also, that within a second I was at that point in time when this incident took place. I had no recollection and we hadn’t arrived at the mentioning of the anger issue. As I said in an earlier post, I had no recollection of this incident, the people that were with me certainly didn’t “lead me” on some type of regression trip. None of that. The only explanation I have is that I had asked the Lord many times for healing, deliverance, or what ever type of label you want to put in this, for this problem. I had even renounced and rebuked it in the name of Jesus. It never left until this day.Brothers, I am willing to take this further under one condition. Are you willing to explore this, or do you want to disprove me. I will continue if you are willing to open yourself up to the possibility that not all spiritual matters are cut and dry, and that we may still be able to learn. In the latter case, I prefer not to continue this. In both cases I pray that God will bless you both and I thank you and Him for having given me the opportunity to testify on this Forum that He is the great I AM.

Brothers, I am willing to take this further under one condition. Are you willing to explore this, or do you want to disprove me. I will continue if you are willing to open yourself up to the possibility that not all spiritual matters are cut and dry, and that we may still be able to learn.letusprayPlease don't misunderstand me if I say that my interest in this thread is not so much your experience as the theology behind it. You didn't, so far as I can see, give me my biblical explanation of 'deep psychological wounds'. You see I don't really know what you mean by 'psyche'. I know it is the Greek word for soul, but the psychologist actually uses it to refer to processes of the mind. I can't map the word 'psychological' to any biblical concept.Suppose I were to invent a word and say 'I have experienced a deep wound in my schlumpf'. You would have no idea what I was talking about, because I have made up the word 'schlumpf'. In a Christian context the word 'psychological' is the same. The psychologist has created his own view of the way the human beings are made, and has given labels, ego, id, consciousness, subconscious, etc. These are man made labels and I cannot verify them from scripture. It becomes even more complicated when Christians take over these man-made labels and begin to interpret their experiences using them. From a biblical perspective I have no idea what this word 'psychological' means. Please give me a biblical version of what you are testifying to. Biblically this 'deep wound' might be in the body, the soul or the spirit, but I don't know of any biblical precedent for this kind of experience. We run the risk of adding a whole 'canon' of langauge and experience to the Bible revelation.For myself, I really try hard to express my experience in Biblical forms, not because I believe it is more spiritual but simply with the hope that their will be a greater consensus with a Bible word than with a non-bible word.

Dear Ron,Dear Ron,I looked up the meaning of the two “words” in the Thesaurus and this is what it said:Psychology - the scientific study of the human mind and mental states, and of human and animal behavior.Psychiatry - a medical specialty concerned with the diagnosis and treatment of disorders that have primarily mental or behavioral symptoms and with the care of people having such disorders.There is no question that this word is not found in the Bible, because there didn’t have this profession. Jesus wasn’t a psychiatrist or a psychologist, but this is what He “knew:”Luke 9:47 And Jesus, perceiving the thought of their heart [kardia], took a child, and set him by him,Heart in this Scripture is the Greek word kardia. This may be understood to mean:1.\tthat organ in the animal body which is the centre of the circulation of the blood, and hence was regarded as the seat of physical life, or2.\tthe soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours This makes it clearer, for Jesus perceived the thought of their soul or mind, i.e., He didn’t have to study their mind or mental state, He saw it. As I have stated in previous posts, I don’t involve myself with psychology, I trust the guidance of the Holy Spirit.John 2 24 But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men,25 And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.This Scripture makes it even clearer: Jesus knew what was in man, i.e., He perceived the true state of their purpose, objectives, reasoning, etc. This is what I believe the key is to all of this. This is why I believe that many of us miss a lot of what the Lord really has given us: Christ in us the hope of glory! What does that mean: Christ in you? Why did Paul labor to see Christ formed in believers? I have posted several times references to the prayers of Paul in his letter to the Ephesian Church. In Ephesian 1:18 he asks God the Father to have the eyes of their heart [kardia] NASB Greek, or the eyes of their understanding [dianoia, mind as faculty of understanding] AV Greek to be “enlightened” i.e., spiritually illuminated; in Ephesians 3:16,17 Paul writes this: That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; That Christ may dwell in your hearts [kardia, AV and NASB Greek] by faith.What do you think happens, if Christ really lives in your heart, the seat of thoughts, emotions, and passions? He still knows what is in man, also the man/woman you are talking to, praying about, or even sitting with. What did Jesus mean when He said:John 1613 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.If Jesus really lives in your heart by His Spirit and you ask the Father in Jesus name, He will show you in your “heart” what it is you ask for. He takes from Jesus and leads you into all truth! If your doctrine declares that the gifts of the Spirit died with the apostles, you have a serious problem, for you hereby deny the full counsel of God with ALL His promises. Of course that is one’s choice; we are free agents, but it is certainly sad for the people who look for the One who came to set the captives free. If Christ would really live in the hearts of all Christians, we also wouldn’t see the excesses in Charismatic circles, for they too would hear the voice of His Spirit in their hearts warning them about false manifestations. If we don’t obey everything that Jesus taught us, we will be deceived, and we are deceived. To clarify another point: all the above does not mean that a Christian, who is a psychologist, cannot have the same guidance, for the Holy Spirit guides us into ALL truth. Many today, who feel called into the ministry, simply cannot get a position anywhere unless they have degrees. As soon as one has to go to some Bible College or Christian University to get a “degree” to preach the Good News, one has to agree with some “doctrinal” point of view. This is an aside, but I want to point out that a true Christian, who knows the voice of God, may certainly be used by God to heal through the leading of the Holy Spirit, even when they have a psychology degree. If churches and boards didn’t require “degrees,” maybe our Lord would be able to better serve the flock by a man who simply trusted God, rather than being bound by needed “degrees,” with the possibility of being led astray by having to follow flawed doctrines.If you are with me on this, I may clarify some of the above with actual examples in another post.

Brothers, I am willing to take this further under one condition. Are you willing to explore this, or do you want to disprove me. I will continue if you are willing to open yourself up to the possibility that not all spiritual matters are cut and dry, and that we may still be able to learn. In the latter case, I prefer not to continue this. In both cases I pray that God will bless you both and I thank you and Him for having given me the opportunity to testify on this Forum that He is the great I AM.I am willing to learn and be corrected, if you prove me wrong in some point then you are my friend. At this point I have a hard time lining up the description of your experience with Scripture. This is not to discount your experience but, as Ron said, the theology behind it seems to be lacking.However, I say that with fear and trembling because I know that Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar basically said the same thing to Job and we all know how that book ended. I tremble to think that I might misrepresent God as they did, stubbornly holding on to some creed. Can you imagine hearing this from the Lord...And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath. (Job 42:7)I hope we can all simply be willing to learn from each other with humility and esteem and earnestly seek God for the truth.In Christ,Ron

letusprayIf your doctrine declares that the gifts of the Spirit died with the apostles, you have a serious problem, for you hereby deny the full counsel of God with ALL His promises. I don't, so we can eliminate that from the discussion. I am not questioning the current availability of gifts of discernment, but what I am saying is that those gifts must be subject to the revelation of scripture. These residual memories or 'deep psychological wounds' just do not fit in to anything that God has revealed to us in the scripture. I can find no trace, in the scripture, of anything even vaguely resembling 'the healing of the memory' which is underlying your posts.I have no problems with 'heart', 'mind', 'soul', 'understanding'; these are all biblical terms. But I still don't know which 'part' of a human being bears the 'deep psychological wound'. To clarify another point: all the above does not mean that a Christian, who is a psychologist, cannot have the same guidance, for the Holy Spirit guides us into ALL truth. Now this is where the danger really lies. You are quoting “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.” (John 16:13, KJVS) This is part of a unique promise given to the apostles. It is this promise which lies behind Christ's prayer:“Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;” (John 17:20, KJVS) Their words would be inspired by the fulfillment of the earlier promise. This is the foundation of a conservative evangelical's understanding of 'verbal inspiration' of scripture. It is because of this promise to the apostles that the New Testament has final authority for the Bible believing Christian. The verse you quote is not a promise that the church, down the centuries, will have continuing revelation which is to be added to the biblical revelation, and it is not a personal promise of infallibility for every believer. It is a promise of infallibility for the apostles' doctrinal statements.Modern medical opinion is not part of the fulfillment of this promise, not even when the modern medic is a Christian. In many ways spiritual discernment is an aspect of the prophetic; they are 'revelations' of the presence of evil spirits, of a specific word 'of knowledge' or 'of wisdom'. But all such 'revelations' must be scrupulously examined in the light of the definitive revelation of scripture. The naming of 'spirits' with the labels for sins, such as 'spirit of rage', 'spirit of adultery' is 'extra-biblical' revelation and I cannot receive it. 'Sins' in the scripture implies personal accountability. If I hear prophetic utterances with an eschatological content, I subject them to the revelation of the scripture. I do the same with the claims of those who see psychologic trauma as the root of sins. My simple question to the theology you are embracing is 'where does the Bible say that?'

