How many christian churches, allow or encourage those who worship in our churches to raise their hands during worship? And how many encourage those worshipers to shout "Amen" or "Praise The Lord" within the service? Just curious.

-- Anonymous, June 20, 2000

Answers

Since when did true worship become defined by the "showing of emotion"......and "the raising of hands"??

Is a church that chooses not to do that....less spiritually "in tune?"

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

For whatever reason A.Kelly....you chose to ignore my questions....so.....I will ask them again.

Since when did true worship become defined by "the showing of emotion" and the "raising of hands?"

If a church chooses to not do that.....are they less spiritually "in tune??"

In fact, anyone can answer the questions.

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Who defines who is "spiritually on fire?"

I believe I have a decent grasp of the N.T......and first....I don't find the term "being on fire"....let alone being "spiritually on fire." Do you??

Second, it becomes very obvious to even a casual reader of the Bible that physical expressions mean little to nothing to God.

Amos 5:21-23 "I hate, I reject your festivals, nor do I delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer up to Me burnt offerings and grain offerings I will not accept them. (In other words.....it don't make a difference how great the "Praise Band" jams for Jesus)....And I will not even look at the peace offerings of your fatlings. Take away from Me the noise of your songs; I will not even listen to the sound of your harps."

Third....you ask how does God determine whether or not a church is alive??

Amos 5:24 could provide a good principle...."But let justice roll down like waters; and righteousness like an ever flowing stream."

Fourth.....Paul says in Galatians that anything that is preached other than the Gospel delivered originally by the apostles is a "perverted gospel" and the one who preaches it is to be "anathematized" (literally...."consigned to hell").

My interpretation?? I don't care if Cowtown Assembly of God has 50,000 in attendance every Sunday and can Jam for Jesus......if they continue to preach a perverted gospel (i.e., faith only..."invite Jesus into your heart" garbage).....then they are spiritually dead....biblically speaking!!

On the other hand.....if Cowtown Christian Church in the middle of no where only has 50 members.....and they hold fast the word....and have nothing but an organ....and 5 members in the choir....God will find them faithful!!

How dare you or anyone else determine to define faithfulness to God by anything other than their willingness to "contend for the faith ONCE delivered."

I think we make a huge mistake when we consider ourselves "spiritually mature" and able to pass judgment about which church is spiritually "on fire" and which ones are not......again...a term the N.T. never uses.

In respect for all who hold fast to the faith once delivered,

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Lee....

I just talked to one of the members of Cowtown Christian Church....and they agreed that they too would love to have you worship with them and they would be glad to put that 'OLE PIANO' away!!!

Yours in Christ,

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

A.Kelly.....

This is a challenge......send me the statement of faith of one AOG church that says that baptism is ESSENTIAL FOR SALVATION.

Send me the statement of faith of one AOG church that says that IT IS AT BAPTISM that we come in contact with blood of Christ having our sins washed away.

Send me the statement of faith of one AOG church that says that it is at baptism that we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

You have my e-mail address. If you can provide this....e-mail me and I will give you my mailing address.

When I receive the material, I will follow up with an interview with the church "pastor"......and find out if what he (or she) says is in line with their literature. I will also find out if their statements of faith are the same as "most AOG" churches.

To make a blanket statement that "most AOG" do....is to say the least...."theologically inaccurate."

The challenge has been placed.

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Mark.....

For someone that supposedly understands logic.....that last post is the worst thing I have ever seen you post.

I believe in logic that is called "poisening the wells?"

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

A.Kelley.....

Never mind!!

I did a web search and found the AOG official web page. Their statements of faith page can be found at......(forgive me again...I'm URL illiterate....so I don't know how to do the actual link). However, here is the address......

http://ag.org/top/about/truths.cfm#5

From this I answered my own questions about their theology....

Is baptism ESSENTIAL for salvation? No!!

Is baptism where we COME IN CONTACT WITH THE BLOOD OF CHRIST? No!!! In their theology salvation comes through repentance and the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. Baptism, as in most "faith only" religions....is an outward sign of what has already supposedly taken place in the believers life.

Do we receive the Holy Spirit at baptism?? No!! In their theology regeneration by the Holy Spirit takes place before baptism. Baptism has nothing to do with receiving the Holy Spirit. Speaking in tongues is evidence of salvation.

So.....my original statements stands....and you can say "how dare you"....but your words in essence are directed at the apostle Paul. He is the one who called it a "perverted gospel"....and he is the one who uses the word "anathematized."

Shoot the messenger if you need to.

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

AKelley.....that was not the issue.

Hermeneutics would have taught you that the terms "blood" and "death" in the N.T. in reference to the atonement are synonymous. In either case....it is at baptism that the benefits of the atoning death of Christ are applied (call it blood or death....whatever you wish).

The issue was......you said....that the AOG "baptizes people into the Lord Jesus Christ."

That was an inaccurate statement as I showed by their own web page. They are baptized as evidence of already being in Christ. Standard Cavinistic doctrine.

If you disagree with the Christian Church position, then I suggest you go the way of Cecil Todd and spend most of your time in the AOG and save yourself and possibly another Christian Church the grief that can be caused when they do not want to accept your AOG point of view.

Your desires are obvious...i.e., to turn whatever Christian Church you can into a "be-like em" AOG. Do not be surprised then, when you receive a block wall from those of us who ain't buyin' it.

As per your reference to Dr. Jon...I don't care who it is...you...Roger Chambers....Jim Smith....Jack Cottrell.....Billy Graham....Danny Gabbard....Lee Saffold.....or by Paul's own words...."himself or an angel".....if a gospel is preached other than what was preached in the beginning...it is a perversion....and the person who preaches it is consigned to hell.

I'm ready to face the Maker as per the gospel I have preached.

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Like I said A.Kelley.....you ought to be in the AOG church.

What did you expect?? You asked the question with an agenda that doesn't fly.

As you say....the same happens to every Christian Church you attend.

So save yourself and them more heartache.....and join up with those with whom you agree.

Since your mind is made up......go for it.

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

Dr. Jon was right about another thing A.Kelley....

Historically, you are standing in a long line behind others who have gone before you who felt "the only answer to a dying church was a renewal of the gifts of the Holy Spirit."

I laugh every time some modern day Charismatic points out...."this is the great ourpouring of the Spirit right before Jesus comes again."

What's funny is.....people have been saying "this is the last one"....for the last 2000 years.

So which "last one".....is this one??

-- Anonymous, June 24, 2000

A. Kelley.....

You have the nerve to call someone cruel....after you, on this thread, have continuously judged congregations who do not fit up TO YOUR EXPECTATIONS of what it means to show emotion???

-- Anonymous, June 25, 2000

A.Kelley.....

You said..."I never once stated that a person MUST shout 'HALLELUJAH, AMEN, PRAISE THE LORD, OR EVEN PREACH it."

Didn't you??

Then what does this statement mean...."I would go so far a to say that those churches that are emotionless are close to being a dead church."

A.Kelly....Scripture is not on your side....BECAUSE NO WHERE IN THE ENTIRE BIBLE IS FAITHFULNESS TO THE LORD DEFINED BY A DISPLAY OF EMOTIONS....IT IS DECIDED BY FAITHFULNESS AND ADHEARANCE TO GOD'S WORD.....i.e.,....for you Keith Green Fans...."To Obey is better than sacrifice."

Your only argument so far A.Kelly is to put up a straw man of what your opinion of Christian Church worship services are or are not.

As per your reference to people's reaction to God when they were in His presence......not one time have do I read in the Bible where people stood up and "gave Jesus a hand."

Most people felt dread and fell on their face in reverant adoration.

Your problem is that you want to define "true worship" the A.Kelley (a.k.a. AOG way).....as opposed to acknowledging that worship in the Bible took place in many different ways....to include....silence. "Be still and know that I am God."

So who is putting God in the box??

-- Anonymous, June 26, 2000

Folks,

I'm with Lee on the fact that there are not "several times."

In fact, there is only once that the Holy Spirit was bestowed without the laying on of the Apostle's hands....and that is in Acts 10. And....as everyone is aware, this was a special case done in order to overcome the predudicial Peter whose words immediately following the bestowment of the Spirit were...."Who can deny these to be baptized since they (i.e., Gentiles) have received the Spirit just like us i.e., Apostles).

In fact....let me lay out a little challenge. Find me one time in the entire N.T. that speaking in tongues took place when there were NOT unbelieving Jews present. Just one time is all you need in order to destroy my hermeneutic which says that the purpose of speaking in tongues was for one reason and one reason only....that is....a sign of judgment upon unbelieving Israel.

Therefore, once Israel was judged in 70 A.D.....no more need for speaking in tongues....(which explains why there is so little mention of the topic in the N.T. and why not one of the Church Fathers make mention of the gifts in their days).

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Oh....so Michael finally comes out of hiding with a silly response...and yet....no answer to the challenge....hmmmmmm.

Come on Mikee....give me the for instance.

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

John....

And what little was said....probably would not have been said....if the Corinthians had not been abusing it to the degree that they were.

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Michael....and others....

Cute....but no one has yet to accept my challenge.

And Michael...if I'm not mistaken.....Scott Sheridan has answered your "telion" question on at least one other thead (maybe more).

It's old...let it die.

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

I'll let Scott answer the "telion" question....as I know from a thread somewhere in the vast arena of "archives" he gave his abbeviated view of that. He can choose to do so again if he desires. I'm getting older....but my memory is not that bad yet.

An instance of speaking in tongues where there WAS NOT unbelieving Jews present.....from anyone??....I'm still waiting.

All it takes is one instance.....to break it down.

Michael.....as per your direct quote from Scripture that implicitly states that the "gifts ended"....I find this interesting coming from someone who.....uses inference heavily for supporting 1) tithing as a N.T. principle; 2) Any drinking of wine as morally wrong. Both require HEAVY use of inference.

Also.....show me one Scripture that says that "the Holy Spirit is God"....which those of us who are "Trinitarians" believe. We rely heavily on inference.

One other example....the taking of the Lord's Supper every Lord's Day. To hold to that....one must also rely heavily upon inference.

So Michael....do not claim a "higher ground" for yourself of someone so rooted in the Word that they never infer anything.

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

AKelley....

Good question!! Answer is "Yes....there were non-believing Jews in Corinth."

How do we know?? Well....there were Jews in the church (thus the discussion of meat sacrificed to idols in 1 Cor. 8). As you know.....that would not have been a problem if there were ONLY Gentiles.

Therefore, since there were Jews in the church....one would be safe to assume there was a population of Jews in Corinth. Otherwise, where would these believers have come from?

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

John....

I'll buy the 2 Cor. 3 passage.....HOWEVER......the Acts passage is heavy with inference. The inference is that when he said God....he was still talking about the Holy Spirit.

BTW.....I made it abundantly clear, did I not, in my post....it is an inference that I agree with. (Don't try to taint the discussion with charges of cultism!)):

Any more passages like 2 Cor. 3????

Now if you want to see a view of the Trinity that makes you very uncomfortable......read Barton Stone's writings.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

Ben....

Myself (and others including DeWelt)....take that passage in 1 Tim. 4....to refer to Timothy's ordination or setting apart to preach the gospel....which certainy fits the context of the preceeding and following verses.

The scenario.....one of the elders who had been laid hands upon by an apostle.....received a prophetic revelation....which was then passed on to Timothy who was then charged (i.e., ordained) with the preaching of that message.

From my best recollection.....I know of nowhere where any type of miraculous gifts or the performance thereof by Timothy.....are mentioned in Scripture??

Are you aware of any??

BTW.....good post above. My only difference would be.....I'VE NEVER seen a "good case" for "teleios" being Jesus. In fact, that is the weakest of all the possibilities.

One other clarification.....Michael D. pointed out that those of us who take a "canon" view of "teleios" have problems because we believe the gifts died out in 90 A.D.

I've never said that. The last apostle died in 96 A.D. which means the ability to "pass the gifts on" died out. But supposing that there were younger men whom John had laid hands upon, these men would have lived on until the mid-second century. Just so happens, the first collection of the canon was produced in 150 A.D. (I believe it was the "Muratorian Canon.") For all practical purposes the Canon was complete at that time. Yes....there were a few books "in dispute".....but by the end of the second century the church was certainly operating on the bulk of the canon.

Which by the way.....a study of early history will show us the reason for the early church deciding to close the canon.

The reason? Scrupulous and false apostles claiming that "the gifts were still alive." If I'm not mistaken, Montanist was one of the main instigators who claimed the church was dead and he attempted to revive the miraculous gifts.

The church's way of dealing with those type of shinanigans.....was to close the canon.

For at least one complete discussion of this....I will refer you to a "non Christian Church" writer.....a one David Ewert in his book..."From Ancient Tables to Modern Translations."

Something to think about.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

Sorry....the name of that book is "From Ancient Tablets to Modern Translations."

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

John....

Thanks....and....

....you proved my point...i.e., "inference" is not a dirty word.

In Christ,

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

John.....

I'm going to cap this for emphasis......I NEVER INFERRED THAT THE PURPOSE OF TONGUE SPEAKING WAS A SIGN OF JUDGMENT ON THE JEWS.....I CAN PROVE THAT FROM SCRIPTURE.....AND IT IS A VERY CLEAR STATEMENT.

I'm just waiting, to give everyone a fair chance.....to show me one indcidence of speaking in tongues where there WAS NOT unbelieving Jews present.

You tell me when you give up.....and then I will give the very clear evidence that the purpose of speaking in tongues was a sign of judgement upon Israel.

I'm just waiting for you (or anyone else) to give me an example of tongues where there was not unbeleiving Jews present.

When you admit....there are none.....I'll show you why.

-- Anonymous, July 07, 2000

AKelley.....

A couple of questions concerning your story.....

1) Why does one need to be in a tree stand all night in order to see a deer at the crack of dawn??? Usually, being in the tree 1/2 hour before daylight is plenty of time.

2) How did two men fit in one tree stand??

3) In most states, it is illegal to be in the woods at night with a gun.....sitting in a deer stand?? Are the state regulations where these men hunted more lenient??

Just curious.

-- Anonymous, July 07, 2000

As in everything you have ever posted Connie.....I ask...."What's your point??"

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

John.....

One flaw in your thinking....it was A.Kelley who made it a test of "ones enthusiam for the Lord."

All Lee and I have done is call that line of thinking into question.

Historically, charismatics are the ones who carry the almost Gnostic idea of "I'm in....and you ain't....because I got it and you ain't."

In fact, one famous contemporary writer calls it the "neo-Gnosticism."

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

Lee....

I for one want to go on record as pointing out that your last post was....well to say the least....brilliant!!!!

Just to show how appreciative I am......I'll even throw in $50 bucks to help with the expenses of the person coming to Atlanta to raise the dead.

Or....better yet....I've got a better offer. For the person who can raise someone from the dead...I'll pay all your expenses to Bethany, Virginia and the Campbell mansion....if you promise to raise Al Campbell from the dead. I'd love to talk to that rascal!!

But....everyone....let it be known....I get Al first in Indiana for a revival!!!

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

Link....

You are right!!! The gifts were distributed!!

Therefore, surely you or A. Kelley can find someone in this great big world to accept the challenge of myself and Brother Lee. Can't you???

I mean something....a longer leg....sight given to the blind....something??? In the whole world of Christendom....there's got to be somebody??

Your whole line of thinking is along the childish line of "Can God make a rock so big He can't pick it up??"

-- Anonymous, August 07, 2000

AKelley:

I invite people to stand or clap or lift their hands or raise their heads or just be seated and quiet, when we gather for worship as a group. But you shoulod maybe retitle your thread. It has little, if anything, to do with emotion.

We don't "encourage" any certain behavior or speech, explicitly.By allowing it, and accepting it as fine when it is done, we implicitly encourage it, I suppose.

-- Anonymous, June 20, 2000

When you say, How many christian churches allow this and that, who might you be talking about? If the *churches* are God's people are you asking "How many of God's people encourage God's people to do this or that." Maybe you are calling the christian church an *it* that allows or disallows. Or could you be asking, "How many of you preachers allow......?

Just wondering!

-- Anonymous, June 20, 2000

A. Kelly,

Why are you Baptist?

Dr. J

-- Anonymous, June 20, 2000

No, I'm not Baptist. What has that got to do with anything? Please answer the questions.

-- Anonymous, June 20, 2000

WHAT?!?!?!?

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

First of all Nelta I was talking to Mr. Kelly not you. Secondly, I was kidding with him! If you would read who the post was addressed to, you wouldn't get in an uproar. On second thought, it is usually the dog that gets hit that howls.

Dr. J

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

I am interested in the responses here, even though some are extremely serious (Nelta's, I think, and of course AKelley's) and some are light ~ Dr. J's, for example.

But Dr. J: While it has been 20 or 30 years since I was in a Baptist church and I know they could have changed in that time, when I attended one (over 40 years ago) these were the most straight-laced people you'd ever want to meet. They kept their hands neatly folded in their laps, and if anyone had said, "Amen", everyone else would probably have lowered their eyes in embarrassment.

And I was struck by AKelley's term: "Allow". If people want to show emotion in adoration of God, won't they just DO IT, without asking permission?

Our church is quite sedate (non-denominational, and not Charismatic), but there are perhaps 10% of the people who might raise their arms and hands during 'Praise' songs. (I've done that on occasion). There is ALMOST never anyone saying, "Amen!" and NEVER anyone saying, "Preach it!" But I don't think they would be ostracized or asked to leave if they did so.

There are handshakes and hugs, and occasional tears. I don't see anyone greeting one another with a holy kiss, but it's possible that it happens. (And it SHOULD!)

Since Benjamin is licking his wounds from the Instrumental/Acapella wars, he may just be tired. ;-) ;-) (Hi, Benjamin!)

Let's Glorify His Name in as many ways as we can come up with!

In Him,

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Oh, yes, we clap sometimes, also, during certain songs.

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Akelly,

The subject of emotion in worship is something not addressed much around our church, except by the individuals who don't think emotion should be allowed in worship. The ironic part is that these dear people are just as emotional as the rest of us, but were raised in a family or rural, North Plains church where public displays of feelings or emotions were considered *always* weak or indiscreet. Their feelings, their anger and resentment is therefore stuffed down within or even denied, and often drives their actions, but in church - "hey! no emotion, no siree." I've said from the pulpit (and will stand behind it) that along with our intellectual ascents, precise interpretations, and matter-of-fact beliefs, we need to allow ourselves to *feel* it. We need to allow the overwhelming grace of God past our minds and into our hearts - that part of us that drives us. Not that we allow our feelings to control everything - then we're out of balance. But we can get equally out of balance by only allowing God's word to dwell in the intellect and not the heart. In reading what Jesus had to say, He talked constantly about the heart. Occasionally there's a tearful testimony or confession here, but it's never grandstanding or morose ..... just honest.

As far as full expression of worship, such as raising hands or speaking up - it happens occasionally. I've never seen anything overdone or inappropriate. It's just not a big deal. But some get so hung up on how clapping/raising hands is "trying to be like everyone else," they can't for a second even consider that it might be a genuine expression of worship.

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

AKelley,

To answer your question first, the only thing we (my church, Crosspointe, not all christian churches) explicitly prohibit anywhere close to being along those lines is tongues. The short answer to those who ask "why?" is to acknowledge that there is disagreement among the "general Christian community" on the issue, so tongues tend to be disruptive, and our God is a God of order.

No one has really tested that freedom to an extreme (no one break dances in the aisle), so I would be curious to see the reaction from the staff and leadership if someone went "too far". Crosspointe seems to be about 60% former Catholics (certainly a majority are former Catholics) and I have yet someone who was a part of a charismatic church at any point, so I doubt anyone will push it.

But I wanted to ask what do you mean "encourage" them? Most people will limit themselves by what is going around them, so are you talking about planting people in the crowds to shout "amen" and "praise the Lord"? About the only other way would be for your upfront people (your band, song leader, whatever) to lead the way by raising hands, clapping, et al. And how would you plan to assure it is sincere, and not "going with the flow"?

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

A very thorny situation here. I've run into it many times before.

The problem with some of these actions (clapping, hand raising, impromptu comments, and even speaking in tongues) is not in the actions themselves. Spontaneous, joyful worshipping of God is not a bad thing. The "bad thing" is when: a) it is expected. As Americans, we hate to feel "left out" or "different" than those around us. Because of this tendency, I think there are some in services who fake the motions. This is because b) It becomes a situation where those who don't act emotional are somehow "less spiritual" or "second-class" in the faith because they do not show emotion.

Emotions are great. I am an emotional guy. But I rarely show public displays of emotion; its not in my personality. The conflict I see here is the clashing of "traditional" style against the popular (and most often seen) "charismatic" style. Neither is "right"; one size does not fit all. Speaking as a Baptist (::laffs:: I thought the brother's comment was funny, actually) I come into contact with this all the time. Baptist worship is basically traditional and kinda subdued. That's 'white' Baptists, that is. In the 'black" Baptist tradition, they are more emotional and outgoing. (I actually hate the distinction in terms; unfortunately, that is how the SBC made the distinction decades ago.) Whenever someone speaks of "renewal" or "revival" what is usually mentioned is that we need to be "on fire" like "them over at that church."

To me personally it is immaturity to believe that being "on fire" for God only means being outwardly verbal and showing emotionalism in public. That idea would have horrified some men who the church has held in highest regard for thier spirituality, men like John Wesley, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Finney. A person's relationship with God is personal, and cannot be dictated by group think (or feel, as the case may be). In my observation over emphasis on emotional display always leads to those who are not extroverted to begin to doubt their salvation because they do not appear to be as spiritual as "them."

"To everything there is a season." There is a time and a place for everything. God is not the author of confusion, but of order. So as representatives of the kingdom in leadership positions, we as the lead ministers must guide, direct and control the emotionalism of the congregation. Everyone must be able to worship freely in services, both introvert and extrovert. But when the immaturity of the extroverted wants them to demand that "only this" is the "spiritual" way to worship, our job is to tell them "no." I agree with the brother about speaking in tongues. If something becomes divisive, then the leader using Godly wisdom must say no to it. If loud or physical displays are disruptive, then the congregation must be (lovingly) corrected. It is my contention that many of the abuses we have seen in the media (i.e., "Brownsville Revival") is not that the event is non-spiritual, but that the leadership did not exercise discernment and proper control.

I have often heard (and said myself) that people act more enthusiastic at a football game then in church. This rebuke is true only to a point. A chruch service IS NOT a football game. We are worshiping the Creator of the Universe. As Charles Finney would say, How dare we act with levity in front of God, when we would never dare to do it in front of an earthly sovereign. THAT is the standard. It is an issue of RESPECT toward our God. If you wouldn't act stupid in front of a governor, or Senator, or the President, anyone in earthly power, why would you want to before God, and say its worship? (That concept is from Finney's "Revival Lectures." I'll have to look up later for an exact quote.)

The bottom line from all this verbosity is that worship should be orderly and respectful.

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Let me clerify some issues that I brought up. First many churches, as some have posted discourage or do not "allow" displays of emotion in worship. The very idea that we must keep our hands down and mouths shut does not show respect. In fact I would argue that those churches that frown on such signs of emotion are mainly doing so our of traditions that are man made.

Worship by very definition is a very emotional experience. I dare anyone to show me a book chapter and verse that reveals that those who either come into the presence of God or in worship of God are sereal or without emotion. When you look in the scriptures, those involed in public/private worship did something! People either wept, fell face down to the ground, jumped for joy, raised their hands, shouted and sange new songs, etc.

I would go so far as to say those churches that are emotionless are close to being a dead church. When the Spirit of the Living God is outpoured upon the worshiper, then that worshipper being so filled with the Spirit will do something to express that joy inside! What ever the emotion be or how it is revealed is between the believer and the Lord.

To encourage a congregation to show emotion manifest in many ways. Whether shown from the pulpit or the worship leader, it must be modeled by the leaders.

I am a Christian Church minister/pastor - I have grown up within the "Christian church" all my life. I remember hearing how certain churches where charismatic and that was looked upon as a bad thing. But, since I have grown up and matured in my faith, I have found that Charismatic displays of emotion is good and biblical!

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

BTW many churches will actually ask someone to leave if they show signs of emotion, such as raising hands or shouting "Amen" "Praise the Lord" or "Preach it"!

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Dr. Jon:

I believe your post is EXCELLENT!! And very much on target concerning this issue. I say to you a hearty AMEN AND AMEN! As a former military man, though I experience emotion, I am not given to an outward display of it. This circumstance does have drawbacks as in cases where I am obviously oblivious to "humor" and apearently insensitive to the feelings of others when I discuss what I believe to be the truth. When I worship God my emotions swell within me but seldom overflow. It is natural with me and it is not likely to ever change nor is their any requirement that it should. I often think of our some of our modern preachers and their misguided congregations as emotion "junky's". THey need the emotional high to convince them that God is with them and that he will keep his eternal promises to them. Such is foriegn to all that is call Chritian in the New Testament. Such preachers are nothing more than "pump primers". They think that by "priming the pump" by setting the stage and atmosphere for the purpose of making it conducive to the manipulation and prompting of emotion that they will bring "water out of a dry well". THey fail to realize that a well that is filled to overflowing does not need "priming" in order to bring forth water. And the priming of a "dry well" is futile to remedy it's dry condition. But the idea that a well without an outside "pump" for anyone to have easy access to the water means that the well is dry is simly absurd! God has open access to my heart but in regard to all other than God I will "guard my heart with all diligence for out of it are the issues of life" as He has commanded. No preacher or singing group, or even a group of any kind will be allowed to manipulate my heart and my actions by arbitrarily claiming that we must have loud clapping before we can feel that we are "on fire" for the Lord. A cursory reading of the New Testament will demonstrate that teaching Christians to "feel" and urging them to offer displays of feeling is foriegn to genuine Christianity. This appearent need for "manufactured" and openly displayed emotions are by their very nature an indication of severe "carnality" among us. When we search for these as confirmation of our spirituality we only demonstrate beyond doubt our complete lack of spiritual descernment.

However, I am writing to give a passage of scripture that supports your words that things be done in an orderly and respectful manner in the worship. Paul through inspiration of the Holy Spirit speaks to this very point in the concluding words of 1 Corinthians 14, wherein he was discussing abuses in the worship caused by those who were misusing their spiritual gifts and condeming their outward disorderly display of the spiritual gifts of tongues and Women speaking in the assembly ect.

THese are his concluding words: "What is it then, brethren? When ye come together, each one hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a revelation, hath a tongue, hath an interpretation. Let ALL THINGS BE DONE UNTO EDIFYING. If any man speaketh in a tongue, let it be by two or at the most three, and let one interpret: if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and LET HIM SPEAK UNTO HIMSELF AND TO GOD. And let the prophets by two or three and let the others discern. But if a revelation be made to another sitting by, let the first keep silence. For ye all can prophesy ONE BY ONE, that all may learn and all may be exhorted. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets; For GOd is not the author of CONFUSION, but of peace." (1 Cor. 14:26-39).THen his final word on the subject is "LET ALL THINGS BE DONE DECENTLY AND IN ORDER." (1 Cor. 14:40).

I sincerely thank you for your excellent and well written response to this issue. I pray sincerely that God will bountifully bless you and your family with joy and peace and with the hope of eternal life in Christ through obedience to the gospel of Christ.

For Christ the Lord,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

In answer to the original post, this congregation out here in Molalla, Or, tries to emphasize that if someone wants to raise their hands or clap or shout "Amen" or the likes, that is perfectly acceptable. We also try to emphasize that if someone wants to be silent and keep their hands in their laps or by their sides, that is perfectly acceptable too. The whole point is to worship God and not be looking at your brother or sister and trying to evaluate what they are or are not doing.

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

We encourage emotion in our services, though its more difficult for the older folks I think. Our church is a little unique -- we have a polynesian dance troupe that travels preaching the gospel in dance. (This week they are in Denver, Colorado.) That gets some gasps from some of the more "traditional" churches, but most are very enthusiastic about it. (If you want to book them, visit our website for details!)

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Now Lee, you have me confused.

You rightfully point out that the New Testament account shows us no clearly stated emotional expression in assemblies. Yet, neither does it prohibit. Are you saying that natural, genuine emotion is to be suppressed in our assemblies? And strangely, your argument (and Jon's) seems to be that emotion is always disorderly.

Why is emotion necessarily disorderly? Is control lost in our assemblies when people raise hands or clap, or cry? If it is, most the time it is because of the disruptions caused not by those expressing the emotion but by those reacting emotionally to the emotion.

Usually your arguments have a scent of logic, even if I don't agree with your steps through the logic. But to go from ORDER REQUIRED implies EMOTION SUPRESSED is one Grand Canyon of a leap.

Let's assume I have misunderstood your conclusion. What are you exactly saying?

And Jon, you say " If you wouldn't act stupid in front of a governor, or Senator, or the President, anyone in earthly power, why would you want to before God, and say its worship?"

so emotion is stupid? And God isn't just a power, He is our Father. I don't think the comparison to political powers holds water! I respected my earthly father, but that didn't prevent me from showing emotional enthusaism about being in his presence.

Are you saying that if a governor of a state where you had been falsely convicted of murder personally grants you clemenacy so you avoid the death penalty, you might not react emotionally in his presence? And yet we are guilty and deserving of death in God's eyes, but He grants us pardon. Are we to surpress that emotion?

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Lee, where do you get your interpretation of I Cor 14? You miss Paul's whole thesis about "order" Paul never once was talking about displays of emotion within the worship service at all. What he was talking about is the abuse of tongues? If you take into context the fact that tongues was abused then you can see why Paul said what he said. Paul was giving the standard for tongues and its use in the church, he did not say that "you must be so orderly that you must sit and be a manikin."! No in fact Paul said "Be joyful always, pray continually, give thanks in all circumstances for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus. Do not put out the Spirit's fire, do not treat prophecies with contempt." (I Thess 5:16-19).

Lee, are you suggesting that preachers who get loud and emotional are all lumped together as "primer preachers"? If so where is your justifcation for saying so?

Many churches do need more fire. As Cecil Todd states, "Most churches have more fire under the coffee pots than in the pew and within the pulpits." This is true. While I must admit one does not have to show the same emotion as everyone else, I true gage of one's spiritual maturity is whether they have emotional feelings toward the God who redeemed them and purchased them through the shed blood of His one and only Son! If thinking of the cross and Jesus' sacrifice does not stir your emotions- then that person has a problem.

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Amen, AKelley! Preach it! (Raising Hands) :)

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

The only way we MUST worship Him is in Spirit and in Truth.

God allows A LOT of freedom in the worship of Him. Man is the one enamored of rules.

The verse about 'the raising of holy hands' is in

I Timothy 2:8: NASB

"Therefore I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and dissension.'

