₦airaland Forum

BabaGnoni:
You can huff and puff as much as you like, I am not getting sucked in
You can puke as much as you want to, you aren't extracting anything further out of me, except that you are close to the truth that "Baba" was giving spiritual authority to his assertions via HIS impressions
I advised not to open up a can of worms, which is why I looked the other way at the earlier spoiling-for-a-response comments, but you're so bent on.
Suck it up. Why are you so determined about this. I have moved on.
Though I did not nor never had called "Baba" an Apostle. It is Joagbaje among others on the record that called "Baba" an Apostle
However to your displeasure, I stand by the statement ""Baba" claiming to be an Apostle"
- made no mistake, don't need retracting the statement nor need to apologize

Sad.

BabaGnoni:
"Baba" did with his.... and the evidences are in his books and all out in the public domain.

If there's anything like that at all, maybe a honorary board member extension should be given to you to know how
- I think it was Gombs that coined the "board-meeting" phrase.

but then vooks has already answered you in some ways nau.

When trouble sleep, yanga go wake am, wey tin, e dey find, my people ooo....

The thread is serene as it is now, if not that it's a lock-jaw thing, why do you want to open up a can of worms

No, he has NOT answered me anything. In fact, he said we should wait for you to respond. Is it that you don't have an ounce of integrity or what?

You accuse somebody falsely and when asked to validate your false claim, you're dancing palongo. That's nauseating and quite unbecoming of a christian. Calling him an apostle was relevant to what your point because you wanted to convey the impression that he was giving spiritual authority to his assertions by adding that he was an apostle.

If you made a mistake, why don't you simply retract the statement and apologize?

BabaGnoni:
I shall lift my eyes to the hills; from where will come my helper?
- We all need help
Don't gang up on WinsomeX, please release and leave WinsomeX alone.
If at all WinsomeX was angry, WinsomeX was angry at the statement (i.e. how it was twisted)

I wasn't referring to you or anybody you were addressing. The person that was associated with anger issues knows himself.

BTW, have you figured out yet if Hagin claimed to be an apostle or not?

Bidam:
Mbaemeka was right. He followed the crowds that are calling the devotional gift of tongues gibberish. In other words he doesn't even believe in the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues.

Correct. Nobody is fooled by his antics. He claims he believes in tongues. But he turns around to reject tongues as generally understood by those who believe in tongues. So, he's no different from those who do not believe in tongues or who treat it as something "mystic".

shdemidemi:
Make we scotch the matter o.... I trust mba to act sensibly with him rejoinder sha..

He shouldn't even respond to the nonsense. This guys needs help. Didn't somebody say sometime ago that he has anger issues?

WinsomeX:
And the way it manifests itself is through experiences? Sign and wonders; miracles; breakthroughs; etc. My friend: the Just shall live by faith and not experiences.

There are many sincere Christian people who will live and die not having experienced a thing and they are soundly God's people who will have greater rewards than some who seem to glory in demons they cast out, miracles they did; alas the Master saith I knew you not, you workers of iniquity.

Why did Paul in all epistles extol the faith, hope and love of the saints; why did he not extol their experiences? It was bc experiences are not what have value before God. You want experiences? Satan will give you plenty.

I am grateful to God for revealing his Son to me, the one I follow daily by faith. Dying to myself and living to him. Endeavoring to walk in holiness and a way worthy of the gospel.

I have had pleasant experiences in my walk with Jesus. Saved at the height of sin; to serve the living God. Blessed with the best family on earth. Called to ministry to serve the living God. Endured great suffering for my testimony in Christ both in the church and in the world. Daily looking unto Jesus the author and the finisher of my faith. Pleasant experiences I tell you.

But all of that I count as dung, only that I may know him, partaking in the fellowship of his sufferings that somehow I might attain to a glorious resurrection to receive the only commendation worth it all: well done good and faithful servant.

That's all the experience I have and all the experience I need. Faith is enough; I am complete in Christ!

You seem to be a master of conflation!

What is the issue here?

1. The experiences are NOT genuine.
2. The experiences should not be placed above the fruit of the spirit.

I don’t know anybody in WOF who has issues with #2. There are many messages on the place of character and charisma. The Lord even gave me one recently. The point is that when people mention experiences, you attack it on the basis that they are not genuine. When they want to show they’re genuine, you dismiss them as elevating experience over character. Haba! Which one is your problem?