Brothers in the Lord,When I wrote the comment about the acceptance of spiritual gifts, it was meant generic, not directed at “you;” the use of the word “one” would have been better and more appropriate.I appreciate your comments and questions; at the same I have to confess that sometimes I become weary having attempted to explain supernatural/spiritual phenomena, and being questioned for over 20 years. That is the reason that I asked if you were really interested, since I have had enough very clever and very educated Christians “prove” me theologically incorrect. It is impossible to “prove” God, or the actual “schemes” of the devil. Yet, it is clear to each true born-again Christian that God is real, for there is the witness to one’s spirit. For the same reason does every real practitioner of the occult know that the powers they call on are real as well. What is extremely disturbing to me is that the schemes of the devil are manifested all throughout the Church of Jesus Christ – from my experience – but I cannot prove this. Again, it is a witness to one’s spirit. I want to drop the word “psychological injury,” even though in our society almost everybody has some notion of what it means, it is not Scriptural. The next question becomes, what do we call it? I call it demonic oppression, since I have not met anyone who has been “possessed” by the devil, as in, i.e., the man with the “legion.” The largest amount of spirits in one person I have encountered was six. Here is where we get into a touchy area. Which Christian will or can accept that a demon can have some form of control over a born-gain Christian? This is a rhetorical question, for I know the answer already: almost none. I say almost, because there are Christians who do accept this, mostly, because they themselves were “delivered” of them. This brings us back to the second page of this thread, where Philologos wrote:I can see no Biblical evidence for the idea that a regenerate person can be indwelt by an evil entity while at the same time being indwelt by the Spirit of God. I just can't do the math! Where would the evil entity locate in someone who was 'filled' with the Holy Spirit?I have to confess, for me it is a dilemma too, for I have studied this subject more than most Christians I know. The Bible gives examples of for instance King Saul who was anointed and since the Spirit of God came upon him and he prophesied – demonstrating, if I may express it this way: a physical demonstration of the Spirit of God – yet, when the Spirit of the Lord left him as result of sin an evil spirit of the Lord took control, and his situation went from bad to worse.This leaves us with only a few possibilities. The only way I can testify is through personal testimony. How did I get where I am today? What does it mean to be born again? When one is born-again, is one filled with the Holy Spirit, or, is one born OF the Spirit and given the ability to “see,” or understand the Kingdom of God? This is where I am today. I have come to a place in my walk with the Lord, where I begin to understand and see things that are very disturbing and put a lot of denominational doctrines into serious doubt (to me that is). I know that I was delivered from an evil spirit, not just one, but three over a period of four years. The last thing I do is give credit to the devil, after all Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil and the Church is to carry on with that part of the mission, for it has not been completed. Did God talk to me the first few years of my born-again state? Yes, He did. I actually started to participate in a prayer group as I have stated earlier and I very much desired to read the Bible. Prayer has been greatest desire ever since I became a Christian, hardly something encouraged by the devil. Yet, if I didn’t have anything of the Holy Spirit, what was It? Within half a year of being born-again, a Charismatic pastor prayed with me and told me that that same day or night of would have the “gift” of tongues. This was correct also. If we judge by measuring the amount of influence of the Holy Spirit vs the “rage,” the Holy Spirit was more influential, since the “rage” only occurred a few times, but my joy was great and almost continuously so. Prior to being saved, I had considered on a number of occasions to end my life. After the night that Lord put His joy in my heart, I had NO doubt about my desire to live for Him. In that respect, I certainly was a new creation in Christ and old things were gone and new things had come, but…not ALL old things had gone. The fact that I, within a month of being saved, learned that my wife was in love with another man, a “spirit-filled” Christian no less, and being able to meet him and ask him calmly “what he was thinking and how he as a Christian could justify, being married and all, using this method to lead someone to then Lord,” and already having forgiven him, was another miracle. In the first years of my Christian walk (before I was delivered of the “rage”) I heard for the first time what I believe was the voice of God. This occurred on quite a regular basis. Within the second year, when I visited my family overseas, I was asked by a 10 year old if I knew how he/she could stop his/her uncontrollable anger. I explained that the only way this could happen was with the help of Jesus. I explained the plan of salvation to the child and we prayed a prayer of commitment and repentance. The anger did not go away. I usually would stay for a period of three weeks and we met again. I asked the Lord to show me why the anger didn’t go away and He “revealed to me” that it had to do with this child’s twin. The twin was born within minutes of this first child and was in critical condition. The twin died after a few days. What I understood from the Lord that this child had formed a strong judgment against the twin and had harbored unforgiveness which now was hidden from memory. This happened during the first days when all the attention was given to the very sick twin, and this child was plainly ignored. Please understand, I didn’t know anything about regression or whatever methods Christians and non-Christians alike, use to “heal” memories. All I know that this is what came into my mind when asked my heavenly Father why this child struggled which this enormous anger. This child was able to take a locked door right out of the wall when the anger occurred. This child also was very puzzled at what I said, but we prayed together, forgiving, asking forgiveness for the judgment, and I rebuked the “spirit of anger,” in the name of Jesus. The anger never reared its ugly head again.I will stop here. If you want explore further, I will share more. This post is quite long.Thank you for listening and God bless you.

I have to confess, for me it is a dilemma too, for I have studied this subject more than most Christians I know. The Bible gives examples of for instance King Saul who was anointed and since the Spirit of God came upon him and he prophesied – demonstrating, if I may express it this way: a physical demonstration of the Spirit of God – yet, when the Spirit of the Lord left him as result of sin an evil spirit of the Lord took control, and his situation went from bad to worse.This is an interesting reference but doesn't it illustrate rather that the Holy Spirit does not co-exist with 'another spirit'.I also had a 'spirit of rage' but I got mine from Adam. :-) and I regard my moment of deliverance as my new birth.

This could not be turned into 'holy scripture', but surely it is 'truth', It may be 'truth' but it is not 'all truth' and the personal 'truth' must be in line with the 'all truth' of apostolic revelation. Otherwise we are into an evangelical/charismatic version of Jake-ism.You are, I think, confusing guidance with propositional truth. He certainly guides his children and teaches them in their walk as a Father guides his children, but that is not the same the same as entrusting the 'deposit' of truth in its fulness to every believer. The danger in the modern psychological approach increasingly used in counselling is that 'further revelation' of the nature of man and his spiritual make-up is being added to the scripture. As the courts would say, verdicts resulting from such 'evidence' are'unsafe'.John 20:21 represents a unique giving of the Spirit which, I think, is not to be confused with new birth. Luke's description of this event is that he 'opened their minds that they might understand the scriptures'. Although every believer will have a measure of this, the apostles are part of the foundation and their role is unique. The prayer of John 17 is specifically for those apostles and 'those who would believe on their word'. The whole section of John 14-16 was delivered to the apostles. Its context is their fear which is why it begins as it does. That does not mean that God excludes others from many of its promises but we need to read it carefully if we are to avoid anarchy.The passage you re-quoted speaks of 'all truth' and 'things to come'. The context is not personal words of assurance to future disciples, although it may accomplish this. The context is the men to whom he would entrust the word. Even to them the promise was not to them as individuals but as to the corporate apostolate. We see this in the way different elements of the 'all truth' were entrusted to Peter, John and later Paul.One of the issues which the charismatic movement has thrown up is the whole question of 'every one taught of God' and a consequent pattern of life prompted by 'impressions'. There is safety in the multitude of counsellors and the NT verses often quoted to support the 'impressionists' are consistent with this. Paul, for example, does not say 'I have the mind of Christ' but 'we have the mind of Christ'. John does not say 'thou hast an anointing' but the plural 'ye have an anointing'. The 'counsellors' best equipped to serve us in walking his way are those who received a special dispensation of the Spirit to be the recorders of infallible and inerrant revelation. viz the New Testament.

Philologos, or dear Brother Ron,You wrote regarding the promise and the mission of the Holy Spirit in John 16:13:Their words would be inspired by the fulfillment of the earlier promise. This is the foundation of a conservative evangelical's understanding of 'verbal inspiration' of scripture. It is because of this promise to the apostles that the New Testament has final authority for the Bible believing Christian. The verse you quote is not a promise that the church, down the centuries, will have continuing revelation which is to be added to the biblical revelation, and it is not a personal promise of infallibility for every believer. It is a promise of infallibility for the apostles' doctrinal statements.I realize Ron that we will not agree. You talk about Jake-ism. Again, you are more educated than I am, for I don’t have any idea what this is. The cause of the disunity of the Church is the matter of the various doctrines and interpretations of certain promises by Jesus, teachings of Paul, and their applications in the Church today. If Jesus asked the Father for UNITY: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me (John 17:23), we, as the Body of Christ, have failed. At least, that is what I believe. Since we continue to disagree about certain Scripture interpretations, we will continue to disagree about the witness of -, and the manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers,Today, a number of well-meaning Christians attempt to get together to pray for revival. The truth is that if these Christians come from various denominational backgrounds, they are NOT one with the Father and Jesus, because they believe different truths about God, and in reality are thereby creating their own gods. There is only ONE God the Father, One Jesus Christ, and One Holy Spirit manifested in the seven Spirits of God. Unless the Spirit of Christ dwells within us and actually leads us into all truth, we will have great difficulty “discerning” truth, and/or, “SEE” THE NEED TO DO SO. For me personally, Christ dwells in my heart and He warns me, for when I am in a meeting of Christians who all pray in tongues and are totally convicted of the fact that they praying “in the Spirit,” I become sometimes so offended in my spirit that I have to leave. I am assuming here, and I know that is dangerous, but I believe that you will agree with me that when Paul wrote:1 Corintians 1229 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.that not everyone would speak in tongues, that the gift of healing is not given to ALL believers, etc. In view of the fact that most believers have NOT received the gift of healing which is quite evident in the Body, why do some insist that ALL should speak in tongues? It is very easy to observe (I purposely don’t use the word “discern”) that not every “Spirit-filled” believer has the gift of healing, but how do we observe that not all tongues are real? Now we need “discernment,” for we cannot observe a spiritual gift that has no physical demonstration of “result” if you wish, except for the audibility of the “unknown” language. The only way we can “humanly understand” if a gift of tongues is of God, is by “spiritual discernment,” or the witness of the Holy Spirit, Christ in us. How do we know that Christ is in us, the hope of glory? There is really only one way. It is the demonstration of the witness of the Spirit of His Son, or the Spirit of adoption, by which we cry out: Abba! Father! Only, and only, if we have to cry out to our heavenly Father, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, do we have the actual witness in our spirit that we have received the Spirit of Adoption – the spiritual contract of adoption – and that Christ lives in us by faith. If we have no difficulty asking Jesus, or for that matter the Holy Spirit, we don’t worship God under “the spiritual contract of adoption,” i.e., being led by the Spirit of Christ in us, Who always cried out to His Father, never to Himself.This then will make us vulnerable to the schemes of the devil, since we don’t obey God’s plan, but our interpretations thereof. There is only ONE WAY to understand the schemes of the devil, and that is through total submission and obedience to God’s Word. Just remember how Satan could challenge Jesus when he said: And the devil said to Him, "I will give You all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish (Luke 4:6). Who had given it to him? Adam and Eve for they had been given dominion over the whole earth: Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." (Gen.1:26).When Adam and Eve disobeyed God only ONE time, Satan obtained dominion over the earth. Do we really believe that we can disobey God and NOT give Satan a foothold in our lives, let alone deceive us? I don’t think that learning about the schemes of the devil is honoring the devil, rather it equips the believers to “stand firm.”I am sorry Ron that we don’t see eye to eye on the witness of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers in this great day of deception. I only hope that you will no longer equate my experience with God with psychology, for that is very painful to me. I love God and have made a commitment to serve Him, and He can do with me what He wants, as long as He gets the glory. I serve God and not men, therefore comparing the things I share to psychology are painful to me.

