Tongues?

[Guest kingdombrat]

1 hour ago, SwordMaster said:

kingdombrat said...

 

What I am referring to is stuff like the Benny Hinn nonsense...waving his jacket around on stage and his die-hard followers "fall out" supposedly under the Spirit. Claiming to heal people and having them come on stage claiming they were healed, only later to be approached by news personalities and confessing that they were never sick in the first place. 

I do believe in miracles, I have seen my share. I believe that God works through certain people in a special way (or He used to, anyway, before the degradation of the church in its present form)...but there are so many charlatans in the pentecostal-charismatic movement that it gives both movements a bad name.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against pentecostals in general, but there are always "black sheep" in the house...faking tongues, faking healings, etc. But, I just try to remember that we are all people, and satan gets under people's skin and causes them to think and act in...undignified ways. 

..

Unfortunately, I cannot disagree with you or your post.   In fact, many of the televised Ministers I worry about when concerning their true doctrine, personal views, and bottom line hidden agenda.   And what's sad are those non televised Ministers trying to become the [next BIG thing].   And surprisingly, you find all of the [sects], not just Pentecostals, suddenly professing views not norm for their traditional specific Doctrines.  When I see Wesleyan's preaching like Baptist, or Presbyterian's getting as excited as Pentecostal's, or which ever may be the scenario, I think "have they been [Enlightened], or is this an act to draw numbers and offering plates?"

 

And the big scare today is not really denominations and their platforms, it's these [Seeker Friendly] churches.   When you scan neighborhoods and find out why people choose not to attend church (Truth of the Gospel, Adultery, SIN) and they feel guilty and convicted...so, you build a Church where you do not preach the "Truth, or what the Bible clarifies as SIN" so those members can attend, give their 10%, not feel guilty for cheating on their Spouse or whatever their [vice] may be...you have built a House of Ill Repute.   And the [Seeker Friendly] church is the (fastest) growing congregation today.   People claiming to know God, claiming to be of the "Elect," claiming to be Saved, but have [NEVER] repented of their sins.   It's an outright Mockery unto God!

[David1701]

14 hours ago, rhomphaeam said:

I am so glad that you added your post script, bother. That was the meaning that the Spirit led me to speak about. 

A word of wisdom:

Do not remove yourself from what you write one day and seeing it another day wonder about your mind. That seeming more difficult thing is a fore shadow of your calling and so when it comes to the fore it is but a momentary drawing back the veil. Your mind is intact and there is no need to examine yourself to look for neurological meanings because others cannot easily receive those fruits. Neither is it an abnormality to say that which comes easily in those moments and then to find it difficult to see the spirit of what you have said another day. When the time of mercy is over and the House has been given the fullness of Christ by those who labour to that end in obedience, and by a sovereign act of God, then that veil will be removed and there will be no doubt about what is to come upon the churches who have eaten by then the fullness of the harvest and still turn away. 

Yes, this is the other side of the coin; however, I do sometimes post things in a poor frame of mind.  I can't claim that all of it is led by the Holy Spirit.

[Frits]

21 hours ago, Justin Adams said:

The Masoretic text was a rewrite. The LXX disavowed due to the early church using it and its messianic flavor. Qumran shows us some of the 'real' autographs. Incidentally, there is not just one Masoretic abridged text either.

It is obvious by their writings that the apostles and therefore Yeshua read many texts that we do not have that include quotes or allusions to the works of 1st Enoch and the War Scrolls. Plus other allusions, for instance, the Book of the Giants.

Hi Justin,

In our country the 16e century there lived a man Desiderius Erasmus. It was he who collected (Greek) manuscripts of the New Testament, and formed the Textus Receptus. This TR has been the starting point for example the King James, and here in the Netherlands the Staten Vertaling. Did you know that and what do you think of KJ Version?    

God bless you.

[Guest kingdombrat]

14 hours ago, kingdombrat said:

Here are 3 Ancient sources who make the claim the Book of Matthew was written in Hebrew [and one of them was a Disciple of John].  