In terms of character, thank God for what He’s doing in your life. But do you seriously think you have better character than everybody or even most people in WOF? I can assure you that character wise, you cannot come close to standing before the Hagin you attack all the time. The fact that you have nothing to attack him on character wise (save plagiarism, which doesn’t count here) is why you cling to laughter and snake hissing and any other stuff you can conjure.

shdemidemi:
I feared the worse when I saw that, thank God it was an analogy. Though, I still don't think visible proofs or experiences are are yardsticks for measuring spirituality.

I am really sorry for misquoting you.

That's fine. You are a gentleman. And a good christian man. In fact, your character qualifies you as a WOFer!

shdemidemi:
[size=20pt]REALLY!!![/size]

The yardstick to measure who speaks the truth of God's word has been reduced to bank accounts,residence et al.

Isn't this the same thing Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar thought about Job? Since you are in so much 'problems', God can't be with you, in fact you must have offended God.

Brother, you're off your game today. Is everything Ok?

Where did I say that the bank account, etc analogy is about the truth of God's Word? I was using a natural phenomenon to illustrate my point. Lord!

shdemidemi:
So many assumptions up there, I call assumptions the lowest and weakest form of obtaining information. If the lady got what God gave her because He is good, what has rolling on the floor and her words got to do with what she got?

Should we start teaching a doctrine of rolling on the floor and other works you 'assumed' this woman did to get her baby?

Even if you assume what she did worked for her, would the same formula work for another christian with a similar challenge?

I suggest you read the post again. ALl your questions were answered there. But to make it easier, let me answer again:

1. She got it AFTER rolling on the floor. So, your question is irrelevant. It's not like God gave her a baby, but she said "No, God, I must roll on the floor first to obtain it."

2. There's no doctrine there to teach. She had a spiritual experience that is contradicted nowhere in the Bible.

3. It may or may not work for another christian. Every christian should stay close to the Holy Spirit to hear His instructions about what to do in a given situation. That's what Jesus did, which showed the diversity of His approaches. A major reason the NT is different from the OT is that OT folks had everything written for them, because they did not have the kind of heart that can receive God's instructions. But God said in the NT, He will give His children a new heart, a heart of flesh, so He can lead them more personally. Then, He said the Holy Spirit to accomplish that.

That's why those that despise experiences with the Holy Spirit are likely christians living far below their privileges in Christ. They're living at OT level.

WinsomeX:
And when the Holy Spirit provides illumination, such illumination will come through experiences? That's the root of deception of the Word of Faith. You won't admit it but WoF considers experiences and the supernatural more authoritative than the bible. If this is not so, why this preoccupation with experiences? Or whether someone has had an experience or not?
It's difficult for you to accept it but there remains nothing like an experience of laughing in the Spirit. Those who have such experience were not found in scripture but in the occult world.

There is nothing to admit. WOF does NOT place experiences above the Word of God. What you seem to mistake is the fact that something present cannot be hidden for long. If you have Jesus or the Holy Spirit, it will manifest one way or another. If somebody keeps on talking about how rich he is, but nothing in their life suggests wealth - bank accounts, charity, dressing, residence, etc - won't you be suspicious of the claim?

shdemidemi:
Yes, I have always said it was God the father for the Old Testament administration(This entire programme pointed Israel to the son), the Son for the four gospels (He came to His own but they rejected Him) and now the Spirit for the mystical body of Christ(He also points us to the son).

Sorry, can't elaborate at the minute...

Thank you for making your position clear. Coming from you that's neither WOF nor Pentecostal, that is significant. Because some people would claim that it is a WOF invention. Which is what they prefer to do instead of discussing the substance.

WinsomeX:
No I don't. I don't owe you an answer. I saw your earlier post asking the same thing and I was beginning to wonder if you have comprehension troubles or something. I have explained to you why it is personal to me and non of your business. What's there in it you don't understand? Pls come to whatever conclusion you wish, it doesn't bother me. I am not WoF and I don't flaunt experiences around. The scriptures are sufficient.

If there's any comprehension problem, it's from your side, not mine. You said you're following Paul's example. I understood that and showed you how you were NOT following Paul's example. You're free not to respond, but to claim there's a comprehension issue here is laughable.

Indeed, I have come to my conclusion: you guys attack spiritual experiences because you hardly have any. The cure as recommended earlier is to get closer to the Holy Spirit and you'll see the difference. Claiming that you read the Bible is not sufficient. Even non-christians do. What makes the difference is how the Holy Spirit provides illumination as we read the Word.

vooks:
Ok sir, let's wait.