And E.Lee's passages are a statement FOR emotion, which apparently can be done decently and in order. I know when my daughter-in-law and her fellow church members prayed for me in tongues during a difficult time in my life a couple of years ago at a shower given at her church for Sue's impending birth of twins (now 3), it was a very gentle, beautiful language, which was hugely comforting, even though I didn't understand it. (It was intended for God's ears, and there was an interpreter for the people assembled, but I don't hear well, so didn't hear the interpretation).

From the whole passage E.Lee shared we have tongues, prophecy, revelations. and interpretations! Sounds like a pretty lively service. Some of what many describe here reminds me of what Darrell, (I think it was Darrell ~ on the thread discussing 'Deism' ~ ) who said many services in the CoC he'd been to were what he called 'Popcorn Pumbah'~ or was it spelled 'Poomba'? Boring, in other words). Jesus came that we might have LIFE and that we might have it more abundantly! I don't think even pastors/preachers/evangelists/ overseers/shepherds should be monitoring the worship practices of anyone but themselves. (And maybe their own sons and daughters and THEIR little friends). IF they start break-dancing in the aisles, as mentioned, a change of subject with a calming influence would be in order. But even the aforementioned might be preferable to DEADNESS.

The reason so many people are leading anemic Christian lives is because their churches are DEAD. And, regrettably, the person in charge is the deadest. (Not an actual word in the English language, I fear).

Jesus and the Apostles and the disciples were emotional ~ they cried, hugged, kissed, raised hands, prophesied, spoke in tongues and interpreted. And in the Old Testament, they DANCED and used all sorts of instruments (David, especially ~ a man after God's own heart. (Drums are not mentioned!) And apparently they did it decently and in order. Are we expected to do any less? It seems to me that if Christ were changing anything about which he considered the Holy Scriptures, He'd have said it in no uncertain terms. As He did with stating that He was the fulfillment of the Law.

John, we did have an 'interpretive dance in praise of God' at our church's Chritmas program a couple of years ago. it was quite beautiful. I know we don't want to consider our services to be 'entertainment' but even singing alone can be put in that category.

In Praise of Him,

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

The place where we should be sober and serious and reflective of our shortcomings and sins is before we partake of the Lord's Supper.

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Brother Mark:

You have said:

Usually your arguments have a scent of logic, even if I don't agree with your steps through the logic. But to go from ORDER REQUIRED implies EMOTION SUPRESSED is one Grand Canyon of a leap.

Now your words here are a tremendous leap from what I actually said to what you imagine that I have said. I said nothing about any suppressed emotions. If you will notice I discussed two specific matters. One was the arbitrary efforts of some preachers to manufacture and manipulate emotions using various tactics one of which is the instigation of clapping etc. Second, I mention the fact that the scriptures teach that all things in such assemblies must be done decently and in order which would naturally involve all of us in some measure of self control. It would also require the elders to be prepared to prevent a loss of decency and order in the assemblies. Now I am answering the question that was asked. I am not dealing with any specific action such as clapping. I was stating the scriptural requirement of decency and order. Any natural outbreak of emotion can lead to a loss of decency and order in the assembly. This could include clapping, shouting, and any other behavior that might distract from our purpose of teaching and admonishing one another and offering our praise to God. None who prefer these outburst have a scriptural right to deliberately disturb the decency and order God has ordained that we should have in our assemblies. He made that abundantly clear to the church at Corinth even to the point of requiring that those who spoke tongues but did not have an interpreter to remain silent in the church and to speak only to himself and God. According to the ideas presented by some in this thread, if that brothers emotions lead him to jump up and speak in tongues without an interpreter he has the right to do that and none should restrict him. But Paul, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit has so restricted that person. He has also restricted anything that would lead to a loss of decency and order in the assembly.

So I have not talked about suppression of our natural emotions only the fact that they are subordinate to the command of Christ through the Holy Spirit speaking through the apostle Paul to maintain decency and order. Few people actually have uncontrollable emotional responses in the assembly. And do not make the mistake of assuming that control is to be equated with suppression. I have a faucet in my kitchen to control the very beneficial flow of water into my home. But none could honestly say that I have thereby suppressed my family from having access and making good and reasonable use of the water. In fact Paul made it very clear that the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. He knew that some would claim that they just could not contain themselves. He required them to do just that for the sake of decency and order. And he was abundantly clear that God is not the God of confusion but of peace. Anything, emotion or otherwise, that creates confusion or disturbs the peace of our assemblies is without doubt a sin against God.

Now whether such practices always disturb the peace or cause confusion or interfere with good order and decency in the assembly I do not know for we do not have such difficulty where I worship. WE do have a great deal of emotion and it comes out quite clearly when we sing and admonish one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. If you could hear the prayers where I worship, they would surely move you with emotion. If you could see the love that is demonstrated and is clearly obvious during and after the assembly you would be touched. In fact it is often difficult for these brethren to get away from each other after the morning worship. Many actually end up spending the whole day with each other talking into the night about Christ and the precious word of God. The teaching program there actually takes the congregation through the entire Bible in three years. This includes all of the classes from the youngest to the oldest. This intense study of the scriptures takes them through many emotions as they travel from Genesis to Revelation. And this study of the scriptures leads them to have emotions that come from GOD instead of shallow emotions manufactured by the artificial tactics of the dimming of lights, holding of hands, and listening to heart rending stories given in human testimonials and such.

Now the emotions that come from hearing Gods word and humbly being obedient to it are far superior to the artificial and manufactured emotions produced by human contrivance. Now this is what should be suppressed even though I did not say anything in my previous post about suppression of any emotions. I am now stating that we should surely suppress these contrived emotions. Sometimes I sense that those who are so eager to clap dance, shout, etc are doing nothing more that substituting the artificial emotions derived from such theatrics for the genuine emotions of Christianity. By genuine emotions i mean to speak of those that arise from a deep and diligent study of Gods word combined with a very close, personal walk in obedience to His will and His commands seen in a life completely in surrender to Christ as Lord.

So, I hope that you can see that you have completely misunderstood what I have said. And neither have I said that emotions are always disorderly but they can become and have often shown themselves to be extremely disorderly. WE are taught to have self control (2 Peter 1:6) and to Let all things be done decently and in order (1Cor. 14:40). My point was that if our emotions are not under control and they lead to a breach of all that is decent and in order that we would thereby be in violation of the command of Christ as given in this passage.

You have said:

Why is emotion necessarily disorderly? Is control lost in our assemblies when people raise hands or clap, or cry? If it is, most the time it is because of the disruptions caused not by those expressing the emotion but by those reacting emotionally to the emotion.

Emotion is not necessarily disorderly and no one has said that it is. You have merely jumped to that conclusion. But no one can doubt that it can cause disorder. Emotions out of control have caused many riots, even crimes of passion in the world and they have often caused division in the body of Christ. The scriptures have clearly forbidden any behavior, caused by emotions or not, that leads to the loss of good order and decency and creates confusion and disturbs the peace of the church. (1 Corinthians 14:26-39,40).

Now you may be correct in saying that those reacting to what they perceive to be emotional outburst that results in disorder and is indecent, and creating confusion, and thereby disturbs the peace of the assembly" are also adding to the disruption. But the simple fact that the behavior of those who were responsible for the emotional outburst made that impression on their brethren. The fact that they could all have easily predicted that it would make such an impression is clear evidence that they are responsible for insisting upon doing something in the assembly that they knew in advance would create this impression. But, they did it anyway because they were more interested in their so-called liberty than in the cause of Christ and order and decency in the assembly, and the unity of the spirit in the Bond of peace. The fact that they could care less about whether they disturb the peace of the assembly they are determined to have their way no matter who it hurts or who is offended is clear evidence that they know nothing of Christ and are not following Him. They are following SATAN and if you support them you will not follow the wise course and our Lord will not accept your behavior

You also say:

You rightfully point out that the New Testament account shows us no clearly stated emotional expression in assemblies. Yet, neither does it prohibit.

Yes, it does prohibit anything, emotional or otherwise, from disturbing the good order and peace of the assembly and it does not take a scholar to see it. (1 Cor. 14:26-39,40). We are forbidden to lose control of our selves (1 Peter 1:6) and this would include the control of our emotions.

Read this verse Brother Mark and see if you can find its application:

Who is wise and understanding among you? Let him show by his good life in meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter jealousy and faction in your heart glory not and lie not against the truth. This wisdom is not wisdom that cometh down from above but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where jealousy and faction are, there is confusion and every vile deed. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without variance, without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace for them that make peace. (James 3:13-18).

Now if you were unable to discern the meaning and application of this passage to this subject nothing anyone will say to you would ever put you on the right path in relation to this matter. I sincerely believe that you will readily see the application and hope that you will find it helpful not only as it relates to this subject but in your life as well.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

I don't have time to put more than a brief answer, but I will try to answer some questions.

1. I am not 'against emotions' or attempting to regulate them. What I am against, and E. Lee mentioned, is "manufacturing" emotions through theatricalism or group pressure. I have met 'emotion junkies' who flit from service to service. Normally they doubt their salvation when they don't 'feel' it. Excessive reliance on feeling, in my experience, produces a Christian who has difficulty maturing.

2. My thoughts were directed to answer the questions about worship services, not individuals. Again, we as the leadership have the responsibility to keep the worship service orderly. How that task will be performed is based on the needs of the individual congregation. There is no "textbook answer." Local leaders must use their own judgment.

3. Spontaneous, heart-felt expressions are not prohibited. I never said it was. But, see #1 above. No false, manipulated displays please. I have to look through my archives. I have a document that was written by a professional hypnotist who showed how some preachers purposely use manipulation. Unlike him, I do not think people do it to be malicious. I think in reality they are emulating someone they thought was effective, not understanding what they were doing. Our example is the one set by Christ and the apostles. They did not prohibit emotions, but they did not purposely manipulate the crowds for a predetermined reaction either. I think I said on a different thread that we are not "selling" Jesus. We need no gimmicks to proclaim the Gospel.

4. One size does not fit all when it comes to the church. Each individual has a unique and different personality. This is reflected in the personality of the congregation. Each congregation by necessity makes its own rules. But all things, in my opinion (and I believe is explained in Scripture), should be respectful to God, and orderly. Its up to the individual church how they go about doing that.

5. Lack of or the having of emotional displays does not signify greater spirituality. Both ends of the spectrum must be carefully guarded against. It is human nature to want to use ANYTHING for pride. Spiritual pride must be guarded against just like you would for any other sin.

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

One question I have is... "How do we define as descency and order?" What may be descent for one is not for another. Is raising hands, clapping, shouting and dancing out of order? To many yes and to many no. So by what criteria do we go by?

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Brother Kelley:

I appreciate you comments as usual. I have made my comments and I will explain some of what appears to me to be a misunderstanding in your response to what I have said. I will not have time to go over all of this with you but I will make this response and leave this subject to the rest of you to hash out since I will be busy for the next week or so. Please understand that I am only hoping to lead us toward what the scriptures teach us to do. I do not have any other purpose. If you consider my comments worthless and undeserving of serious consideration that is your right. But I will not be able to continue at length to discuss this with you and I apologize for that fact for I know that we would both learn something from it. So please accept this response to you as an effort say what is true and I leave it to the forum to judge it.

You have said:

Lee, where do you get your interpretation of I Cor 14? You miss Paul's whole thesis about "order" Paul never once was talking about displays of emotion within the worship service at all. What he was talking about is the abuse of tongues? If you take into context the fact that tongues was abused then you can see why Paul said what he said. Paul was giving the standard for tongues and its use in the church, he did not say that "you must be so orderly that you must sit and be a manikin."! No in fact Paul said "Be joyful always, pray continually, give thanks in all circumstances for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus. Do not put out the Spirit's fire, do not treat prophecies with contempt." (I Thess 5:16-19).

Brother Kelley:

If you will read again what I said you would see that I made it quite clear that Paul was talking about the regulation of the use of tongues in the assembly and that he also was regulating the women speaking in the church. Some of commentators believe that this refers to emotional outburst of the women in the Church though I see no evidence of that but it does show that he was regulating more than tongues in the assembly. The regulation of tongues in the assembly is only ONE of the things that he regulated. He regulated prophesy he regulated their thinking when he said in verse 20,  Brethren, be not children in mind: yet in malice be babes but in mind be men (1 Corinthians 14:20). SO it is obvious to any thinking person that Paul had much more on this plate than the proper regulation of tongues as you have sought to have us believe. But when Paul ends this discussion of prophesy, tongues, revelations, thinking, women being in silence in the assembly, and the fact that His words were inspired, etc. he concludes with a general principal about the conduct in the assembly. That principle covers all that he did not specifically mention when he said, let ALL THINGS be done decently and in order. (1 Corinthians 14:40). The word of God says ALL THINGS are to be done decently and in ORDER. He does not say TONGUE SPEAKING IS TO BE DONE DECENTLY AND IN ORDER. Which is the way you would like for it to read but unfortunately for your position it just does not read that way.

Therefore you are not correct on two counts. One, Paul is speaking in 1 Corinthians 14 of the regulation of the use of spiritual gifts in the assembly. Thus it is not restricted solely to tongues. In fact it is a continuation of the discussion that begins at the end of 1 Corinthians 12 and continues through chapter 13 of the same book and is concluded with the words of verse 40 of the 14th chapter. That verse covers all that is mentioned in his entire discussion. Two, you are surely incorrect in assuming that the principle that he laid down verse forty does not apply to behaviors in the assembly prompted by our emotions. If their behavior, which was being prompted by the very spirit of God had to be under their control it is surely reasonable to conclude that behaviors that are being prompted by our human emotions must also be subject to the same control. This requirement that ALL THINGS (this includes emotional things) ALL THINGS must be done decently and in order is not restricted to tongue speaking only. Now that, Brother Kelley, is the truth of Gods word on the matter.

Now the same inspired Apostle Paul that said, "Be joyful always, pray continually, give thanks in all circumstances for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus. Do not put out the Spirit's fire, do not treat prophecies with contempt." (I Thess 5:16-19). Also said, The spirits of the prophets are subject to the Prophets and Let all things be done decently and in order. So it is obvious that maintaining good order and decency and the prophets ability to have his spirit subject to his control does not in any way whatsoever put out the spirits fire.

I have written another response to brother mark with words that apply to you as well. I hope that you find them helpful.

I wanted to express these things and show my appreciation to Dr. Jon for his comments with which I entirely agree. However, at the moment, as you all know, I am preparing for the debate with Brother Jack on instrumental music in the worship and will not have time to pursue this subject in detail with you. But I do hope that you will think seriously concerning these things and the words that I have said. Search the scriptures and you will find that it has much to say about the control and regulation of our emotions. It would be an interesting project or study to engage yourself.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

E. Lee,

Are you a fast typist or do you just have a lot of time on your hands?

I wish I had the time to respond in full to your message.

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

I would like to apologize to Dr. Jon for seemingly denigrating the Baptists. I shouldn't do that, because it might be hurtful to you. I really have nothing against the Baptists, per se. My mother just happened to be a Baptist who was not a Chrisitan. Her parents were Baptists who were Christians. I loved all of them.

God, throughout our Christian lives, seemed to lead us to a non- or inter-denominational stance ~ at our first Bible study, at our present church of 33 years, and at our Christian school.

I have respect for many denominational people from every denomination, and while I may disagree with each on certain issues, we almost never discuss those differences, so that we can keep the bond of peace.

Also, I didn't mean to denigrate the CoC church, either. Darrell is the one who made the statement about 'Popcorn Pumba', and I just repeated it.

I think what some here fear is a repeat of what occurred at Cane Ridge. It is difficult to 'live down' some of these things.

I am not aware of the 'Brownsville' occurrence, to which you, Dr. Jon, refer.

Blessings,

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Connie, Brownsville Assembly Of God has had an ongoing revival for over 5-6 years- they claim they have seen over 100,000 people give their lives to Christ. It is like a Cane Ridge Revival all over again but longer.

Danny, Satan cannot dwell where there is perfect praise. I have been in many churches that refuse to raise hands, to give thanksgiving and praise by use of emotional outburst- and they are dead (at least the one's I have experienced). Like I stated before I think it is a spiritual gage. So to answer you, YES if a church does not show emotion I would consider them dead or dying. Danny here is a question for you- How do we define whether a church is alive or dead? I love Southeast Christian Church- but does a large crowd constitute being alive? We can be entertained all we want- but are we truly spiritually on fire?

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Danny...... Preach it, Brother!

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Brother Danny:

I want to express a hearty AMEN AND AMEN to your post. I am sincere! AMEN brother. I guess to follow the example of those who agree with Brother Kelley and have the expresses need to impress everyone concerning just how "on fire" for Jesus they are I had better say something like "PREACH IT BROTHER or they may pronounce me "dead"! Ha! For certianly, if a "congregation" is considered dead without such humanly contrived "false" displays of emotion then surely any individual that happens to unfortunately be a little bit reserved and introverted would have to also be pronounced "dead on arrival" because that individual does not meet Brother Kelley's self designated "test" of faithfulness and spiritual vibrance and life! Brother Danny you have completely exposed this nonsense for what it is and point clearly to it's source.

Christ is the one who decides who is dead or not. He spoke of one congregation, the church in Laodicea, that was neither cold nor hot and treatened to spew them out of his mouth. But he was not refering to their lack of "emotional display". Listen to the words of Christ, " Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have NEED OF NOTHING; and thou knowest not that thou art WRETCHED, and MISERABLE, and POOR AND BLIND, AND NAKED." (Rev. 3:17). But he does not even begin to claim that they are "dead". He tells them to repent. And he says of them, "As many as I love, I rebuke (not a favorite word around here) and chasten (a word unheard of around here)be zealous therefore and repent". (Rev. 3:19). Though they were all of those things they were not "dead" but on the verge of being removed from Christ's body. But Brother Kelley, for far less offenses, has pronounced half of the body of Christ "dead" as if he has the right to "spew them out" of the mouth of Christ's body. You are surely right and I for one appreciate your comments.

I highly recommend a reading of the letters to the seven churches of Asia for those who are so ready to stand in the place of Christ, like the pompus POPE of Rome, and pronounce from the pulpit which congregations of the Lord's people are dead! No one on this earth has that right or power! NO ONE!We will all appear before the judgement seat of Christ. We had beeter be faithfully following Him and holding to the truth like a sailor holding to mast of a ship on a storm- tossed sea.

Now I cannot go without saying that my hearty AMEN applies to everything but that "OLE PIANO"! But you know why I must say that! But I did not want to let your "PIANO" in this response to Brother Kelley to prevent my standing behind and showing my full support for your very excellent response!

I do pray that the "piano" will go away! Ha! But I sincerely hope that all can comprehend the clear truth which you have otherwise spoken, even if they agree with you to keep the piano! Ha!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Danny:

By the way where on earth is this place called "COWTOWN"? And how on earth did the Church get there if everyone one was "dead upon arrival" because they were not jumping up and down and clapping and manufacturing feelings and dancing down the isle. How in the world did the gospel ever get delivered by such "dead" Christians. Many of the churches, where these men preach who are pronouncing everyone dead were starded by people that they would have pronounced "dead" because of their disdain for this false, pretentious, manufactured and humanly contrived emotions. Just a thought!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Emotion has always been part of our worship. How can it not be?

Love for each other is present (and obvious) in our fellowship before and after the services....

Anger at complacency and hatred for sin is evident in the popping veins on the preacher's neck when he "really gets rolling"...

Joy and laughter are shown by all, from the children to the aged...

Compassion and concern are demonstrated during "prayer request" time.

Love and praise to God are genuine when "praise reports" are given.

The Subject Title for this thread does not square with the contents. It assumes that emotion = "raising hands" or "shouting amen"

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Connie,

The reason I haven't participated in this thread so far (apart from the one word "WHAT?!?", when people were talking at "cross purposes" at the beginning) is not just because I have been "licking [my] wounds from the Instrumental/Acapella wars". Rather, it is because I think the wrong question was asked. And, as usual in this and related discussions, people are comparing "apples and oranges" -- or "grass and air" in their discussion.

In a sense, both sides are right. Of course people should have emotion in their relationship with God and it is good for us to have an outlet for that emotion; but of course we need to do things "decently and in order" (or "in a fitting and orderly way"). The real question is, "What is a 'fitting and orderly way' to express our emotion in the context of our Christian fellowship and community worship and praise of God?" And there is no single answer to that question. It depends first, of course, on what the Bible teaches about acceptable worship, but my belief is that we are allowed a lot of freedom for our own choices. After that, it depends mainly on culture; it depends also on the backgrounds and temperaments of the people involved; it depends on the situation.

Even without making the black/white dichotomy that one or two have referred to, what is appropriate in Japan or Germany, what is appropriate in Britain, what is appropriate in the "deep south" of the U.S., what is appropriate among Chinese in Hong Kong, what is appropriate among Filipinos in Hong Kong, what is appropriate among people from a "charismatic" background, what is appropriate among people from a "high church" background, etc., may be as many DIFFERENT things as there are different ethnic groups and different variations in the upbringing of the individuals involved. What is appropriate when people are gathered around the Lord's Table and the average age of the group is 40 or above, and what is appropriate for teenagers around the campfire at summer camp, is almost certainly going to be different.

"Do you allow ....?" As an elder and the main preacher of our congregation, I don't see it as being up to me to either "allow" or "prohibit" any particular forms of expression as long as the congregation finds it helpful to them. I see my role in this matter to be to help mediate between the extremes so that those who prefer things one way don't ignore the preferences of those who prefer things another way, and to make sure that nothing is done that is disruptive to other people.

Our biggest problem with disruption is with people talking during the service, especially during the sermon, special music, and announcements. Even for this I tend to hang back and not say anything unless it is really bad or until someone else brings it up as a problem, because in some cultures it is considered quite normal to comment on what people are saying or doing while they are doing it.

One thing that our congregation has found helpful in regard to the related question of music styles, is to allow/encourage different styles in different situations. We have two services. (We are forced to have two services because the room we use is not large enough to hold the whole congregation at once, but it does have some other advantages.) The first service (at 2:00 p.m., BTW) is, by agreement, more "solemn", while we are free to be more lively, if people want, in the second service (at 4:30 p.m.). In each service we start with a "singspiration" of two or three songs which may be more lively (it's up to the song leader), but after the "call to worship" song, things are generally more solemn. We also have outdoor fellowship activities roughly once a month, and the music is always lively at this -- usually contemporary "praise songs."

Back to the influence of culture on preferences, I personally do not like the habit of many American song leaders and preachers of demanding a particular response from the "audience" -- "Amen?" "AMEN!" "Praise the Lord?" "PRAISE THE LORD!" It seems manipulative to me. But I have also attended a few (very few) American basketball games in my lifetime, and see the same from the cheerleaders there -- "Who's the best?" "SMALLVILLE!!" "Give me an S." "S!" "Give me an M." "M!" "Give me ...." So I assume it is a part of American culture and try to tolerate it when I'm there. "When in Rome ...."

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Brother Mark:

You have said:

"Are you a fast typist or do you just have a lot of time on your hands?

I wish I had the time to respond in full to your message."

Are you pretending to be ignorant or do you just enjoy asking stupid questions?

If you try hard enough you can find some time to respond my message. THere is nothing that says you must respond today or ever for that matter.

No, brother Mark, I do not have a lot of "time on my hands" but I do have a lot of concern in my heart and therefore I am here at 1130Pm finding time to respond. Whether I am a fast typist or not is none of your business.

So, if you care about these things, Mark, stay up late and get up early if you really feel dedicated to this work we do in this forum. But do not just attempt, by sly remarks, to indicate that when I said I will not have much time in the next few weeks that I was not being truthful just because I took some of my "precious time" to respond to you. You see, I know what you were really trying to say but did not have the courage to clearly speak. Do not be cowardly. If you think I have lied about how much time I have to write in this forum just say so. You cannot know how much time I have and neither can you know how much effort I put into writing in this forum.

So you will find time I am sure to respond but I will not likely have time to return your response for a few weeks. When I said that I do not have much time I was telling the truth. I do not owe you any explainations whether I respond to anything you say or not. THat is my right and if you do not like it there is nothing I can or am willing to do to help you deal with it.

I sincerely responded to your words because you misrepresented what I had said. I have that right. I had the right to ignore this tread altogether but I chose not to.

Enough of these slight underhanded ways of calling someone a liar. You do not want anyone to be able to critisize you for calling me names so you hypocritically insinuate or imply such things without having the courage to say them so that you can have every appearence of being "respectful". You should be ashamed but I doubt if you are. After all you are so busy being superior in spirituality by clapping hands, shouting and manufactoring emotions in the worship you could not possibly be guilty of what I have charged you with doing. But do not ever forget that GOD knows the truth.

You should be pleased with what I have written above because it will most likely generate some "emotions" but they are probably the kind of "emotions" that you think should be "suppressed" in the church. THe emotion of "righteous indignation" at the sight of hypocrisy is a very good emotion and should not be prevented when it comes out naturally in the church. I do not however see anyone working to "manufacture" much of that particular "emotion" and provide a place for it to be openly expressed! It must be because it cannot be done by "clapping hands" or raising arms or holding hands in a dimly lighted room or "sharing" tear jerking stories of mutual "misery".

The hypocrisy of this "allowing emotions" in the worship is surely evident to those who know the truth.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 21, 2000

Lee,

You've said you have a problem with humour. I think it is especially apparent when it comes to any form of "teasing". I don't know what was in Mark's heart, but here's how it looked to me. Many of your posts are long (as are most of my own -- which I sometimes apologise for and sometimes just make jokes about, myself). I thought he was just teasing you about that. Please try not to be so quick to take offence when none was intended -- or at least it didn't appear intentionally offensive to me.

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Thank you, Benjamin, and I think I shouldn't have made any references to that other subject.

I favor a calm, reasoned, worshipful atmosphere and that is what our church provides. Our occasional expressions of praise in adoration of God are in no way contrived, but are a true expression of sincere worship.

I just don't look down on groups which encourage more expression even than we do, as long as the Gospel is being preached. As you say, 'when in Rome...'.

A harsh, judgmental spirit is so unChristlike, and so lacking in Christian love that I can't get over that people who call themselves 'Christians', much less 'Christian preachers', find it acceptable to spew out such bile.

I am SO THANKFUL for our loving, edifying, Christ-filled workers in our church. They are SO FAITHFUL to the spirit AND the letter of the law. They love Christ, and they want everyone in the world to know of Christ's love for them.

They keep in mind that love of God and love of neighbor are the main commandments, and encompass the whole law.

It sounds to me as though you incorporate and embody what God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit intended when They gave us the Scriptures, as do others who have posted here.

If only all Christian ministers could. They might set the world on fire!

And JUSTICE *is* what God desires and metes out. He is the One Who keeps the books, for which I am very thankful.

ROMANS 12:19: KJV/ASV

Dearly Beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Matthew 5:11-12: NASB

11: Blessed are you when men cast insults at you, and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely, on account of me.

12: Rejoice, and be glad, for your reward in heaven will be great, for so they persecuted the prophets which were before you.

May you all have the Peace which passes all understanding, in Christ Jesus,

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Lee,

Cowtown is a nickname for Fort Worth, TX, like Big Apple is for New York and the Windy City is for Chicago. Now, Danny might not of known that when he referenced that; I suspect that he was just making up a name and hit on Ft Worth's nickname.

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Lee,

I am sorry you have taken offense to my teasing. I admit I am a bit frustrated that I do not have the time to answer you in full. You do say that I should find the time to respond in full if I care. Well, I care, but my priorities are elsewhere, this forum is not the highest on my agenda. If I could find more time or if I make the effort to create it, I would spend it elsewhere from here -- I am unwilling to add much more time here. This is one forum I use to "sharpen my sword" and "equip me for battle" but I will not sit on sidelines all day long sharpening and training while the battle rages. I am grateful for the grace of God while I go to engage in battles. When I say all this, I don't mean to imply that you or anyone else on this forum aren't battling too. I am not a full-time preacher, I do have a two year old son, so my job (when they actually give me something to do) can be time consuming and certainly an energetic two year old who will simply not go to sleep until after 9 is.

Now, Lee, understand something. I think you and a few others on this forum are often too quick to equate one position with another. I probably have been guilty of this too, so I am not claiming innocence. I have never said that I favor "manufactoring" emotion, though I may have recognized that some will clap if and only if someone next to them does. I see no problem with that if the original clapper(s) were sincere, it is not worth suppressing the original solely on the basis that the effect was to manufacture emotions.

And the Bible does tell us that men everywhere should lift holy hands in prayer -- and I do lift my hands during prayer on occasion, and will lift them while singing if the song is a "prayerful" song, one that is really a sung prayer. You may interpret 1 Tim 2:8 as being figurative in lifting hands -- I think that it was literal at the time it was written, and that there is nothing wrong with interpretting it literally now.

As for me being underhanded and accusing you of being a liar, well, I am sorry you feel that I was doing that. Apparently this word only forum, lacking complementary body language, tone and voice inflection has created a bad situation between you and I, one I didn't intend. In my prodding of you to clarify for me your positions (or what you see as the Biblical position), you have taken offense where none was intended. While this grieves me, I fear to try to make amends through writing will only risk further unintended offenses. Still, if you wish to try, write me at seminole@springmail.com and tell me exactly which words I said that form the basis for your many accusations. I would also appreciate at it that if in the future, if you have any such accusations to make, that you will do it first privately. Any apologies to be made would of course then be public.

Now, just so it is clear: I don't believe that sincere emotion should be suppressed except for one it causes a disruption, nor should it be intentionally manufactured. I would disagree that if my sincere emotion causes a disruption among the immature, then I am necessarily at fault and should supress myself at all times in the future -- though perhaps I should take the initiative to educate. Yet further I recognize that sincere emotion may have the side effect of manufactured emotion, much like it only takes a handful of people, sometimes just one, to prompt a standing ovation. Emotion should not be suppressed just because it has that effect.

Now where I am uncertain is on encouraging sincere emotion in an environment where emotion has been suppressed, without manufacturing emotion. How much do we risk manufacturing emotion where emotion has been suppressed? You may not think it matters, but I have been places where there has been "orderly emotions" and visitors have remarked "I can see that you love God". I never have heard such remarks in stoic churches.

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Brother Ben:

You have said:

Lee, You've said you have a problem with humour. I think it is especially apparent when it comes to any form of "teasing". I don't know what was in Mark's heart, but here's how it looked to me. Many of your posts are long (as are most of my own -- which I sometimes apologise for and sometimes just make jokes about, myself). I thought he was just teasing you about that. Please try not to be so quick to take offence when none was intended -- or at least it didn't appear intentionally offensive to me.