Dear Hans am sorry Ron that we don’t see eye to eye on the witness of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers in this great day of deception. I only hope that you will no longer equate my experience with God with psychology, for that is very painful to me. I love God and have made a commitment to serve Him, and He can do with me what He wants, as long as He gets the glory. I serve God and not men, therefore comparing the things I share to psychology are painful to me.I am sorry if I have offended you in what I have said, but I am not 'equating your experience' with psychology, I am questioning your explanation of the experience. The phrase 'deep pyschological wound' was yours not mine. The terminology that you have used to describe your experience is not biblical terminology, so I constantly have to ask what do you mean. I am deeply suspicious of spiritual experience which cannot be described biblically. It almost inevitably leads to 'extra-biblical' theology.Again, I am genuinely sorry if my questions have offended you, but I am not 'repentent' in that if we started the thread all over again I would still have to ask the same questions.My reference to Jake-ism is a SI in-house comment/joke. We have a regular contributor on SI who was originally known as Jake but now as Bubbaguy. He is a Bible-believer where it fits his thinking but adds a whole bundle of other things which he believes just as passionately; these include reincarnation and the notion that Adam's original sin was becoming a non-vegetarian. His justification for this 'extra-biblical' belief is that he has an inner witness that it is so. Once the inner witness begins to add 'revelation' to the scripture revelation we are adrift in a boat without oars and at the mercy of any passing current. Jake rejects whole sections of the scripture because they do not fit into his personal theology. It is a man made mix created by leaving out divine relevation and adding in human revelation. That was my reference to "Jake-ism'; it isn't a denomination just a personal delusion.

But I am also aware that you are trying to move this discussion into your comfort zone - the written word. Whereas the testimony of Jesus Christ (the living Word) as it has been experienced by an individual believer (in this case, me), is as valid; the word is nigh me, even in my mouth. You are mistaken. I am not trying to move the discussion into my 'comfort zone'. I have no ultimate terms of reference for my understanding of spiritual fact other than a divine and infallible revelation which i find in the scripture. If your 'experience of Jesus Christ' is as valid as the written word, it is little wonder that we are in fundamental disagreement. This is exactly Jake/bubbaguys position.I can't think how I would have connected 'anointing' to 'calling'. I see them as very different concepts so I can't add much to this.

Dear Philologos, I have not been following this thread through entirely, so I could be missing some things. I am not really seeking to debate or disagree with you, but better understand where you are coming from. I have no ultimate terms of reference for my understanding of spiritual fact other than a divine and infallible revelation which i find in the scripture.What do you mean by this? Are you suggesting that the whole of your understanding of Christ and the Spirit comes from the bible only? In love,Blake

What do you mean by this? Are you suggesting that the whole of your understanding of Christ and the Spirit comes from the bible only? I am saying in the words of Luther 'that my conscience is subject to the word of God' and so is my understanding. “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” (2Tim. 3:15-17, KJVS) The scriptures are able to make me wise to the salvation that is in Christ, by faith, and to completely equip me for the work of God.dorcas wrote:Whereas the testimony of Jesus Christ (the living Word) as it has been experienced by an individual believer (in this case, me), is as valid; the word is nigh me, even in my mouth.What you said is that "the testimony of Jesus Christ" as perceived subjectively "is as valid as" the 'written testimon'y where we find the truth 'objectively'. There are others who use this site who believe as you do, but I am not one of them.

Please could you show from scripture how an evil spirit could not be in the flesh of a person who has received the Holy Spirit? Please show me from scripture that this ever happened in the record of God's dealings with men. There are many things I can't prove from the scripture. I can't prove from the scripture that there is no one living on the moon.the bible promise is that 'you' will be filled with the Holy Spirit, and it states that 'your body' is the temple of the Holy Spirit. Paul bids me present my body a living sacrifice, holy...

brethreni've followed this discussion and found it to be most interesting. i feel led of the Lord to say something. in our reading of scripture, how much to we rely on Holy Spirit for interpretation? let us all go before God and ask that He show us this. i had a revelation from the Lord some time ago about scripture. it is brethed of God's Spirit and requires God's Spirit to interpret it and minister to us. in addition there is much more to scripture than what is on the surface, there are things between the written lines (for lack of a better expression) or deeper things in scripture which at first glance may appear to be non-biblical. Perhaps we should always be aware that there are things in scripture that the Lord hasn't revealed to us yet? this is not to say that everything "non-biblical" is of God but rather that what the Lord has revealed to bro X may not be known to bro Y, in short none of us know it all as it pertains to scripture. also i shared with another brother this same revelation and his response was interesting, surface reading of scripture produces superficial Christians/hypocrites. it's no wonder (for me anyway) that the church is as it is...perhaps we read too much on the surface and don't seek the deeper things of God?bro hans i can bear witness to much of your testimony, it seems that the Lord has made it such that we have more in common than i thought.

So on what basis do you judge that another person's claim to 'have the witness in himself', is as valid as yours to have the witness in yourself?Why would I judge another person's claim to 'have the witness in himself'?

sorry, it only posted part of my response, so I deleted this and reposted.

i had a revelation from the Lord some time ago about scripture. it is brethed of God's Spirit and requires God's Spirit to interpret it and minister to us. in addition there is much more to scripture than what is on the surface, there are things between the written lines (for lack of a better expression) or deeper things in scripture which at first glance may appear to be non-biblical. Perhaps we should always be aware that there are things in scripture that the Lord hasn't revealed to us yet? this is not to say that everything "non-biblical" is of God but rather that what the Lord has revealed to bro X may not be known to bro Y, in short none of us know it all as it pertains to scripture. I agree with the sentiments of the first half of this. It is almost a repeat of the famous charge to the Mayflower Pilgrims I charge you before God and His blessed angels to follow me no farther than I have followed Christ. If God should reveal anything to you by any other instrument of His, be as ready to receive it as ever you were to receive any truth of my ministry; for I am very confident the Lord hath more truth and light yet to break forth out of His holy word."-- but this is NOT 'extra' biblical revelation. In this sense 'extra' means 'in addition to' and does not relate to interpretation of the scripture, but to 'new' revelation' which is not contained in the scripture.As regards 'biblical revelation' in truth being 'reinterpreted' and 'made alive' by the same Spirit of inspiration... my whole life's work has been based on this expectation. There are different aspects of Bible study which are equally important. Exegesis is the examination of the 'text' within its 'original context'. Exposition is the application of the exegeted truths to my life and the lives of my hearers. An old preacher used to say that the scripture were the 'dehydrated word of God' which would choke us to death unless they were 're-hydrated' by the same spirit who inspired them. There is much truth in this statement.but 'extra-biblical' revelation is 'truth' added to the scripture as part of a doctrinal revelation. Any such 'truths' must be vigilently examined in the light of the scripture. Is. 8:20 (KJVS) To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. This is why, Ironman, I opposed your 'revelation' that you had been given a 'tongue' which enabled you to command angels.

The issue as I see it is that someone comes along with an experience, a dream, or a vision and voila, a new cult is born! We have every obligation to judge every claim made by anyone according to the revelation of scripture! Ron, you are right on target, and led by the Spirit of Truth in pointing out the spirit of error that is being demonstrated in this thread.Hans, sorry but Jesus did give us permission to ask HIM in prayer,"Whatever you ask in my name, that will I DO, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask ME anything in MY name, I WILL DO IT."John 14:13&14.Hans, did God the Father tell you specifically to start a website to relate your dreams and revelations to the rest of Christendom? Or did you assume since you had a dream that you were ordained by God to proclaim some new "truth" about the proper form of prayer to the Father?Its nice that you had dreams and revelations and deliverances, so have I! I have subjected mine to the Spirit of truth as revealed in the Scripture and I have also subjected them to the Mind of the Lord through prayer, and guess what, they were all of my own flesh!You had an experience, so did Ellen White and Joseph Smith. Reconsider the path you are on.

I am reading an old Quaker book called 'Christian Discipline of the society of friends' printed in 1883. It is a fascinating book and shows the Quakers of that time to have been solidly evangelical and evangelistic. There is a section relating to the resurrection body of Christ which says ...how and what manner of change it met withal after it was raised from the dead, so as to become such a glorious body as it is declared to be, is too wonderful for mortals to conceive. The Scripture is silent as to the manner thereof, and we are not curious to inquire about or to dispute it; nor do we esteem it necessary to make ourselves wise above what is written, as to the manner or condition of Christ's glorious body in heaven...It was the section that I have underlined which caught my attention. There is a deep wisdom here, would that they had stayed on this path! For myself I would walk this path; I have no wish to be 'wise above what is written'. In this sense. like many a man before me, I am more than content to be 'a man of one book'.I fear that the church may be passing through an Athenian stage! May it 'pass' quickly! “(For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.)” (Acts 17:21, KJVS)

“(For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.)” (Acts 17:21, KJVS)Ron, I would fully concur with, actually go further and say that by and large it has very much become this. Was brooding on this element earlier, even amongst the 'secular' world. How it is akin to one giant game of leap frog. A desire for some 'thing', it's attained, enjoyed for a moment and then quickly discarded for the next. It never ends. Television lives on it and off it. And the wonder is how the church has been caught up in this whole mindset, seeking signs and wonders...But reading through all this here and the red flags coming up over the last couple of days. Some dangerous comments, especially in regards to what the witness is in our spirit, the very scary thought's that there is such a thing as a truth revealed to one that is valid... don't want to misconstrue the words... This came to mind;1Co 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? 1Co 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 1Co 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. 1Co 14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. 1Co 14:40 Let all things be done decently and in order. Actually, think I still have another verse in mind that goes along the same path just evades me right now. But isn't the essence that we test all things amongst ourselves against the scriptures? That there might be an upfront willingness to approach what we present with a ready mind to discard it, rather than protect it? That motive?That likely sounds incorrect... What Ron is stating is of great importance. Maybe it's just me, but ever have the thought's running through you that "I am not so sure I have this straight"?Why it seems is the opposite more the compulsion; "Prove me wrong" rather than "Am I wrong"? And that without the air of superiority.Test all things. Are we willing to learn or only to pronounce? Can a prophecy be for only one and the rest just have to catch up with it?2Pe 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Within this and believe a very good point was made elsewhere, that which applied to the apostles and in essence to them 'only' as to finishing the words that were to be recorded...I think another misconception is apparent as well. That this holding to scripture is somehow to negate everything else or that this is some kind of superiority trip. it is not. I know the passion that Ron brings and rubs many the wrong way, because of the insisting of testing ideas and thoughts, even the witness of our spirit to scripture. It must be so. It is to everyones good.What more is needed to be said that has not already been said? Am perfectly happy to be stuck within a closed cannon. Stranger still, there is enough contained for all eternity to explore within what we have already...If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual,How many things cross through these fallen minds of ours that at one time we think are from an inward witness, from the Lord that upon further investigation (against scripture) or the passing of time prove to be in error? More and more am finding many things that I can get caught up in, in my head that must be discarded. Isn't it a happy thing to be corrected? By those who are of your own kind, by the Lord Himself?A perfect example that has come to notice is in prayer. Keep catching myself "praying to my head". In other words what may start out as something of a burden to lay before the Lord can turn into a sermon I am preaching in my head,or something I feel compelled to write, a self discussion and before I know it, I am no longer praying to anybody but myself. To catch it in mid stream... "Oh Father, forgive me" and then a turn back to getting on track again.Bit rushed here, hope this makes some sense, glean what is true and discard the rest. Better, correct it. Please.