Allow me to ask you, do you believe tha Holy Spirit manifests in ways different from what is recorded in the scriptures?

My answer to your question is Yes. The Holy Spirit can manifest in any way He chooses so long as it does not contradict the written Word of God. Let me give an example. A woman shared a testimony. She and her husband did not have a child for the first 15 years of marriage. Then, she asked her husband to let her go to their annual church program alone, although the husband had been there with her in previous years. She wanted to pray uninhibited by what anybody thought about her. While at the meeting, she rolled on the floor over and over again. She was asking God to remove her reproach. Now, let's say it's the Holy Spirit that told her to roll on the dirty floor. Let's also assume that her problem had been self-righteousness and she had to come to a point where she realized that God would be doing the miracle, not because she was a good girl who had been a committed christian, but because God is good. Rolling on the floor may help her catch the point of humility. She got her miracle and not only did she have a child shortly after, but last time I saw her (this year), she was pregnant with a second. Some of you'd ridicule her experience and claim that God could not have told her to do so because God never told anybody to do so in the NT. That's your cup of tea, but you cannot post ONE scripture that supports your position.

Regarding the accuser-of-the-brethren wannabe, you may have to wait for a while for him to respond to his allegation that Hagin claimed to be an Apostle. It appears the guy has a low Integrity Quotient. Not only did his silence on the Eve story demonstrate it, but he also showed his true character during the deleted WOF thread. There, he accused Hagin of writing something. I told him that was not possible since Hagin was dead AFTER the date he calimed he wrote it. He kept quiet on that. When I saw him making other posts on that same thread, I reminded him of the falsehood he passed across.

What was his response? That he did not correct his erreneous statement because he had chosen earlier not to be responding to my posts. Can you imagine such nonsense? I told him he did not need to respond to me to correct it, as he can do so in a fresh post, not quoting or addressing me. I excoriated him for placing his personal feelings or decisions above the TRUTH and his obligation to ensure that his readers were not fed the wrong information.

You can see why I hardly take some of you critics seriously. The people you criticize have more integrity in their pinky finger than some of you have in your whole body!

vooks:
I got curious because I know from one of his books He gave Gifts to Men that Hagin was against titles. He has described how he stepped into the office of a Prophet in 1952 15 years after he started ministry and so forth. So I knew him to at least have regarded himself as a prophet but he seldom used the title.

The site I posted by Randall an obvious big fan of him came up. You may want to click the link again

You are just as vengeful as mbaemeka carrying grudges to the tenth generation. You may want to take up growing up seriously, it don't hurt growing up


Arguments from silence are notoriously unreliable. I know Hebrews has employed that argument effectively on Melchizedek but that's Spirit inspired. In normal circumstances, use them if you have NOTHING else. Why would I dignifiy your infantile rants by responding to them? I hold my peace and let you wallow in your own folly alone. There is so much truth to never-argue-with-a-fool line

Vengeful must have a different meaning from the one in the dictionary.

In fairness to the "accuser" brother, he never said that Hagin used the title of Apostle. One can claim to be an apostle while disclaiming the use of that or other title. So, let's give the brother a chance to provide just ONE example of Hagin claiming to be an apostle or claiming to be called to the office of an apostle. Asking him to show an instance of Hagin using the title or addressing himself as Apostle will be a taller order.

WinsomeX:
I agree with everything you have written. I do not deny the person of the Holy Spirit. Indeed the Holy Spirit is Christ in us. If it is "in this sense" you see the Spirit REPLACING Christ in us, I cannot argue further. But note that the emphasis is on the name Christ: "Christ in us..." There is a reason for it. It is Christ the Holy Spirit glorifies.

There is however a danger with a devotion to spirits, it opens up the believers to all kinds of spirit that have gone into the world and that's why there must be that distinction btw the Spirit of Christ and other spirits. Same way as the NT has distinguished God as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ from other gods. The name Christ is the distinction and he remains the object of our worship. If our devotion is made to a Spirit, it must be in Jesus name, anything else is cultic.

This also does not justify extra biblical occurrences like laughing in the Spirit.

But everything he said is what I had been saying, down to the meaning of comforter and the use of the word "dispensation." And you were there disagreeing? That's why I don't like to write sometimes until I can relax and express my ideas, so that it is as clear as crystal.