I do believe that is often possible for people to hid behind humor and launch attacks that are personal in nature and often difficult to respond to because they are couched in humor. I have seen such often in this forum. The difficulty in making a response to such is that you must be willing to accept accusations of being too quick to take offense. Some times it turns out to be the truth that you actually opened fire on innocent civilians when you thought you were fighting Viet Cong. This may be one reason that I have trouble with humor. It is often used too much as a tactic to hide the real enemy by moving among innocents who are not combatants! I learned early in life that if you are being fired upon there is an enemy out there somewhere. If you fire back the enemy will either run or die with everyone else! Hiding an enemy among the friendlies is not something that this Veteran can deal with calmly. That is a fact of life for me and I do not apologize for it. Those who use humor should understand that not everyone really appreciates it and that humor carries with it the extreme potential of being offensive rather than useful. When speaking to a general audience such as we have in this forum, anyone choosing to use humor must know that they are running the risk of appearing to be the enemy and must be careful and realize that they must take responsibility when it offends someone. So if Brother Mark was intending to be humorous the very fact that I took offense is proof that he failed in his use of humor when attempting to communicate with me. I did not choose his words for him and I am still not convinced that he was not making a snide remark. So who is responsible for his words and the effect that they produce. It is not just the hearer that is responsible. Among humans it is both sides of the communication path that is responsible for the misunderstanding that occur.

I would have appreciated your comments more concerning this matter if you had also admonished Brother Mark to be careful how he uses humor. For it can sometimes blow up in your face when the person that you are talking to does not appreciate the humor and sees it instead as a snide remark or a veiled attack. This is especially true when talking to someone whom you know does not appreciate humor and has problems with it.

I believe that it would be good for those who use humor to consider its judicious use. If you know that someone has a problem with humor, would it not be wise to at least take that fact into consideration when using humor in speaking to that person? Everyone that has been in this forum for a while knows that I often cannot tell when someone is simply trying to lighten up the conversation with a little humor or using it as a tactic to hide a veiled attack. But the idea that the person who is offended by a remark that was intended to be humorous is somehow responsible for the misunderstanding is ridiculous. The person making such a remark is responsible for making it clear that it is a joke or intended to be humorous. If he receives a reaction that indicates that his joke was not received as a joke he can know that he has failed in his attempt to communicate with the person to whom his remarks were directed.

Now I do not say the above words to be critical of what you have said to me. For I sincerely appreciate your good advice. For I indeed would benefit greatly from developing a greater sense of humor. And you can rest assured that I will sincerely do my best to follow your advice to not be so quick to take offense. I will therefore, if I sense that it may be possible that no offense is intended, try to persuade myself to ask if it is a joke first before responding otherwise.

If I am certain that offense is intended I will wait a while before responding to be sure. But if I cannot see how the comment was in fact intended to be a mere joke I will respond as if it were serious. But I can assure you that such behavior will not always prevent someone from saying to me, when responding to such language, Lee do not be so quick to take offense.

I am looking for the day when someone will tell those who use jokes as a cloak to hide the fact that they are attempting to stab you with a sharp dagger that they are being too deliberately deceptive and cowardly to call themselves Christians. Our Lord warned us to beware of wolves in sheeps clothing. If you see me apparently slaying a sheep do not be so sure that it is not the wolf that I have accurately detected and slain until you take a closer look at the so-called sheep!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Brother Danny:

I appreciate your following words:

I just talked to one of the members of Cowtown Christian Church.... and they agreed that they too would love to have you worship with them and they would be glad to put that 'OLE PIANO' away!!!

Please send my warmest regards and Christian love and respect to the church in COWTOWN. And be sure to tell them that I greatly appreciate their invitation to worship. I may get to take a vacation someday and I know that my wife and I would immensely enjoy this opportunity to go worship with our Brethren in Indiana and Cowtown. Also tell them that I am very much touched (that is emotion that is natural and not of the artificially manufactured variety) by their willingness to forgo something (that Ole Piano) that they enjoy for the sake of their weak brother that just cannot accept it. Tell them that I very much admire them for that love for Christ, their brother in Christ, and for the peace and harmony in the Church of Christ. It is indeed a beautiful and touching (there goes that emotion again) example that I sincerely pray catches on elsewhere and will become a habit that may bring us all together again as we were before the Ole Piano was a New thing.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Danny, if cowtown Assembly of God, Baptizes people into our Lord Jesus Christ (Which most AOG churches do) then AMEN! In fact if I would rather attend a AOG than most "Christian Churches or COCs" . How dare we say they are going to Hell?

Danny Do you love your wife so much that you would cry when you think of your love for her? Should we not display more emotion toward Christ?! Most church members have lost their first love- most christians are dead in their relationship, notice I did not say all. I think Lee, posted that only Christ knows- and that is true- BUT there are fruits that we do go by. THe favorite past time of many Christians is to complain, gripe, and bicker.... Is that a fruit of joy, love and peace? No where did I ever say or imply someone is not a Christian is they do not show emotion, but it DOES show where they are at spiritually.

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

AKelley,

Saw an old Indian, opps, excuse me, Native American proverb quoted the other day, and the more I think about it, the more I like it. I think it goes to many things in this thread:

"Whenever someone is bumped, some of what they are filled with spills out."

When Christians complain, gripe and bicker, what does that show they are full of?

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

AJKELLEY:

Scroll back. Danny did not say "they are going to hell"

He wrote;

..if they continue to preach a perverted gospel (i.e., faith only..."invite Jesus into your heart" garbage).....then they are spiritually dead....biblically speaking!!

Now my question:

Do you agree that preachers of a perverted gospel are spiritually dead? Yes or no?

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

ACTS 10:44-48: NASB

44: While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message.

45: And all the circumcized believers who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon the gentiles also.

46: For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered,

47: Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who HAVE RECEIVED the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?

48: And he oredered tem to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked them to stay on for a few days.

God doesn't fit in ANY of our preconceived boxes.

To show emotion only when one is angry, or at a sports event, is counter-productive. There are more emotions than anger. God gave them to us. He told us to use them for good. He told us to not let the sun go down on our anger.

He spoke of love as being more important than even faith. Not that a large group indicates a spiritual reality, or that a small group indicates error. What IS important is exhibiting the 'fruit of the Spirit' ~ love, joy, PEACE, long-suffering, etc. (Galatians 5).

In Him, and prayerfully submitted,

Connie

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

I think Lee, posted that only Christ knows- and that is true- BUT there are fruits that we do go by. The favorite past time of many Christians is to complain, gripe, and bicker.... Is that a fruit of joy, love and peace? No where did I ever say or imply someone is not a Christian is they do not show emotion, but it DOES show where they are at spiritually.

Now Brother Kelley, please think of what it is that you are saying! If you agree that I was correct in pointing out that the scriptures teach that only Christ knows if someone is dead spiritually then it follows that you do NOT know. The fruits that you refer to cannot always be seen in every place. When a Christian is suffering and follows the injunction to pray and you see him at his prayers and detect no emotion of joy Love or peace you would not and could not reasonably conclude that anything about where he is spiritually! In fact, Brother Kelley, the fruits that you should be inspecting are the fruits of those who teach false doctrine because this is what Christ was talking about when he said, By their fruits ye shall know them. He was not talking about joy peace and love. He was referring to their doctrine or teaching. This is why John warned us, Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ HATH NOT GOD. If any man come to you an bring not this doctrine RECEIVE HIM NOT INTO YOUR HOUSE NEITHER GIVE HIM GODSPEED. For he that giveth him GODSPEED is a PARTQAKER OF HIS EVIL DEEDS. 2 John 9-11. You still have not learned the clear and unmistakable lesson of this passage. You are persistently granting GODSPEED to those who teach false doctrine. This makes you a PARTAKE of their evil deeds. Beware brother. You are in danger because of this very thing.

Then you say:

No where did I ever say or imply someone is not a Christian is they do not show emotion, but it DOES show where they are at spiritually.

You could not prove such a statement from the word of God to save your life! The man whom you saw praying but demonstrating no emotion whatsoever would give you absolutely no indication concerning where he is spiritually. He may be sincerely praying fervently. He may be going through the motions or he may be trying one more time to hear a word from God before drawing the conclusion that there is not God! You just do not know such things! I am surprised at you Brother Kelley. All this words from one that I remember complaining that we should not be judging others. In fact even in this thread you seem to object to our judging that these false teachers from the (AOG) are teaching a perverted gospel. Which we can prove by comparing their fruits (Doctrine) with the doctrine of Christ and you rush in headlong to judge those who do not display their emotions as you think they should. And draw the conclusion, without any word from God to support it or any teaching from God to compare it with and decide, without telling us that you know where they are spiritually. Just where are they spiritually since you claim to know but have not the courage to come out and say?

I recommend a good reading of the word of God for nothing short of ignorance of its teaching could have brought you to this point.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Typos in my last post: 'ordered' and 'them'

<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><

'You shall KNOW THEM by their fruit'. What 'fruit' would that be?

Matthew 5 and Galatians 5 are good places to start. And most of these verses do not differentiate between believers and unbelievers; it is the way we should treat EVERYONE.

We need to get the beams out of our own eyes before trying to get the motes out of others' eyes. Then we can see better to get the motes (small things) out of their eyes. God wants us to work on our own shortcomings FIRST.

If we believe that we have the gift of the Holy Spirit (no matter when each one believes he/she received Him) why don't we trust Him to instruct, teach and reprove each believer instead of usurping His authority?

The crux here is that certain ones of you do not believe that certain other ones are Christians if they have not done things in a traditional order. Sad. While the world is dying. I'm glad God is not in that box.

Respectfully and paryerfully submitted,

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Lee thank you for the slam I appreciate it. But, I think you underestimate me and you misunderstand me. My original thought and question is do we encourage or discourage emotion in our services. Many leaders and ministers discourage so stronly that I use the word "allow". Now I just because I feel that a good gage of one's spirituality is due to whether they display at least some emotion or not; is not grounds for "ignorance". I use the term fruits loosely to express what I am trying to say. I know what the Bible says!

Danny, I being Christian Church, even question where it says that in baptism we meet the blood of Jesus. I once thought so and I still by and large do, but where is the verse that in baptism we meet the blood that washing away from all sin? Is it not a theological stance that we take? Romans 6 tells us that we are baptized into His death, but it does not state blood! Thus just because a person does not agree that we meet the blood in baptism doe not make them a spiritual pervert or even totally in error. If that is a dividing line then Dr. Jon, who I think I remember as a baptist is "perverting the gospel," if he indeed believes contrary to you.

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Danny,

I cant sit back and read this garbage any longer. Ive called in the troops,shot the cannon, and blew the bugle! I will not let you stand alone.

It amazes me how far the Lords Church has digressed! If one doesnt preach, teach, share, or obey the terms of pardon and they preach, teach,share or proclaim a different gospel, which is not the gospel. Then they PERVERT the Word of God. Otherwise, we will love everybody into HELL! What in the world is the matter with the Church? Dont they believe anything any longer. If it doesnt matter, Ill go back to the Catholic organization and go to hell in style.

I really think that Ill let the Apostle Paul say the rest, after all I wouldnt want to offend our denominational friends. In fact, I just ought to let them go to hell on their own! I really dont want to make them mad or upset.

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

-- Anonymous, June 22, 2000

Mark:

You mean when Bob Wills sings "Big Ball's In Cowtown", he's talking about Ft. Worth? I always thought Cowtown was Kansas City!

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

Sam,

Kansas City may also be nicknamed "Cowtown", all I know for sure is that Ft Worth is one town with that nickname. My understanding is that Ft Worth got its nickname from those in Dallas trying to insult Ft Worth (once a major town on cattle drive routes), but Ft Worthians kind of liked the name.

Historically, Ft Worth's retort was to claim that their city was where the West begins, while Dallas is where the East peters out.

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

Our standard that we must judge ourselves and all things is the written Word of God. That is the standard. It doesnt matter what 'tradition' someone comes from. The standard to judge against is the Word of God.

The biggest problem for me in this area is the logger-head that happens when there is the clash of experience versus what is NOT written (or prohibited). It is hard to negate personal experience. I am not saying anyone is "wrong." I am saying that experience does not cancel out the Word of God. My personal gripe with Charismatics is that all too often at the pew level experience becomes a "new revelation" equal to and on par with the Bible. (Now understand this: I am former AOG, so I know what I am talking about. This is not a criticism, but an observation I made after being in the Charismatic movement for a large number of years.) Judge for yourself what you are doing based only on the Bible, not your experience.

The over-emphasis on 'emotions' or 'emotionalism' in a service in my estimation is an unbalanced approach. And so is the opposite end of the spectrum.

Once again, people butt heads over this as an 'either/or' thing, which it is not. God created us with emotions, and He created us with intelligence. We are to use both. But we also are to be MATURE. Maturity equals control folks. Maturity equals wisdom. Maturity doesnt mean people will stop disagreeing. The problem with American churches (one of them) is that they are full of baby Christians who never mature. That's where the bickering and back- biting parts come in. In my mind a mature Christian will not see this as an issue at all. (And that is my experience too, from associating with Charismatic and non-Charismatic believers. Its not an issue, its a normal part of being a true human being.)

And since it was mentioned: I agree with Danny in the last post. It doesnt matter who the person is, a different Gospel is wrong. I am a Baptist because of preference and convenience. I am a Christian FIRST. If they get stupid (as they have been doing, being political rather than spiritual) I have no qualms about leaving the SBC. I identify with a group because of the weakness of the church, which insists on these false party affiliations. My Captian is Jesus Christ, not Paige Patterson, or anyone else.

The Bible tells us in Phil. 2:12b: "...work out your salvation with fear and trembling." I take that pretty seriously. I think Danny does too, as well as you all. We are talking our and those we influence eternal destiny. It is a matter of grave and serious consequences. "Sola scriptura" has to be our rallying cry, not denominational ties.

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

Dr. Jon I agree with you to a point, as I agree with Danny to a point. But, what the Christian Church is missing is more emotion! I have a right to say that, due to the fact I have grown up in the "Christian Church" and I went to two Christian Church colleges- went through a Christian Church masters program... yet of all the churches that I have vistit and preached in and studied- we are either dead or dying in emotion. Yes, we have all the logically - and we have it made- but very few Christian church members show emotion- and the ones that do are looked as weird or Pentecostal.

What Danny fails to recognize, and will always fail to recognize is that emotion is a very good thing. Look at those who came into the mighty presence of God- they fell on their faces in fear often crying for repentance! Does that happen in the Christian Church- NO! Why? Because of all the churches I have been in- the presence of God is not there (at least in that think ever prevalent way). Sure Christ is among the two or more beleivers. But, when you go to Brownsville, or Smithton you can difinately feel God's mighty presence.

In our arogance to quickly point out the faults and doctrines of others we neglect to look at our faults. Do we have exclusive rights on salvation as a "Christian Church" non denomination- denomination? No! Are there saved Christians in the AOG? YES there are! And if Danny wants to break fellowship with me because I think that we should be more like the AOG- then fine! The Church of Christ nor the Independent Christian Church has not exclusive rights to salvation. Is a person saved when they accept Jesus into their heart, repents and then is immersed- YES! Why? My Bible tells me so! If a sinners comes forward to accept Christ by faith and prays for repentance and immersion then that person is saved... regardless whether it is in a AOG church or a 'Christian Church". Our theology of exactly when we meet with the blood may be different, but it is not a damnable perverted doctrine that will lead to hell. If so, then by us neglecting the use of spiritual gifts that have not ceased and telling others that they did- then we too are guilty!

If then the Christian Church has exclusive rights to salvation and no denom does, then you must throw out all CDs or tapes by musical groups that do not come from our movement. We cannot read commentaries written by those outside of our movement, and we cannot go to Christian bookstores to by study bibles, written and translated by non Christian Church scholars. In fact you must throw out all translations except Alexander Campbell's translation, due to the fact they were translated by denom. scholars. Even your KJV was translated by the Anglican Church (by and large), and dedicated to King James of England- who was not an immersed beleiver. If you open up your Greek NT - you will never find the book of James, but you will find the book of Jacob instead. James was dedicated to King James (as I understand from History). Do you get my point?!!!!

Our churches do need more emotion, and I pray that God will pour His Spirit on us, before it is too late!

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

When did God dry up?

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

May I ask a question? What is an AOG church?

The good thing about dead churches is that they can be brought to life with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

God is in the resurrection business.

Affectionately,

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

Connie -

AOG is the Assemblies of God denomination.

And you are actually right too -- it is the Holy Spirit that gives life, not programs, actions or enthusiasms. We all seem to have missed that point.

To everyone else:

This is all I intend to say on this particular subject. Once again, it seems that the point has been missed. "Life" in a congregation comes from the Holy Spirit. It is manifested in the lives of the believers. Unless the fire of the Holy Spirit (to use the vernacular) burns in the hearts of the people, no amount of chorus singing, amen shouting or hand clapping will awaken them. Enthusiasm is an outward expression of the inward life. Since people in the pews (and clergy types too, unfortunately) refuse to pray privately, refuse to read and study scripture, and refuse to obey God's Word, there will not be excitement in the church.

Quite frankly I am a little tired of those from non-Charismatic persuasions who see what they do and sudden decide that "this" is the answer. No its not, sorry. What I put in the above paragraph is the answer. Don't expect a "textbook" response either. That is why I LEFT the AOG. Local congregations just don't get it, and keep insisting on unproveable points like "speaking in tongues as a sign of salvation" etc etc. You are excited about this now: but wait. See if you "feel" this down the road a bit. Christianity is not based on feeling. It is based on promise. We don't have to "feel" we are saved. We KNOW we are saved because of the promise of scripture. Our experiences are evaluated by Scripture. Scripture is not evaluated (or validated) by our experiences.

Friends, I have walked this road already. Be very very careful.

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

Dr. Jon,

Thank you for your response.

Please understand that I am not looking for more emotion in the church, and never a phony, manufactured display.

But I think there is a joyous middle ground. As I've stated, We don't have a Charismatic church. It is quite sedate. I prefer a calm, reasoned service where everything is done decently and in order. We laugh and talk in our one Sunday School class, and feel affectionate toward one another (with no displays of emotion).

But I cannot deny others their right to a more expressive service OR A LESS EXPRESSIVE ONE. But if a pastor/preacher/evangelist, etc. is either trying to produce emotion OR suppress emotion, that would be wrong (unless it were a chaotic situation, or one where people were actually expiring in the pews (as in a dead church); then it would be time time to step in!

The Scriptures DO SAY to lift holy hands and to greet one another with a holy kiss. There are the instances where the brethren hung on Paul's neck and cried and kissed him, when he was leaving them.

I say there is freedom in Christ and what is happening in other churches is not our business, unless there is blatant sin or if the Gospel is not being preached. Actually, this may be one reason for denominations: people's different tastes in worship practices and music.

Joyfully in Him,

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

Dr. Jon:

There are times when I am amazed at how much we agree with each other. It is true what you say as follows:

"This is all I intend to say on this particular subject. Once again, it seems that the point has been missed. "Life" in a congregation comes from the Holy Spirit."

And this is especially true as you have said below:

"Since people in the pews (and clergy types too, unfortunately) refuse to pray privately, refuse to read and study scripture, and refuse to obey God's Word, there will not be excitement in the church."

The spirt of God operates upon our hearts through the word of God. We are told by the inspired apostle Paul, " which things also we speak, not in words which man's wisdom teacheth; but which the holy spirit teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual." (1 Cor. 2:13). Peter says, " according as his divine power hath granted unto us ALL THINGS that pertain unto life and godliness through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and vertue." (2Peter 1:3). Paul again says, "All things are of God, who reconciled us unto himself through Christ, and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation;to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not reconing unto them their trespasses, and having committed uto us the WORD OF RECONCILIATION." (2Cor. 5;18,19).

The word of God makes believers. "many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book: but these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life in his name." John 20:30,31.

THe word begets. " I begat you through the gospel." ( 1Cor. 4:15).

The word of God quickens or makes us alive (which seems to be what everyone is worried about in this tread and trying to accomplish by the artificial means of manufactured emotions and the raising of hands and shouting etc.). " This is my comfort in my afliction; for thy word hath quickened me." (Psalms 119:50). " I will never forget thy precepts for with them thou hast quickened me." (Ps. 119:93).

The word of God is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. (Whichis something some hear are trying to do by their efforts to discern the intents of their brethren's hearts based upon how much emotion they display in their worship and the manner in which they display their emotion!). " For the word of God is quick (alive) and powerful, dividing asunder of soul and spirit and of the joints and the marrow and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart". (Hebrews 4:12).

THe word of God enlightens us. "The commandment of Jehovah is pure, enlightening the eyes." (Ps. 19:8).

By the word of God we are sanctified. "Sactify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. (John 17:17).

Faith comes from the word of God. " so then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God." (ROmans 10:17).

The word of god cleanses. " Already ye are clean because of the word which I have spoken unto you." (John 15:3).

The word of God saves us. " receive with meekness the engrafted word which is able to save your souls. ( James 1:21). " Who shall speak unto you words whereby thou shalt be saved, thou and all thy house. (Acts 11:14).

The word of God will judge us. "He that rejecteth me and receiveth not my words hath one that judgeth him. The word which I have spoken the same shall judge him in the last day." (John 12:48).

THe word draws us to the father. "it is written in the prophets, and they shall all be taught of God. Every one that hath heard andhath learned of the father cometh unto me." (John 6:44,45).

I hope that these verses will edify and instruct. I sincerely appreciate and agree with you that we must be moved by God through his word and not through subjective and manipulated feelings and emotions. This is especially true when those subjective feelings lead us to believe, teach and behave contrary to the teach of the very word of God.

For Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

AKelley:

I feel SO sympathetic to what you are saying. I say that some people's minds are hermetically sealed ~ and lately I've been thinking that they are HERMENEUTICALLY SEALED.

You sound as though you are responding to the Holy Spirit and I pray that you will stay very close to the Lord and His word. There is SO MUCH Scripture to support the activity of the Holy Spirit in the lives of Christians, that I can't understand the denial of it by Christian pastors. I can't understand any advantage to the denial of the Spirit's working in our lives. There are only pluses. He's the third part of the Trinity!

You will be in my thoughts and prayers,

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

I think that Jon, Connie and Lee (egads, they are all in agreement!) have hit on it. At first I thought I (and so many others) was just seeing a stoicism held over from Lutheran and Presbyterian roots, or a aversion to some potential Cane Ridge event, but now I see it as it is. What is lacking in our churches is not a lack of emotion. It is a lack of joy in the Holy Spirit. (No amount of programming or emotional workouts can substitute; you can't produce the latter with lots of the former. But you can produce lots of the former with the latter.) As some in our congregation (which needs a lot of prayer right now) have noted recently, a lot of people treat church like a VFW meeting ... something you do each week, a civic duty, sit in the pew and listen to the sermon then go home to your life which has nothing to do with what just happened. We have forgotten our first Love.

-- Anonymous, June 23, 2000

Connie thank you for your prayers. I do need them. The Lord and His mighty HS are working on me. The Spirit indeed is revealing to me each and everyday that there is more and more to experience in my Christian walk.

What I am discovering or rather realizing is that we in the Christian Church and COC are VERY judgmental when it comes to the HS working within our life ( I am guilty as anyone here). In fact many COC, do not even believe that He works actively within our lives pouring out His presence upon us. Rather they believe that the HS works exclusively through the Word. Yes, I do believe that the HS DOES work through the Word, but I also believe and know (through the empirical senses) that the HS is and does work through our lives in many other ways. In fact, I believe that the miracles, and various manifestations seen in Acts are still in existance today! Alexander Campbell used John Locke's emperical method to discover that all knowledge come through the senses, and thus experience is a very Campbellian thing.

In my humble experience, most churches (Christian Church and COC) are dying dramaticly. Why? I believe that we are quenching the HS today within us. We do not allow Him to work- thus we restrict Him in a box. Now, too much emotion can be fatal, as Dr. Jon pointed out, but not enough can be fatal as well. Which we seriously lack in emotion. Danny, Lee and the others can say all they want in defense, but the reality is that we have lost that first love that we once had. We need another Cane Ridge outpouring (in my opinion).

We as a Christian Church seek unity, yet we are vastly divided. Yes, we try to hash out the old arguments over and over- but they do not do any good. For example, the piano issue is a dead horse. The many in the COC will never sing with one, and many in the CHristian Church will not sing without. We fight and argue over stupid stuff! The piano should be the least of our concerns- yet we make it an issue. We grieve and quench the Spirit, our churches look like funeral parlors rather than a MASH unit. We try to introduce program after program trying to raise the dead- but we cannot. We try things as singspirations, unity meals, pot luck dinners, fifth Sunday sings, All Christian CHurch men's meetings, women's circles, etc (nothing wrong with any of these), but we use them as a means to unite, or even grow and they do not work. I thank the Lord that He has placed me in a Church where we were able to spend over $10,000 on a crusade to reach the lost- we have 50 decisions and 10 baptisms (one my oldest daughter). So there is hope, but not with the traditional method, and not with the legalistic or nonemotional method.

I say what we need is to allow the HS to burn within us! Is the Lord our passion and drive? Do we actively seek to save the lost? In many cases no! I weep for our movement... because we are sinking like the great Titanic- and we do not even realize it! If I mad some of you mad by my statments then great- let the HS work on you.

-- Anonymous, June 24, 2000

Dear All:

I Thessalonians 5:15-23: AMPLIFIED

15: See that none of you repays another with evil for evil, but always aim to show kindness and seek to do good to one another and to everybody.

16: Be happy [in your faith] and rejoice and be glad-hearted continually - always.

17: Be unceasing in prayer - praying perseveringly;

18: Thank [God] in everything - no matter what the circumstances may be, be thankful and give thanks; for this is the will of God for you [who are] in Christ Jesus [the Revealer amd Mediator of that will].

19: DO NOT QUENCH (SUPPRESS OR SUBDUE) THE (HOLY) SPIRIT.

20: DO SPURN THE GIFTS AND UTTERANCES OF THE PROPHETS - DO NOT DEPRECIATE PROPHETIC REVELATIONS NOR DESPISE INSPIRED INSTRUCTION OR EXHORTATION OR WARNING.

21: BUT TEST AND PROVE ALL THINGS [UNTIL YOU CAN RECOGNIZE] WHAT IS GOOD; [TO THAT] HOLD FAST.

22: Abstain from evil _ shrink from it and keep aloof from it _ in whatever form or kind it may be.

23: And may THE GOD OF PEACE HIMSELF SANCTIFY YOU THROUGH AND THROUGH - THAT IS, SEPARATE YOU FROM PROFANE THINGS, MAKE YOU PURE AND WHOLLY CONSECRATED TO GOD - and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved sound and complete [and found] blameless at the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Messiah.

<>< <>< <>< He does it! <>< <>< <><

Psalm 133:1 AMPLIFIED

BEHOLD, HOW GOOD and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity.

Ephesians 4:3 AMPLIFIED

Be eager and strive earnestly to guard and keep the harmony and oneness of [produced by] the Spirit in the binding power of peace.

Praise HIS name!

-- Anonymous, June 24, 2000

Brethren:

Brother Kelley has said:

The Lord and His mighty HS are working on me. The Spirit indeed is revealing to me each and everyday that there is more and more to experience in my Christian walk.

Now I never thought that I would hear Brother Kelley claim to be inspired! But he has surely done so with these words. Notice how he speaks of the Spirit revealing. He is telling us here that he is receiving revelations from God. So if those revelations are being written down in this forum then Brother Kelley is writing inspired scripture! The next thing you know he will be in here telling us that he is an APOSTLE of Christ in the exact same sense in which Peter, Paul, James and John were apostles. Who knows when he may come in here and relate a story similar the events that happened to Saul on the road to Damascus claiming to be the apostle to the Church of Christ!" False teachers from as far back as you can find them in the scriptures followed this same approach.

Then he tells us:

What I am discovering or rather realizing is that we in the Christian Church and COC are VERY judgmental when it comes to the HS working within our life ( I am guilty as anyone here).

Now what the rest of us have discovered is that Brother Kelley is the one that is Judgmental" about this matter. For he is the one who has decided that his brethren are dead". He reaches this conclusion simply because they do not follow his requirements to wear their emotions on their sleeve and participate in his favorite form of theatrics. The fact that they follow the word of God and obey him is not enough for them to be alive! But the word of God has no such teaching! This is all a fabrication of the inspired A. Kelley. It is interesting to note just here that he claims to be "as guilty as" the rest of us. I deny this completely because the rest of us are not guilty of any such thing but he is guilty of being judgmental, as I have shown. Therefore he is the only one, thus far, guilty of being judgmental concerning this issue.

He wants you to believe the following words concerning the Holy Spirit:

We do not allow Him to work- thus we restrict Him in a box.

Now this is interesting! Ha! The very idea that we can prevent the Holy Spirit from doing what he wants to do with and to us is ridiculous! The word of God teaches no such thing. We may live in such a way as to cause the Holy Spirit to be grieved concerning how we are living but the idea that we are able to prevent him from doing his work is not true at all. You have said your self Brother Kelley that the Holy Spirit is the third member of the Godhead. No one controls God. None have ever been able to put Him in a box. This is just pure idle talk you have heard somewhere but you have not read it in the word of God in any place! God is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think and none are able to restrict him. Ha! God in a box!!! How stupid could any one be to even imagine that such a thing is possible? This is typical of those who believe in these miraculous gifts of the spirit today! They do not see these miracles happening but they believe that God is doing them. So they BLAME us as if our lack of faith could actually diminish the power of God to act! Now listen closely Brethren, WE HAVE NO POWER OVER GOD OTHER THAN SUCH THAT HE ALLOWS US TO HAVE BECAUSE HE LOVES US. There is no way anyone is ever going to put GOD IN A BOX. Brother Kelley acts as if God is something that we invented or created and we can do with him, as we will to do! Like some toy that a child puts away in the toy trunk before going to bed! Away with such absolute ignorance of the word of God! Brother Kelley, you had better return to the scriptures and study if you think that God is controlled by man just so that you can claim that we have the miraculous gifts of the spirit today even though you are completely unable to demonstrate such to be the truth and all you can do is empirically sense it!

Then he tries to pretend to agree with the teaching of God's word as follows:

Yes, I do believe that the HS DOES work through the Word, but I also believe and know (through the empirical senses) that the HS is and does work through our lives in many other ways.

Notice that Brother Kelley does not know this from the word of God but from the empirical senses. Now that is conclusive evidence! Ha! We know brother Kelley is right because he has sensed empirically that he is right! Who on earth could argue with that! It does not matter what the word of God says, according to Kelley, we should believe him because he has empirically sensed it. Here is the classical method of interpretation of the word of God by Pentecostals. They examine the word of God in the light of their empirical senses instead of examining their empirical sense in the light of the revealed word of God. This explains how they are able to claim that the Holy Spirit has taught them things that turn out to be the opposite of what the Holy Spirit teaches in the word of God. By this we find them contradicting the Holy Spirit and claiming that the Holy Spirit is responsible for the contradiction. If some one teaches a gospel other than that which was received through the Holy Spirit speaking through the apostles Paul said Let him be anathema! (Gal. 1:8,9). This includes those who claim that the Holy Spirit has appealed to their empirical senses and delivered this false gospel to them.