Dear JimBon and Philologos,The Jehovah's Witnesses objectify the bible. Because of this, they dismiss one crucial revelation that is personally reveal to every converted believer. This revelation is the Trinity. They deny the diety of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit.No where in the bible does it say that Jesus Christ is God. It refers to Him as Lord and King. However, according the the Witnesses, Jesus can be a Lord and King and yet still be less than God. The bible says that Jesus and God are one. However, the bible also says a husband and wife are one. And yet, husbands and wives are still seperate. Additionally, these points of where Jesus and God are said to be one are not clear. They are stated in different ways in different translations. No where in the bible does it clearly state that Jesus Christ is God. There are illusions and references, but it is not clear.This is important. This is the secret kept hidden from everyone until the proper time. Only those who have given themselves unto Christ and are born of the Spirit can know this revelation. The reason for this is that we are to walk by faith. Our faith is in Jesus Christ. When we believe that Jesus Christ is God, then we are accepting Him as our Lord and savior. We are submitting unto His authority. We do it as an act of love. We make a choice. If everyone knew that Jesus was God, then we could not choose Him out of love. We would choose Him selfishly because He is God. We would seek salvation not to be saved, but rather to profit our own selfish ways. You know of the people I am speaking. These are the people that believe in God but deny Christ. They are like the Pharisees and are self-righteous.Rather, this fact (that Jesus is God) has been hidden so that we take a leap of faith. We step out in faith to believe in Christ. Then, when we do, He reveals to us the truth: Jesus is God. He is supreme. He is Lord over all. He is almighty. He is the host of hosts. The Jehovah's Witnesses base thier entire faith on the bible. They follow it like a book of law written to command and control thier lives. Look at how far they have fallen from the truth because of this. If the bible were truly the object or basis for faith, then why would we need faith? God would have given us the final word in the bible. Who would need faith? It is finalized with the bible. Do you see how this is wrong? The basis of our faith is on Jesus. We are Christians, are we not? We mimic Christ. We follow Christ. He lives inside of us, does He not? Once we submit to Christ and are revealed of His diety by the Holy Spirit (once we are born again), then the bible becomes the word of God for us personally. Only when we are born again can we become conscious of what God is really saying in the bible. By this, scripture does not become our object of faith for even the bible is still subject to Christ, rather, the bible becomes a strengthener of our faith. It will make "wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus" by adding to our experience. However, the bible is not the basis for it. Was it not you, my dear friend Ron, who argued for Tozer believing that we needed to experience a death unto the law? This experience is not revealed to us by the bible, for if it was then we would all be saved the minute we read it. Rather, this experience is accomplished through Christ. We die with Christ.If you objectify the bible and say there is no revelation apart from what is in the bible, then who can be saved? Salvation only comes from Christ. Lastly, the bible, scripture, was written by men and women filled with the Holy Spirit. God had revealed unto them truth. Likewise, has not God revealed unto you truth? Is not the Holy Spirit called the Spirit of Truth? And so, is your faith based upon the revelation of the bible (of other men and women)? Or is it based upon personal testimony of Christ in you? In love,Blake

Beenblake,Did I imply my faith was in the Bible alone? You probably should re-read my post. The mormons will ask you to verify the truth of the book of mormon through a subjective experience called a "burning in the bossom". You can have all the subjective experiences you want, I've had plenty myself, yet I test them all to see if they are from God. The evangelical/charasmatic denominations are full to the brim of people running on their own steam and following their own visions, why should I not test them as I test myself?And when I test anything, I have a standard to use, and I would rather objectify the Bible, than to subjectify it(to my own pressupositions) wouldn't you? Or do you judge scripture according to your own experiences and pressupositions first, and then find scripture to support them? Not every little dream or thought that pops into our heads is from God, Christians, especially those that claim they are leaders, are capable of hubris too.

I had left this thread and started a new one addressing Mike,and the Church at SI. I just looked at this and found some comments I feel I have to address. HansQUOTE from JIMBOBThe issue as I see it is that someone comes along with an experience, a dream, or a vision and voila, a new cult is born! We have every obligation to judge every claim made by anyone according to the revelation of scripture! Ron, you are right on target, and led by the Spirit of Truth in pointing out the spirit of error that is being demonstrated in this thread.Hans, sorry but Jesus did give us permission to ask HIM in prayer,"Whatever you ask in my name, that will I DO, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask ME anything in MY name, I WILL DO IT."John 14:13&14.Hans, did God the Father tell you specifically to start a website to relate your dreams and revelations to the rest of Christendom? Or did you assume since you had a dream that you were ordained by God to proclaim some new "truth" about the proper form of prayer to the Father?Its nice that you had dreams and revelations and deliverances, so have I! I have subjected mine to the Spirit of truth as revealed in the Scripture and I have also subjected them to the Mind of the Lord through prayer, and guess what, they were all of my own flesh!You had an experience, so did Ellen White and Joseph Smith. Reconsider the path you are on.UNQUOTEThis is the question that has to be asked. WHAT PATH AM I ON?Thank you jimbob, for this post. I appreciate your candor. I only wished that some of you would go further than to just post with some label, rather than letting us know who you are.This, Church of SI brings us to the truth. It has to, for we have to know the truth, it is the only thing that will set us free. This is what our Lord Jesus promised us, that we would know the truth and it would set us free. It is for exactly that reason that I asked your concurrence to explain myself rather than having to debate every point. Let me explain myself and you test it; that is YOUR task. You HAVE TO; OTHERWISE INDEED ANOTHER CULT WILL BE BORN!I will start a new thread called the Schemes of the Devil. There is no way that I can follow two or three threads on this Forum. Write for my own website, and meet the other obligations the Lord has brought on my path. If this does interest you, please follow along on this thread. It is because I test everything against Scripture that I say the things I say....how and what manner of change it met withal after it was raised from the dead, so as to become such a glorious body as it is declared to be, is too wonderful for mortals to conceive. The Scripture is silent as to the manner thereof, and we are not curious to inquire about or to dispute it; nor do we esteem it necessary to make ourselves wise above what is written, as to the manner or condition of Christ's glorious body in heaven...What an amazing wisdom in this quote. Thank you Philologos for sharing this, for this approach will indeed prove that when we “understand” Scripture, we don’t need to dispute. My observation is that we in the Church of Jesus Christ have made us WISE ABOVE WHAT IS WRITTEN

The basis of our faith is on Jesus. We are Christians, are we not? We mimic Christ. We follow Christ. He lives inside of us, does He not? which Christ?“For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.” (2Cor. 11:4, KJVS)Paul carefully distinguishes between these two positions in these follwing verses.“But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” (2Tim. 3:14-17, KJVS)Paul is not propounding, here, faith in the scripture as the means of salvation, but faith in a Saviour who is revealed in the scripture. Otherwise which Jesus is a person putting their faith in?The Quakers addressed these issues often because of their insistence in the presence of 'light in every man'. In 1883,which was 200 years after George Fox, they wrote about their 'belief in the divine authority of the Holy Scriptures, and upheld the sacred volume as the only divinely authorized record of the doctrines of true religion'. They re-affirmed their condifedence in the scriptures and added:In conformity with these principles it has ever been, and still is, the belief of the Society of Friends, that the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament were given by inspiration of God; that there can be no appeal from them to any other authority whatsoever: that they are able to make us wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus; being the appointed means of making known to us the blessed truths of Christianity: that they are the only divinely authorized record of the doctrines which we are bound as Christians to believe, and of the moral principles which are to regulate our actions: that no doctrine which is not contained in them can be required of any one to be believed as an article of faith: that whatsoever any man says or does which is contrary to the Scriptures, though under profession of the immediate guidance of the Spirit, must be reckoned and accounted a delusion.The Quakers had decades of finding the balance between the 'inner light' and the final authority of the scripture. Some of their best men went of into 'delusions'. In this era of claims of experiences which are extra-biblical and of the doctrines which spring from them, we have much to learn from the Quakers.astly, the bible, scripture, was written by men and women filled with the Holy Spirit. God had revealed unto them truth. Likewise, has not God revealed unto you truth? Is not the Holy Spirit called the Spirit of Truth? And so, is your faith based upon the revelation of the bible (of other men and women)? Or is it based upon personal testimony of Christ in you? I thank God for revelations of truth to my own heart. My work is based on what I call 'hunches' which I then test ruthlessly against the scriptures. If I cannot 'test and approve' it by the scriptures I will not pass it on. The Spirit is indeed the Spirit of Truth and the way we may know that we are receiving revelation from that Spirit is that He will never say anything which is inconsistent with what He has already said. My faith is in the person of that Jesus Christ who is set forth in the scripture. My experience is of 'Christ in you' and the inner witness of the Spirit and the outer witness of the apostles' writings are in absolute agreement in every particular in this. This is exactly what was promised.“But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall bear witness of me: and ye also bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” (John 15:26-27, ASV) I thank God for the twofold witness of the Spirit in my heart and of the scripture to my understanding.

There is a big difference between thinking something and having the LIGHT of God instruct you. When the Light of God shines, it touches your soul and you know it in every fiber of your being. It's a lot different than reasoning and thought. you are still making your own recognition of truth the final arbiter. Your Quaker predecessors made the scripture the final arbiter.