Note also that when I said I was using dispensation in the loose sense, I meant that I wasn't using it in the technical sense it is often used among christians, like the dispensations consisting of Law, Grace, etc.

Now, do you have answers for us regarding your spiritual experiences, following the standard of Paul?

shdemidemi:
Who does the groaning in Romans 8:26- the believer, the believer's spirit or the Holy Spirit?

Not trying to avoid the question. But was I right in my conclusion that YOU agree that we are in the Age of the Holy Ghost, just as the previous Age was that of Jesus Christ and earlier one was that of the Father? Care to elaborate further, so people can learn some more? I think you did a fine job of it the other time.

vooks:
GBAM!

I may be mistaken, but were you not the guy that asked that pidgin not be spoken to you because you're not Nigerian? You know of and use Gbam, huh?

WinsomeX:
You said the Holy Spirit came to replace Jesus. I said no. You said this dispensation is the dispensation of the Spirit and I said no it isn't.

DrummaBoy had pasted an article where he made it clear that the Christian devotion was to Christ and not to the Spirit. A point he believes was drawn home by the Spirit being mentioned once on Colossians. He said that the over emphasis on the Spirit is the root of errors by groups like the Pentecostals that leads them into mysticism. Even at that he made it clear that he was not belittling the Holy Spirit only stating that Christians should lay the right emphasis.

You refuted this position by saying that the Holy Spirit has come to replace Christ and I made it clear to you that that is error because the gospel we preach is the Gospel of Jesus Christ and not of the Spirit and our devotion is to Christ and not the Spirit.

Apparently when the error of your initial position downed on you, you have now helped us with your "in that sense statement" below. But the fact remains that the root of so much errors in the church, especially Pentecostals, is mysticism that arises from an emphasis on the Spirit that scripture does not teach. If however it is in this "sense" you mean that the Spirit "replaced" Christ in us, we are on the same page then.





I am not "attacking" anyone. If that's how your simple mind sees it, then mature in thinking. I just told your "boy" the facts I am defending here.

Also, my Christian life is not experience based. I don't count them as things to recount to anyone. They are personal and yes I will keep them closeted. You could as well ask Paul why he kept his closeted too.

2 Corinthians 12:4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

And as to your counsel to seek a "deeper Christian life", thank you but no thanks. Go and find out the beginning of all errors in all religion. It was always because the simplicity of Christ was not enough for them and while seeking "deeper life" they encountered demons. I don't need it. I am complete in Christ - the message of epistle to the Colossians.

I have said the same thing since the beginning. If you couldn't catch it earlier, that's your problem, not mine.

Paul talked about and demonstrated his experiences. He said he spoke in tongues more than them all. Do you speak in tongues? He said Jesus appeared to him a number of times. He said the gospel or kingdom was not in speech, but in power. And he showed it by manifesting spiritual gifts to heal, cast out demons and cause blindness. Have you manifested any spiritual gifts? At least, let's judge you by the standard by the standard you have selected - Paul's.

Even in the scripture you quoted, Paul mentioned he had been somewhere, the third heaven, and saw things but wouldn't disclose all he heard there. Where have you been, even if you don't want to share what you heard?

You guys amuse me with your penchant for dissecting other people's lives but want to keep yours off limits. Some of you even want ministers to disclose their health situation, claiming that Paul did. Ok, now follow Paul and tell us about your spiritual life.