Brother Kelley wants us to believe that the Holy Spirit is doing all today that he was doing in the New Testament times. If that is true he is inspiring men today and revealing the word of God to them. If brother Kelley happens to be one of those who is being so inspired by the Holy Spirit, since he says the Holy Spirit is working on him, then his words which he has written while the Holy Spirit was working on him would be just as inspired as the Bible. Now, think of these Brethren! Is the Holy Spirit still inspiring men today and revealing the word of God through them today so that when we receive their writings we are to append them to the Holy Scriptures? If not then there is at least one thing that he did in New Testament times, which was miraculous, which he is not doing today. The Holy Spirit used Miracles for the purpose of confirming the word of God that He had delivered to inspired men. The Hebrew writer tells us, How shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation? Which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard; God also BEARING WITNESS WITH THEM BOTH BY SIGNS AND WONDERS, AND BY MANIFOLD POWERS, AND BY GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, ACCORDING TO HIS OWN WILL. (Heb. 2:3,4) So one can see that God did not consign us to believe what anyone said because they have empirically sensed it as brother Kelley has sought to have us do. He confirmed the words of those Holy Spirit filled men with signs, wonders, and manifold powers and gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His will. So if the Holy Spirit is doing these things today, and Brother Kelley has the Holy Spirit working on him today in the same way as is found in the New Testament it would be easy for him to convince us. All he has to do is use those gifts of the Holy Spirit and do some signs and wonders so that we can have the same evidence that God is working through him that the 1st century Christians had to prove that God was working through the inspired ones of the New Testament who brought the word of God to us and delivered the gospel to us. I doubt if we will see any such thing happen even though Brother Kelley claims to know empherically because he has sensed it empherically that these miracles continue today. It was a miracle that God inspired men with the truth and delivered it to us in the scriptures. Is he doing this today, brother Kelley? If he is, by whom is he doing it and what are the manifestations or miracles that are being done that CONFIRM that their words are from God?

After all Brother Kelley says:

In fact, I believe that the miracles, and various manifestations seen in Acts are still in existence today!

He does not prove this from the word of God. And if they were still in existence today he would not have to prove it from the word of God because it would be evident to all. Lets just look ad some of those miracles in Acts and ask Brother Kelley if he has ever witnessed them today?

In Acts the eighth chapter we are told, Now when the apostles that were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For as yet it was fallen upon none of them: only the had been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then laid they their hand s on them and they received the Holy Spirit. Now when Simon say that through the LAYING ON OF THE APOSTLES HANDS THE HOLY SPIRIT WAS GIVEN he offered them money, saying, give me this power also that on whosoever I lay my hands he will receive the Holy Spirit. Then Peter said unto him, thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought to obtain the gift of God with money, thou HAST NEITHER PART NOT LOT IN THIS MATTER for thy heart is not right before God. (Acts 8:14-21).

Now here is a man much like brother Kelley. He wants to have the same miraculous power that God gave to the apostles the only difference is that he, at least, offered to pay for it! Brother Kelley wants it for free! But the Holy Spirit made it clear to Simon, and to Brother Kelley through Simon, that he had NEITHR PART NOR LOT IN THIS MATTER for thy heart is not right with God. Notice that this is in reference to the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit and the scriptures are quite clear that these were given ONLY through the laying on of the Apostles hands. Now I do not believe that Brother Kelley thinks that we have apostles living today on this earth as we had in the New Testament. But if he wants these miraculous gifts he will have to get them the way God has given them. He never received the power to pass these gifts to men by the laying on of hands because, just like Simon, God has not given him any part or lot in this matter. But if he wants the miraculous gifts that were received from the Holy Spirit on this day by the Samaritans he will have to get one of the apostles to lay hands on him. Now I do doubt very seriously if he believes we have inspired men like the apostles today walking on the earth laying hands on those who have become Christians that they may receive these gifts describe here as being given through the laying on of the apostles hands, unless of course he claims to be an apostle himself! I can tell you that no one today is able to lay hands upon others to give them the Holy Spirit. None by the apostles had any part or lot in this matter. But Brother Kelley tells us that we have the same miraculous powers now that are in the book of Acts. Well, this is one that we do not have! Yet this is the way in which all of those miraculous gifts were imparted to all who had them except the apostles who received them directly from the Holy Spirit.

Now read Acts 19:1-6,  And it came to pass that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper country came to Ephesus, and found certain disciples: And he said unto them, Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye believed? And they said unto him, nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was given. And he said, into what then were ye baptized. And they said, into Johns immersion. And Paul said, John baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people that they should believe on him that should come after him, that is on Jesus. And when they heard this they were immersed into the name of the Lord Jesus. AND WHEN PAUL LAID HIS HANDS ON THEM, THE HOLY SPIRIT CAME UPON THEM; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

Now here again we have an Apostle who was miraculously inspired. An inspired apostle is one of the miracles in the New Testament that we do not have LIVING among us today. But Brother Kelley wants us to believe that we have the same miraculous things today that they had in the New Testament. But it was through the laying on of the apostles hands that these other miraculous gifts we given in the book of Acts. And this account in Acts the 19th chapter is just another example. We see here an apostle showing concern that these people should have received the miraculous gifts that came from the receipt of the Hoy Spirit in this miraculous way. He did not do like brother Kelley has done and ask them the LET THE HOLY SPIRIT DO HIS WORK. No he laid his hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. If Brother Kelley is concerned that anyone in the Church of Christ does not have the Holy Spirit, there is no need for him to blame us! Paul did not blame these people from Ephesus. He simply solved the problem. He laid his hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit and spake, which tongues and prophesied.

So Brother Kelley, if you are worried about us in this matter, why do not you just Come over to Atlanta and lay hands on us confidently as did Paul upon these Ephesians so that we can receive the Holy Spirit as they did? Oh, you will say I am not an apostle and I cannot do that. Well, an apostle is a miraculously endowed man found in the Book of Acts and you are claiming that we have those same miracles today. But you cannot find us an apostle who can impart these miraculous powers to us. Therefore you have no means of ensuring that we receive these powers in the way they received them in the Book of Acts. But maybe you think that you have these powers because you have empirically sensed it some how. The come over to Atlanta and pass then on as did the apostles.

Now I know that Brother Kelley does not claim to have these powers himself. But why doesnt he? He claims to know his statements to be true by his empherical sense then why cannot he empherically posses these powers! Brethren, I recommend that we read the word of God and follow it instead of wandering around seeking emotional outburst to prove that we have something from God that God has already said very plainly that we have no [part or lot in. Simon had no part or lot in having the power to lay hands on others so that they would receive these miraculous gifts of the Spirit. But he did have these miraculous gifts of the Spirit having received them by the laying on of the apostles hands. This is proof that those who received these powers did not receive the power to pass them on to others. When the apostles died, the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were not longer given. For those who had the part of giving those gifts are no longer with us. Then means of receiving those gifts has passed and God has not provided in his word any other means for us to receive them. So we must accept that we do not have them. It is obvious that Brother Kelley does not have them, but he has sensed empirically we all need an outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Well, Brother Kelley, God is the one who does that and there is nothing anyone can do to stop him. Is he any less intelligent than you? You are talking nonsense again! If God wants to pour out the Holy Spirit again as he did on the day of Pentecost he can do so. But he has made no such promise. You see, when he did on the day of Pentecost is what he promised hundreds of years before through the Prophet Joel. (Joel 2:28). In fact when Peter explained the events of the day of Pentecost to the people he said, This is that which was spoke through the prophet Joel! God does not just jump in and surprise us with a sudden out pouring of the Holy Spirit. He promises that it will happen and then he makes it happen according to his promise. That is what happened on the day of Pentecost in the book of Acts. That is what you are claiming is still happening today. If that is true then where is the promise that God has made of an outpouring of the Holy Spirit in our day? So that when it happens you can stand up and say as Peter did on the day of Pentecost, This is that which was spoken Brother Kelley, you will not find any such promise for God has not made one! But you say we need an outpouring. How do you know this? Is this something that you empirically sense again or is this some thing that you can prove by the word of God or confirm by a miracle so that we can know that God is speaking through you?

I believe enough has been said to expose you complete and absolute empirical NONSENSE.

God inspired the Apostles and gave then=m the power to grant these gifts unto men. The men who received the Holy Spirit in his miraculous manifestations through the laying on of the apostles hands were denied the power to pass them on to others. When the apostles died and those to whom they had laid their hands upon to receive these miraculous powers died. There was an end of these miraculous gifts. Now brother Kelley, you can search far and wide but you will not find one person on the face of this globe today that has any of these miraculous powers that you read about in the book of Acts today.

Now, just for those who are lurking, I want to make it clear that we do all receive the Holy Sprit when we are immersed according to (Acts 2:38,39). But the Holy Spirit through the laying on of the apostles hands gave these miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit. So I have not said that we do not have the Holy Spirit. I have only shown that the miraculous manifestations and gifts that were given through the laying on of the apostles hands are no longer being given to men today, Brother Kelleys empirical sense not withstanding!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 24, 2000

Re-posted from above to correct an error:

20: DO SPURN THE GIFTS AND UTTERANCES OF THE PROPHETS - DO NOT DEPRECIATE PROPHETIC REVELATIONS NOR DESPISE INSPIRED INSTRUCTION OR EXHORTATION OR WARNING.

Of course this should say:

20: "DO *NOT* SPURN THE GIFTS AND UTTERANCES OF THE PROPHETS", etc...

-- Anonymous, June 24, 2000

John,

I will pray for your church. I believe that you had said awhile back that your church has a new preacher/evangelist ~ did you not?

ALL of our churches need prayer because satan is working overtime.

In His Holy Nmae,

-- Anonymous, June 24, 2000

Brother Kelley you have said:

The real heresy, is putting the HS into our own theolgical box. Nowhere does the scripture ever say that the HS works ONLY through scripture. If He does then why even indwell within us when we come to Christ. I firmly believe the HS DOES work in and through the pages of the OT and NT but more than that He works actively within our lives revealing HImself, CHrist and the Father more and more everyday. Sometimes the COC goes too far the other way in an effort to not be like denominations that they invent heresies as this just to separate themselves.

Brother Kelley:

Your ignorance, displayed in these comments you have made trying to inform the good people of this forum concerning the beliefs of the Church of Christ on this subject of How the Holy Spirit works today is only excelled by your obvious ignorance of what the word of God teaches on that subject.

You say but do not prove the following:

 He works actively within our lives revealing HImself, CHrist and the Father more and more everyday.

Now no one in this world doubts that the Holy Spirit works actively in our lives but we do doubt that we are miraculously endowed with the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit that were given through the laying on of the apostles Hands. (Acts 8:14-22). When Paul came to Ephesus he found some who had been baptized and he asked then, Have ye received the Holy Spirit since ye believed. And they said, We have not even heard if the Holy Spirit be given He then realized something was wrong with their baptism because they had not heard of the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit that was connected with baptism. So he baptized them into Christ and we are told When he laid his hands on them THEY RECEIVED THE HOLY SPIRIT AND SPAKE WITH TONGUES AND PROPESIED. (Acts 19:1-6).

Now in two places in the Book of Acts it is made clear that these miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were given only through the laying on of the apostles hands. (Acts 8:14-22) and that none else had any Part or lot in that matter).

Now these miraculous gifts that were given through the laying on of the apostles hands is clearly what we are saying we do not have today because we have no living apostles to lay their hands upon us. This was Gods way of giving these gifts and controlling their natural cessation along with the natural accomplishment of their purpose, which was the revelation, and confirmation of the word of God.

Now Brother Kelley has said in another place:

In fact, I believe that the miracles, and various manifestations seen in Acts are still in existence today!

Well Brother Kelley,the apostles were miraculously inspired men revealing the word of God to us. Do we still have that miraculous manifestation today? Do we still have men doing the work of the apostles? Do we have anyone that can lay hands on another so that they can receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit? The scriptures say that only the apostles could do that and therefore we do not have anyone showing that particular manifestation today that is in the book of Acts. But most of the other miraculous manifestations in the book of Acts came from this source.

If you are concerned that we are sinking like the titanic (a statement that tells us that you have be busier watching movies than studying the word of God) then why do not you come over here to Atlanta and just lay hands on us like an apostle so that we can receive these miraculous gifts the way they were given in the New Testament? You will say it is because you are not an apostle and cannot do it. Well maybe you could find the same apostle that gave these powers to those of the AOG or the same apostle that has given them to you to come over and Lay hands on us. But you will say that no apostle laid hands on them either. We it is clear from that admission that the powers that they CLAIM to have are not from God because that is how God gave them in the Book of Acts. And the fact is that they do not have any miraculous powers at all as they falsely claim. They are just plain lying just like brother Kelley is doing when he attempts to explain what the Church of Christ believes about this.

He is pretending to agree that the Holy Spirit operates through the word while at the same time claiming that he is working the same miracles today that he did in the book of Acts. But he does not prove any of his words from the word of God he just asserts them and expects all to just believe such nonsense without a shred of evidence to support that view. Apostles giving the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit by laying their hands on baptized believe for that purpose in not happening today anywhere and he know that to be true. Anyway, My only purpose he is to respond to say that Brother Kelley is not telling the truth about the Church of Christ. The Church of Christ follows Jesus Christ received from the Holy Spirit who spoke through the apostles and other inspired writers of the New Testament and confirmed those word with signs and wonders done by the Apostles and men upon whom the apostles had laid their hands. We do not accept any so called modern revelations from men who CLAIM to be speaking for God and doing miracles. Because we know that they are not APOSTLES and neither are they among those upon whom the apostles laid their hands. Therefore they do not have these powers. Now that is the teaching of Christ given by the apostles of Christ which they received from the Holy Spirit who was sent by Christ to revel and confirm their words as coming from Him.

If you wish to read more of what I have to said to Kelley about this matter read the Do you allow emotions thread. Now we see the real motivation behind this call for all kinds of theatrical displays of emotion in some places as called for by Brother Kelley. He cannot have the genuine gifts of the Holy Spirit because he cannot find an apostle to lay hands upon him. So he seeks to pretend that he has these gifts and cause others to believe that the spirit is moving them by stirring their emotions. Emotional responses of man are not evidence of the influence of the Holy Spirit. They are often easily deceived and misguided. Especially when they are removed so far away from the powers of intellect as is the case with brother Kelley. This subject bears some diligent study but I do not expect false teachers to do much of that!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 24, 2000

Lee, you proved one thing to me... people can be cruel. Especially one you thought you respected. I really respected you, Lee, but all you accomplished is to slander me in full view of all the readers of this forum. I never once did that to you.

All though you believe that I am wrong- I on the other hand feel I am right. You cannot prove NOWHERE in the word of God where the "gifts" ceased to exist or that all gifts where solely given upon the laying of the Apostle's hands. All you can do is inject your assumptions, but not biblical fact. You slander me as a "false teacher" by your COC logic, which is very faulty. I too consider myself very strong in the Word of God- we must always be seeking God's Word for answers. But, God's Spirit that lives and dwells within me does lead us in our daily lives- as He is leading me.

Lee, I feel sorry for you for you base all your knowledge on man made intrepretaions and assumptions. I never once said I was a prophet (as in the OT sense) or an apostle, or even inspired other than through the Bible. But, what I did say is that the HS does lead in my life for my spiritual growth- as he does with us all. And that He leads us also apart from the word. But notice I never said that He usurps the word to give a 'new' revelation.

I do not nor will I ever buy into the false theology that the gifts dies with the apostles- which is a MAN MADE asumption. Traditionally the COC has enspouced this theology- and it is false. Lee, you can not back it up! The only reference you can fall on are only the very few cases where an apsotle laid their hand on someone and then a gift was discharged. But, my friend you cannot make a theological stance and something as flimsy as that. If you can give me a "thus saith the Lord" then I will accept you view. But, you cannot. And you cannot pull out the "perfect" argument- for it gramaticly cannot be the NT. Lee, I have heard all of the arguments. But there is not one solid piece of proof!

Thank you for being kind to me in the past.

-- Anonymous, June 24, 2000

Sorry, Danny, but I have to agree with AKelley on this one, at least to a point. It looked as if Lee was very disingenuous and hostile in his last post. AKelley did NOT say he was receiving special revelation, he said that the Holy Spirit was active in his life, revealing in his heart where he fell short. Convicting him of sin, etc., which is the Holy Spirit's function. At least that is what I read in my Bible. To leap from this to calling AKelley a false prophet was stepping over the line I.M.H.O. I am with AKelley in believing that the common pew-warming Christian needs to repent and seek God's face and learn what it means to rely on the Holy Spirit, be "on fire" as the vernacular has it, or as the Bible would call it, "hot", or our churches will continue to wither. I am NOT saying we need some miraculous pentecostal Cane Ridge experience. I AM saying there are way too many people asleep in our churches. Lukewarm. Benchwarmers and fencesitters.

ASLEEP IN THE LIGHT by Keith Green from the album, "No Compromise" (C) Sparrow Records

Do you see, do you see, all the people sinking down Dont you care, dont you care, Are you gonna let them drown? How can you be so numb, Not to care if they come? You close your eyes and pretend the jobs done

"Oh bless me Lord, bless me Lord", You know, its all I ever hear No one aches, no one hurts, No one even sheds one tear But He cries, He weeps, He bleeds And He care for your needs And you just lay back And keep soaking it in! Oh, cant you see its such sin!

Cause He brings people to your door And you turn them away As you smile and say, "God bless you, be at peace", And all Heaven just weeps Cause Jesus came to your door ... Youve left Him out on the streets.

Open up, open up, and give yourself away! You see the need, you hear the cries, So how can you delay? Gods calling, youre the one, But like Jonah you run, Hes told you to speak But you keep holding it in! Oh, cant you see its such sin!

The world is sleeping in the dark That the church just cant fight, Cause its asleeping in the light! How can you be so dead When youve been so well fed? Jesus rose from the grave and you, You cant even get out of bed!! Oh, Jesus rose from the dead, Come on, get out of your bed!

How can you be so numb, Not to care if they come? You close your eyes and pretend the jobs done You close your eyes and pretend the jobs done Dont close your eyes, dont pretend the jobs done!

"Come away, come away, Come away with Me, my love Come away, from this mess, Come away with Me, my love!"

"Woe to you who are complacent in Zion, and to you who feel secure on Mount Samaria, you notable men of the foremost nation, to whom the people of Israel come! Go to Calneh and look at it; go from there to great Hamath, and then go down to Gath in Philistia. Are they better off than your two kingdoms? Is their land larger than yours? You put off the evil day and bring near a reign of terror. You lie on beds inlaid with ivory and lounge on your couches. You dine on choice lambs and fattened calves. You strum away on your harps like David and improvise on musical instruments. You drink wine by the bowlful and use the finest lotions, but you do not grieve over the ruin of Joseph." (Amos 6:1-6 NIV)

-- Anonymous, June 25, 2000

Connie, fyi:

We have an interim pastor right now, and are seeking a permanent pastor/evangelist/whatever.

-- Anonymous, June 25, 2000

Acts 10:43 KJV

To Him give all the prophets witness, that through His Name whocoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins.

From above:

ACTS 10:44-48: NASB 44: While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message.

45: And all the circumcized believers who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon the gentiles also.

46: For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered,

47: Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who HAVE RECEIVED the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?

48: And he ordered tem to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked them to stay on for a few days.

Even someone as stubborn and pig-headed as our dear Peter saw that these received the Holy Spirit and were speaking in tongues (gifts) BEFORE being baptized, and WITHOUT the 'laying on of hands'.

Repectfully and prayerfully submitted,

-- Anonymous, June 25, 2000

Danny, I have never tried to judge anyone. All I have stated is my experience. But, if Christ reigns within our hearts then we should at least show and display some emotion- what ever it might be. I never once stated that a person MUST shout "Hallelujah, Amen or Praise the Lord, or even Preach it". A long as I have been on this forum there are some, who tend to jump all over those who do not fit into our or your theological "box"- in which case you and Lee have done with me.

What I meant from the very begining of this thread is that Christ should be such an over all passion in our lives, that we cannot contain nor surpress our emotion. I do not say that a person is not a CHristian if he or she is subdued and shows no emotion, but I do ask how much "fire" we have. And I can tell from experience... that there is very little "fire" in the churches that I have been in. If I question a method, tradition, or theological stance of the Restoration Movement, then I do so knowing that what I question maybe sacred cows, but they are not biblical. For example, Lee brought up the theological stance that he beleives, as do many on this forum, that the gifts died with the apostles. I question that because it is a traditional theological stance that is an assumption out of a method of intrepretaion. In another thread you, Danny, have done the same with communion, when you question our method. Think about it!

If you want to get biblical, then tell me of how many people, who came into the presence of God where subdued. Few if any. What is seen is that people did something and showed real emotion. For example the Israelites, cried out of fear and fell to the ground with their faces in the dirt, when called called them from MT Sinai. Again, even in our NT, when Jesus healed a person, such as the blind man who was blind for 40 years. Was he stoic when he received sight? No he cried out for joy and told everyone of his dramatic healing. I can quote you passages and verses to this true fact, you cannot deny it.

-- Anonymous, June 25, 2000

Amen, AKelley ... Preach it!

<GRIN>

-- Anonymous, June 26, 2000

Brother Kelly:

You have said:

Lee, you proved one thing to me... people can be cruel. Especially one you thought you respected. I really respected you, Lee, but all you accomplished is to slander me in full view of all the readers of this forum. I never once did that to you.

I suppose that you mean by this that you perceive that I have been cruel to you and that you once respected me but now that you perceive that I have been cruel to you no longer respect me. Then it appears that you have accused me of slandering you. Now, I will ask you the same question that Paul asked the Galatians when some of them no longer respected him. He said, am I become your enemy because I tell you the truth? Now I have told you the truth Brother Kelley. That is not slandering you. A slander is when I tell a lie about you. It is a crime in this country and you could sue me for slander. Now if you were to take me to court to prove that I had slandered you in this forum you would fail miserably because I have told no lie about you. I have quoted your words and responded to them. You do not agree with my response. Neither do you like the strong language that was directed toward you but that does not make it slander. Nor does it make it cruel. The rebuke of a friend is a good thing. Now I do not mean that I have rebuked you. But I do mean that because something comes directly at you in strong words it does not equate in the least to cruelty. Now because you are too tender to take it does not make it cruel. It only indicates a weakness on your part. You are demonstrating again, as you did in the PK thread that you are more interested in your personal feelings than you are in the truth.

Now, if the things that I said are not true then you could simply correct me and I would stand corrected. But you did not make much of an attempt to answer the things that I said. You merely complain that I have been cruel to you. If what you teach is not the truth it is not cruel to correct the error. Now the fact that I sought to correct you in full view of everyone in this forum is also not a problem. Because you sought to teach that which is not the truth in full view of the people in this forum it is not wrong to correct your error in their full view. You would prefer to teach that which is false in public and receive gentle and sweet correction in private. Well, that is just not the way it is ever going to be Brother Kelley. So face that fact.

Then you say, I never did that to you. Brother Kelley, neither have I slandered you. SO what you have done is falsely accuse me of slander in the full view of everyone in this forum. I do not complain, however, I only point out to you that you have done so.

Then you tell us that we are all judgmental but you have NEVER tried to judge anyone with these words:

Danny, I have never tried to judge anyone. All I have stated is my experience.

Well lets see if you told Brother Danny the truth with those words. Please notice your following judgmental statements:

In my humble experience, most churches (Christian Church and COC) are dying dramaticly. Why? I believe that we are quenching the HS today within us. We do not allow Him to work- thus we restrict Him in a box.

Now you offer no proof of these charges but you tell us your judgement concerning the Christian church and the COC (I suppose this means the Church of Christ, which is the body of Christ (Eph.1: 22).). Then you judge that we are quenching the spirit which you could not prove from the scriptures or by any other means to save your life. But you charge your brethren with this because they do not display their emotions as you (Not Christ) deem that they should be displayed.

Then you judge that your Brethren, INCLUDING YOURSELF, are guilty of being judgmental with these words:

What I am discovering or rather realizing is that we in the Christian Church and COC are VERY judgmental when it comes to the HS working within our life ( I am guilty as anyone here).

Please notice with your above words that you have placed in parenthesis you admit to being as judgmental as you are accusing the rest of us of being. Now please tell us just how that admission from you squares with your assertion to Brother Danny that you have NEVER tried to judge anyone? So, Brother Kelley, in one place you tell us that you have never tried to judge anyone. Then in another place you tell us that you are as guilty as the rest of us of your own charge that we are VERY JUDGMENTAL when it comes to the HS working in our lives. Now this is, without doubt a clear self- contradiction. Either you have NEVER TRIED TO JUDGE ANYONE as you claimed or you have been, like the rest of us, VERY JUDGMENTAL when it comes to the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives. Now which one is the truth?

Now here, you say we, which is a word that includes you, are very judgmental. But above you said to Danny that you have NEVER tried to judge ANYONE. Now I am at a loss to understand how you could include yourself in this very judgmental statement against your brethren and not be guilty of judging someone! You are either being hypocritical in the process of including yourself in a charge of which you do not sincerely believe that you are guilty or you admit that you have been judgmental. Now even if you claim that you are merely being accommodative with the use of the words we in this sentence you leave no doubt in your parenthetical statement that you admit guilt in this matter of being judgmental. However, you are being judgmental toward your Brethren by judging that they are very judgmental. In either case, the words that you spoke to Brother Danny wherein you claim to have NEVER TRIED TO JUDGE ANYONE is just simply not the truth.

You even judge God in this matter with these words:

Our churches do need more emotion, and I pray that God will pour His Spirit on us, before it is too late!

You claim that our churches need more emotion and talk as if God is doing nothing about it! You say that you pray that God will pour out his Holy Spirit on us, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE! Now what if God does not make it in time? What if he just does not move fast enough for you Brother Kelley? Are you not blaming God for this situation? You want God to get busy and do something before it is too late. You talk as if God would never have realized this awful situation if you did not pray and urge him too hurry or it will just be too late. Are you not implying that God is not moving with enough dispatch to correct this terrible evil? It has never crossed your mind that God had a purpose for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. And that he promised it through the prophet Joel and that he fulfilled his promise on the day of Pentecost and during the time when Gods inspired word was in the inspired men who delivered once for all the precious faith that we all share. Have you never noticed that if it were not for those inspired men delivering, in writing, the inspired word to us that you would not even know that there was a Holy Spirit? God has never poured out his Spirit" upon men because they were lacking emotion! Such an idea is absurd in the highest degree. He also promised to give gifts unto men after he poured out his Spirit upon them. He gave them gifts and he did so for the purpose of revealing and confirming the word of God to all. (Heb. 2:3,4). So you are telling God to do before it is too late what he has already done and has not promised to ever do again! God never poured out his Spirit upon men just because they were lacking in their display of emotion in worship. In fact, God has never promised that the Holy Spirit would come to help us become more emotional. God has not promised to send another out pouring of the Holy Spirit. He promised it through the prophet Joel and that promise has been fulfilled for Peter even said, This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel. Therefore God has already poured out His Spirit in keeping with His promise to his prophet Joel and that out pouring has accomplished the purpose for which it was done. There is no need for it to be done again.

But despite all of this you have no confidence in this promise that God made through Joel which gave us the inspired men of the first century who delivered to us the inspired word of God. No, Brother Kelley, that precious word of God is not sufficient for you, now is it? And God is not moving fast enough to do that which you have urged him to do before it is too late, is He? Even though he has not said anything whatsoever to indicate that it is his will or his intention of ever sending another outpouring of the Holy Spirit for the completely ridiculous purpose of getting the rest of us to display our emotions to Brother Kelleys satisfaction. Even though this is true, God simply must hurry to send an outpouring anyway just so that our disturbed and alarmed Brother Kelley will not perceive that his brethren are DEAD in Christ! If he does not do this it will be too late for Brother Kelley to see our emotions properly displayed in the worship in his lifetime. Brother Kelley, you should be ashamed of having such an attitude toward God. God is not your servant to be ordered around and told to take action immediately on matters of grave concern to you before it is too late. God knows what he is doing, Brother Kelley. The problem here is that you do not know nor understand what he is doing because he does not seem to have as much interest in another outpouring of the Holy Spirit as you do! You really should examine yourself in this matter for there is no doubt that your heart is not right with God. I pray fervently for you.

Then, with another judgmental statement, you judge that your brethren, in all of the churches where you have preached in or studied, are DEAD OR DYING IN EMOTION. These are your words:

yet of all the churches that I have vistit and preached in and studied- we are either dead or dying in emotion.

Now these words are extremely judgmental and I would have no problem with the fact that you say them if they were righteous judgement but you cannot prove a single word of your charge concerning them to be the truth. How would you know their emotions before God? You are saying that simply because these brethren do not display their emotions in a way in which A. Kelley can observe and judge their genuineness that they have no emotions and are therefore dead! You even gave an illustration by asking Brother Danny if he loved his wife would he show emotion to her. Now there is no doubt that Brother Danny would display his emotions to his wife. But what if Brother Kelley showed up for Sunday dinner. And told Sister Jenny that Dannys love for her is DEAD. And stated his reasons for this was the simple fact that he had not noticed BROTHER DANNY KISSING HER OR HOLDING HER HAND OR IN ANY WAY DISPLAYING HIS EMOTIONS TOWARD HER. Would she not correct such an outrageous and absurd allegation immediately with the caution that he should mind his own business? You had better believe she would! Well this is what he has done to his brethren whom he has decided are not on fire because they do not display their emotions toward God in a public way so that he could judge where they are spiritually! God knows those who love him and they are not DEAD because Brother Kelley has not observed them crying or clapping or walking across the back of the pews as they sometimes do in some Pentecostal churches that I have witnessed. Just because they do not have the same spiritual pride and arrogance displayed by Brother Kelley in making this charge against them does not mean they are spiritually dead. One might well ask just who made him a judge of where his brethren are spiritually?

Yes Brother Kelley, you have been and are being very judgmental in this matter. Which would not be bad if you judged righteously and proved what you say to be the truth. But this you do not do.

Then you say:

No where did I ever say or imply someone is not a Christian is they do not show emotion, but it DOES show where they are at spiritually.

But you say the following:

YES if a church does not show emotion I would consider them dead or dying.