I look at the big picture of the Scriptures Why would you believe the big picture when you reject so many of the details? You reject Paul's testimony and the Revelation. You eliminate the passages which speak of eternal judgement. Your big picture is so 'edited' by what you chose to believe that it is now a seriously flawed picture. You insist upon the right to subject the scriptures to your own conceptions. I cannot force you to do otherwise and wouldn't even if I could, but I do not recognise your position as either Quaker or Christian.

Evolution is not my conception. It is a theory because of the tremendous amount of physical evidence that supports it. ...and Adam's original sin being his abandoning of vegetarianism and Eve's new shape which came from chasing animals, as I recall. Then there is reincarnation... You maintain the right to pass judgement on the Word of God; whereas part of its purpose is to pass judgement upon us.

Dear Ron,I understand where you are coming from. I do agree that God does not conflict and would never say anything in confusing or conflicting over time. I understand your reasoning that the bible is the basis by which we can use to discern the truth. Please try to understand where I am coming from. I am not trying to say the bible is false or useless, or justify extra-biblical prophecy. I believe that Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Father are all the same person. Just as I am a brother, husband, father, and such at different occasions in life, so God takes on different roles. In my Christian walk, this is most essential for what this means is that Jesus is the foundation, the basis, the heart, and the center of all things. He is God. Jesus is God's Word as John reveals in the book of John chapter 1. This is also essential for what it means is that Jesus is the truth. Jesus is the Holy Spirit. He is God. When I was saved, Christ came down from Heaven and entered me. Christ lives inside me. Because of this experience, I have a testimony of Christ. When I was saved, I went forth and testified to Christ. The bible, scripture, was written by men who also testified to Christ. The bible then, is not the Word, for even the bible declares that Christ is the Word, rather, the bible is a testimony to Christ. The bible testifies to the Spirit. Thus, the bible is not the Word, the bible testifies to the Word.This is an important distinction, don't you think? This means that these men wrote the bible based upon thier own personal experiences with Christ. Therefore, the initial writing of the bible was based upon subjective experiences.Granted, the experience of many of them was with Christ as a human being, where our experience is with Christ as a Spirit. Evenso, Paul's experience was with Christ as a Spirit for He did not know Christ when Christ walked on earth.This is not to cheapen the bible or say it is less. Rather, it is to say that the testimony of each person is as equally valid as the testimony as of the Bible. Christ gives to each accordingly. When I was growing up, I read the bible frequently. Granted, I never understood this testimony, I still listened. Many years later, this testimony was backed by the testimony of other Christians, and I became saved. Christ saved me. The testimony of His love from the bible and other Christians helped me to make the choice to call upon Christ for salvation. The testimony of the bible is valid. It is good for teaching and instructing. However, my personal testimony is valid too. And as you pointed out, these two should always agree. The thing that must be understood about the bible is that not only does it say something, it has meaning. We must understand that there is a difference between what something says and what it means. Here is a good example. I could call your house and say, "Is Ron there?" Literally, I am asking, "Is Ron at the house?" However, what I mean by this statement is this, "I want to know if Ron is available to talk. If he is, ask him to come and talk to me."The bible says many things, and in these sayings we may find conflict. However, there is no conflict in the meaning. God did not say the bible. The bible is not the words of God. Rather, God inspired the bible. The meaning of the bible is from God. The testimony of the bible, the message it carries, is from God. And in the message there is no conflict. You are saying that we can verify or test all things in accord with the bible. That is true to a degree. However, we must becareful that our own understanding of the scripture is not distorted. The bible is only as good as it's interpretation. Before I was saved, I could read the bible and understand what it says. However, what I could not understand was the meaning. It was not until after I was filled with the Holy Spirit that the message of the bible really began to speak to me. Many people read the bible without the Spirit, and by this, the bible has been used to promote many lies and false Christs.In order to interpret the bible correctly, we must first turn to the Holy Spirit. We must first open our hearts to the Christ in us. Once we have submitted unto Christ, He then can speak to us. Then we can turn to the bible and read it correctly. This means that we first turn to Christ, and the bible is secondary. Once we have been filled with the Spirit of Truth and have submitted unto Christ, then we can read the bible and interpret the truth within it. By this, it is the Holy Spirit that reveals us the truth within the bible. Another way of saying this: the bible only becomes the living Word when the person reading it has first submitted unto the Holy Spirit and is filled with the Holy Spirit, for only then can the Holy Spirit speak through the bible.And so, when we test things in accord with the bible, we are actually testing them in accord to the Spirit, for we first turn to the Spirit and ask the Spirit to grant us understanding. However, if we use the bible alone as the authority, we run into problems. For, I could use the bible to justify anything I wish. I have seen people use the bible to justify homosexuality or to show that Hell is a lie. Personally, I love the bible. It is an awesome book full of wisdom. I love to read the bible and read it for fun. I love to read different translations. Admist the lies, the many interpretations, the lost books of the bible, and all else, I am comforted.... John 10:27 "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:"I know this is true, not because the bible says so, but because Christ within me affirms this. He is my shepard.In love,Blake

Hi BlakeI believe that Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Father are all the same person. Just as I am a brother, husband, father, and such at different occasions in life, so God takes on different roles. Do you want to clarify this before the feeding frenzy starts? :-) As it stands this is 'modalism', the belief that God has manifested Himself in different modes but that there is not a Triune God. If you do believe this we probably need to go back a few paces. I know this is true, not because the bible says so, but because Christ within me affirms this. He is my shepard.This sentence would have to be changed before I could agree with it. If it were to say 'not ONLY because the Bible says so...' it would get my 'amen', but as it stands it leaves your personal conviction as the ultimate authority. I cannot share that view.

bubbaguy wrote:"You insist upon the right to subject the scriptures to your own conceptions."Evolution is not my conception. It is a theory because of the tremendous amount of physical evidence that supports it. Bubdrdino.com - Dr. Ken HovindAnswersInGenesis.com - Dr Ken HamThey blow any thought that evolution could possible be true out of the water. Not only Biblically but scientifically. There is no proof for evolution. It is the religion of humanism's story of creation. You have to have completely blind faith to believe in it. There is no proof.

Hmm I am very tempted to start a discussion on Creationism, but I'll let the websites I mentioned show the facts.

Dear Ron,Yes, my dear friend, I believe in the triune God. It seems there is no adequate way to state that without someone arguing about the way I said it. Lol.but as it stands it leaves your personal conviction as the ultimate authority.How so?In love,Blake

because of this statement from a recent post of yours know this is true, not because the bible says so, but because Christ within me affirms this. He is my shepard.

Dear Ron,I know what you are referencing. I am trying to understand how you make the connection between the two. How does my statement make personal conviction the ultimate authority? What do you mean by "personal conviction"?What is the ultimate authority? Additionally, when Paul and other writers wrote the scriptures, they were writing from thier personal experiences with Christ. The four gospels are four personal testimonies of Christ. Are they not? I am sorry if I seem a bit frustrating. I am trying to listen and make sure I hear you correctly. In love,Blake

Additionally, when Paul and other writers wrote the scriptures, they were writing from thier personal experiences with Christ. The four gospels are four personal testimonies of Christ. Are they not? Indeed they are, but they are not ONLY that. They are the breathed out words of God. As “the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake” (Acts 1:16, KJVS) so the Holy Spirit spoke by the writings of these men in a definitive way. The recorded testimony of these men is not of the same 'order' as my testimony nor yours.What do you mean by "personal conviction"?What is the ultimate authority? By 'personal conviction' in the context of this thread I mean your own personal 'witness' that God has revealed truth to you independent of any biblical source or confirmation.By ultimate authority, I mean that the scripture is the final court of authority and by them all our 'personal convictions' must be judged.You're not frustrating, not to me at any rate. I think you are putting your own 'convictions' which you believe to be from God on the same level as propositional revelation as we find it in the scripture. If I am mistaken in that please correct me and tell me why you are not prepared to accept the scriptures as the final court of appeal.

Dear Ron,I see. Now I understand what you are saying. I think you are putting your own 'convictions' which you believe to be from God on the same level as propositional revelation as we find it in the scripture. If I am mistaken in that please correct me and tell me why you are not prepared to accept the scriptures as the final court of appeal.Yes and No. Let me explain:The scripture holds revelation. However, the revelation of the scripture means nothing to me, unless it is revealed to me by the Holy Spirit. I guess another way you could say this: the scripture is my personal conviction. God reveals things to me through the scripture, but not only through the scripture.When I read the scripture, the Holy Spirit reveals unto me what it says. Therefore, scripture becomes my personal conviction. However, if I read the scripture apart from the Holy Spirit, then the scripture reveals to me whatever I want it to reveal to me. By this, the scripture becomes my own personal interpretation. Do you see the difference? By ultimate authority, I mean that the scripture is the final court of authority and by them all our 'personal convictions' must be judged.I am sorry, but I happen to disagree with you on this. (I am nothing. Though I disagree, I respect you.) I believe Jesus Christ is the ultimate authority. In Romans 13, Paul stated that we should submit ourselves unto the authorities above us. Romans 13:1 (KJ) "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God."And yet, Martin Luther defied this very scripture by protesting the Catholic Church. He was not the first or the last. It was widely believe at the time that the bible should not have a single word changed, not even to be translated into another language. They felt this was an immense sin. And so, when Tyndale translated the bible into English, they killed him. I believe in all my heart that Tyndale and Luther were submitting unto the will of Christ holding Him as the ultimate authority. However, the men they protested against were holding the bible (thier own interpretation of it) as the ultimate authority.The Holy Spirit spoke through King David and the writers of the bible. He used these writers to spread His message. Likewise, the Holy Spirit uses people today. Have you never heard His voice in someone? Have you not ever had an experience where someone said something to you, and you knew it was the Lord speaking to you? When Christ speaks, whether through the bible or another person, is it not all by the same authority? Or is the bible always greater?Saying the bible is the final court of appeal scares me. Christ died to set us free from the law. He died, so that we could be forgiven. As you showed me, Christ died so that we might die with Him and in that, we die to the law. Why would Christ set us free from the law, only to institute another law? The old testament scriptures were the law. Before Christ came, the scriptures were the law. The Pharisees judged everything in accord to the scripture. By this, they were able to use the law to benefit thier own selfish desires. In the same way, the bible can be used to benefit our own selfish desires. However, if we first submit unto Christ, we will follow Him. We will not only accept the bible into our heart, but we will be able to discern the truth in it. If we hold Christ as the ultimate authority, then He will direct our path. He will direct our path by revealing truth in scripture as well as speaking to us through other people.I do understand what you saying. Not all our thoughts, convictions, passions, and feelings come from God. And so, how can we tell what is from God and what is not? Your answer is to say that the bible is the primary revelation, and we should check everything against it. I do agree with you to a certain degree. God is not a god of conflict or confusion. And so, the bible is a good way to test different thoughts and philosophies. If our thoughts or convictions conflict with the bible, we should be very wary of thoughts or convictions. However, before checking our convictions against the bible, don't you think we should first turn to Christ and submit unto His authority? Should we not pray and ask Christ first? Additionally, God speaks to us in more ways than just through the bible. If our conviction conflicts with the bible, and we have prayed about it, is it not good to also bring it before other believers? Is it also not good to check ourselves against the Church? Should not the Church be united?However, if we have done all these things, and the Lord is still pushing us, then should we not listen to Him?I must admit that I am quick to follow every conviction laid on my heart. And for that I am guilty. I am learning to be patient and wait on the Lord. If the Lord really wants us to do something, He will affirm us. Like Jonah, He will not leave us alone until it is done. I believe people should always do the will of God first and foremost. They should always follow Christ first and foremost. Thanks for sharing,I will pray more about this and take your every word to heart. Blake