mbaemeka:
John 16:7 KJV
Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient and I you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
John 16:28 KJV
I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.
Jesus was leaving the world. He was about to complete his mission by dying on the cross so he began to prepare the minds of his disciples by telling them exactly so. Naturally, they felt sad. The Teacher, helper, cormforter, advocate etc. Was going to leave them after all he had taught and shown them. They felt abandoned like Orphans. So he shares a secret with them that he is sure will make up for his absence: that when he leaves the father would send 'Allos Parakletos' meaning another one of the same kind. The only difference being that he would be a spirit that will live in the disciples butwwould be unseen or unknown to natural men.
Jesus goes further by saying it is to their advantage that he leaves the scene. For if he doesn't, that Spirit of truth will not come. The Spirit of truth is whom Jesus referred to as Allos Parakletos. He was to REPLACE Jesus in the lives of the disciples because he is EXACTLY like Jesus and Jesus was leaving the scene.
Jesus said he would testify of him and only take from him to show the world. Jesus said he would teach all truth (the same 'all' truths Jesus could not share with his disciples at the time). He was to glorify Jesus and make Jesus 'still present' in the disciples life even though Jesus would be in heaven. That's why Paul kept saying "if Christ be in you" "till Christ be formed in you" etc. Christ will only be present in the christians life by the agency of the Holy Spirit.
In 2 Corinthians 13:14, Paul shows us who we are to fellowship with. He says we are to know the Love of God and the Grace of the Lord Jesus but when he gets to the Holy Spirit, he tells us to have communion, fellowship, intimacy with him. Why? Because he is the one present now in the world and in the life of a christian. Not a single person can claim to know Jesus without fellowshiping with the Holy Spirit. That's why feel for those who neglect their devotions to him and in the same breath claim they know Jesus. It is not possible.
This is the reason there are some self styled christians that question the way this precious Holy Spirit of God chooses to manifest himself. They question it because they do not know the one who makes these manifestations possible- The Spirit of Christ himself and we are in his DISPENSATION.

Thank you, jare. It is sad that some people that call themselves Christians don't know this simple truth. I didn't have the strength to do the bobo's homework for him. Sadder still because this guy claimed to have attended Sprit-filled churches for years until he was shown the door by one last year or so.

vooks:
I don't have an opinion on the matter, I just quoted Randall. Dyslexia perish in Jesus name!

You sure have an opinion. Your goal is to bail somebody out. Otherwise why take the trouble to run a google search and post the irrelevant search result you posted? As you can see, I modified my post to ask you another question, Mr. I don't argue from silence AND Mr. If I don't respond to people's claim against me, it doesn't mean it is true. You people and your useless double standard!

vooks:
I did a simple Google and this site came up. It's owner is Randal Grier
http://rgm.me/what-ive-seen-in-the-spirit/who-was-kenneth-erwin-hagin/



This is not to say that Hagin called or regarded himself as an apostle but at least his close friends did and he never corrected them

Even coming from you, this is ridiculous. Who are the close friends and where did they make such reference?

So that's your new standard for determining if somebody made a claim or not?

For your information, Hagin stated repeatedly what his calling was. And it was not apostle. He even had something to say about those who claim the apostolic mandate without the call to back it.

WinsomeX:
I believe you were quoting the wrong person. But here is my answer all the same.
No I can't. I have made "why' clear to you earlier.
There is nothing in the strong concordance different from what I had said earlier. If there is, quote Strong here and show me.
Remember our point of contention: The Holy Spirit is not a REPLACEMENT for Christ. There is no such thing as the dispensation of the Spirit.
The Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Christ, is our helper, our advocate, our counsellor. He is with us to help us with our devotion to Christ and NOT OUR DEVOTION TO HIMSELF. This is what scriptures, especially John 14 and 16, teaches.
Devotion to the Spirit is the foundation of many delving into mysticism and errors.

Who said anything about the Holy Spirit and devotion to Himself?

Whatever Jesus was to the disciples while He was on earth - teacher, comforter, etc - that's what He sent the Holy Spirit to do for us. It's in that sense He's a replacement. Jesus and the Holy Spirit are One, so there's no competition. As Jesus, the Holy Spirit would testify of Jesus. He's not here to seek His own glory.

If you keep your experiences closeted, you forfeit the legitimacy to attack other people's experiences and also leave open the conclusion that you have no such experiences. The call is yours to make. I certainly do not believe you have such experiences. Thus, I stand by my counsel that you should seek closeness to the Holy Spirit so He can usher you into deeper Christian life.

BabaGnoni:
The facts and truths are "Holy Ghost laughter" is nothing more than just glorified "Laughter yoga"
- an exercise done in groups, involving making faces, sticking out tongues, prolonged voluntary laughter, and where feigned/forced/suggestive laughter soon turns into real and contagious laughter.

Otherwise, it then is something else worse, sinister and darkening, on par with Kundalini.

"Baba", been an Apostle as he claimed he was, had prophesied (i.e. this is captured on video) that God promised Him that a new wave of special anointing will sweep across the country and the world beyond

Since then, "Baba" had been trying to validate this prophecy, with the occasional attempts of laughing in Pastors meetings at his Tulsa base,
this is all long before Rodney Howard Brown came on the scene.