If they are DEAD SPIRITUALLY as you claim, then how on earth could you consider them Christians or are you claiming that they are Christians but they are DEAD ones? Even though you know that Christ came to give them life and life more abundantly. In order for them to be DEAD spiritually they would have to be OUTSIDE OF CHRIST because There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:1,2) But you are saying that they are Christians which means that they are IN CHRIST but they are Condemned to death. You say this of them simply because they do not satisfy A KELLEYS standards of emotional display in their worship. For Christ has not given us any such standards of emotional display whereby we are to judge that our fellow Christians are DEAD SPIRITUALLY. Therefore you have judged that they are not Christians or you have condemned them to death as Christians. In which case you are either not telling the truth when you say that you did not say or imply that someone is not a Christian if they do not show emotion or you are implying that they are DEAD IN CHRIST which Paul said cannot be true.

Then you complain as follows:

The favorite past time of many Christians is to complain, gripe, and bicker.... Is that a fruit of joy, love and peace?

Now, Brother Kelley, the only person complaining, griping and bickering in this thread is you. You are complaining that we do not display our emotions in such a way as to make it possible that you can tell that we are all alive spiritually. You gripe that we are just DEAD OR DYING emotionally because you do not see our emotions on display before you. Even though you must know that it is possible that many of those whom you have consigned to death are expressing deep emotions before God in their prayer closet. I can just see the Pharisee who prayed with himself claiming that he was not like that sinner who would not even lift his eyes to haven but simply said Lord be merciful to me a sinner. Brother Kelley, you are plainly saying that you are not like us who will not even lift up our hands and shout for we only go to our closet and say lord be merciful to me. The publican did not go through the public and ostentatious display of his spirituality as the Pharisees did. If Jesus were like you he would have said that this publican was dead because he showed so little emotion that he could not even be brought to lift his eyes much less his hands toward heaven so that all could judge "where he was spiritually. For he knew that God always knows where we are spiritually.

But the one who is doing all of this complaining, griping, and bickering about this emotionalism in the Church is the one who CLAIMS that the Holy Spirit is working on him. But this complaining and griping is not the fruit of the spirit therefore we must doubt that the Holy Spirit is working on you in this matter, Brother Kelley.

Then, instead of quoting scripture to support your erroneous view of this matter you quote Mr. Cecil Todd as follows:

As Cecil Todd states, "Most churches have more fire under the coffee pots than in the pew and within the pulpits." This is true.

Now you say, this is true without offering the slightest proof from the word of God that it is true. Neither do you prove from any other evidence that it is true. This is a cute saying and gains attention and brings a few smiles in a book or a sermon. But it is not the truth! You could not prove it from the scriptures and you cannot prove it from observation and experience simply because the emotion that one holds in their heart does not necessarily show itself according to your only criteria of raising hands, shouting, dancing, clapping, crying publicly etc. You may seldom ever see or even take notice of those faithful ones who preach the gospel on their jobs even at great risk of losing their means of livelihood. You may never notice the faithful brother who has visited people in prisons over the last twenty years of his life because he has never announced to everyone that he is involved in a prison ministry. He just decided to do something and it never crossed his mind that it should be brought out for public display so that his fire" would be evident to all lest they pronounce him a dead Christian. He was not worried about such things. You may never see the brother that steps across the street every week to cut his neighbors grass because she is old and recently lost her husband who always took care of those chores. He will not come to announce such things to the church nor will he report it to Brother Kelley so that Brother Kelley can know where he is spiritually. You cannot hear their Prayers, Brother Kelley. You cannot see their daily study of Gods word and the many times that they fall upon their knees and pray fervently with tears at home alone? Something they have no desire to do in public because they know that Christianity is between them and God and when they come together they do so for the purpose of teaching and admonishing one another and provoking one another to love and good works. They do not come together for an emotional roller coaster ride of the swells and troughs of rising and falling manipulated and manufactured emotions so the preacher can feel the power of his sermons! I cannot say more about this point. I can only say that you cannot tell where your brethren are spiritually by their display or lack of display of emotion. In fact one could judge that those who are so concerned for such display are hypocrites like the Pharisees! Why preachers love these cute saying that they are constantly sharing with each other and their congregations over the many beautiful and true passages of Holy Scripture I just cannot understand.

Now just how would Mr. Dodd know how much fire is in the church? Just because he does not see the fire burn in the middle of the living Room and is confined in the fire place does not mean there is no fire in the house. Just because you cannot see smoke coming out of the chimney of my house does not mean that I do not have heat! The only thing that would convince brother Kelley and Mr. Todd that our house had any fire would be for him to see us set it on "fire" and rejoice in watching it burn down. Then they would say, "now that house is on fire"! Mr. Todd would have done better to have simply proven from the scriptures that our fire must be displayed to our fellow Christians or it does not exist. And Brother Kelley surely would have done better to quote scripture instead of Brother Todd on this matter.

Just as Brother Kelley does Below, Brother Todd simply says something that sounds good but that is simply not taught in the scriptures. Brother Kelley now tells us:

What I meant from the very beginning of this thread is that Christ should be such an over all passion in our lives, that we cannot contain nor surpress our emotion. I do not say that a person is not a CHristian if he or she is subdued and shows no emotion, but I do ask how much "fire" we have. And I can tell from experience... that there is very little "fire" in the churches that I have been in.

Notice here that Brother Kelley does not tell us just how many churches he has been in and neither does he tell us just how he determined that there was NO FIRE there. The word of God is a fire in our bones but it is not displayed by emotional outburst. Is Brother Kelley saying that none have ANY of the word of God in the hearts of the members of the churches where he has preached? I doubt if such is true. But if it is true, I cannot see how Brother Kelley could have corrected that situation while he was there if it is his habit to quote men like Brother TODD instead of the scriptures to prove his points.

Then Brother Kelly tries to say that I accused him of claiming to be a prophet or an apostle and that all of my knowledge is based upon man made interpretations" as follows:

Lee, I feel sorry for you for you base all your knowledge on man made interoperations and assumptions. I never once said I was a prophet (as in the OT sense) or an apostle, or even inspired other than through the Bible. But, what I did say is that the HS does lead in my life for my spiritual growth- as he does with us all. And that He leads us also apart from the word. But notice I never said that He usurps the word to give a 'new' revelation.

Now first of all he says ALL of my knowledge is based upon man made interpretations. Now none would doubt that I know that Christ is the Son of God. Is that based upon man made interpretations? I know that Christ is Divine because the scripture says so. (John 1:1). Now those are two things that I know that are based upon what the scriptures say. But Brother Kelley feels sorry for me because I base ALL OF MY KNOWLEDGE on man made interpretations. Now would he tell me just how I could find an INSPIRED interpretation of the scriptures? Is he claiming that his interpretation is inspired of God while mine is man made? If neither of us is inspired what on earth could he be talking about?

Notice also brethren that he claims to not be a "prophet (in the old testament sense). Does this mean that he was calimng to be a prophet in the "New Testament sense" or in any other "sense"?

Then he complains that he never once said that he was a prophet or an apostle, or even inspired as if I had accused him of having said such a thing. The following is exactly what I said:

Now I know that Brother Kelley does not claim to have these powers himself. But why doesnt he? He claims to know his statements to be true by his empirical sense then why cannot he empirically posses these powers! Brethren, I recommend that we read the word of God and follow it instead of wandering around seeking emotional outburst to prove that we have something from God that God has already said very plainly that we have no [part or lot in. Simon had no part or lot in having the power to lay hands on others so that they would receive these miraculous gifts of the Spirit. But he did have these miraculous gifts of the Spirit having received them by the lying on of the apostles hands. This is proof that those who received these powers did not receive the power to pass them on to others. When the apostles died, the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were not longer given. For those who had the part of giving those gifts are no longer with us.

Now Brother Kelley claimed that these miracles found in the book of Acts are still with us today as follows:

In fact, I believe that the miracles, and various manifestations seen in Acts are still in existence today!

I pointed to a miracle in the book of Acts that he knows does not exist today. The Holy Spirit, with attending miraculous manifestations is not being given by the laying on of Apostles hands today. He said that those manifestations in the book of acts are happening today. I asked where are the apostles that are doing this today. There are no apostles on this earth today but they were manifest in the book of Acts giving the Holy Spirit through the lying on of their hands. This is not happening today and Brother Kelley admits it. Therefore his contention that the Miracles and various manifestations are STILL WITH US TODAY is false. The apostles giving the Holy Spirit through the lying on of HANDS is not with us today. So where does his doctrine go? Can he show us any of the exact same manifestations in the Book of Acts that are still with us today? Can he show that they are ALL still with us today? Has he even attempted to show from the scriptures that they are still with us today? No he has not and I have demonstrated one such manifestation that is not still with us today.

So Brother Kelley, I know that you have decided to not respect me any more and I can understand your reasons. But do not think that you can enter a forum like this and judge and condemn your brethren without one word from God that your words are true and that no one will respond to you according to the seriousness of your false charges.

I have told you the truth and have supported it with the word of God. You have denied that what I have said from the word of God is true. But you do not even attempt to state your case from Gods word. It is from Cecil Todd and your humble opinion. This will not be sufficient to convince those of us who study Gods word that your doctrine is the truth.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 28, 2000

Changing the subject, if I may -- not the overall subject, but switching back to something that came up earlier.

I notice that a few people have referred to the passage in I Tim. 2:8 where Paul refers to "lifting holy hands in prayer". Has anyone noticed that that verse is specifically for MEN? The Greek word used is not ANTHROPOS, which is "generic" and can include women, but ANDRES (pl. of ANER), which means specifically either "male persons" or "husbands", and it is then followed by instructions for the "women" or "wives". Men are to pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarelling; women are to adorn themselves modestly and learn quietly and submissively.

For those who want to encourage people to take verse 8 literally, to "lift your hands to God" in prayer, shouldn't you be restricting this to the men only?

It's an interesting thought!

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2000

Yes, Benjamin ~ I noticed that when I typed it.

But then I fall back on that verse (by Paul) that there is no more Jew or Greek, no more slave or free, no more male or female...especially since I believe that we have freedom in Christ (but not to sin), in our worship: our days for worship, our choice of instrument or acapella music, when and what to serve for the Lord's Supper (within a certain Biblical range), whether to be emotional or bumps on logs (not suggesting anyone here is that).

You said that you believe we have freedom in some degree as well, I believe, if I remember your post accurately.

I don't believe God has pressed us into a mold. Cookie-cutter Christians are not what He has in mind, in my opinion. I feel He likes sameness to some degree ~ we all have eyes, teeth, hair, etc., even though each person's is identifiable from every other person's.

But he also likes variety ~ such as every snowflake's being different from every other; voice prints and fingerprints being individual; DNA, etc.

God likes variety! (I'm glad).

Do you think it's O.K. that I lift my hands during 'Praise' songs occasionally? I have the feeling that you don't do that. Perhaps you should start and I should stop! ;-) ;-)

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2000

Benjamin,

I re-post your words from above, because they are so sensible:

In a sense, both sides are right. Of course people should have emotion in their relationship with God and it is good for us to have an outlet for that emotion; but of course we need to do things "decently and in order" (or "in a fitting and orderly way"). The real question is, "What is a 'fitting and orderly way' to express our emotion in the context of our Christian fellowship and community worship and praise of God?" And there is no single answer to that question. It depends first, of course, on what the Bible teaches about acceptable worship, but my belief is that we are allowed a lot of freedom for our own choices. After that, it depends mainly on culture; it depends also on the backgrounds and temperaments of the people involved; it depends on the situation.

I hope my levity in the just-prior post is taken as just that. I've found that humor has a way of back-firing, so I really shouldn't use it, I'm afraid.

Respectfully,

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2000

Topic: Emotion Let us remember, "Give thanks to the Lord, call upon His name; make known among the nations what He has done, Sing to Him, sing praise to Him, tell all of His wonderful acts. Glory in His holy name; let the hearts of those who seek the Lord REJOICE. Look to the Lord and His strength, seek His face always." (Psalm 105:1-4).

Also, "My heart is steadfast O God; I will sing and make music with all my soul. Awake, harp and lyre! I will awaken the dawn. I will praise you O Lord, amoung the nations, I will sing of You among the peoples." (Psalm 108:1-3) And Again, "Praise the Lord, Praise God in His sanctuary; praise Him in His mighty heavens. Praise His for His acts of power; praise Him for His surpassing greatness. Praise His with the sounding of the trumpet, praise Him with the harpe and lyre, Praise Him with tambourine and DANCING, praise Him with strings and flute, praise Him with the CLASH of the cymbals, praise Him with resounding cymbals. Let everything that has breath Praise the Lord. Praise the Lord." In fact, over and over we see, the reult of praise- emotional response!

Topic Gifts: "Therefore do not lack in any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed." ( I Cor. 1:7).

"There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men. Now to each on the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom... to another...knowledge... gifts of healing... miraculous powers... to another prophecy... discernment... tongues... interpretaion of tongues... All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one just as HE determines." Notice nowhere the laying of hands of the apostle's) I Cor 12:4-11.

"Love never fails. But where there are prophecies they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part but when the perfection comes (maturity through Christ) the imperfect will disappear." (I Cor. 13:8-10).One cannot base the perfect as the NT- the arguement is too flimsy.

"Therefore brothers, be eager to prophesy and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way." (I Cor14:39-40)

"The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness goodness, faithfulness,gentleness, and self control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ have crucified the sinful nature and its passions and desires. Since we live by the SPIRIT, let us KEEP in step with the SPIRIT..." (Galations 5:22) In other words the Holy Spirt does lead us in our daily lives to conform more and more to be like Christ Jesus!

Lee, I challenge you to find all the scripture you can to show me where the gifts have ceased (past tense)! I dare you to prove not through you Pharisical church teaching but through the WORD of God which, you so pointedly say that I do not show enough of. SHow me the scripture! Show me the scripture! But, I know the answer, because you cannot- yes you can show me some passages that seem to support your case- but you can not show me a "Thus saith the Lord" and that is where you will be! Lee, you can call me a false teacher, you can call me whatever you want. But the proof is in the pudding! You charge me with feeling to much. I have much much more to go on than just "feeling" I have the power of the Spirit working in my life!

Lee, have you ever killed anyone? I do not know that answer only you and God know. But, your training has given you ability to do so effectively without emotion. In a combat situation, as the old cliche' goes "If you think you are dead." In fact in a combat situation your training kicks in and you no longer feel as the adrenaline rushes through your body. Often that reaction produces heros in war. But, believe it or not it take emotion to show no emotion. It takes, a emotional response to surpress showing a emtion. But, still that is emotion. In church, we still show emotion- whether good or bad. But, we must show the postive joyful emotion to our Lord! Why because the WOrd of God says so!!!!!!!!!!! For every criticism you label me with I can show you hundreds of emotional reposnses in the scriptures that people have had when they come into the presence of God. So logically that would tell you that, if there is not one display of emotion in the service- people are negatively revealing an emotion against the leading of the Holy Spirit to react to God. Mankind is very stubborn! I am not suggesting that that emotion is displayed by running, clapping, or shouting; but on the other hand- why not? Tell me where in scripture does it say that you cannot do that in church. You may say, "Ha- God is a God of order" well, is that out of order with God? Was it out of order with David? Or you may say "Ha what about everything shall be done in a fitting and orderly way?" Well, where does is say that any of those outward displays of emotion is out of order or not fitting? The sciptures certainly does not say that. When Paul says to rejoice in Philippians, what does it mean to truly rejoice? Is is to sit in the pew on your blessed assurance and shut up and just inwardly jump up and down. Or can is mean to literally rejoice and celebrate?

Lee, give me better arguments than what you have given- they are truly poor indeed.

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2000

Brother Kelley:

I do not have the time at the moment to respond to all that you have said because I am working out of town. I do however want to say a few things to you. First, you have said:

"Lee, give me better arguments than what you have given- they are truly poor indeed."

Now Brother Kelley, we do not know if those arguments are "indeed" poor becuse you have made no attempt whatsoever to respond specifically to ANY of them. If they are so "poor" as you claim, why is it that you have not even attempted to answer them? Those reading in this forum can see the way in which you have persistently contradicted yourself as I have pointed out but you say nothing in response. It does appear to me that your only response is to say that the arguments are weak without proving that they are weak. So while I am working he in New Jersey, why don't you make some effort to answer those arguments that I made in my last post and I will give more for you to work on when I get home.

Second, You have asked me:

"Lee, have you ever killed anyone?"

What on earth would be your purpose of asking that question? I know that you are angry with me and do not appreciate the fact that I have taken issue with what you have said in this thread. But, has it never crossed your mind that asking a question like that of a combat veteran is touching upon an area of life that is very painful? Was it your intention to cause me to live those events over again and visually see these things just so that I would have some of the so called emotion that you claim that I do not have simply because I do not manufacture false emotions by stimulating others mechanically through holding hands and running accross the back of the pews in the assembly as the Pentecostals do? It is none of your business whether I have ever "killed" anyone or not!

Then you talk of combat as if you know somthing about it and attempt to make an argument from it. Maybe you could tell us just how much experience you have in combat so that we can evaluate from the number of people that you have "killed" whether you are in a position to make an argument from that premise.

Third, You accuse me of being against emotion in the worship of God and that is a clear misrepresentation. I condemned your assumptions of your following statment and others like it:

"yet of all the churches that I have vistit and preached in and studied- we are either dead or dying in emotion.

You make this judgement only because you do not see emotion displayed as you would prefer it to be displayed. According to you if we do not clapp our hands, shout, and run accross the back of the pews like Pentecostals do, we are not having any "emotion" in our worship and are therefore dead. I have emotions in the worship as do many others and just because I do not display it for you to see so that you can determine "where I am spiritually" does not mean that I am a Christian who is "dead" in Christ. But you have condemned your brethren to death because they do not display their emotions the way you prefer them to. That is my point.

Fifth, We are discussing two seperate and distinct issues here. Why don't you decide which one you want to discuss first. We are discussing emotions in the worship. And we have digressed from that into a discussion of the miraculous spiritual gifts continuing today. Now those two subjects have nothing to do with each other. So, chose which one you want to pursue first. Let us take them up in the order that you chose. But it will do us no good to continue to mix them together. If you want to talk about spiritual gifts we will talk about that. If you want to talk about emotion in worship we will talk about that. But mixing the two together will not work.

Then you say again, without any proof whatsoever that you have the Holy Spirit working in your life. Now you are not clear, but given the things that you have said it appears that you mean that you have these miraculous gifts of prophesy and tongues. If you mean that the Holy Spirit is influncing your life I would not be able to doubt that because I could not know if such a thing were true or not. Just because you claim it does not make it true. THe fact that you are a Christian makes it very likely. But if you are claiming the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit are working in your life I can prove from the scriptures that that is not the truth. So you chose which subject you want to "focus" on first.

In the mean time, why not try to answer my last post instead of ignoring it? I am asking that you deal specifically with the arguments that I have made and the places where I have shown you to have been severely inconsistent.

Do not ever ask me again if I have ever "killed" any one. That is none of your business. If all you want to do is drag up old memories that are severely painful to me then I will avoid this discussion with you completely and you can go your way believing as many lies as you wish. My personal life is not a toy for you to play with Mr. Kelley. That is OFF LIMITS! And belive me when I say OFF LIMITS.

But if you wish to discuss what the scriptures have to say about these two subjects I am more than happy to discuss it with you.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2000

Hello, All,

I've thought of a box I don't mind being put into, although ordinarily I don't like 'boxes'. I don't like the 'denominational' box; I don't like the 'Protestant' box; I don't like the 'non- Catholic' box, as I was referred to in my childhood by Catholic friends (so I can sympathize with E.Lee on the 'non-Instrumental' box; I don't like the specific denominational name boxes (Baptist, Calvinist) but I can accept the EVANGELICAL box! But mainly I want to be in the box that Jesus is in. Forever and ever.

Name-calling is hurtful. I used to tell my children not to call their friends any names that their Moms and Dads didn't name them ~ that it is hitting with words. I still believe that.

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2000

Oh, Dear.

My post is inappropriate as I now read E Lee's post. He must have been posting as I was, because I didn't read it before my post.

I thought it would be appropriate on Duane's thread about denominational intimidation, but thought better of posting it there.

Sorry.

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2000

Connie:

Your post is not "inappropriate" in the least simply because it follows mine to Brother Kelley. I agree with you when you say that you do not like these sectarian "boxes" that are so often used. I do not accept any "box" that anyone other than the Lord puts me in. I have determined to be a Christian and a Christian only without being "denominationalized" by anyone. It is enough for one to be a Christian. THere is no such thing as "different kinds of Christians" in the scriptures. Christians belong to Christ they do not "belong" to ANY denomination or sect or anyone or anything else in this life. Christians have only one Master.

Brother Kelley's charge that his fellow Christians have in some way been able to put "GOD IN A BOX" is absurd. It is impossible for any man to "put" God anywhere. God is everywhere and knows everthing. God is soverign. We serve Him and He does not serve us. No one can restrict God from doing anything that he has promised to do nor can they MAKE Him do anything that he has chosen not to do.

I welcome your comments and it does not matter to me in the least that they follow my comments to someone else in the forum and say nothing directly related to what I had said. I do not want you to fell that such was "inappropriate". It was perfectly appropriate in every way.

Your friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2000

Connie;

If you're looking for the box Jesus is in ... Jesus can often be found living in a box on skid row.

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2000

You are SO RIGHT, John.

We worked with our local mission on a project remodeling houses for the sad people in our community. These are homes with 24-hour staffs.

The main mission cares for indigent men, with substance abuse problems and the "Victory Center' helps women alone who have a problem with drugs or alcohol or drugs. The 'Family Center' helps mothers with children, the mothers having problems with substance abuse; and there is a second location for men with substance abuse problems, but we didn't work on that one, except that my husband did the re-design for them to bring that house up to code.

I know the 'Victory Center' and the 'Family Center' have Bible Studies and retraining programs, and just a whole period of intensive spiritual and physical care. The ones entering there have to be willing to submit to the Lord before they enter the programs.

The main Mission, of course, takes any man who has no place to stay.

-- Anonymous, June 30, 2000

Lee, you as of yet did not answer my statments. You make an argument that I do not answer- but you are doing the same.

I am truly sorry I caused you any harm toward my comments. I am sorry, for that.

-- Anonymous, June 30, 2000

Brother Kelley:

You have asserted the following:

Lee, you as of yet did not answer my statements. You make an argument that I do not answer- but you are doing the same.

Now it is evident to anyone reading this thread that the assertion that you have made with this statement is clearly false. I will demonstrate that it is false by showing assertions that you have made that I have answered and to which you have not replied. Please take note that I have replied to even this false assertion. Some of them as follows:

1. You asserted:

Lee, you proved one thing to me... people can be cruel. Especially one you thought you respected. I really respected you, Lee, but all you accomplished is to slander me in full view of all the readers of this forum. I never once did that to you.

I answered but you did not reply.

2. You asserted:

Danny, I have never tried to judge anyone. All I have stated is my experience.

I answered but you did not reply.

3. You asserted:

What I am discovering or rather realizing is that we in the Christian Church and COC are VERY judgmental when it comes to the HS working within our life (I am guilty as anyone here). I answered but you did not reply.

4. You asserted:

Our churches do need more emotion, and I pray that God will pour His Spirit on us, before it is too late! I answered but you did not reply.

5. You asserted:

yet of all the churches that I have vistit and preached in and studied- we are either dead or dying in emotion.

I answered but you did not reply.

6. You asserted:

No where did I ever say or imply someone is not a Christian is they do not show emotion, but it DOES show where they are at spiritually. I answered but you did not reply.

7. You asserted:

The favorite past time of many Christians is to complain, gripe, and bicker.... Is that a fruit of joy, love and peace? I answered but you did not reply.

8. You asserted:

As Cecil Todd states, "Most churches have more fire under the coffee pots than in the pew and within the pulpits." This is true.

I answered but you did not reply.

9. You asserted:

Lee, I feel sorry for you for you base all your knowledge on man made interoperations and assumptions. I never once said I was a prophet (as in the OT sense) or an apostle, or even inspired other than through the Bible. But, what I did say is that the HS does lead in my life for my spiritual growth- as he does with us all. And that He leads us also apart from the word

I answered but you did not reply.

10. You asserted:

In fact, I believe that the miracles, and various manifestations seen in Acts are still in existence today! I answered but you did not reply.

11. You asserted:

"Lee, give me better arguments than what you have given- they are truly poor indeed."

I answered but you did not reply.

Now I have been waiting for you to reply to these things before answering any more of your arguments because it is useless to answer if you will not respond. Now, what I mean by reply is that you have not responed to my specific response to your words. You have done nothing more than make further assertions in response. That is not a reply to my arguments.

But do not worry, if you do not respond I will return and continue until I have answered all that you have said and the people reading this forum are more than competent to decide for themselves whether your nonanswers are sufficient to prove that your false doctrine is the truth.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 01, 2000

Lee, as one can read the post- they will see that I have answered- or at least tried to answer you post, but you are unwilling to answer me directly. You charge me with the accusation that I am a false teacher well... let us see.

I have and will state over and over my postion- but you are unwilling to listen.

Here are just a few thoughts I will give more later.

1. We need more emotion. I further state that one can gage (generally but not in all cases) that spirituality CAN or COULD be judged by display of some emotion. Whatever the display- no matter how calm or loud or extravagant. I base this on scripture- (I Tim. 2:8, PS. 63:3, 134:2,141:2, 150 ect.) In fact I site all of Psalms for displays of emotion whether in rejoicing or in sorrow. Or even as far back as Exodus 19 cf. Heb. 12). Emotion does lead one to proper worship with the God of the universe. If you are in His presence, then my friend you will fall down and truly worship Him with MUCH emotion.

2. Is the Christian Church and Church of Christ dying or Restoration Movement Churches? Well, it depends on who you ask and what you mean. Lee, to assert that the Church of Christ is the only expression or visible means of the bride of Christ- that is false. Then if that logic is taken further- every one who is non "Church of Christ" is wrong- that is false teaching. As I have based, my opinion, I have done so thoughtfully and prayerfully. In many areas I have seen our movement wane and die. Is it over for our movement- no. We can and will flurish. But, it means letting go of some things (I am not talking about Baptism nor communion), for example we have become so lifeless and logical that we have forgotten our first love.

Lee, we can go round and round about this and even concerning the gifts issue. If you want to know more about my conclusions then list them in the order that you want answered, please only a few at a time- I do not have a lot of time on my hands to answer all at once. Present them to me in clear short sentences. It is hard to answer a book!

-- Anonymous, July 02, 2000

Brother Kelley:

You have said:

Lee, as one can read the post- they will see that I have answered- or at least tried to answer you post, but you are unwilling to answer me directly. You charge me with the accusation that I am a false teacher well... let us see. I have and will state over and over my postion- but you are unwilling to listen.

Now with these words you simply pretend to have done something that you have not done and everyone reading this thread can plainly see that you have not even touched on the responses that I have made to your words. You know it, I know it and God in heaven knows it. Now for you to come in here with the pretense that you have responded to those things that I listed in my last post to you is simply a clear and deliberate lie. Those who love their own doctrine more than the doctrine of Christ should not be expected to have any aversion to telling such lies. I am surprised that you would claim to have attempted to answer each of those points mention in my last post. It is interesting that you do not state those points and then quote for the rest of us the exact words that you claim were used in answer to each one of them. If you had made such an attempt it would be all too easy to have taken each one and simply pasted your previous reply to each of them. But you do not do that because there is no reply that you have made which you could paste under them as being a response to those words. Fact is that you simply have not responded. Now Brother Kelley, there is no hurry for you to respond. You can take as much time as you like or not respond at all but to come in here and claim that you have responded when it is clear to anyone with the slightest amount of intelligence and ability to read that you have done no such thing. Now, that, Brother Kelley is called LYING. There is no need to lie. Just be honest and tell me that you do not have time and that you will respond later or tell me that you do not want to discuss the matter now, or tell me that you think my words are undeserving a response. But to lie is sinful.

Then you claim to be responding with these words:

1. We need more emotion. I further state that one can gage (generally but not in all cases) that spirituality CAN or COULD be judged by display of some emotion. Whatever the display- no matter how calm or loud or extravagant. I base this on scripture- (I Tim. 2:8, PS. 63:3, 134:2,141:2, 150 ect.) In fact I site all of Psalms for displays of emotion whether in rejoicing or in sorrow. Or even as far back as Exodus 19 cf. Heb. 12). Emotion does lead one to proper worship with the God of the universe. If you are in His presence, then my friend you will fall down and truly worship Him with MUCH emotion.

Now, Brother Kelley, I have not said that we should have any less emotion than we have now. Neither have I condemned emotion in the worship, as you would have noticed if you had attempted to respond to what I had said about that matter. It is your assertion that we MUST express those emotions in the manner that you describe before they can be considered acceptable to the Lord that I object to. The passages, which you quote, say nothing about HOW to express our emotions. You are arguing that we should allow ANY expression of emotion in the worship even if it is manufactured! Even if it is simply the preacher working to manipulate everyones emotions with the use of crowd psychology" much like the way Hitler whipped the people of Germany up into a white heart of emotion by the use of such manipulation. You would see nothing wrong with the practice in some Pentecostal churches of running across the back of the pews to convince everyone with their expression of emotion that the Holy Spirit is moving in them. Down here in the south we have people that still believe, as you do, that the miraculous gifts of the spirit continue today and they attempt to practice Mark 16: 18,  they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing it shall in no wise hurt them, they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. Because they believe, as you claim to believe, that the miraculous gifts of the spirit exist today they bring poisonous snakes into their worship and handle them. This is an expression of great emotion intended to demonstrate their faith. Several have died during my lifetime with their emotional worship involving this very exciting and stimulating practice. You would see nothing wrong with this because it is an expression of their emotion. And I must say this for them. At least they are willing to show that they sincerely believe that the miraculous gifts of the spirit exist today. You on the other hand simply claim that you believe it. You would not handle a poisonous snake because you know full well that the New Testament teaches that these gifts ended when they completed their purpose and the apostles died which removed forever the means of passing these gifts to men. You may as well tell a young man searching for a wife to ask God to put him to sleep and make one out of his rib like he did for Adam as to ask God to inspire us as he did the Christians of the first century. God made one man from the dust of the ground and one woman from the rib of man and all after that miraculous event are now brought to us by natural birth. There is not one place in the entire Bible where God says that he will not make a man and woman in that way again. Neither is their any doubt that he still has the power to do it. But the fact remains that he has made it clear by what he did and the purpose in which he did it that he has no plan or intent to create man and woman in this way again. He accomplished his purpose in creating man and arranged for their natural perpetuation. He would not have arranged for such a natural perpetuation of the human race if it were his intent to always create them from the dust and from the rib. God has done the exact same thing with miraculous spiritual gifts, which gave us his revealed and inspired word. God is not revealing his word nor inspiring men to deliver his will to us today. He has once delivered the faith. He does not intend to deliver it more than once. This faith was delivered by means of miraculously inspired men who were able to confirm the word of faith by sign and wonders. (Heb. 2:3,4). He worked with them confirming the word with signs following. (Mark 16:17-20). Now that he has once delivered the faith (Jude 3) we are to know it and defend it from every false way. This is the reason the church is called the pillar and ground of the truth. (1 Tim. 3:15). GOd has given us his inspired word in written form by these miracles. The scriptures are the only book in the worlsd delived, written and authenticated by MIRACLES. By this book Christianity is perpetuated and God therefore has demonstrated that he does not intend to reveal and confirm any more word to us. Therefore we need not expect any more miracles to reveal and confirm the word of God today no more that we can expect God to make a man from the dust of the ground or a woman from man's rib.