Hi BlakeWhat you are saying is that the scripture only becomes the word of God when it becomes the word of God to you, personally. That is Barthianism. Here is a test for you. "God is Spirit" Is that true or is it true when you believe it? You use the phrase 'the scripture holds revelation', Barth (and Bubbaguy, and you will see where it has taken him.) would have said 'the scripture holds the word of God' but is not the word of God in itself. Barth believed that the scriptures were the testimony of men and women to the 'word' of God' and not the word of God in themselves. The testimony of the scriptures might have some errors but the experience to which they testified was true. What we have then is a highly dubious testimony of a fallible eyewitnesses and we are dependent upon the person who bears the witness. This is why Bubbaguy rejects Paul's testimony in the scripture, because he cannot trust the man who Paul was.Christ, who is the word of God, believed that the scriptures were the word of God “Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.” (Mark 7:13, KJVS)“If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;” (John 10:35, KJVS)In this latter quote the phrases 'the scriptures' and 'the word of God' are synonimous. Certainly a man's spirit taught by the Spirit of God will recognise the 'word of God' as he reads it in the scripture, but recognising is not the same as validating. The scriptures must validate the 'word of God' as it is apprehended in the human heart. A man's spirit taught by the Spirit of God will 'witness to' the same Spirit's testimony in the scriptures. In fact, if a man's spirit does not recognise the the scriptures as the 'word of God' I question who is instructing his spirit.And yet, Martin Luther defied this very scripture by protesting the Catholic Church. He was not the first or the last. It was widely believe at the time that the bible should not have a single word changed, not even to be translated into another language. They felt this was an immense sin. And so, when Tyndale translated the bible into English, they killed him. I believe in all my heart that Tyndale and Luther were submitting unto the will of Christ holding Him as the ultimate authority. However, the men they protested against were holding the bible (thier own interpretation of it) as the ultimate authority. This is a gross distortion of the historical record of the lives of these two men. Whatever your grasp of the theology of the word of God, your history grasp is completely flawed on this point. But it makes your position clear that you do not believe in what evangelicals call the 'verbal inspiration of scripture'. This most certainly puts you alongside Bubbaguy whose 'witness' has led him to believe that human beings changed their shape when the committed the original sin of eating fleshmeat. Bubbuguys witness has also led him to a belief in reincarnation and a denial of hell as eternal. He rejects the Revelation because he was no 'witness' to it, and a good part of the OT goes the same way. In fact, once a person takes your stance they are yielding to the 'ultimate authority' of their own convictions. They will call it the 'inner light' or the 'witness of the Spirit' but in reality when it comes down to the wire they will stake their own convictions against the revelation of the scripture.The Holy Spirit spoke through King David and the writers of the bible. He used these writers to spread His message. Likewise, the Holy Spirit uses people today. Have you never heard His voice in someone? Have you not ever had an experience where someone said something to you, and you knew it was the Lord speaking to you? I have that experience all the time but I check what I think God is saying to me against the testimony of the scripture, my final authority. In fact the word 'likewise' is wrongly used in your comment above. No one today is creating scripture which would be the case if your argument were correct. The canon would not be closed which, in effect, is what you are saying by adding other equally authoritative revelation to the scriptures..When Christ speaks, whether through the bible or another person, is it not all by the same authority? Or is the bible always greater?Hopefully, it is by the same author but not with the same authority. The 'scripture cannot be broken', this is not the same with current guidance that God may bring in any way he chooses.However, before checking our convictions against the bible, don't you think we should first turn to Christ and submit unto His authority? Should we not pray and ask Christ first? I have never said that the Bible is the 'only' authority; that would be a misconception of my position. I am not even saying that it should always be the 'first' authority in chronological terms. But it must be first in the nature of its authority and must be last in the nature of its verdict.

Ron, the problem you are ignoring is that we all have to interpret the bible when reading it. Blake is saying that he depends upon the Holy Spirit in doing so. Do you?JakeI believe I do, but I believe in the Spirit led interpretation of a Spirit inspired Bible, do you?

The Bible records the history of man's growing relationship with God. As we have come up from primative times, the relationship evolved and this is reflected in the differing presentation styles and progression of the books within it.Just what Bible are you talking about. My Bible records the history of man's lost relationship with God as a result of his disobedience. My Bible says man fell downwards not upwards.It is inspired by God and recorded and passed down through the generations by fallible man.and who decides which bits are 'fallible'? fallible man?Yet, it is full of Truths and provides the basis for understanding and accepting salvation from sin through the teachings and sacrifice of Christ Jesus. It is worthy of study and consideration in the guidance of our lives and provides many fine examples of how people have dealt with this sinful and evil world. Can you see how selective this passage is? It is full of truths but not the Truth. The Truth I presume can only be revealed to infallible men who 'inner light' is never fallible.It teaches universal, unconditional love, and that is the most important thing in it. But how can you believe it when it teaches such things, knowing that it has been recorded and passed down through generations by fallible man?It is God's revelation of the true condition of man as a result of sin and sins. As such it claims, for itself, infallibility. Christ believed in its infallibility, so did George Fox and the early Quakers, and in its verbal inspiration, but it seems that is not sufficient for you. You must subject these things to your own judgement rather than trusting His. You prefer to put your faith in a man's fallible judgments rather than Christ's. There is no document on earth that I could trust if it was as full of error as is your Bible. I have not tried to measure it, but your rejection of most of the Old Testament, anything which speaks of judgement in the NT, the writings of Paul and the Revelation, must bring the percentage down to about 20% at most. If I asked you to risk your life on a document that was 80% inaccurate or unreliable where would you stand?If you reject Christ's witness, through the outbreathed words of God as contained in the scripture, you are perishing and this is not the first time I have tried to warn you of your perilous position. Contrary to your own stated position the testimony of scripture still stands...“To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” (Is. 8:20, KJVS)Your 'light', bubbaguy, is 'darkness'.

Yet, it is full of Truths and provides the basis for understanding and accepting salvation from sin through the teachings and sacrifice of Christ Jesus.If you believe that you are saved through the teachings and sacrifice of Christ Jesus then can I assume that you take the four gospels to be good history? What I mean by "good history" is that when you test them by the standards of historical research, do you believe they are historically reliable?In Christ,Ron