This "Holy Ghost laughter and slain in the spirit" thing in early videos is what "Baba" declared to be the first filling demonstration of the new spiritual anointing he said God had promised him

The "finale" video which you conveniently left out, is where "Baba" said it is the FIRST TIME they experienced the FULL manisfestation of the laughing anointing (i.e. all other incidents or videos prior the finale video were warm ups)

Care to share some of those spiritual experiences you have had, so we can also evaluate them as you have been evaluating other people's? Or am I supposed to simply take your word for it?

As to the place of the Holy Spirit, I modified nothing in my position. I've been saying the same thing in different words. You have access to Strong's. Look at the phrase used there for another comforter and you'll know what Jesus was saying, which is the same thing I'm saying here.

BabaGnoni:
The facts and truths are "Holy Ghost laughter" is nothing more than just glorified "Laughter yoga"
- an exercise done in groups, involving making faces, sticking out tongues, prolonged voluntary laughter, and where feigned/forced/suggestive laughter soon turns into real and contagious laughter.
Otherwise, it then is something else worse, sinister and darkening, on par with Kundalini.
"Baba", been an Apostle as he claimed he was, had prophesied (i.e. this is captured on video) that God promised Him that a new wave of special anointing will sweep across the country and the world beyond
Since then, "Baba" had been trying to validate this prophecy, with the occasional attempts of laughing in Pastors meetings at his Tulsa base,
this is all long before Rodney Howard Brown came on the scene.
This "Holy Ghost laughter and slain in the spirit" thing in early videos is what "Baba" declared to be the first filling demonstration of the new spiritual anointing he said God had promised him
The "finale" video which you conveniently left out, is where "Baba" said it is the FIRST TIME they experienced the FULL manisfestation of the laughing anointing (i.e. all other incidents or videos prior the finale video were warm ups)

You guys are so comfortable with lying. Raises questions about who you fellowship with more: the father of lies or the Father of life? Can you point to just ONE place in almost 70 years of ministry where Hagin claimed to be an apostle?

WinsomeX:
Next time you could consider saying upfront that you were using the word "loosely". Though I almost thought so too but no matter how "loose" you use dispensation, I am yet to see anyone teach three dispensations under the Trinity title. You alluded to it to make the point that our time is a dispensation of the Spirit - a doctrine that is foreign to the bible.



This is what Jesus said of the Holy Spirit in John 14 and 16:

John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. 14:18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. 14:20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me. 14:25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 16:9 Of sin, because they believe not on me; 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; 16:11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 16:13 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. 16:14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 16:15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 16:16 A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.

I quoted all this to challenge your theory that the Holy Spirit is not just our helper/comforter but Christ's replacement. I am convinced that neither this passages nor any other passage of scripture teaches that the Spirit REPLACES Christ. Rather, what is clear in all scripture is that when the Spirit is mentioned, it is always in regard to his duty. The Holy Spirit comes to do a work in the believer on behalf of the other God-head. Read through the above scripture and see that the Spirit is sent to DO something.

Again the essence of all this is not to belittle the Holy Spirit but to point to Christ whom the Spirit himself glorifies. It has pleased God to make the Son of his love, Jesus Christ, the object of all of humanity worship and no other. It displeased the religious mind that with the turn of the NT, the emphasis was no longer on God but on Christ, just as the emphasis is not on the Spirit today but on Christ. I maintain that men begin to delve into realms of error when they place an emphasis on the Spirit that scriptures does not.



If you remember well in Colossians 4, Paul instructed the Colossians to obtain the epistle he sent to the Laodiceans. These cities were neighbours. Apparently, Paul did not think that that epistle was sufficient. Neither am I saying so. DrummaBoy and myself are saying that Paul told the Colossians what was important; what he felt needed emphasis and in the process he mentioned the Spirit once. Again in the place of duty:

Colossians 1:8 Who also declared unto us your love in the Spirit.

The Colossians walked in love only as they found help by the Spirit. That's all. And I think that's one emphasis we should lay too: walk in love by the Spirit. Gods Holy Spirit is here to help you walk in love. If I achieve this by the Spirit and fail in tongues, miracles or experiences, I will be content and everyone of us should be.



It is not my fault that you idolize Hagin so much that you refuse to see that he was human and could make mistakes including preaching false doctrine. Some of us have chosen not to do this. We can judge him by his life and ministry, which must include not only what he wrote but what the cameras caught him doing.