 

 

 

Papias: Matthew composed the sayings of the Lord in the Hebrew language, and everyone translated them as best as they could (Eusebius's Church History 3.39.16).

 

   Irenaeus: Matthew wrote a Gospel in the Hebrew language, while Peter and Paul were preaching the Gospel and founding the church in Rome (Against Heresies 3.1.1).

 

  Origen: The first Gospel was that according to Matthew, who was once a toll-collector but later an apostle of Jesus Christ. He published it for those who became believers from Judaism, since it was composed in the Hebrew language (Eusebius's Church History 6.25.4).

This is interesting to go along with these other 3 [PROOFS]!

 

This account I am adding even claims NO ONE knows who authored the Greek Matthew because it was not the [original nor authentic] version of Matthew:

 

Jerome: Matthew – who was also (called) Levi – was an apostle and former tax-collector. He first composed the Gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters and wrote for the Jews of Judea. It is not known who translated the Gospel into Greek. The Hebrew Gospel still exists, and Jerome claimed to have read it. (Illustrious Men 3)

Edited December 6, 2020 by kingdombrat

[David1701]

14 hours ago, kingdombrat said:

Here are 3 Ancient sources who make the claim the Book of Matthew was written in Hebrew [and one of them was a Disciple of John].  

 

 

 

Papias: Matthew composed the sayings of the Lord in the Hebrew language, and everyone translated them as best as they could (Eusebius's Church History 3.39.16).

 

   Irenaeus: Matthew wrote a Gospel in the Hebrew language, while Peter and Paul were preaching the Gospel and founding the church in Rome (Against Heresies 3.1.1).

 

  Origen: The first Gospel was that according to Matthew, who was once a toll-collector but later an apostle of Jesus Christ. He published it for those who became believers from Judaism, since it was composed in the Hebrew language (Eusebius's Church History 6.25.4).

Okay, thanks for that.

I've now had a chance to have a quick look at some views and evidence online and, from what I've seen, you could be right that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, but it's far from certain.

[Guest kingdombrat]

1 minute ago, David1701 said:

Okay, thanks for that.

I've now had a chance to have a quick look at some views and evidence online and, from what I've seen, you could be right that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, but it's far from certain.

Let me ask you this:

 

Why would Ancient Sources [including a Disciple of John the Beloved Disciple of Christ] "lie" about Matthew being originally written in Hebrew?

[David1701]

8 minutes ago, kingdombrat said:

Let me ask you this:

 

Why would Ancient Sources [including a Disciple of John the Beloved Disciple of Christ] "lie" about Matthew being originally written in Hebrew?

I'm not suggesting that anyone lied.

Here's a link to a Wikipedia article about the subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Gospel_hypothesis#:~:text=Matthew also issued a written,in Hebrew for Jewish believers.

[Alive]

A little levity. The universal translator (Star Trek) unveiled.

https://gadgetslaboratory.com/trending/cool-gadgets-2020/more/translator_offer/?clickid=e5393qdmygh8aa

[Justin Adams]

2 hours ago, Frits said:

what do you think of KJ Version? 

Very good considering what they had to work with. A little 'monarchistic' in places and 'RC' in others, but on the whole an excellent work.

[Guest kingdombrat]

4 hours ago, David1701 said:

I'm not suggesting that anyone lied.

Here's a link to a Wikipedia article about the subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Gospel_hypothesis#:~:text=Matthew also issued a written,in Hebrew for Jewish believers.

Wiki is the idealism and thoughts of human assumption, not absolute fact.   There are other sources claiming the first, the authentic, and the original version Book of Matthew was written in Hebrew.   The only reason there is even an argument over the Hebrew Book of Matthew is because several key beliefs from the Greek version [IS NOT] found in the original true Hebrew Book of Matthew.   Some people believe it changes views toward Baptism, the Godhead, God, and so they don't want to accept the true original Hebrew version.

Edited December 6, 2020 by kingdombrat