Dear Ron,I understand your fears and why you would not want to walk down the same road as Barth. However, I do not believe that because the bible was written by fallible men that it is untrustworthy. Rather, what this shows is how powerful God is to be able to use fallible men and women to deliver His message. I must say that I do not believe the bible is the Word of God. Immediately, this probably sets you back a few steps and causes you to question me, as you have said. I understand your fear especially since you are established in your belief that the bible is the Word of God. Please open your heart and listen to what I have to say first. Take my words to Christ and pray over them. May He speak to your heart. My intention is not to make the bible incredible, but to make Christ greater. As I have said many times, I love the bible. I do not think it is incredible or unreliable. I believe that Christ is supreme. John 1:1-14 (KJ)1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended F1 it not. 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. 11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power F2 to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.Some points I would like to highlight: "the Word was God" and "And the Word was made flesh".I do not think I need to argue that these scriptures are referring to Jesus Christ who is God and God's Word. It does not come out and say, "Jesus is God." However, "the Word was God" and "the Word was made flesh." When you say the bible is God's Word, then according to this scripture you saying that the bible is God. Do you believe that the bible is God? In addition to this, when you say the bible is God's Word, then what you are saying is that it is the words of God. The bible was written by men. They are the words of men. And so, when you say the bible is God's Word, then you are saying the men who wrote the bible are God. Do you believe Paul and John are God? I am sure you believe Jesus is God. There is a statement above that makes clear what the bible is. John says, "He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light." The bible bears witness to Jesus Christ. There is a significant difference between saying this and the bible is God's Word. The bible is just a witness. It is a message carried by messengers. The message comes from God. However, the messengers are God's people. The bible is a revelation. A revelation reveals. The bible reveals God's Word. However, the bible is not God's Word.The bible is the words of the writers. For example, the bible is the words of Paul. He spoke under influence of the Holy Spirit. He was a witness to Jesus. He was not Jesus. You are also a messenger of Christ. I have heard God speak through you to me on occasion. Your words were inspired by God as He revealed them to you. Does this make you God? Does this mean I can't believe your words because you are fallible? I do admit that I don't trust anyone easily. However, your words were revealed true to me not because they came from you, but because Jesus in me affirmed your words in me. This may be complicated to grasp. I am not saying the bible, or you, become God's Word at any time. I am not saying the bible or you ever become God. Rather, what I am saying is that God who is in me takes the message from the bible and confirms it in me. You must understand, the same Holy Spirit that filled the writers of the bible, like Paul, is the same Holy Spirit inside of you and me. The Holy Spirit is the same, but our experiences of it are different. The Holy Spirit reveals the same truth, (Jesus is the truth). However, our interpretation of the truth is different. We all serve the same God, but we each worship Him in different ways. When you say the bible has authority, you are elevating to the level of God, and you are also saying that there are more than one God. There is only one God, one authority, ruling over all. If you say the bible has authority, then the bible is God. If the bible is not God, then you are saying there is one God, the bible, and then another God, Jesus. This is not true. You once said that the testimony of Paul and the apostles is greater than mine or yours. This cannot be true because you are saying there are two Holy Spirits and two Christs. Paul and the apostles have one Christ who is greater than the Christ we have. There is one Christ, who lives in all Christians. The Christ in Paul and John is not greater than the Christ in your or me. It is the same Christ. Let me also address the scriptures you quoted:“Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.” (Mark 7:13, KJVS)“If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;” (John 10:35, KJVS)In both these scriptures, Jesus is referencing the law. And at that time, the law could not be broken. Jesus had not died to set us free from our sins. The law still had power and authority. Before Christ died, the law was the word of God. Men did not write the law. God wrote the law on two tablets with His own fingers. God wrote the law. The law was so Holy, it was preserved in the ark in the center of the temple. The law was final and it had authority. The law is the basis for which all things will be judged. The scripture, the law, the word of God cannot be broken. However, Jesus gave His life so that we may be set free from the law through His death. This is the message you preached to me. Therefore, we have been set free from the law as an authority, so that we can obey it in truth. Before we died with Christ, the law had authority over us. We were condemned by it. However, when Christ set us free, the law no longer had authority over us. Rather, we have submitted ourselves unto the authority of Christ. The bible has no authority over us. Rather, Christ has authority over us. This was done so that we could live up to the law in truth. The law is based upon love. However, love is a choice. The problem with the law is that it removes our choice. The law says. “You must do this or else you will die.” How can anyone show love if it is forced? Rather, now that we are free from the law, we can obey it in love. We can choose to believe in God’s Word. We can choose Christ. We can choose to live up to the law. By giving the bible authority, you are removing all of what Christ has done for us. You are saying, “The bible is God’s Word, it has authority greater than you, and it is what you must follow and do.” When people follow the law or abide by the bible because of the bible’s authority, then they are not doing it out of love. They are doing it because they must, because they have to. Rather, we should be filled with love and choose to do God’s will by choice. There is only one authority. He is Jesus Christ. We should follow Him. If we truly follow Christ, then we will also accept the bible in love. We know that the bible is inspired by God. It is one tool of many that Christ uses to spread His message. The bible is not the truth, it bears witness to the truth. By this, the bible can be used for teaching and instructing. If the bible were the truth, it could be used to command and force. However, the bible cannot force anything on anyone. The bible has no authority and exhibits no power apart from Christ. Ephesians 4:4-6 (KJ) 4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.What we have then is a highly dubious testimony of a fallible eyewitnesses and we are dependent upon the person who bears the witnessWe are NOT dependent upon the person who bears the witness. If that were true, then our faith would be based on the bible or another person. Our faith is based on Christ. We are dependent on Christ to give us our own testimony. We are not dependent on the person who bears the witness for each Christian bears Christ. We each have our own witness. Do you not have a testimony of Christ?Each of our testimonies is valid for Christ gave them to us. Each of us bears witness to the light. Whether we like it or not, our life is a testimony of Christ. We, as Christians, carry the name of Christ. Everything we do speaks to others about Christ (bears witness). (All the more reason to live Holy lives.) We are dependent on each other to complete the body of Christ. Each of us holds valuable gifts and knowledge that when combined we form the body of Christ. In this, it is important that we love each other and encourage each other in faith. Jesus is a personal God. He wants an intimate relationship with each of us. He wants to love us, not from a distance, but right where we are. Why would He put the bible in the middle of that relationship? The bible, I believe, is a gift from God. He gave it to help us, not control us.I hope this helps you to better understand what I have been saying.In love,Blake

Dear Ron,I wanted to comment on this quote, even though it wasn't directed to me. I hope you don't mind. But how can you believe it when it teaches such things, knowing that it has been recorded and passed down through generations by fallible man?How do you know you are saved? Do you base your salvation on the bible?I know I am saved because Jesus confirms it in me. He is in me. I can read the bible and discern truth because of Jesus in me. I can listen to a sermon and discern truth from it because of Jesus in me. I can read your responses and know what is truth, because of Jesus in me. Sometimes, I do admit that I am hard at hearing. Sometimes, I am stubborn and I stumble. However, Christ the good shepard always leads me back. If there is something important that I need to hear, He will make sure that I hear it. That's the whole point. I am an infallible man who bears sin and error, and yet within me is Jesus Christ. Inside of me, a lowly and unworthy being is Jesus Christ, the Holy and most High God. Through Paul, a murderer of God's own people, God chose to deliver His infallible and perfect message. If you reject Christ's witness, through the outbreathed words of God as contained in the scripture, you are perishing and this is not the first time I have tried to warn you of your perilous position. God's Word, His message, is Jesus Christ. Those who accept Jesus goto Heaven. Those who reject Jesus goto Hell. The bible is NOT Jesus. There are many, many religions out there that accept the bible. Are they all going to Heaven? There are many, many Christians out there that reject the bible. Are they all going to Hell? Can the bible save a person? We are saved by faith in Jesus Christ. Are we not? In love,Blake

Dear Ron,I am nothing and certainly the least of everyone. And it is known on this board that I have erred. But, I make a plea with you in love as your brother to think about your words carefully. Are these words of encouragement? Your 'light', bubbaguy, is 'darkness'.Matthew 7: 1-5 (KJ) 1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? 5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. In love,Blake

I am nothing and certainly the least of everyone. And it is known on this board that I have erred. But, I make a plea with you in love as your brother to think about your words carefully. Are these words of encouragement? It is no kindness if you see a man with his coat on fire to pat him on the back and wish him good morning.

The Gospels reinforce one another and yes, I believe they are historically accurate.Now, if those are good history, if that really happened–if Jesus did give these teachings that many think are the greatest moral teachings the world's ever seen, if He taught powerfully and with great insight into the spiritual realm and then punctuated His claims with miracles and the capping miracle of all, the resurrection–if that really did happen, if the historical evidence seems to be compelling, well then, it strikes me that this man's opinion about the source of the Old Testament matters.Jesus put His stamp of approval on and quoted from every section of the Old Testament. He would say, "God said" or "Scripture says" or "Moses said" or whatever writer. But clearly when you examine those words, in His mind those terms are interchangeable. He quoted from them as if they were authoritative, from God Himself.If Jesus gave His imprimatur to the Hebrew Bible, and if Jesus is someone whose word we might be able to trust, then that gives us good reason to trust the authority of the Hebrew Bible in all it says.Now, this may raise other questions, like what about the apparent contradictions? But you see, now I go to the Bible with good reason to believe it is not merely a book written by men about God and therefore would be subject to all of man's errors. I approach it as a book given by God to men about Himself, even though men were involved in writing it down. If the Bible is the word of God, and God can't err, then His word can't err. If I have good reason to believe that this is a fair way of looking at it, then when I come to a possible apparent contradiction, since my evidence is on the side of being authoritative, what I'm going to look for is a way to resolve the contradiction. I'm not going to camp on one apparent problem and use that to disqualify all the rest. Because if one apparent problem disqualifies the Bible as the word of God, then Jesus was wrong about His source of authority–the Scriptures–as coming from God. But Jesus was the one who worked the miracles, who rose from the dead, etc. And I think it's less likely that Jesus was mistaken than that I'm mistaken. I'm probably the one who's misreading.In Christ,Ron

I do admit that I don't trust anyone easily. However, your words were revealed true to me not because they came from you, but because Jesus in me affirmed your words in me. Don't believe a word I say... unless it is in absolute agreement with the revelation of God in the scriptures.Before Christ died, the law was the word of God. According to the reasoning of your post this would make 'the law - God'. You are right to say that the bible 'has no authority over us', but the bible is the revealed will and word of He who does have authority over us. This argument is as if you were saying I will disobey the law of the US because my loyalty is to the US and not to the law. I am not pleading for a 'law keeping' evangelicalism but your reasoning is the consequence of the first error in which your ultimate authority is not what Jesus Christ has said but what you think you hear him saying now. This has led you to the creation of your website; your perception of what Christ is saying now. I say that if what you are hearing is different to what Christ has already said, the voice you are hearing is not that of Christ. This is the warning I share with bubbaguy too. Which Christ are you talking about? There are many who claim to be Christ. I say that the scriptures will bear witness to the authentic Christ, and if your Christ speaks not according to their testimony, he is not Christ but a counterfeit.You once said that the testimony of Paul and the apostles is greater than mine or yours. This cannot be true because you are saying there are two Holy Spirits and two Christs. Paul and the apostles have one Christ who is greater than the Christ we have. Not at all. We are not questioning salvation but the recognition of God's voice. If you put your revelation on the same level as that of Paul and the Apostles you have no points of reference other than your own convictions. Have you ever been wrong in your inner witness convictions? or do you experience 100% infallibility in this area? It is quite plain from the verses shared that Christ equated the scriptures with the word of God. “If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;” (John 10:35, KJVS) The point I am making here does not relate to the law at all, but simply that Christ believed in the inerrancy of the Scripture. Even Bubbaguy admits that, but he believes Christ was fallible in his earthly experience believing the fantasies of his day eg Jonah and the great fish.Where do you stand with this? Was Christ fallible and therefore capable of error? If so was heaven and hell another accommodation to his day and age? If He was wrong on these issues how can we be sure that he was right on others?Paul claims that all scripture is god-breathed. Would he say the same of your website? If not, there is a qualitative difference between the inspiration of scripture and your 'inner witness'. If Paul was wrong here how do we know he was right elsewhere? Most of the teaching of the New Testament on the saving consequence of Christ's death comes from Paul; what if he was mistaken? Peter says that Paul's writings were scripture...“as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” (2Pet. 3:16, NKJV)...is your website 'scripture'? If not there is a qualitative difference between your inspiration and that of Paul. You are heading in the direction of those like some early Quakers and more recent Mormon's who claimed that they could 'make scripture as well as' Paul. Why not? if there is no qualitative difference between their experience of the Spirit's inspiration and that of the Apostles.There is an article on the Inspiration of Scripture by John MacArthur that I would encourage you to read. It will present these same arguments but in a structured manner not possible in these threads.