If in doing this, however, you think some of us have no experience with the Holy Spirit, you are entitled to your opinion. I however think you must deem yourself omniscient to conclude that some people do not have spiritual experiences when you do not live with them, you have not read anything in them beyond nl, nor have you seen them on camera.

But I understand your plight: we've been there before. It's called "do me, I do you..."



Again I maintain this:

1. That there is no biblical account of scripture that recorded Christ and his apostles laughing in the Spirit. If you indulge such practices, please undrstand that you are involved with extra scriptural experiences and practices.

2. Laughing in the spirit are experiences prominent among New Age cults and easter religion. Those who import them into the church need not be considered heroes.

3. I have not denied that Christians can have experiences. I have mine. They are personal and private, and need not be revealed, 2 Cor 12:1ff. However experiences are SECONDARY to the Christian walk. What is primary is a walk of faith: shown in knowing Jesus and serving him.

4. The matter of the Spirit not being the emphasis of Colossians is the point of this discuss. Those who lay emphasis on the Spirit to the point of indulging extra scriptural mystical experiences, like the Charismatics do, have waded into error unknowingly.

1. Go and check the meaning of the word "comforter" in the Greek. It's simply means somebody like Jesus that will be in His place among the believers.

2. So, I can assume you have the spiritual experiences that you ridicule? That would make you worse than a hypocrite. Therefore, I would assume that you simply do not have those experiences. Omniscience is not required for that. Simple deductive reasoning would do.

nannymcphee:
And fastened on his hand - καθῆψεν kathēpsen. This word properly means to join oneself to; to touch; to adhere to. It might have been by coiling around his hand and arm, or by fastening its fangs in his hand. It is not [size=16pt]expressly affirmed that Paul was bitten by the viper[/size] yet it is evidently implied; and it is wholly incredible that a viper, [size=16pt]unless miraculously prevented[/size] should fasten himself to the hand without biting

just have an open mind, we know you have been taught that he was bitten, now the scenario is being presented in a new light, starting with the original Greek word(which doesn't suggest biting)

if you we're watching someone from afar, seeing a snake coiled around any part of his body, won't you assume he will be bitten, if yes( then your answer will account for the statement made by paul onlookers)

Why are all of you emphasizing the part of the commentary that is convenient? Your quote clearly says that the way "fastened" is written there, it is implied that he was bitten. That may even be the reason Luke did not bother elaborating. He assumes he's writing to people with common sense, who would understand what happens when such a snake fastens itself on somebody's hand. And that's exactly what the villagers did, as Luke was kind enough to report. If something outside the norm occurred, i.e. the sanke fastened without biting or attacking, then Luke would have found it important to mention that. But he did not. In this case, and in light of what he reported about the people's impression, silence speaks volumes.

Candour:
Is God shutting the mouth of the snake and preventing it from biting not miracle enough? Or you think God is powerless to stop the snake from biting like he closed the mouth of the lions? Doesn't God preventing a bite also mean God saved Paul?

Why paint a false picture that folks are denying the power of God in that instance?

But the Scripture never said that the miracle was about the snake's mouth being shut. You're the one suggesting that. In Daniel's case, the Scripture was clear. Here, the Scripture starts by telling us the people's impression. While that may not be a yardstick, the Scripture would have been clear to tell us the miracle was the snake's mouth being shut and thereby correct the people's erroneous impression. By leaving that impression uncorrected, we are left to hold on to it.

vooks:
The problem is basically TRADITION. You have heard of this passage hundreds of times used and many principles or lessons derived from it. You have been told the snake BIT Paul. That's truth for you. Most people arguing for BITE here have NEVER dug the Greek behind it until now

I am not the first Christian on earth and most certainly not the first Spirit filled believer. So I have a lot of respect of Commentaries and those who were in Christ before me. They are not authorities but certainly have a lot we can learn from. Let's look at Barnes;

And fastened on his hand - καθῆψεν kathēpsen. This word properly means to join oneself to; to touch; to adhere to. It might have been by coiling around his hand and arm, or by fastening its fangs in his hand. It is not expressly affirmed that Paul was bitten by the viper, yet it is evidently implied; and it is wholly incredible that a viper, unless miraculously prevented, should fasten himself to the hand without biting.
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/barnes/acts/28.htm


I wonder how easy it is to shake/brush off a snake with even half an inch of a set of its fangs deep inside your flesh. I see strong evidence against a bite than for

Actually, what you posted is stronger evidence that more than fastening occurred. And when we join it with the people's impression, we get a better picture.

nannymcphee:
While they might not be against it, much emphasis is placed on getting it NOW, the same way churches are not Aainst holy living & righteousness but much emphasis is placed on prosperity and you know what that has led to today, people are no longer heavenly conscious but earthly conscious, how best they can live the good life here



You didn't quite follow then, the issue wasn't that instant miracles/harvest wasn't possible rather it was an issue of the "instantness" being hinged on one's great faith !!