But Brother Kelley wants these gifts which were given for the purpose of revealing and confirming the word of God for all time(mark 16:17- 20; John 20:30,31; Jude 3; Heb 2:3,4), so that he can move the brethren to great emotion. He does not believe that the word of God is sufficient. No, according to Brother Kelley we need more! We MUST demonstrate our emotions in the way that HE wants them demonstrated or he will condemn us all as dead in Christ which he has done and I have challenged his doing so but he has spoken nothing in response. Yes, Brother Kelley thinks we are dead if we do not run and jump and shout and cry and roll in the floor and run across the back of the pews, we are "dead" even though we are in Christ Jesus. Yes, according to Him we are dead. So, if we do not scream and yell and stammer and pretend to speak in tongues (since it is impossible to do so today without studying the language that you wish to speak) we are "dead". All of these things we must do so that Brother Kelley will feel that we are alive. Now he may claim that he does not want us to handle snakes or drink poison but why not? He believes that those miraculous gifts exist today and imagine the emotion that would be generated if one did such marvelous things in our worship. The passages, which he sites, tell us to have emotion, which I do not disagree with. But he wants to say that these passages tell us How to demonstrate our emotions. Brother Kelley also goes back to the Old Testament to find things, which Christ does not authorize in the New Testament. Why, I would not be the least bit surprised if he showed up one day with a bowl of incense and a fatted calf to sacrifice in the worship to God as symbolic of Christ for that is exactly what they did in the old testament. WE are not under the law and things done in the temple are not the things God has ordained for the church. If you want to prove what Christians should do you need to tell us what Christ had to say. For we follow Christ and not Moses, or David or any of the Old Testament laws. Philippians 4:4 says, rejoice in the Lord always and again I say rejoice. This we should do every day of our lives. But is does not say that we must follow Brother Kelley in demanding that all of our Brethren clap and shout and raise their hands, cry out loud and run across the back of the pews and create general loud noise and riotous confusion in the worship of God. This is the difference. Let the word of God stimulate and motivate your heart to act. You will find that you are full of emotion but you will feel no need for these carnal expressions seen among the Pentecostals and advocated by our Brother Kelley.

Then you tell us Brother Kelley that the Church of Christ is dying and that the church of Christ" is not the only one that is right. These are your words:

2. Is the Christian Church and Church of Christ dying or Restoration Movement Churches? Well, it depends on who you ask and what you mean. Lee, to assert that the Church of Christ is the only expression or visible means of the bride of Christ- that is false. Then if that logic is taken further- every one who is non "Church of Christ" is wrong- that is false teaching. As I have based, my opinion, I have done so thoughtfully and prayerfully. In many areas I have seen our movement wane and die. Is it over for our movement- no. We can and will flurish. But, it means letting go of some things (I am not talking about Baptism nor communion), for example we have become so lifeless and logical that we have forgotten our first love. Here you ask if the Christian Church or Church of Christ is dying. Then you say it depends upon whom you ask. Now Brother Kelley whether the body of Christ, which is the church of Christ, is dying does not depend upon whom you talk to. Rather it depends upon whether they are faithful to Christ who is the head and the savior of the Body. Now let me explain something here. The Bible teaches that Christ has but one body. There is ONE BODY and one Spirit even as ye are called in ONE HOPE of your calling. (Eph. 4:4). Then we are told,  And put all things under his feet and given him to be the head over all things to the church, WHICH IS HIS BODY, the fullness of him that filleth all in all. (Eph. 1:22). The body of Christ is the church. The body and the church are the exact same thing. There is but one body according to Ephesians 4:4 and therefore there is but one Church. The body of Christ is the church of Christ. I am not here referring to any name I am referring to the fact. The church is the body of Christ. Further evidence of this fact is that Paul told us by inspiration,  And He (Christ) is head of the body, the church: (Col. 1:18). Therefore again we see that the body of Christ is the Church. And again, Now I REJOICE IN MY SUFFERING (not the kind of rejoicing brother Kelley has recommended) for your sake, and fill up on my part that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his bodys sake, which is the church. (Col. 1:24). Again we are told that the body of Christ is the church of Christ. If the body and the church are the same then the terms body of Christ and Church of Christ refer to the same thing. The church is the called out from the term ecclesia. It is those who have been translated out of darkness into the kingdom of Gods dear son. (Col. 1:13). According to Acts 2:47, the Lord added to them (the church or the ecclesia) such as should be saved. God does not save us as a group. He saves us individually and then adds us to the group made up of all those who are saved. That group is referred to in the scriptures as the body and the church. Just as there is only one body (Eph.4: 4; Icor.12: 13) and the body and the church is the same thing there is only one church or body of Christ. This body is not made up of all denominations teaching different doctrines and commandments of men. It is the body of those who have been saved in obedience to the gospel of Christ. (John 3:3-5; Mark 16:16; Acts 2; 38; 1Peter 3:21.). None is in the body of Christ who has not been immersed into it (1 Cor.12: 13; Gal 3:26,27). Salvation is in Christ and the body of Christ or church of Christ is made up of all in the entire world that has obtained eternal salvation in obedience to the gospel of Christ. This body has no denominations in it for they are all of one heart and soul (Acts 4:32). Now this is the Church of Christ. I know nothing of any other. Now just because a group of people builds a building and paint a sign that says the church of Christ meets here does not mean that the sign speaks the truth. Neither is it necessarily untrue. It is simply not the way to identify this body of Christ. This body or Church of Christ follows the doctrine of Christ and is the ONLY way to salvation in Christ. There is no salvation outside of this body.

Therefore Brother Kelley, I reject completely your use of the term "church of Christ" in the denominational sense when referring to those who are Christians according to the doctrine of Christ. You are speaking of those whom you know to be Christians, who are therefore members of the ONE body of Christ as if they are nothing more than just one more among the human denominations created by men. I do not belong to any such thing neither does any other Christian who is faithful to Christ. They belong to Christ and are automatically members of His body, which is the church. This is what Paul was referring to when he said, salute one another with a Holy Kiss the churches of Christ salute you. Romans 16:16. Notice that I have said nothing about a NAME for this body. For it was described in many different ways in the scriptures but the church does not have a NAME. Each individual Christian bears about in his body the NAME of Christ. The Church is referred to as the body and the church of Christ. It is called by many other scriptural terms designed to designate certain of its characteristics and relationships. But it does not have any denominational designation. Paul refers to this body as the churches of Christ because this body is owned by Christ and BELONGS to him. Now if you think that anyone can be saved outside of the Body of Christ which belongs to Christ, which is the Church of Christ, you are sadly mistaken. The denominations of men, regardless of what they denominate themselves, even if they pretend to be the very church or body of Christ will only lead men to destruction. But the Body of Christ, which is the church of Christ, is made up of those who have found the hope of eternal life in Christ Jesus. WE could tear down our sign out from in front of our buildings and we would still be the church of Christ because we are in Christ Jesus. No denomination is right. They are all wrong. Including any that you might one day join because you have persuaded yourself that your brethren, who are in Christ Jesus, are dead. You are completely wrong about them. They are alive, not because they may chose to jump up and down and go into emotional mindlessness with you. But they are alive because they have found the forgiveness of their sins and the hope of eternal life in Christ our Lord. And they will not lose that life just because you have decided that they must express themselves a certain way in order for you to pontificate and designate them as being alive in your sight. It is Gods sight that they care about.

Then you ask me to do something that if you had read my last post you would notice I have already done with these words:

Lee, we can go round and round about this and even concerning the gifts issue. If you want to know more about my conclusions then list them in the order that you want answered, please only a few at a time- I do not have a lot of time on my hands to answer all at once. Present them to me in clear short sentences. It is hard to answer a book!

Now here you say, if you want to know more about my conclusions list them in order that you want them answered. Brother Kelley that is exactly what I did in my last post to you. I LISTED eleven things in the ORDER in which I answered them, which is the order in which I would like for you to deal with them but if you do not like that order you can take them up as you wish. But I have done that in my last post. If you really wanted to answer you could have at least tried to begin with at least one of them. But you are pretending about these things that is why you have not noticed that I had already given you such a list. You can take them one at a time and do not rush. You take as long as you like. But the list is there in my last post. Your response however has been only to ask me to make a list. Are you blind? I have already made a list and your response to my list that I gave you was to ask me to make a list. It is amazing what those who do not follow the truth will do to avoid it. Absolutely amazing to me!

Then you say it is hard to answer a book. This is true for anyone who cannot answer a sentence. If you can answer one argument then you can answer another and then another and eventually you will have answered a book. But the truth of the matter is that I listed eleven things for you to answer. Anyone can see that they are not even near to being anything like a book. If you are too lazy to work then I cannot help you and neither can anyone else. Now you may not have time to respond. This I can understand, for I often have the same problem. But blaming me for your lack of time or lack of will to answer something by claiming that it is too long when in fact it was not very long at all is simply playing to prejudice among those who assume that anything I write will be too long. Anyone with the ability to think would have learned by now that I do not care about the length of my post or what anyone else thinks about it. I have made that much abundantly clear. SO enough excuses. Take responsibility for your actions. Do not blame me for your lack of time. In fact I doubt if my last post to you would be more than two pages if that much. But you complain that it is hard to answer a book. You are doing nothing with such a comment than playing upon the sympathies of the lazy that care so little about the truth that they are offended by lengthy discussions related to it. Your problem is that you cannot answer a sentence that I have put to you so you hide behind the excuse that it is hard to answer a book. You do not have to answer at all Brother Kelley. It is perfectly all right for you to ignore all that I say to you. But pretending to have answered and making excuses for not answering at the same time is absurd in the highest degree and the thoughtful and discerning can see right through your idleness.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 03, 2000

Lee, I do want to say somethings... I will try to finish other comments later.

1. Prove that I have lied.

2. Please direct your comments in the first person not in the third- I am trying to chat with you!

3. I will grant to you this. My comments concerning the emotions are out of an opinion that I do make. But, I am still working through this issue. I do not state nor have I ever stated, that one is not a Christian is they display emotion. But I have siad , and I will state again that one's spirituality could or can be gaged by some display of emotion. For, example if one weeps uncontrolably in a service, then that person MAY have a personal problem that we may be able to help them with. Maybe it is sin, or something else. But, the point is they are displaying emotion out of where they are at spiritually. And for a person to sit in a pew, lifeless can be a gage of if the Lord is real and ever present in their lives. Some come to church.... and you wonder why they are there.

3. The gifts as "you know they do not exist" is a false assumption you make. No I do not know that they ceased? Why Because no where does the scripture say that. Lee, if you find the scripture that tells me that they cease, then I will forever more be silent on the issue. But, the simple FACT is you cannot!

4. Displays of emotion such as running, shouting, dancing, are biblical and should not be surpressed. Even though you attend a sit down and shut up restoration movement "Church of CHrist" non denomination- denomination, does not imply that you are right. In fact you can only state this issue from your opinion and assumptions not biblical fact. Does the NT say that displays of emotion are wrong? No! If you say yes then type the scripture out in full in big letters so I and all can see. I want proof!

Lee, I love you as a brother in CHrist, but please refrain from the language of calling me a liar or false teacher. I repented of my nsensitive comments earlier. Please refrain from doing the same. Let us reason this issue out without name calling, nor from harsh words. Do not try to "attack" me like a target, but let us reason together.

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

<2. Please direct your comments in the first person not in the third- I am trying to chat with you! >

When someone directs his comments in the third...he is gossiping and that is a sin. It is also making the one responding to as if he is not worthy of being addressed. That also is a sin. Methinks that in the judgement day there will be many surprises.

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

AKelley:

4. Displays of emotion such as running, shouting, dancing, are biblical and should not be surpressed.

How does this work with Paul's command that when the church is gathered for worship, that everything be done "in a fitting and orderly way"? (I Cor 14:40)

You seem to be taking bits of Old Testament descriptions of what some people did sometimes, and making them the standard for the church's gathering. You might want to show some instances where the New Testament Church is described as doing these things in worship or other gatherings. If you can find any.

. But I have said , and I will state again that one's spirituality could or can be gaged by some display of emotion.

This is just silly. You are doing a lot of asking for scriptural references . . . how 'bout giving me one to back this up?

Oh, 'scuse me. Just before this you said,

I will grant to you this. My comments concerning the emotions are out of an opinion that I do make.

Well, then how 'bout giving Lee the same option of expressing his opinion on the matter without demanding scripture from him?

To assert that emotion is the way that spirituality is gauged is preposterous. For every one person you can point to as showing genuine spiritually mature emotion, I suspect that I could show you a dozen who allow their emotions to rule the day, rather than their spirit. Lots of folks are emotional minefields, whose displays of emotion show nothing about how spiritually attuned they are, but that they are in fact emotionally unstable, and have no control over the feelings raging up and down within them.

I certainly wouldn't prohibit folks from expressing emotions in worship, to a certain extent. Again, tho, I have to come back to Paul, whose instructions about what happens in worship gatherings, and how it happens, don't leave much room for the abandonment of self- control that you are seemingly atempting to thrust upon us.

Also, the fact that little emotion is being outwardly shown is no indication of what might be happening on the inside. I often sit in worship with a heart alternately full of grief, joy, celebration, contemplative thankfulness, and many other emotions churning thru, but I don't make a big display of them outwardly. I don't want to draw attention to myself and my emotions. I want the attention drawn toward God.

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Lee,

You continue to assert, "[The Apostles] were manifest in the book of Acts giving the Holy Spirit through the lying on of their hands." There are several examples of the Apostles doing this, but where do you find that this was the only manner in which people received the gift(s) of the Spirit? Several times in Acts people received the Holy Spirit without any Apostolic manipulation whatsoever. It seems to me you are drawing your conclusion from several false assumptions, this being one of them.

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Nelta:

You said the following:

<2. Please direct your comments in the first person not in the third- I am trying to chat with you! >

When someone directs his comments in the third...he is gossiping and that is a sin. It is also making the one responding to as if he is not worthy of being addressed. That also is a sin. Methinks that in the judgment day there will be many surprises. 

Now there is no doubt that there will be surprises in the judgment day. Those who listened to false teachers are going to be woefully surprised to hear the Lord say, depart from me for I never knew you. Jesus said,  Not every one that saith unto me Lord. Lord shall enter the kingdom of heaven but he that doeth the will of my father in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord have we not prophesied in thy name and in thy name cast out demons? Then I will profess unto them depart from me ye that work iniquity. Matt7: 21- 23.

One thing for sure, Nelta, the sins that you have committed in this forum may be forgotten by many but God will not forgive them until you repent of having committed them. You will not be "suprised" in the judgment when God points to the fact that you have not repented of the LIES that you have told and the FALSE accusations that you have made concerning Brother Danny wherein you accused him of "having something against women" without any evidence whatsoever to prove that it was true. You will face God in the Judgment for this sin which you stubbornly refuse to repent of having committed and you will not be suprized when he brings it up for you know that you have done these things. So you are definately not going to be suprized on that day. Nor will you be suprized when your false doctrines face you in the judgment. You will hear the words, "depart from me" because you are a worker of "iniquity". Now I say these things to you knowing that almost everyone else has forgotten your lies. I have not forgotten and I remind you of them because your soul is at stake because of your refusal to repent of having told them.

Your "Neoothodox" theology is a system of false doctrine that will cause those who follow you, and I thank God that they are few in number, to be suprised to learn that you lied to them. Now it is interesting indeed to have a false teacher telling us that there are going to be suprises at the judgment. Indeed thousands who have been lied to and convinced by false teachers that they are christians when they have never obeyed the gospel of Christ are indeed going to be suprised. But those of you who teach false doctrine will not be suprised unles you have told so many lies that you have been able to deceive yourselves! You will receive your just reward. I hope that you repent before that day comes. For our Lord will judge all men. You will not be excluded.

The use of the third person in writing and speaking is not a sin as you describe. One cannot speak the English language without using the third person. Your assertion that anytime anyone uses the third person they are doing nothing more than gossiping is ridiculous. Even a fourth grade English student would know better than to say something so blatantly ignorant. When I used the third person in my last post to Brother Kelley I did so purposefully. When I am talking to Brother Kelley I must use the first person. When I am directing my comments to the readers of this forum concerning the things that Brother Kelley has said in this forum I must use the third person. Such is not gossiping because I am referring to something that he said in this forum and telling others my view of his comments IN HIS PRESENCE. Everyone involved can see and read what I have said including Brother Kelley. This is not what occurs in the sin of gossip. When one is gossiping he is repeating things he has heard about another person with out proper regard as to their truthfulness and is saying them in the absence of the person of whom he is speaking. Now it is true that when one gosips he uses the third person to do so but this by no means indicates that this is the ONLY reason that anyone could use the "third person". It definately does not mean, as you imply, that anytime someone use the "thrid person" in the English language that person is guilty of gossiping. He may use the third person when commiting the sin of Gossiping about others but his use of the "third person" is not itself the sin of gossip! Brother Kelley:

I have never addressed you directly using the third person. The use of third person is to indicate that I am appealing to our readers to hear what I am saying concerning what you have said. My doing this does not leave you out. In fact I am doing it in your presence. You have done the exact same thing to me for the exact same good reason. The use of the third person in the English language has it s good purpose and I will continue to use it when I deem it essential to expressing my thoughts on the subject to persons other than the one that I am immediately addressing. It is a way of bringing the readers into focus upon certain matters. I have referred to you Brother Kelley as a false teacher because what you are teaching is false and you have yet to even attempt to answer what I have said to you.

As to the matter of spiritual gifts my arguments stand clear and the verses than I have given are there for you to examine. The two passages that I have not dealt with yet are 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 and Ephesians 4:11-16. I have not discussed these two passages because I have already established without using them that miraculous gifts have ceased. SO there are two passages that teach the miraculous gifts have ended. Even if these two verses were not in the scripture it would be just a certain that miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit have ceased as it is that God no longer makes man from the dust of the ground and neither is he making women from the rib of man anymore. But if you were to ask for the scripture that clearly says God is not making men of the dust of the ground or women from a mans rib anymore you would not find one. But it is obvious from the teaching of the scriptures that God is not doing that any more. Neither is God inspiring men to reveal his word to us for he has (Once delivered it Jude 3). We have received all things that pertain to life and Godliness". God hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and Godliness through the knowledge of him that calls us to glory and virtue. (2 Peter 1:3). God is not now revealing his word and therefore is no longer doing the miracles that were designed to CONFIRM that word as being from Him. Now you claim these miracles still exist today but you do not believe that you or anyone else is inspired as those who gave us the scriptures were inspired. I have listed the passages that show these things over and over again and you have ignored them. You cannot escape the clear truth that none are doing miracles as were done in New Testament times. You have never witnessed any such miracles and if you claim to have witnessed such be prepared for me point out the fact that you are lying again. I have already proven in my previous post that you have conspicuously ignored the evidence and proof that you are lying. But you refused to deal with it. When you told brother Danny that you have never been judgmental you lied. I proved it in the post wherein I accused you of it. This is the post that you continue to ignore because of the fact that it is impossible for you to escape the fact that you did not tell the truth concerning this matter. The proof that I offered is your statement in another post in this forum where you admitted to having been guilty of being judgmental. Now in one place you claim to have never been judgmental and the other you ADMIT that you were guilty of having been judgmental. Now in one of those two places you lied. You did not tell the truth in at least one of those two places. That is called "lying" Brother Kelley and lying is what false teachers do. By their fruits ye shall know them. If the tree bears LIES the tree is false. I have identified the lies you have told and you do not respond and explain them. This is only one example. There are several other examples of your self- contradictions in that post which you have refused to answer. You say you want to talk with me? Then why do you deliberately ignore those things that I have now called upon you to answer more than three times? You read what I have to say and then ignore it and make further assertions that are not true. You claimed to have answered those things and I have proven that you have not even attempted to respond to them. That is LYING Brother Kelley. Now, I am not trying to be unkind to you in this matter. You appear to be lying and I have pointed it out. If I am wrong then please correct me by showing how those contradictions that you have spoken in this forum are not contradictory after all. You have been given the opportunity to answer but have refused to even try.

I will use the third person any time that I chose. When I am speaking directly to you I will do as I have always done. I will use the first person. But whether I use the third person or first person is my choice and it is not wrong for me to do so in any case.

We do see from this however that Nelta is not only ignorant of the Greek language she has very little understanding of the English language. She demonstrates this by claiming that the use of third person in English constitutes a SIN that is described as gossiping. So be careful Brethren. You cannot, according to Nelta, even speak your own native tongue without sinning because it is impossible to speak English without ever using the "THIRD PERSON" and using the "third person" according to her is SINFUL becuse it is "gossiping". Be sure to have your children, when they return to school after the summenr break, to inform their English teachers that they cannot use the "third Person" in class homework because it would be sinful for them to do so because the "third person" constitues gossip! Be sure that they give Nelta proper "credit" for this egegious ignorance! This nonsense is pathetic indeed. But false teachers are quick to support each other even if they must use nonsense to do so!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Before we were Christians, my husband read in a book that Baptists (immersers) were 'hair-splitters'. He laughed uproariously, since I was, at that time, a Baptist.

Do you think there is something IN the water? ;-) ;-)

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Brother John:

You have said:

Lee, You continue to assert, "[The Apostles] were manifest in the book of Acts giving the Holy Spirit through the lying on of their hands." There are several examples of the Apostles doing this, but where do you find that this was the only manner in which people received the gift(s) of the Spirit? Several times in Acts people received the Holy Spirit without any Apostolic manipulation whatsoever. It seems to me you are drawing your conclusion from several false assumptions, this being one of them. 

I have not said that this was the ONLY way in which the Holy Spirit was given in the book of Acts. In fact, the apostles did not receive the miraculous gifts of the Spirit by laying hands on themselves! They received it from the Holy Spirit directly in fulfillment of the promise made by the prophet Joel and the promise made by Christ that they were to wait in Jerusalem until they were endued with power from on high. (Acts 1:8) and the spirit fell upon them directly as we read about in Acts the second chapter. It is interesting also that the household of Cornelieus in Acts the 10th Chapter received the Holy Spirit in exactly the same way as the apostles though for a different reason.

The purpose of the outpouring on the day of Pentecost was to fulfill the prophecy of Joel and miraculously delivered the gospel and establishes His kingdom on this earth. (Joel 2:28; Mark 9:1; Acts 1:6-8;Acts 2:17-21).

The purpose of the miraculous outpouring upon the House of Cornelius was to show that the gentile was also accepted of God as well as the Jews. In fact, Peter was astonished that the Holy Spirit fell upon the house of Cornelius AS ON US AT THE BEGINNING. But Peter by inspiration showed the reason this was done. Listen to Peters words concerning this matter: And as I began to speak the Holy Spirit fell on them AS ON US AT THE BEGINNING. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit. Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I that I could withstand God? When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, THEN hath God also to the gentiles granted repentance unto life. Acts 11:15-18. Now no one else received this baptism of the Holy Spirit but the apostles on Pentecost to fulfill the prophecy of Joel, and the Promise of the Lord and the establishment of the kingdom or Church of Christ. And the house of Cornelius it was done for the purpose of demonstrating that the gentiles were also granted repentance unto life. By these two miracles God created His kingdom on earth and demonstrated that the gospel was for all men not just the Jews. None others received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit immediately except the house of Cornelius and the apostles. All others received these gifts through the laying on of the apostles hands. When the Samaritans sent for Peter and John we are told that Peter and John came THAT THEY MIGHT RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT FOR AS YET HE HAD FALLEN UPON NONE OF THEM" (acts 8:14). It is clear from this that Peter and John did not expect the Holy Spirit to fall upon the Samaritans as it did upon the house of Cornelius. In fact, even in the case of the house of Cornelius it was so unusual that Peter was amazed and impressed and could see clearly that it was a sign that God had accepted the gentiles. If such had been the common occurrence he would not have taken it to mean anything. He certainly would not have noticed it as being significant. In the case of the Samaritans he did not expect that the Holy Spirit would fall upon them until he laid his hands upon them and they received the Holy Spirit. The same is true in the case of the Ephesians in Acts the 19th Chapter. And the clear statement from the word of God that plainly says that through the laying on of the apostles hands the Holy Spirit was given is proof that such was the normal way it was done and that anything other than this was an exception to the RULE. Now Paul himself said to the Romans: For I long to see you that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift to the end that ye may be established. (Romans 1:11.) Now why would Paul want to see them in order to impart some spiritual gift if there was any hope that they could get these gifts by any other means? Therefore it is clear that the Holy Spirit was given miraculously to the apostles and the house of Cornelius but after that the miraculous gifts of the spirit were given ONLY through the laying on of the apostles hands and no one else had any part or lot in the matter. In the case of the Samaritans, Phillip was there why did not he lay hands upon them that they might receive the miraculous gifts? The answer is simple, he, just like his famous convert, Simon, had neither part nor lot in that matter in other words God had not made that their business. No one received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit without having an apostle lay their hands upon them except the Apostles themselves and the House of Cornelius, which was done for the sole purpose of establishing the fact that the gospel was for gentiles also. (Acts 8:14-18; Acts 19:1-6).

You claim that there are several instances in the book of Acts where persons received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit without the laying on of the apostles hands. Apart from the occasion when the apostles themselves received it and the house of Cornelius you cannot find a place where anyone received these miraculous gifts without the laying on of the apostles hands. Now that is a fact. But in either case, it is true that these miraculous gifts were for the purpose of revealing and confirming the word of God to us. (Mark 16:17-20; John 20:30,31; Heb 2:3,4) Now unless you are willing to claim that God is inspiring men today and revealing His word today you cannot claim the miracles found in the New Testament exist today because that was the very purpose of the miraculous.

As an illustration, making man from the dust of the ground is not the only way in which God made a human being. When he made woman he put Adam to sleep and took a rib and made woman. Because God made them in such a way that they would be able to perpetuate themselves through natural birth he no longer makes men from the dust of the ground and women from the rib of man. The fact that he used a miracle to make man is no evidence that he will do that forever. He only did it once. He only man from the dust of the ground once and he only made women from the dust of the ground once. He did it in such a way as to arrange for their beginning and set up natural laws to perpetuate what he had done.

God revealed and confirmed his word by the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit. This was their function. It was done miraculously. Then when the word of God was written it was delivered to us by them that heard him (Heb. 2:3,4). Once that was completed there were still miraculous gifts around because the apostles were alive and those upon whom they had laid their hand were also living. But when they died we no longer had inspired men. All we had was the inspired book, which leads men to Christ. The Bible is the only Book that has been delivered by miraculous confirmation. God is not continually inspiring men and giving us successors to the apostles today any more than he is making men out of the dust of the ground.

Then you must remember that these miraculous gifts were not just a matter of ARGUMENTATION but it was a matter of DEMONSTRATION. Then when you look around to see if ANYONE ANYWHERE can DEMONSTRATE these miraculous gifts and show us that they are in fact in existence today you find none are able to so demonstrate that such is true. I know that you cannot demonstrate it Brother John and I can assure you that our Brother Kelley cannot demonstrate it either. Among those who CLAIM to have these gifts their so-call powers are NOTHING but sheer trickery and lies. Even the things that they claim to be able to do are nothing in comparison to the New Testament. The so-called tongue speaking today is nothing but a farce! So if one expects these miracles to be in the life of a Christian and he does not find them there if he is honest he might conclude that Christianity is a farce. This is the real danger of following these liars who teach others that the miraculous gifts of the spirit are still with us. They have never see such a miracle. They have never met anyone who could do such miracles, and they do not accept the inspiration that comes with these miracles and that those who had these gifts were INSPIRED. They claim that they believe in the sufficiency of the scriptures but they seek more than the scriptures. They want miracles and signs because they have lost confidence in the word of God that was reveal by miracles and confirmed by miracles. It was confirmed by genuine miracles not craftily devised hoaxes and deception, and trickery. In the south we have found many deceivers and exposed their tricks. So I ask all of you that claim that these gifts exist today to tell us just where they exist and what is the DEMONSTRATION of this power and we will be able to see it for ourselves! Why do they keep arguing that the gifts exist when ONE demonstration of a miracle similar to those we read of in the New Testament would end all controversy? The answer to that question is obvious. The reason those would believe in the miraculous gifts of the spirit exist today would rather ARGUE than DEMONSTRATE is conclusive proof that they are LYING!

Now you misunderstand, brother John if you think that I was saying that the gifts of the Holy Spirit were received ONLY through the laying on of the apostles hands ever in the history of the world. No, I was saying, and I do not think that I made it clear, that after the day of Pentecost when the apostles received the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, and with the exception of the case Cornelius who is the ONLY one to receive the LIKE GIFT that was given to the apostles, the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were given to all others ONLY through the laying on of the apostles. This explains why the scriptures say that it was through the laying on of the apostles hands that the Holy Spirit was given. (Acts 8:14-18; Acts 19:1-6.) I appreciate your bring that issue to our attention because I had not explained those details. I am sure that you have had to show the Mormons that we do not have apostles today and that we are not receiving modern revelations today. But Brother Kelley and those who believe that all of the miraculous gifts of the Spirit exist today fail to realize that some of those gifts were used when God revealed his word and others were used to confirm his word (Heb. 2:3,4). These brethren want the miracles but they do not want any more revelations from God and they are not bold enough to claim inspiration for themselves. But these gifts made men inspired and gave them the power to demonstrate that God was with them in order to PROVE that they were INSPIRED. You say:

Several times in Acts people received the Holy Spirit without any apostolic manipulation whatsoever. It seems to me you are drawing your conclusion from several false assumptions, this being one of them.

You cannot find SEVERAL TIMES when men received the miraculous gifts of the spirit apart from the laying on of the apostles hands. It is interesting that you do not reference just where we can find these so- called several times that you talk about. I have not made any assumptions that you accuse me of having made.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Lee, Again you are making assumptions... please for this thread, keep to facts. I will repent of making judgmental statements such as, "Churches are dying" (although I still believe it), and "We can gage one's spirituality by their show of emotion," I will try in the future to refrian from such wide and jugemental statements. I may feel that they are true, but for those such as you who cannot handle them... I am sorry.