In saying this, I am fully accepting of the authority of scripture, to those who have scripture in their hands, but, I am concerned at the emphasis you put on it, seeing not only was Paul not with the twelve, (although he knew the Old Testament writings very well) but, there are literally thousands of Christians who have chosen to die for Christ's Name, who have never held a Bible in their hands.Paul's writings are expressly judged as scripture by the Apostle Peter.When I was three, I was given a beautiful book with Bible stories and gorgeous pictures. It was big, and we had to sit at a table to look at it. I remember the angels standing round the garden of Eden and the fiery sword turning in all directions to guard the way to the tree of life. Did this mean anything to me? Well, God thought it meant enough, for, the day after an extremely traumatic experience, He sent an angel to show His interest in me. There are two ways I knew what I was seeing was an angel. Firstly, he looked like one of the angels in the picture. Secondly, I was terrified - just like the shepherds in the field.I am struggling to see where this hallucination fits into our discussion. I am not disputing the fact that God can communicate with us in all manner or ways. I am not saying that a person becomes a Christian because they believe the Bible. I am saying that if they put their faith in a Jesus who is not the Jesus of the biblical revelation they are being misled. I do not believe that Bible words are magic; it is the entrance of God's word that gives light. What I am saying is that we are required, as we are able, to test our experience against the scripture and if it fails the test we re-evaluate our experience not the veracity of the scripture. The scripture thus becomes the final court of appeal.

Dear Ron,“If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;” (John 10:35, KJVS)The point I am making here does not relate to the law at all, but simply that Christ believed in the inerrancy of the Scripture.Consider the context:22 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter. 23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. 24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make F22 us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. 25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and my Father are one. 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.Let's establish the scenario first. Christ was talking to some Jews who were questioning his claim to being God's son. He was in a debate much like we have been debating. In order to establish an defense, Christ used the law to establish His point. "Is it not written in your law..." He then quoted scripture. In order to establish His point, He had to then establish that the law was final. And so, in doing so, He said, "and scripture cannot be broken." Christ was not giving a command to His disciples. He was not stating His position on a particular subject. He did not preface this scripture with, "I say..." Christ was speaking to the Jews in order to justify Himself in a debate. The law is binding and cannot be broken. This is true. We are all judged according to the law unless we have been saved by Christ. At the time Christ lived, the law was written in the scriptures. The scriptures were considered sacred and Holy. The law is final.However, as you established once before, when we have been born again, we die to the law. What does it mean to die to the law? Whatever your answer may be, it is the same of the bible. Peter says that Paul's writings were scripture...“as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” (2Pet. 3:16, NKJV)As a side note, I think it's interesting that you have quoted the KJVS up to this point, but for this scripture you quote NKJV. In the KJVS, it says "they do also the other scriptures."Peter does allude to Paul's letters as scripture. And I am not denying that the bible is indeed scripture. I agree with you. I do agree with you on many things. I agree the bible is good for teaching and instructing. It bears witness to the truth. The bible is an excellent way to check ourselves and learn more. It can be a way for the Lord to speak to us. I believe the Lord has given this as a gift to help us and guide us. I believe the writers of the bible were filled with the Holy Spirit. I believe the bible is inspired of God. The bible is an awesome book, and always my first pick. In our country, we are blessed to have the bible. We are blessed to have the bible written in our language. We are blessed to have it in abundance. What of other countries where resources are limited? What would you say for those people? Is it possible to be with Christ, to know Christ, to preach Christ, and not ever read a bible?The bible has not always been abundant. And not everyone has been able to read. This is a gift we should be greatly thankful for. For many years during the Dark Ages, the majority of people only knew Christ based upon the teachings of the Church. I do believe that Christ has used other vessels than the bible to speak to His people throughout History. And He does even yet. I do believe that Christ uses all His people in some way or another. We all play an important part in delivering the good news.Paul claims that all scripture is god-breathed. Would he say the same of your website?This confuses me. What website are you referring? I think you must have me mixed up with someone else. I don't think Paul was referring to his own letters when he said the above. Paul never called his own letters scripture. Even still, I think He would say his letters were inspired by God. Paul did say repeatedly that He was commissioned to deliver the good news to the gentiles. I cannot speak for Paul. I am not Paul. However, there have been times that the Lord has used me to speak to other people. Yes, there has been times the Holy Spirit has filled me and used me to deliver His message. Most of the time, I am unaware the Lord is even using me. How should I know? The message is not for me. However, the times I do know for sure are the times people were saved. Anyhow, I think I should stop debating. I will let this set in Christ's hands and pray over it. If you have more to say, I will read it and look it over. I checked out that link you sent me. The writer stretches His arguments thin on many things. It would be a long post to debate everything. The important thing is that we give ourselves unto Christ as our Lord in love. I believe in all my heart that you have. And by this, we are in agreement. For the same Christ that is in you is in me. I trust in Christ, therefore I trust in you. Thank you for sharing all that you have. In love,Blake

I have read much of this thread with interest and would make a very simple statement.Sin is always voluntary, so if I sin it's a decision I chose to make. The devil didn't make me do it.

This is not what I have said. My point is that Christ spoke to the condition of people in the times of His earthly existence. He refers to Adam because no one could have understood anything else. This is cultural. He refers to Noah and the flood because it is a point of reference that the people of that culture and history would understand. He makes these points in context. This is not saying He is fallible at all.so was there an Adam, was there a Jonah? Christ tied the miracle of his resurrection into the literal equivalence of Jonah's experience. “For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” (Matt. 12:40, KJVS)You will notice the equivalence 'as Jonah' so... the Son of man. If Christ's use of the the Jonah story is the use of a cultural image what are we to make of his resurrection?

Paul claims that all scripture is god-breathed. Would he say the same of your website?This confuses me. What website are you referring? I think you must have me mixed up with someone else.

Quote:Peter says that Paul's writings were scripture...“as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.” (2Pet. 3:16, NKJV)As a side note, I think it's interesting that you have quoted the KJVS up to this point, but for this scripture you quote NKJV. In the KJVS, it says "they do also the other scriptures."I did so intentionally because I thought the NKJV makes the point a little more clearly. The word used 'loipoi' means 'the remaining ones'. Peter referred to the OT etc as 'the remaining ones'. That is to say the 'scriptures' are made up of Paul's writings and the 'rest'.Why did you find it 'interesting'?

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;There is no need to take in the whole of the chapter in this instance. I am simply showing that 'the word of God' and 'scripture' are synonimous terms in this verse.

Dear Philologos, After all this discussion on the authority of the bible, I decided to do some research. As a result I read two helpful articles from Bakers Evangelical Dictionary, one on the "word" of God, and the other, "Authority of the Bible." Interestingly enough, the articles state proposals from both our arguments. Although, it does end with the "The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy" which I reject in part (not entirely). Obviously, we are not the first or the last to debate this issue. Nonetheless, all this has lead me into deep prayer and seeking. As a result, I have established a statement of faith on the authority of the bible in agreement with both the bible and what Christ has revealed to me. Although, I am nothing, and this statement is of no use to anyone other than myself, unless directed otherwise by Christ.Thank you for sharing all you have with me. I have learned a great deal. BlakePS....I must say, after this research, your pen name has been given new meaning. Definition Philologus = "lover of the Word" 1. a Christian Paul greets in his epistle to Romans (Ro 16:15) Although, you spell "logus" as "logos" which is "a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea." This point most interested me:"A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus first used the term Logos around 600 B.C. to designate the divine reason or plan which coordinates a changing universe. This word was well suited to John's purpose in John 1." -------from (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/) Greek lexicon based on Thayer's and Smith's Bible Dictionary plus others; this is keyed to the large Kittel and the "Theological Dictionary of the New Testament." These files are public domain.

This point most interested me:"A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus first used the term Logos around 600 B.C. to designate the divine reason or plan which coordinates a changing universe. This word was well suited to John's purpose in John 1." Hi BlakeIt has been a matter of scholarly discussion for centuries as to just how 'well suited' the Greek concept of the 'logos' is to John's use of the term. The question is was John using 'logos' in the Greek philosophical sense or was he using it the way the Greek translation of the OT had used it. Was John thinking of the Targum of Jonathan or the philosophies of John's day? No doubt the discussion will continue. :-)

So, why do you accept Mark's and Luke's word, who were not disciples with the twelve?It is pretty well established that Mark was the 'penman' for Peter. As you say, there is no rush for others writing to be 'included in the Bible' but there has always been a pressure for people under 'inspiration' to have their view 'added to the Bible'; the obvious modern equivalent of this would be the Mormons, but in more subtle ways the 'charismatics' are constantly tempted in this direction.Luke's writings (page for page, he wrote more of the NT than anyone else) would be a the exception, but orthodox Christians have never questioned the authenticity of his contribution. His association with Paul would be part of his authenticating credentials.Some of these issues are well covered by F F Bruce. and in particular the Canon of the New Testament.

Although, you spell "logus" as "logos" which is "a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea."You are the first one to pick up the difference in spelling! I opt for my spelling simply because it makes the connection with 'logos' more obvious. It could also be translated 'Friend of the Word'. I do enjoy 'words'. For some years during the Y2K 'bug' issue I was employed by an international bank to explain Y2K issues and resolutions to their customers and country regulators. I described myself as an 'entomological etymologist' - the 'bug-hunters word finder'! :-D Although, you spell "logus" as "logos" which is "a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea." I would express it as 'the concept expressed'. You have to watch Thayer at times, he was a unitarian and consequently did not believe in the divinity of Christ.

Dear philologos, It has been a matter of scholarly discussion for centuries as to just how 'well suited' the Greek concept of the 'logos' is to John's use of the term. The question is was John using 'logos' in the Greek philosophical sense or was he using it the way the Greek translation of the OT had used it. Was John thinking of the Targum of Jonathan or the philosophies of John's day? No doubt the discussion will continue.I didn't know that, but I could definitely see why and how that would come about. The word "logos" seems to encapsulate a broad range of meaning, in denotation and connotation. All this debate and discussion over the bible shows that even in the bible we must have faith. I do believe that our faith in Christ will lead us to the bible. I have never know a believer to accept Jesus, reject the bible, and flourish in faith.Thanks again, Blake

The word "logos" seems to encapsulate a broad range of meaning, in denotation and connotation. People who hear me preach must tire of hearing me say 'Bible words don't have definitions, they have histories'! :-) This is why we must allow the scripture to be its own interpreter. Otherwise we end with the result once described by Spurgeon when he commented that "the Bible throws a lot of light on the commentaries!" :-D