In order words, if you have great faith you can command your harvest to come now.

That's why I kicked against hezekiah's prayer as an example. Nothing there suggests that he got an instant reply from God because of his great faith but rather Gods mercy was at work there( I'm in no way saying his prayer had nothing to do with God changing his mind) but it was not his faith per say that moved God to add 15yrs INSTANTLY

Talking about instant harvest & "if thou shall say unto this mountain be that cast into the sea....." Why didn't Jesus command figs to appear on that tree that moment he needed them? After all he was hungry, this is the same Jesus that turned water into wine instantly!!!!

Maybe he didn't have "great faith" at that point!!!!

btw, Jesus said if you have faith as a muster seed(it has been established that the mustard seed is very small), one will say to the mountain

Gombs et al will have us believe that it is great faith that does the work & not the small muster seed size of faith that does the work

Just before you open ur mouth, I have the book "how to make your faith work" & I was in the meeting it was first taught:Charismatic Renewal Conference (this directed at Gombs)

No no no, you're mixing up facts. The Hezekiah example came only AFTER you doubted instant miracles and asked him to provide examples. It was after he pointed you to Hezekiah that you started questioing if his faith was what did the miracle. And then injected God's sovereignty into the debate.

I've been in WOF much longer than you have. I do not know ONE WOF leader that emphasizes getting it now. I have tons of books and materials from them and I do not see it anywhere. Can somebody preach that you can get instant miracles? Sure, but that does not mean that he's emphasizing it. Even by saying you require great faith for that simply means it's not something you expect many believers to experience because most people do not have great faith.

The point some of the brethren were making here is that there is no SET time for harvest. It could be any time. Instant miracles confirm that. If there was a harvest time, why would miracles occur instantly instead of waiting for the period alloted to harvest? Note that harvest time as used in this context is different from time of harvest. When you receive the harvest, you can point to the time you received it. That's your harvest time. But is there a particular time devoted to harvest in God's way of operating? That's the question we were examining before we all got sidetracked.

vooks:
The same apostles who wrought instant miracles suffered persistent sicknesses/delayed miracles
Name ANY WOFer and I can show you a string of delayed miracles or no miracles at all.

I still don't get your point. WOF is not against delayed miracles. Teachings abound on what to while waiting. And how God sometimes gives you the blade, then the ear and afterwards the full corn. Are you Ok?

Again, if you didn't hear it the first time, we're not talking instant miracles here because WOF accepts only such. We're talking instant miracles because somebody suggested that there's no such thing as an instant result from prayer and in response was shown lots of examples from the Bible. How you can jump from there to your baseless charges against WOF is puzzling.

Image123:
Who is the hyper Grace brother?

Your sweet friend in London, who thinks the bulk of the NT does not apply to Christians!

vooks:
I have given a plausible explanation for their reaction.
1. They knew he had survived a major danger;shipwreck
2. The mere sight of a venomous snake at a striking distance to the same man made them assume he had been bitten and they waited for the signs.
3. Luke's failure to capture the miracle ( argument from silence). How does he narrate ALL that and miss the climax?


So they were not foolish to expect his death any more than the disciples were foolish when they were scared out of their wits by a 'ghost'

No, your explanation is not plausible. There are 2 reasonable explanations.

1. The Maltans thought Paul was bitten. They found out he was not. They still went ahead to consider him a god, not a lucky but ordinary fellow. They must be idiots to think that way. And neither Luke nor Paul acted honorably in relaying this story without telling us that what the people thought was not true. They needed to correct the impression both to the people present and to their readers. Why did they choose not to? Would you, as a Christian, act in that manner? Oh and people survive shipwrecks. It doesn't make them gods.

2. The Maltans thought Paul was bitten. They never found out he was not. So, they treated him as a god. But that cancels out scenario 1. Which is it? You guys seem to suggest both are possible simultaneously, which makes no sense. Besides, Paul and Luke's obligation to correct the wrong impression is also present there.

That they did not suggests that they were affirming the people's impression.