But, Lee... to claim that I am a false teach by what I believe is something you have not proven. If I am a false teacher then it is your reponsiblity to call my eldership- and get me fired. It is your reponsiblity to start a new thread on how no one should listen to AKelley, because he is false. It is your responsiblity to "blackball me" in the Christian Standard or Restoration Herold or the Gospel Advocate. But, in order for you to do such you must PROVE with fact that I am false. But, you cannot!

The verses concerning I Cor. 13 and Ephesians 4, do not point out in time and space that the gifts have ceased. It is an interpretation out of an assumption that you have stated it. THis is a theological debate- but one you cannot prove through a "thus saith the Lord"... I will state this as strong as I can... PROVE IT!!! But, what it will boil down to is your opinion against mine. There is not any proof that the gifts died out with the Apostles... I DARE YOU OR ANY ONE TO PROVE THAT TO ME!

Now, you call me a liar for saying that I have experience or seen miracles, then you must continue to call me a liar... for I have seen and experienced miracles. God is still pouring out His Spirit on those who desire more of HIm. Since when did the prophecy of Joel end? It began on Pentecost- but did it stop there. When did this happen... "I will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and billows of smoke. The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." Joel 2:30-31? Excuse me but I must have missed all of this- if this has not happened then the previous verses in 2:28-30 have not yet come to completion either. Since we have been living in the "last days" since Pentecost then why would God stop one and yet to continue another. We cannot solidly answer- because God has not stopped pouring out His Spirit. Can God heal my body and totally cure me, once someone laid their hands upon me? Yes that is what James 5:13-15 teaches. Can the blind recover sight without surgery... yes! Can the lame walk without any help... yes. Can cancer disappear... yes. Can we drive out demonic spirits... yes. If I have the Holy Spirit within me... I can be given the words to say to help people in their lives. If Christ is within us, and Christ is greater that Satan and the world, then it stands to reason that we are greater than any denominc or worldly influence!

Am I a liar for believing that the Living God of the universe can and does produce miracles that blow our minds... well I stand before God... let Him judge me! I once stated that some people put God into a box- now of course we can never do that!!! But, you misunderstood me... which you do a lot of... most people theologically put God into a box. They think God can and does work only one certain way. That my friend will lead people to be onlywhat their denomination or church tradition will let them be. God is much more and He is much bigger... I do beleive God does work the same as in the New Testament- I will always believe that- and I will always teach that!!! You nor anyone on this earth can tell me other wise! Why, because the BIBLE does not tell me that... like I stated the BIBLE nowhere stated that the gifts died! But, if you can show me (which I know you cannot) then I will repent in front of everyone!

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Danny...

Not buying today, friend. Got anything else to sell?

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Here's a question that has been bugging me lately ... if the spiritual gifts all died off when the Bible was completed, what the heck was the purpose of having that entire section of 1st Corinthians included in the Bible in the first place. I mean, if spiritual gifts ceased, then it makes little sense to have a Bible that has instructions on their proper use. Especially at such great length.

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

I stand with Danny here. Once I get my web software working agian I am posting an article on the web that appeared in Bibliotheca Sacra several years ago. The author did a study of the early Church Fathers from 100 to 40 AD, and the only sound you hear concerning tongues are the crickets chirping.

John, when viewed with the whole of the NT, there is really not that much written concerning the miraculous gifts. There is no other method mentioned in the Nt by which a person received the gifts except thru the apostles hands, with the exception of the apostles themselves and Cornelius' home - which are the only two places in the NT that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit took place.

THe Church at Corinth was abusing the gifts given to them and Paul wrote to straighten it up. Let us not forget that the letter was written to them first, for our benefit second.

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

And AKelley,

I'm only responding to part of your last post - The sun darkened, the moon turned to blood, etc., is simply an OT way of saying that judgment was about to fall upon a great nation. Is. 13:10 it was used concerning the fall of Babylon, in Is. 34:4,5 it was used of Idumea, in Ez. 32:7, 8 it was used of Egypt and in Mt. 24:29 Jesus uses it refering to the destruction of Jerusalem. If you will notice Peter's sermon, it deals a great deal with judgment. Peter quotes Joel, and both are refering to the destruction of Jerusalem. Yes, you missed it.

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

Brother Kelley:

You have said:

Lee, Again you are making assumptions... please for this thread, keep to facts.

It is so easy to say something without proving it. This is your response to my words but you do not specify exactly what assumptions you claim that I have made nor do you quote the words wherein I made them. You are not specifically dealing with any of my arguments. All you have done with this statement is to offer a broad sweeping statement without pointing to anything specific to support it. This is the way of false teachers. You did not do like Brother John did. Brother John mentioned a specific assumption that he thought I had made and I was therefore able to understand what he meant and respond accordingly. But you do not do this. You simply assert and do not prove anything that you say. You do not even attempt to prove it. Then you ask me for proof and I have already given you much proof. Now if you do not think that my arguments prove the point then at least accept your responsibility to PROVE that they are not correct. You do not want to do any work now do you? All you want to do is assert without having any responsibility to face the arguments that I have made squarely.

I have kept to the facts Brother Kelley, and the fact that you do nothing more than ignore the majority of the FACTS that I have presented is evidence that you are the one that is unable to keep to the facts.

Then you make a feeble attempt at a show of repentance without changing anything that you have said that you should have repented for having said.

You said:

I will repent of making judgmental statements such as, "Churches are dying" (although I still believe it), and "We can gage one's spirituality by their show of emotion," I will try in the future to refrian from such wide and jugemental statements. I may feel that they are true, but for those such as you who cannot handle them... I am sorry.

The fact is that you pretend to repent of being judgmental when you have already said to Brother Danny that you have never been judgmental. What you should repent for having done is lying to Brother Danny by claiming that you had never been judgmental when all along you knew that in another place you admitted to having been judgmental. It is the LIE that you should repent of Brother Kelley not that you had said something that you believe to be true that you should not have said because the rest of us cannot handle it. If you are going to repent do not blame the rest of for your sins. For if we are the ones that are guilty then we should repent not you. But if you are convinced that you have something to repent of having done then repent but blaming us is not genuine repentance. Now this inability on your part to tell the truth and even understand the nature of repentance is clear evidence that you are not being lead by the Holy Spirit who is the Spirit of truth.

You then say:

But, Lee... to claim that I am a false teach by what I believe is something you have not proven.

Brother Kelley, Your own words have proven you to be a false teacher and I have only pointed out your numerous self-contradictions and your contradictions against the word of God. You have not answered any of my charges and evidence that I have presented which conclusively shows that you are a false teacher.

Then you presume to tell me my responsibilities with these words:

If I am a false teacher then it is your responsibility to call my eldership- and get me fired.

Now you should know that each congregation of the Lords Church is autonomous. I have no authority in your local congregation and therefore I have no responsibility to tell the elders to do anything concerning you. If you are teaching these doctrines in that congregation then a false teacher has surely surfaced among you and the elders should be able to recognize it. They should then deal with you according to the teaching of the word of God. That would mean that they would teach you if possible the truth and then after the first and second admonition they should reject you and they should discipline you according to the word of God. That is their responsibility not mine. If they read this forum they most certainly should be able to see your egregious errors and correct you. But that is their responsibility. Now your assertion that I should try to get you fired is something that I cannot find in my Bible. There is a process of Church discipline and firing preachers is not necessarily the first thing that must be done. But you would like to depict me as one who is trying to get you fired so that you can gain some sympathy for your cause and you do this because thus far you have not found any arguments that will gain any sympathy among the wise and discerning who read this forum.

Then you say:

It is your responsibility to start a new thread on how no one should listen to AKelley, because he is false.

Now Brother Kelley, this thread is sufficient for the purpose of exposing and refuting your false doctrine but it has never been my procedure to urge others to not hear anyones arguments, even the worst false teacher should be heard and answered. So your advice is again absurd and out of harmony with the scriptures. We are told, Prove all things and hold fast to that which is good. Now if you were being lead by the Holy Spirit, as you claim, you would not be advising me or anyone else to do things that are contrary to the teaching of the Holy Spirit as you have done with this statement. It is just further evidence that the Holy Spirit is not guiding you at all in these matters.

Then you urge me to blackball you with these words:

It is your responsibility to "blackball me" in the Christian Standard or Restoration Herald or the Gospel Advocate.

Now anyone can see that the Holy Spirit did not lead you to say such a thing! It is not a Christians responsibility to blackball any one. Those things are done in Masonic lodges not the church of Christ. You are to be challenged and taught and convinced and urged to accept the truth as it is in the New Testament and if you reject it the process of discipline and withdrawal must be followed but blackballing is not a scriptural thing to do to any brother in Christ. But you tell me to do this thing to you! This statement is nothing but more evidence that the Holy Spirit is not leading you! Besides, I doubt very seriously if the Standard would allow me to write anything in their paper! And I am certain that the restoration Herald has no desire to hear anything I have to say. And I am not well known and respected enough to even have the gospel Advocate to print anything that I say. This does not even take into account that I am not talented enough as a writer to have my work accepted in such papers. Now if the Holy Spirit were guiding you he could have told you such things. The very idea of blackballing someone is foreign to the scriptures. Discipline with the view of obtaining repentance and restoration is scriptural but blackballing is not taught in the scriptures. The Holy Spirit knows this and if he were guiding you He would not have guided you into recommending that I violate His word in such a way!

Then you say:

But, in order for you to do such you must PROVE with fact that I am false. But, you cannot!

Now anyone who has read brother hood papers for any length of time knows that I could blackball you as you recommend without having the slightest evidence to support such action. You are proof that one does not need evidence to prove their assertions in order to make them and have some people agree. You have offered no proof of your assertions. In fact, you refuse to even attempt to deal with the conclusive proof that I have already offered which demonstrates conclusively that you are continually self contradictory and that you are teaching that which is false in several areas not just this subject. You say I cannot prove it. Brother Kelley I have already proven it and you are unable to or unwilling to even attempt to show that my arguments, which are so numerous that you cannot even decide where to start, are wrong.

Then you assert the following:

The verses concerning I Cor. 13 and Ephesians 4, do not point out in time and space that the gifts have ceased.

Yes they do and all one has to do is read them to see the point in time especially when you take into consideration the fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel 2:28-30 which had its fulfillment beginning on the day of Pentecost and ending in the destruction of Jerusalem. With that prophecy as a background one can clearly see what Paul is talking about in these two verses. This argument I have not the time at the moment to fully develop. And since you have done nothing more than ignore all that I have said thus far I will simply wait until I have time to develop this theme more fully for others in the forum to see. But they can read for themselves and see that Both passages speak of an end of these gifts and both of them refer to the purpose of these gifts and their end coming upon the completion of that purpose. In the Corinthian passage we have the word when used which is a reference to time In the Ephesians Passage you have the word till which is also a reference to time. And both of these words point to a time when these miraculous things would cease or be complete by having accomplished their purpose. I say all of this simply to indicate that your assertion that they do not point to any time is false. But for now, since you have done nothing more than assert that they do not point to a time when the gifts would cease, I am asserting the opposite. Let our readers read those verses for themselves. I will return when I have time just to give an exegesis of these two passages of Scripture for the benefit of those who might be interested. Now, you have already said that nothing anyone can say will cause you to change your mind. I would have thought that the TRUTH may have some bearing upon your thinking but you said nothing could change your mind. I suppose that you mean that even the truth would not steer you into a different course. If that is the case there is no hope for you.

Then you ask me again to do what I have already done with these words:

But, what it will boil down to is your opinion against mine. There is not any proof that the gifts died out with the Apostles... I DARE YOU OR ANY ONE TO PROVE THAT TO ME

I have already offered evidence that proves that the miraculous gifts ceased when the apostles died and the last person on whom they laid their hands died. And you have not shown that evidence to be wrong in the least. All you have done is completely ignore that evidence and come in here and call for proof. I have already proven it. Now it is your job to show that the arguments that have been made are in error. But you simply ignore them and demand proof. If I offer more proof, which I will be happy to do later, you will only ignore it as well.

Then you lie again when you say:

Now, you call me a liar for saying that I have experience or seen miracles, then you must continue to call me a liar... for I have seen and experienced miracles.

You have seen no such thing as the miracles that are found in the pages of the New Testament. You can claim such but you cannot prove it to be true. You do not even bother to tell us when, where, and under what circumstances you have seen such miracles and you do this because you do not want anyone to compare the so-called miracles that you claim to have witnessed with the genuine miracles of the New Testament. This is the major difference between the miracles of the New Testament and the hoaxes of our present day. There was no one, in the New Testament, who denied the fact that the miracles found in the New Testament actually happened. Some may have ascribed them to another source but none denied that they occurred. But I am denying that you have ever seen a miracle like the ones we read about in the New Testament. I notice that you do not tell us of any nor do you prove that you have actually seen them. Since the New Testament clearly teaches that these things ceased when the apostles died and those upon whom they laid their hands upon died no one else had those powers, it is clear that you are lying if you claim to have seen such things. But we will be more than happy to go with you to witness some of these miracles or allow you the opportunity to demonstrate that you have such powers. You are LYING to us again Brother Kelley when you say that you have seen these miracles today. Now that is a fact and we will wait to hear your proof that you have actually seen such things today. Anyone one can claim to have seen such things and there are many other deceivers who make such claims but none of them have EVER proven their case! We wait for you to PROVE that you have in fact witnessed such things.

Then you assert:

God is still pouring out His Spirit on those who desire more of HIm.

Now it is your turn to give us proof that such is true. Prove to us that God is still pouring out his spirit upon those who want more of Him. We wait for your proof. Anyone can assert such a thing but where is the proof? God has never given His Holy Spirit to someone just because they wanted more of Him as you claim! Simon, in Acts 8:14-18, wanted MORE than the mere miraculous gifts that he had received at the laying on of the apostles hands. He wanted the SAME POWER that they had that on whosoever he laid his hands they would receive these miraculous gifts. But Peter told him that he had no PART OR LOT in this matter. So here is someone who wanted more of him as you would say and he was denied to have any more in no uncertain terms. But you assert that God is giving more of him to those who simply want it. No this is just another lie. The truth is that you know you have not seen any such miracles but you claim it anyway. Now my charge that you are LYING will stand until you can prove that you have seen such things.

Then you ask,

Since when did the prophecy of Joel end?

It ended when it was predicted to end. It ended with the destruction of Jerusalem. Read Joel 2:28-30. This prophecy is the background of the miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. This prophecy of Joel also points to the destruction of Jerusalem. The quotation of this prophecy of Joel 2: 28-30 by Christ when he was also predicting the falloff Jerusalem is proof that Joels prophecy of the coming of the Holy Spirit also included the destruction of Jerusalem. Read these passages. (Matt. 24:29;Mark 13:24; and Luke 21:11). A study of Matthew 10:19-23 in its context will show that Christ promises inspiration to the apostles, and follows with this promise with a reminder of the persecution that would come upon them, and includes the coming of Christ in judgment upon the Jewish nation. This arrangement indicates that the miraculous would begin at Pentecost and cease by the fall of Jerusalem. Thus we have the coming of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, the persecution that would follow, and finally the promise that this persecution would be judged by his coming in judgment upon the Jewish nation. In between Pentecost and the destruction of Jerusalem we have the miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit as promised by Joel. We have the beginning, the middle and the end of the fulfillment of Joels prophecy. Now, I have only briefly stated these matters. It would take more time than I have at the moment to show what impact this prophecy has on many passages concerning the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit. But that prophecy defines the limits of that which Joel predicted concerning this miraculous outpouring .

Now you asked when did the prophecy of Joel end. The answer is that it ended with the destruction of Jerusalem. Now the fact that the destruction of Jerusalem is a type of the end of time and has a reference to it does not change the fact that the prophecy of Joel only encompasses the time from Pentecost and the fall of Jerusalem. I recommend that all spend some time in diligent study of this significant prophecy and the connection and bearing that it has upon the subject of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit. It is the very complete description of all that happened and it has been completely fulfilled by the events beginning on Pentecost and ending with the fall of Jerusalem. SO that is when the prophecy of Joel ended.

I will only mention this just here but there is much in the realm of prophecy that places a clear time to the end of these miraculous gifts including the sealing up of the vision and prophecy spoken of by Daniel in his prophecy found in Daniel 9:20-27. This prophecy also connects the end of these things with the fall of Jerusalem. But this is admittedly a very difficult passage and would take far more time to explain and therefore I do not use it in these arguments in this forum. I mention it only to encourage all to study it with diligence and look at what it says and you will find that there was a time coming when prophecy and visions would be sealed up That time was the fall of Jerusalem. I mention this simply to encourage all to give that prophecy some study also. For in this prophecy Daniel foretold the coming of Christ, the preaching of the gospel of redemption, and, with the revelation of the gospel, the CESSTATION OF THE PROPHET, and the end of the Jewish State. In referring to this prophecy of Daniel Ellicott makes the following comment on the phrase to seal up The impression of the translators being that all visions and prophecies were to receive their complete fulfillment in the course of these seventy weeks. It appears however to be more agreeable to the context to suppose that the prophet is speaking of the absolute cessation of all prophecies. (1 Corinthians 13:8).

Therefore it is very possible, and I believe it is true, that Daniel, in foretelling the culmination of redemption in Christ and the Church, also announced the cessation of the prophet, and with the prophet, the end of the miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit. Thus, with prophecy as the foundation of Revelation, and the miraculous confirmation that accompanied it, the announcement of the end of prophecy would of necessity include the end of the miraculous gifts that were associated with prophecy. A completed revelation left no place for a prophet and, therefore left no place for miraculous gifts

Then you say:

If Christ is within us, and Christ is greater that Satan and the world, then it stands to reason that we are greater than any demonic or worldly influence!

Christ has over come Satan and the miraculous gifts of the spirit are no longer necessary to protect us from demons. Read Zechariah 13:1- 6. Christ has accomplished what the Prophet Zechariah predicted concerning this matter also.

Then you ask:

Am I a liar for believing that the Living God of the universe can and does produce miracles that blow our minds... well I stand before God... let Him judge me!

No Brother Kelley you are not a liar for believing anything. You are a liar because you have told lies. You claimed that you had never been judgmental and then claimed to be guilty of it in the exact same discussion. You did not tell the truth in both places. You have lied in several other cases, which I have already proven and you have ignored and I will not go back over it all again. You are a liar because of the lies you have told and I have proven that you have told them. You claim to have seen miracles such as those found in the book of Acts. You are a liar for having made such a claim. You know that it is not the truth. That is why you are a liar, Brother Kelley. And you are correct when you say that God will judge you. He surely will do just that, Brother Kelley. Then you say:

But, if you can show me (which I know you cannot) then I will repent in front of everyone!

We have already shown you but you have ignored deliberately all of the arguments that we have presented. And, besides, you have demonstrated to us that you do not even know how to repent with your pretence of repenting in the earlier part of your post. SO we cannot have confidence that you would repent even if you knew you were wrong. But the fact is that we have shown you the proof and will show more but the blind cannot see and those who deliberately close their eyes and shut their ears cannot see or hear either.

Well, I have to go to work tomorrow. This is enough for now, especially since it will be completely ignored and left unanswered.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 04, 2000

If you accept the word "till" in Ephesians 4 to mean until the Bible is complete, then wouldn't that mean that all gifts of pastors, teachers and evangelists would have also ceased at that time?

Also, how do you explain I Corinthians 12:7, which states, "Now to each one [to each Christian, not just to a select few in the first century whom Paul laid hands on, I would read this] the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good." These "manifestations" include not only the miraculous "sign" gifts of healing and tongues, but also faith, discernment, teaching, evangelism, administration, being able to help others, etc. Have all these also ceased?

Personally I believe that the miraculous "sign" gifts may have indeed ceased (except, perchance, by the grace of God in regions of the world where the gospel is still making inroads, and even then very rarely), but these others have continued, since they are still useful and needed. After all, Paul mentions only that tongues, revelation knowledge and prophecy would pass away; he did not mention that any of the other more "mundane" gifts would cease.

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

May I suggest that ALL the participants in this thread -- especially those on "both sides" (or more) who are becoming increasingly "emotional" (just teasing) about whether or not miraculous gifts are still given today -- might profit from a thorough re-study of I Corinthians, chapters 12 to 14.

Take the whole thing as a unified WHOLE, and look especially at what Paul says about the PURPOSES of tongues and of prophecy, and the proper use of each when they are used. EVEN IF they were to be given today (and for the present I'd rather not say what my own views are about whether or not the miraculous gifts still exist) they would be for the same purposes, and would require the same limitations on their use, as Paul wrote. I wonder sometimes if it might not be more profitable, rather than spending hours arguing about whether or not these gifts still exist, to insist that if someone thinks he/she has them and wants to exercise them, it should be done in the manner prescribed and for the reasons prescribed.

A couple of suggestions of things to especially note and think about:

Since most people agree that Paul wrote what he did to the Corinthians because they had a problem with the abuse of the gifts, doesn't this suggest that we need to be particularly careful to differentiate between what he says about these gifts as being "what is" (but which might actually be improper) and what he says "should be"?

What do you make of the apparent contradiction in 14:22-25? (Tongues are a sign not for believers, but for unbelievers, but if you are all speaking in tongues and an unbeliever comes in, won't he think you are all crazy?) For a clue to the possible meaning, read Acts 2:1-15.

And I'd like to suggest a possible different approach to 14:27-28 than the usual. "By two or at the most by three" is usually taken to mean two or three speakers in tongues. Some years back I heard someone (I think it was Carl Ketcherside) suggest that it might not mean two or three speakers, but two or three sentences at a time -- allowing time for the translator to translate before continuing. If the gift of tongues no longer exists, then I guess this is an irrelevant side issue -- though it does give good advice for preachers going to places where they don't know the language and using a translator. If the gift does still exist today, then perhaps this is how it should be exercised.

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

Lee, a lie is deliberate and willful deception. I never purposely decieved anyone. I did realize my mistake when I made some judemental statments then, I stated that I made none. But, Lee, I never intentionally lied. I will try in the future to not make the same mistakes again.

Again, you will not answer my comments... so now I will not answer you. I told you the proof is in the pudding. All you have shown is that you give the typical response from someone of your background. You are giving the very basic robotic answers. Nowhere have you ever shown that the gifts have ceased.

Lee, as far as the miracles, I guess in your mind I am still a liar. For I am a walking miracle. I should be dead, but I am not- the Lord saved me from a tragic car accident- in which is a miracle itself.

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

Danny...

You know that this is an issue that will always be one of proper hermeneutics. You can attempt to proof-text until the cows come home but it does not change the FACT that there is not a single verse, text, or even inference that states or implies that the supernatural gifts have ceased today [or to make you happy, ceased when the apostles died.]

Danny, you and I have hashed this out ad infinitum and I have no desire to re-hash. There was never a response from anyone last time we discussed this issue how Paul could have been speaking of the canonization process in 1 Cor. 13 (for that MUST BE what he refers to if the typical RM dogma is to be accepted concerning supernatural gifts).

What I don't understand is the inherent inconsistencies within the typical anti-pneumatological views in the RM. Did the gifts cease with the death of the apostles (which would be in the latter half of the 90's A.D.) or was it when the Scriptures were canonized (and would that be with Nicea or later)?

It all totters on that word "teleion" in 1 Cor. 13...what is the "perfect"? Do we have any indication in any of the other nine usages of the word that it is a reference to a document (such as a completed document like the canonized Scripture)? Or is that absolutely irresponsible scholarship due to a NEED to keep "complete" a view of the Holy Spirit's workings that runs contrary to the whole counsel of Scripture?

Well, Regis, my final answer does not run contrary to the Scripture's! The Holy Spirit is the same, today, yesterday, and forever. He works as He chooses to best suit His purposes (and His purposes never contradict His character or Will).

Now as far as I understood, this thread was about emotion in worship. How did it get to supernatural giftedness? You've heard the old joke...there was a theif who went into a bank with a gun and pointed it at the teller. He said, "This is a stick up, put your hands up!" The teller said, "I'm sorry, I'm from the Christian Church, I'm not allowed to put my hands up!"

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

Ha ha ha Michael =D

Benjamin: I completely agree with you. Assuming for the sake of argument that the gifts have continued, churches that practice them do not do so Biblically. Many speak [babble?] at the same time, and there is no interpretation. Preachers interject tongues into their preaching, again with no interpretation, apparently trying to put some "divine stamp" on their sermon. I paid a visit to a charismatic church a few years ago and the entire congregation began "speaking in tongues" and it was exactly as Paul predicted: I thought they were all nuts!

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

Please, Danny Gabbard, show me where my uncle answered my question concerning teleion. Nowhere in all the years I have been asking him that question has he answered that question. Neither have you. The reason you want it to die is because you hope it does.

You have no challenge because the problem is a hermeneutical problem. If you would use consistent hermeneutics then the issue of supernatural giftedness would be non-existent. I would love for you, Scott, or anyone else to answer my question concerning "teleion." But don't shoo it away by saying my uncle had dealt with it... I love Scott, but he and I are in two vastly different worlds when it comes to our pneumatology. He is definitely old school thought on the issue...I just believe the Bible (just jesting, Scott). Seriously, why don't you deal with the hermeneutical problem first Danny?

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

Danny, here is a thought provoking question, were there any non believing Jews in Corinth. I know the abuses in Corinth, but I also know it was primarliy a Pagan Gentile city, a saliors town. If I am not mistaken Corinthians does not mention any. Nor does Paul mention that the gift of tongues is for strickly non believing Jews.

Also, I have been asking Lee, which he never answers, or anyone. Where does it state that the gifts have died with the apostles? AND, where does it state without question that the teleion is the NT? All that can be made are assumptions based on your theological view.

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

Danny;

I hope you were not serious when you said you did not know of any scriptures that called the Holy Spirit God and asked someone to show you just one, but just off the top of my head, here are two (I've been on this merry-go-round a million times with Jehovah's Witnesses ... I never thought I would hear it coming out of my own church!):

Then Peter said, "Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God." (Acts 5:3-4)

Now the Lord [Kurios, the Greek word which the Jews used as an equivalent to Jehovah, and used in that sense here) is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. (2 Corinthians 3:17)

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

Brother Kelley says:

Also, I have been asking Lee, which he never answers, or anyone. Where does it state that the gifts have died with the apostles? AND, where does it state without question that the teleion is the NT? All that can be made are assumptions based on your theological view.

I have made numerous arguments that you have completely ignored and I have already shown from the scriptures that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were given only through the layin on of the apostles hands and that since they were the only ones that had that power and they could not give it to anyone else those miraculous powers which were given only through the laying on of the apostles hands died when the last apostle died and when the last person upon whom they laid their hands upon died. I made that argument with these words, which he has NEVER even attempted to respond to:

Now I know that Brother Kelley does not claim to have these powers himself. But why doesnt he? He claims to know his statements to be true by his empirical sense then why cannot he empirically posses these powers! Brethren, I recommend that we read the word of God and follow it instead of wandering around seeking emotional outburst to prove that we have something from God that God has already said very plainly that we have no [part or lot in. Simon had no part or lot in having the power to lay hands on others so that they would receive these miraculous gifts of the Spirit. But he did have these miraculous gifts of the Spirit having received them by the lying on of the apostles hands. This is proof that those who received these powers did not receive the power to pass them on to others. When the apostles died, the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were not longer given. For those who had the part of giving those gifts are no longer with us. Now Brother Kelley claimed that these miracles found in the book of Acts are still with us today as follows: In fact, I believe that the miracles, and various manifestations seen in Acts are still in existence today! I pointed to a miracle in the book of Acts that he knows does not exist today. The Holy Spirit, with attending miraculous manifestations is not being given by the laying on of Apostles hands today. He said that those manifestations in the book of acts are happening today. I asked where are the apostles that are doing this today. There are no apostles on this earth today but they were manifest in the book of Acts giving the Holy Spirit through the lying on of their hands. This is not happening today and Brother Kelley admits it. Therefore his contention that the Miracles and various manifestations are STILL WITH US TODAY is false. The apostles giving the Holy Spirit through the lying on of HANDS is not with us today. So where does his doctrine go? Can he show us any of the exact same manifestations in the Book of Acts that are still with us today? Can he show that they are ALL still with us today? Has he even attempted to show from the scriptures that they are still with us today? No he has not and I have demonstrated one such manifestation that is not still with us today. I discussed it further with Brother John as follows:

None others received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit immediately except the house of Cornelius and the apostles. All others received these gifts through the laying on of the apostles hands. When the Samaritans sent for Peter and John we are told that Peter and John came THAT THEY MIGHT RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT FOR AS YET HE HAD FALLEN UPON NONE OF THEM" (acts 8:14). It is clear from this that Peter and John did not expect the Holy Spirit to fall upon the Samaritans as it did upon the house of Cornelius. In fact, even in the case of the house of Cornelius it was so unusual that Peter was amazed and impressed and could see clearly that it was a sign that God had accepted the gentiles. If such had been the common occurrence he would not have taken it to mean anything. He certainly would not have noticed it as being significant. In the case of the Samaritans he did not expect that the Holy Spirit would fall upon them until he laid his hands upon them and they received the Holy Spirit. The same is true in the case of the Ephesians in Acts the 19th Chapter. And the clear statement from the word of God that plainly says that through the laying on of the apostles hands the Holy Spirit was given is proof that such was the normal way it was done and that anything other than this was an exception to the RULE. Now Paul himself said to the Romans: For I long to see you that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift to the end that ye may be established. (Romans 1:11.) Now why would Paul want to see them in order to impart some spiritual gift if there was any hope that they could get these gifts by any other means? Therefore it is clear that the Holy Spirit was given miraculously to the apostles and the house of Cornelius but after that the miraculous gifts of the spirit were given ONLY through the laying on of the apostles hands and no one else had any part or lot in the matter. In the case of the Samaritans, Phillip was there why did not he lay hands upon them that they might receive the miraculous gifts? The answer is simple, he, just like his famous convert, Simon, had neither part nor lot in that matter in other words God had not made that their business. No one received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit without having an apostle lay their hands upon them except the Apostles themselves and the House of Cornelius, which was done for the sole purpose of establishing the fact that the gospel was for gentiles also. (Acts 8:14-18; Acts 19:1-6).

Now, even though I have made this argument numerous times to brother Kelley he has completely ignored it and comes back asking me to give evidence again and accuse me of ignoring his request. I did not want to give the evidence over again because he would only ignore it as he has done thus far. But I will give it one more time for all so that he can have one more chance to respond. But I will not waste my time repeating it again if he choses to return with his ridiculous assertion that I have ignored his request which was an ignorant request for me to do what I had already done and he had ignored it. SO the following is a concise statement of the argument.

The miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit was given only through the laying on of the apostles hands, except for the case of Cornelius who received the Holy Spirit in the exact same way as the apostles for the purpose of showing that the gentiles were accepted of God and were also, along with the Jews, granted repentance unto life.( Acts 11:15-18) Other than this exception, the rule was that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit was given only through the laying on of the apostles hands and NO ONE ELSE HAD THIS POWER. (Acts 8:14-24) Since God gave no one other than the apostles the power to bestow these miraculous gifts upon any man it is necessarily inferred that when the apostles died no one on this earth had this power to bestow these gifts upon men. Therefore, God thereby denied these gifts to anyone living after the death of the apostles and those upon whom they had laid their hands.. Now that is the argument briefly stated.

The following passages support that position:

1. The miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit was given only through the Laying on of the apostles hands. And when Simon saw that THROUGH THE LAYING ON OF THE APOSTLES HANDS THE HOLY SPIRIT WAS GIVEN, he offered them money saying, GIVE ME ALSO THIS POWER, that on whomsoever I lay my hands he may receive the Holy Spirit. But Peter said unto him, thy money perish with the because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. THOU HAST NEITHER PART NOR LOT IN THIS MATTER: Acts 8:18-21. Now it is obvious that the purpose of Peter and John coming to Samaria was to see that the Samaritans received the Holy Spirit in this miraculous manifestation. Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem hear that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who when they were come down prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit: (For as yet he was FALLEN UPON NONE OF THEM only they had been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) THEN LAID THEY THERE HANDS UPON THEM AND THEY RECEIVED THE HOLY SPIRIT. (Acts 8:14-17). SO we see that the Holy Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles hands. Remember now that Phillip was the one that had converted these Samaritans. And we are told that he was a man full of the Holy Spirit. . Wherefore brethren look ye out from among you seven men of honest report, FULL OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, whom we may appoint over this business. And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and PHILLIP and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch. (Acts 6:3,5). SO Phillip was a man FULL OF THE HOLY SPIRIT because he was one of the seven that the apostles required to be men who were full of the Holy Spirit. Now, even though Phillip was a man full of the Holy Spirit the apostles still sent Peter and John, two of their number as apostles, to go to Samaria and LAY HANDS upon them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. (Acts 8:14-18). Now it is obvious to anyone that even though Phillip was a man full of the Holy Spirit he was not given this power to lay hands upon anyone that they might receive the Holy Spirit. Why was it necessary for the apostles to come and bestow the Holy Spirit upon the Samaritans? Simply because Phillip could not do it because it was only through the laying on of the APOSTLES HANDS that the Holy Spirit was given. (Acts 8: 18).

2. Then we have another example in Acts the 19th chapter that shows that the Holy Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles hands. When Paul met these twelve men from Ephesus he asked them, HAVE YE RECEIVED THE HOLYU SPIRIT SINCE YE BELIEVED? (Acts 19:1) What a stupid question this would have been if we received the Holy Spirit in its miraculous manifestations automatically upon our being baptized! But we know from the situation with the Samaritans above that it was always possible that their would be men who had been converted by someone like Phillip who did not have the power to bestow these miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit by laying on of hands. For only the apostles had this power. SO the question was therefore a very reasonable one. When he learned that not only had they not received the Holy Spirit they had not erven heard if the was a Holy Spirit he knew that they had not been baptized by anyone like Phillip who would have told them of the Hoy Spirit because he was a man full of the Holy Spirit. Then after Paul baptized them into the name of Christ we are told, And WHEN PAUL LAID HIS HANDS UPON THEM THE HOLY SPIRIT CAME UPON THEM AND THEY SPAKE WITHTONGUES AND PROPHESIED. (Acts 19:6). Now again we see a group of people who would have never received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit if they had not come into contact with an APOSTLE who laid his hands upon them. No one else had this power. God could have given them the Hoy Spirit without Paul laying his hands upon them for God surely had the power to do so but the fact is that he DID NOT DO IT UNTIL AN APOSTLE LAID HANDS UPON THEM. This is evidence that such was Gods will that these gifts would be bestowed in THIS manner and there was no other way in which it was done in the New Testament, with the exception of Cornelius which we have already show was an exception to the rule designed to demonstrate that the Gentiles were accepted of God through the gospel as well as Jews. (Acts 11:15-18). 3. Then we have another instance, which I have already mentiond before and it also has been ignored of Pauls desire to go to Rome so that he might impart unto them some spiritual gift to the end that they might be established (Romans 1:11). Now this not only shows that those whom he spoke of in Rome that did not have spiritual gifts would have to wait until Paul, or some other apostle came to them before those spiritual gifts could be imparted unto them. Now there were already those in Rome who had spiritual gifts but they could not impart spiritual gifts to those whom they had converted to Christ. Paul wanted to come to them to impart these gifts. Then he gave the reason, to the end that ye may be established. Thus again we see that it was only through the laying on of the apostles hands that these gifts were imparted and there was no other way for it to be done.

4. Then of course we have the statement of Paul that Timothy had received a gift through the laying on of his hands. Wherefore I put the in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God which is in the BY THE PUTTING ON OF MY HANDS. For God has not given us the spirit of fear; but of POWER, and of LOVE, and of a sound mind.(2Tim.1:6,7). SO here again we have miraculous gift from God being given through the laying on of an APOSTLES HANDS. It is clearly taught in the scripture that this is how the Christians in the first century received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Now the above scripture are conclusive that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were given through the laying on of the apostles hands. These gifts were not given any other way. It was certain that during the New Testament era if one became a Christian and wanted Spiritual gifts that person would have to wait until an apostle laid hands upon them before they would receive those gifts. When the all of the apostles died no one could receive the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit through the laying on of the apostles hands. Since this was the only way it which it was bestowed by God upon men these gifts were no longer given after their death. And after the death of those upon whom the apostles had laid their hands these miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit passed away naturally. They had by that time accomplished their purpose of revealing and confirming the word of God. This had nothing whatsoever to do with the collection of the cannon as some have sought to make this matter revolve around. This had to do with the completion of the revelation and confirmation of Gods word. These gifts had accomplished that purpose by the time the apostles died and those upon whom they laid their hands which could have been some time after they died.

I must go to bed now for I have to work tomorrow. But this is the argument. It has now been presented three times and it is surely the truth as taught in the word of God. Brother Kelly is not likely to be able to give a scripture to show that God is no longer making men from the dust of the ground today and he is no longer making women from the rib of man today. But he knows that it is not being done. He knows it because the scriptures teach it andhe has never seen it happen. The same is true of these miraculous gifts. They are not among us todaybecause the apostles are not here and God is not giving these gifts anymore.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 05, 2000

Do I dare make another quick comment or two (a) without one side or the other thinking that I am "taking sides" either for or against their position, and (b) without getting drawn further into the argument than I want to be or have time to be? I don't know. I'll try, and hope I don't regret it.

I wondered when someone would bring up I Cor. 13 and "TELEIOS". I Cor. 13 says, in no uncertain terms, that the gifts of prophecy and of speaking languages one has not learned will come to an end. (I have heard it pointed out that either the words used or the tense, I'm not sure which, for prophecy and languages ceasing suggest an abrupt ceasing, while the one used of knowledge suggests a gradual "passing away." Whether this means anything significant or not, I'm not sure.) When will this happen? The SUGGESTION is that it will occur when the TELEIOS comes -- since the gift of prophecy is partial, it will be superseded when the "complete" comes (but nothing is said about "tongues" in this connection). But if we look at it closely, I'm not sure it says that directly, in so many words. Even if it did, the big question still remains, what is the TELEIOS?

(Parenthetically, as beautiful as I Cor. 13 is in any language, I think we probably fail to appreciate the second half of it fully when we read it in translation. TELEIOS had several meanings, and Paul makes contrasts with several of them. It could mean "complete", as opposed to "partial", and Paul draws the contrast with prophecy and knowledge being only partial. It could mean "mature", as opposed to "immature" and "childish", and Paul uses the analogy of the young child growing up. It could mean "perfect", as opposed to anything that is not perfect, and he contrasts the warped mirror with seeing "face-to-face".)

What is the TELEIOS? I have heard a number of different possibilities suggested. Among them, the following,

(1) Jesus, at his second coming. This seems to be the most common idea, though whether it is correct or not is an open question.

(2) The completed canon of the New Testament. This fits with the contrast of partial and complete, with prophets needed in each congregation or at least each region in a church that did not yet have the complete New Testament to refer to, but unneeded once that book was complete. (BTW, the New Testament canon was "complete" as soon as the last book was written. It did not need the council of Nicea to put its stamp of approval on the collection for it to become God's word. A case MIGHT be made, however, for prophecy continuing until the written word had been disseminated widely enough that most congregations had some kind of access to the completed work.)

(3) True Christ-like AGAPI love, in individuals and widely practiced in the church. This would fit with what is said in the first half of the chapter, and with what he says about this being "the most excellent way". As a personal note, I found in my marriage that as part of learning to apply the qualities of love given in the first part of the chapter, I also had to learn to "put away childish ways" of reacting toward my wife and children.

(3) Spiritual maturity, either in the individual or in the church generally.

(4) Christian unity, c.f. Ephesians 4:10-16.

Which of these is it? I have seen people make a good-sounding case for each of these possibilities. Could it possibly be that Paul means maturity/completeness/perfection in a general sense, and that it therefore could include more than one of these?

I have my own opinions and I think there are practical applications that can be made from all of them. But I don't personally find the evidence for favouring any particular one over the others to be strong enough to support too big a weight in building other doctrines.

The silence of the Church Fathers regarding people speaking in languages they do not know in the post-apostolic era, which Scott (I think) referred to, is good SUPPORTING evidence for a couple of points, but hardly conclusive by itself. When we read the whole of Bible history, O.T. and N.T., we find that miracles of any kind were concentrated in certain eras -- e.g. from the Exodus through the time of the Judges, the time of Elijah and Elisha, the lifetime of Christ and the beginning of the church, etc. The rest of the time they were either rare or absent.

If you can prove conclusively that NO miraculous gift of any kind was ever given to the church apart from the laying on of the apostle's hands, and/or that TELEIOS in I Cor. 13 must mean the canon of the N.T., then the silence of the early post-apostolic Church Fathers is good SUPPORTING evidence that the gifts did in fact cease permanently. If you can't absolutely prove one or both of the first two points, it may be "suggestive", but proves nothing other than that that was one of the "quiet" times of history when the miraculous gifts were rare or absent.

On the other side of the fence, the fact that both the Bible itself and church history show that there were these "quiet" times is good evidence for saying that the miraculous gifts are NOT NORMATIVE. Therefore, those who would require them as a sign of spiritual maturity and/or of being a Christian and having the Holy Spirit are way out of line in their teaching.

Requiring that ALL Christians must speak in languages they do not know to show that they have the Holy Spirit is in direct contradiction to Paul's clear teaching that this was NEVER a gift for all Christians, but was only given to some.

Teaching that speaking in different languages, not known to the speaker, is beneficial to the person's personal relationship with God is in contradiction to what Paul says (and what the examples in Acts show) about the purpose of this gift. People like to use I Cor. 14:1-4, where it says that "anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God" and "he who speaks in a tongue edifies himself", to say that this is a good thing to do, since it builds us up. Hogwash! Read the context. What he is actually saying is that prophecy was a better gift, because it was good for edifying the whole church, whereas tongues-speaking, where there was no one who understood that language, was NO GOOD AT ALL EXCEPT to speak to God and to edify oneself alone (i.e. it was a selfish thing to do). In verse 5, he says that prophecy is a much better gift than tongue-speaking unless there is an interpreter so that others too can be edified. In verse 13, he urges those who speak in languages they do not know to pray that they might also receive the gift to understand and interpret those languages. So much for it being beneficial to your relationship with God if you can speak to Him in a language you don't understand!

I would say that I Cor. 14, read carefully and as a whole, far from favouring modern Pentecostalism and the way it deals with "tongues-speaking", is actually a scathing indictment of such practices.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

Bro. Lee,

Since part of your "conclusive" proof that miraculous gifts were ONLY ever imparted to Christians through the laying on of the hands of the APOSTLES (with Pentecost and the household of Cornelius being the only exceptions) is II Tim. 1:6, where Paul reminds Timothy of the "gift of God" that he, Paul, imparted to Timothy by the laying on of his hands, what do you make of I Tim. 4:14? -- "Do not neglect your GIFT, which was given you THROUGH A PROPHETIC MESSAGE when the BODY OF ELDERS laid their hands on you."

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

Brother Ben:

You have asked me an excellent and very reasonable question. I will quote your exact words with a response following:

Bro. Lee,

Since part of your "conclusive" proof that miraculous gifts were ONLY ever imparted to Christians through the lying on of the hands of the APOSTLES (with Pentecost and the household of Cornelius being the only exceptions) is II Tim. 1:6, where Paul reminds Timothy of the "gift of God" that he, Paul, imparted to Timothy by the laying on of his hands, what do you make of I Tim. 4:14? -- "Do not neglect your GIFT, which was given you THROUGH A PROPHETIC MESSAGE when the BODY OF ELDERS laid their hands on you."

It is true that I do believe that the evidence that I have presented from the word of God is conclusive that miraculous gifts were imparted only through the lying on of the apostles hands. Especially is this true since there is no evidence of it having been done any other way. With the exception of the apostles themselves on the day of Pentecost and the house of Cornelius which I have already explained to be an exception designed to indicate miraculously to the apostles that the gentiles had also been granted repentance unto life. (Acts 11:15-18). This was a part of the mission that had been given to the apostles and no one else had any part or lot in this matter. Being told clearly that it is through the laying on of the apostles hands that the Holy Spirit was given. (Acts 8:14-24; Acts 19:6).

You have asked me about this gift that Paul plainly states was given to Timothy through the Laying on of HIS HANDS. Wherefore I put the in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee BY THE PUTTING ON OF MY HANDS. For God has not given us the spirit of fear; but of POWER, and of LOVE, and of a sound mind.(2Tim.1: 6,7). This naturally brings to mind the statement made by Paul, which apparently is speaking of the same subject and the same gift in 1 Timothy 4:14. Which states, Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. If this is talking of the same gift and referring to the same occasion (and I believe that it is), it is obvious that Paul was present with the presbytery that laid hands upon Him when they did so. And he makes it clear in 2 Timothy 1:6 that it was the LAYING ON OF HIS hands that actually gave Timothy this gift.

This is not out of harmony with the joint action of the apostles and elders of the Church that happened in other places in the New Testament. For example, the joint decision made by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem in answering the question of circumcision and the wording of the announcement of that decision indicates their joint participation in sending that decision out by Barnabus and Paul. Notice what is said,  Then it seemed good to the apostles AND THE ELDERS, with the whole Church, to chose men out of their company, and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabus, namely, Judas called Barsabbas and Silas, chief men among the brethren: And they wrote thus by them, the apostles and the elders, unto the brethren who are of the gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greeting: Now this shows how the apostles and elders jointly participated in decisions and in sending men out to do certain things. It also demonstrates that this joint participation was not an indication of equal powers and authority. The elders did not have the same POWER as that of the apostles. It is not unreasonble to believe that the apostles, on such occassions, might impart spiritual gifts unto those being sent out by laying their hands upon them concurrently with the elders who laid hands upon these men to appoint them to certain task. And it is not unreasonable to think that this lying on of hands was also done by the elders when they appointed men to certain task and sent them out. But none would conclude from this joint action that the elders had the same poweres as the apostles to impart spiritual gifts because it was evident, as in the case of Phillip who was full of the Holy Spirit, that those men could not impart spiritual gifts to their converts. Therefore, even though they were involved in sending men out and making decisions with the apostles they did not have any part or lot in this matter of giving of the miraculous gifts which was done through the laying on of the apostles hands. (Acts 8:14-24; 19:6).

With this background in mind, one can see how that the apostle Paul could have been jointly working with these presbyters to appoint Timothy to a certain task and send him out on it. And that they all laid hands upon Timothy, including the apostle Paul, who clearly states in 2 Timothy that it was the laying on of HIS hands that imparted the gift unto him. The lying on of the hands of the presbytery, though concurrent with the apostle lying on his hands, did not impart any spiritual gift unto Timothy. Paul makes it clear that it was the laying on of HIS hands that the gift was imparted to Timothy. That this was also done on the same occasion that the presbytery laid hands upon him to appoint him to a certain task does not in the least negate the fact that it was only through the laying on of PAUL'S hands that the gift was imparted unto Timothy. If this is not the case Paul would have not been telling the truth when he said that this gift was given through the laying on of HIS hands. Especially, if he knew it was through the lying on of the hands of the presbytery and not through the Laying on of HIS hands. It could not have been both ways because the presbyters had neither part not lot in this matter. (Acts 8:14-24).

This would not have been a concern to the early Church who had already seen enough such cases to know that it was through the laying on of the apostles hands that the Holy Spirit was given. (Acts 8:14- 24; Acts 19:6).

Paul was there when the presbytery laid hands upon Timothy and he also laid his hands upon Timothy and imparted spiritual gifts. Thus it is true that it was done BY THE "LAYING ON OF THE APOSTLE'S HAND" concurrently with the occasion of the presbytery laying on their hands to appoint Timothy to a certain task and send him out on it.

I am at work, Brother Ben, and this is all that I have the time to write at the moment. I hope that it is sufficient to explain my reasoning and thinking upon your excellent question.

I pray that our Lord will abundantly bless you in your work in China among a people that I love dearly and pray for constantly.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

Danny;

It only takes one ;) I'm not sure if there are any others, but then again, there aren't too many that come right out and say "Jesus Christ is God" either. Not in so many words. Though there are some, it seems to be accepted as a "given" through inference, as the Holy Spirit is. Even Christ Himself didn't come right out and say "I am God" (with the possible exception of John 8:58), he mostly implied it. But there is enough evidence through inference and implication to make an iron-clad case that would stand up in a court of law, if need be. "Beyond a reasonable doubt," as they say.

And yes, Stone makes me very uncomfortable. He definitely did not have an orthodox view of the Godhead.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

Lee, let me tell you an analegy based on a true story. I gentlman in our churc had a conversation with a game warden who adamately denied the presence of a "long tail cat" or panther in our part of Missouri. The Game warden said that they no longer exist. He cited his graphs, charts and his rule books. The warden told the fellow, that all the evidence pointed to a conclusive proof that they no longer exist. Well, several weeks after the man in our congregation had the conversation with the warden, he decided to go dear hunting with a friend not so far from here (only ten miles away). The two men sat in a tree stand all night long in order to to spot a dear at the crack of dawn. Both men, heard something stirring in the woods but they never could get a good look at it. Both men dozed off in the wee hours of the morning, when they awoke, they heard a heavy breathing and growling sound from the tree limb behind them. As they turned around they saw, a panther- staring them face to face. The two men were so scared that they jumped down and ran to their truck. THey jumped in side and waited a while. THen the panther lazily walked up to their truck, and sat in the bed and then on the roof. After a few hours the panther strode off into the forest. Those men were scared, frightened and they knew beyond a shadow of doubt that the panthers (or at least one) were still in the area and probably never left. You can try to reason with these men concerning the long tail cat, and try to proof to then with all the evidence that you can muster, but reality is that they have experienced it to be real.

We are at an empass. Your "seemingly" biblical evidence proves not your point. It may lend you some evidence to your cause. But, there is a point that Lee, Danny, Scott and others have to make an assumption. If Paul said that the gifts died when the canon of the NT is finished or when the last of the Apostles die, then there is no argument- then they are no longer available. But, we do not have that. What you have are several scriptures that lend to some weight, but they in themselves are not conclusive concerning the matter. Thus what you have to go on is a theological ASSUMPTION! Lee, you in your mind think that you have given me all the evidence needed. But, what I want you to admit is that your conclusion is an assumption made from some biblical evidence. It is a theory, but it is not proof. It it were a matter of black and white then, I would totally agree with you. But, this area is not nor will it ever be black and white. This issue will only be resolved till the Lord comes back.

Lee, you have charged that I have not seen miracles such as presented in the NT. How do you know if I have or have not. For example, I have personally seen people who have been prayed for and have had hands laid upon them... healed of their sickness. I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Lee, you again make judgmental statments and assumptions that are not conclusive. In order to be conclusive you must weigh the evidence (all of the evidence) and then decide. You must 'test the spirits' and find out if they are real or not. But, that involves you (being objective) and talk with people who have first hand knowledge of these happenings.

All I have seen from some, is the assumption that the gifts ceased. Some may cite texts to try to prove their point, then make the assumption that 2x2=10. The data is incomplete and inconclusive. Those on the non gifts side must admit that they make such claims based on assumption. It is the same argument that I make above, when I made statments like the "movement is dead" which was an assumption on my part, whether right or wrong.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

on the other hand .... (to play devil's advocate)

I think that inferring the perfect must be the completed canon from the passage in 1st Corinthians, and inferring the Joel passage must refer to the destruction of Jerusalem ...

My point being, inferring a doctrine based on one sketchy verse (there are hundreds of rather clear verses concerning Jesus and the Holy Spirit) and then being so dogmatic about it that everyone who even dares to think otherwise is a "false prophet" is very dangerous ground IMHO.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

AKelley,

You are right, it is hard to argue with experience. But when experience of the type you are talking about is the main argument against either objective facts or what some feel to be plain Scriptural teaching, it not only stifles discussion but can be dangerous.

I have known of Chinese people who refused to accept Christ because they had been sick and they or some relative prayed or made offerings to some idol AND THEY WERE HEALED! Therefore the idol must some kind of reality and they also owe allegiance to the idol. I've known of several cases where a parent or grandparent dedicated a child to a particular idol if the idol would heal the child. The child was healed, so the child is considered dedicated to that idol. Even when the child is grown, the family feels the child cannot change religions. (I am not saying that your experience necessarily falls into quite this same category -- I am just pointing out the problem.)

When you and your friends "spoke in tongues", what were the languages they spoke? And what non-Christians heard them, understood, and were convinced to accept Christ because of what they heard?

If you did not speak in a known language, what you spoke was not the same as the "speaking in tongues" discussed in the Bible. It is a documented fact that in MANY non-Christian religions there is a kind of ecstatic babbling that takes place at the height of certain kinds of religious experience. Many think that this is what the "oracle at Delphi" did. What made the "speaking in tongues" described in the N.T. unique was that they spoke actual languages that could be understood by the non-Christians around who heard them. See Acts 2:5-13.

If you "spoke in tongues" and it was not witnessed by at least one non-Christian who understood and was convicted thereby, you were not using the gift for the purpose it was intended. See I Cor. 14:22-23.

On the other "side" of the question (perhaps playing "devil's advocate" like John), I'll take the word of those of you who say that all those mentioned in the book of Acts who received the gift of speaking in other languages received the gift through the laying on of the hands of the apostles. (I haven't had time to double-check this myself yet, but it seems to be true of all the examples I can remember off-hand.) However, what about the Corinthians? Who passed the gift on to them? The only apostle that we know was there was Paul. There might have been others, but, if so, we don't know about them. We can infer the possibility, but we don't know. It could easily have been Paul himself who passed the gift on to them, but he says nothing about having done so. In fact, he stresses that it is the Holy Spirit that distributes all Spiritual gifts to whomever he chooses (not whom the apostle might choose), I Cor. 12:11. At the end of ch. 12, he tells them to "earnestly desire the higher gifts". (He doesn't specify what they are, but prophecy seems to be implied, in view of what he says about prophecy being preferable to tongues-speaking, though another possibility might be AGAPI love, in view of the fact that he follows with the "love chapter.") The whole section concludes with admonitions to "earnestly desire to prophecy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues", I Cor. 14:39.

Speaking of prophecy, Paul describes it as a more important gift than tongues-speaking. Most view it as a miraculous gift. (There are some who interpret it to mean "preaching", but the evidence for this interpretation seems, to me, a little weak.) It was probably more necessary than tongues-speaking in the era when the N.T. had not yet been fully written. Where is there ANY hard evidence (as opposed to inference from parallelisms) that this gift was EVER given by the laying on of hands by the apostles or anyone else? Most likely it was bestowed that way at least part of the time, but is there enough evidence to PROVE that it was ONLY given that way?

I'm afraid that the arguments about Timothy's gift or gifts seem a little circular. Certainly, Timothy did receive one "gift" by the laying on of Paul's hands. And that MIGHT be the same gift that he is said to have received when the elders laid their hands on him. If so, Paul must have been there. Even if it was a different gift, Paul MIGHT have been there. But the assumption that it MUST have been so is based on the idea that no spiritual gift was ever given except by the laying on of hands of an apostle (and never mere non-apostolic elders), and one of the pieces of evidence for that idea is the fact that Paul, an apostle, says he bestowed a spiritual gift on Timothy when he laid his hands on him. It may all be true, but the evidence hardly seems strong enough for us to be as dogmatic about it as some are.

-- Anonymous, July 06, 2000

By the way, and in response to and agreement with Danny's comment, above --

Neither I Tim. 4:14 nor II Tim. 1:6 calls Timothy's "gift" a "miraculous gift" or a "spiritual gift" (though II Tim. 1:6 does call it a "gift of God", but God's gifts are manifold). The idea that it was a "spiritual gift" of some kind, and esp. a "miraculous spiritual gift" is an assumption. And I don't know of any evidence that Timothy ever exercised any miraculous powers. My point is that if you use II Tim. 1:6 as one item of proof that miraculous gifts were only given by the laying on of the hands of an apostle, you need to also take into consideration the parallel passage in I Tim. 4:14 and what it says AND DOES NOT SAY.

-- Anonymous, July 07, 2000

And just in case the other side of the question is not clear enough -- If it was NOT a "miraculous gift" or at least some kind of special "spiritual gift", then II Tim. 1:6 isn't even relevant to the question of whether or not the miraculous/"spiritual" gifts were ever bestowed by any means other than the laying on of an apostle's hands.

-- Anonymous, July 07, 2000

Brother Kelley:

Your last post has much in common with most of your post in this forum, especially in this thread. It is void of any scriptural references whatsoever. You begin with an analogy that is basically useless as to offering any proof that miracles such as those in the book of Acts continue today as you have asserted. Your so-called analogy was as follows:

Lee, let me tell you an analegy based on a true story. I gentlman in our churc had a conversation with a game warden who adamately denied the presence of a "long tail cat" or panther in our part of Missouri. The Game warden said that they no longer exist. He cited his graphs, charts and his rule books. The warden told the fellow, that all the evidence pointed to a conclusive proof that they no longer exist. Well, several weeks after the man in our congregation had the conversation with the warden, he decided to go dear hunting with a friend not so far from here (only ten miles away). The two men sat in a tree stand all night long in order to to spot a dear at the crack of dawn. Both men, heard something stirring in the woods but they never could get a good look at it. Both men dozed off in the wee hours of the morning, when they awoke, they heard a heavy breathing and growling sound from the tree limb behind them. As they turned around they saw, a panther- staring them face to face. The two men were so scared that they jumped down and ran to their truck. THey jumped in side and waited a while. THen the panther lazily walked up to their truck, and sat in the bed and then on the roof. After a few hours the panther strode off into the forest. Those men were scared, frightened and they knew beyond a shadow of doubt that the panthers (or at least one) were still in the area and probably never left. You can try to reason with these men concerning the long tail cat, and try to proof to then with all the evidence that you can muster, but reality is that they have experienced it to be real.

Now this does apply to this discussion in one way that I have mentioned before but you have ignored. This does show that this subject is not as much one of argumentation as it is one of demonstration. All you have to do, Brother Kelley, to end this discussion forever is ONE DEMONSTRATION. But you cannot demonstrate that these miracles exist today and therefore you do nothing but talk about it. Why not just show us the panther? That is the best way to end this discussion just as it resolved the issue for those men from your church that actually saw the panther. This way your analogy will fit perfectly! Show us the panther Brother Kelley. We can meet in any hospital in the country and you can bring this so- called miracle worker with you and we will simply help some of these good people that desperately need healing and at the same time see this panther of miraculous gifts for ourselves! Then, just to make sure there is no doubt left in anyones mind we can meet at the local grave yard and bless some fortunate family by raising someone form the dead since this is also a miracle that occurred in the New Testament, including the book of Acts. Then we would all have seen the panther for ourselves and this controversy would be over. No one doubted that the apostles did these very things because they were not done in a corner but were designed to be a demonstration of Gods presence with these men. SO what do you say Brother Kelley? Are you prepared to give us a demonstration and show us before our own eyes this panther of miraculous gifts. We cannot take your word for it. So we wait for you to show us this panther! Otherwise, Brother Kelley, your so-called analogy has no significance whatsoever for this discussion.

I believe that you are deliberately lying to us when you claim to have spoken miraculously in a language that you have never studied. But we are willing to see you demonstrate this power. So again I say to you that you are a deliberate liar when you make such a claim. If you can demonstrate that you have this power I will apologize for calling you a deliberate liar. But if you cannot demonstrate this power you are clearly lying and doing so deliberately and my accusation that you are a deliberate liar will stand and I will not apologize for calling you what you have demonstrated yourself to be.

Brethren, it is interesting to note just here that those who CLAIM that these miracles exist today only want to talk about it. They are not willing to demonstrate it. But the miraculous gifts of the New Testament were designed for the very purpose of demonstrating that God spoke through those who possessed these gifts, especially the gift of prophecy and tongues. So, we wait for the truth to come out. Paul proved that he was an apostle by demonstrating the signs of an apostle. Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, by signs and wonders, and MIGHTY WORKS. (2 Cor. 12:13). Paul DEMONSTRATED that he was an apostle by these miracles and used them to prove his apostleship. Brother Kelley claims these same powers without claiming to be inspired or that he is an apostle. He is simply claiming to have similar powers. So where is the demonstration of those powers? Brother Kelley is just like those men who pretended to be apostles of Christ though he does not claim to be an apostle but his procedure is the same. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, fashioning themselves into apostles of Christ. (2 Cor. 13). Brother Kelley is seeking to fashion himself into one who possesses the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit. But he refuses to answer any arguments to the contrary from the scriptures and is completely incapable of DEMONSTRATING that he has such powers. He wants us to believe it just because he says it is true. Notice that he has not shown one passage of scripture that indicates that we are to receive these gifts today. But there is no need for him to do that if he can demonstrate that he or anyone else in fact has these powers. He claims to have witnessed someone healing the sick. Then he should be able to have this person demonstrate those powers for us. The miraculous gifts of the New Testament were designed to be a demonstration and conclusive evidence that God was with the Christians that had those powers. It is interesting that all Brother Kelley wants to do is assert. He is not able to show from the scriptures that they exist today and would have no need to do so if he could demonstrate that he has these gifts or that someone else has them. I can assure all of you that Brother Kelley will make absolutely no attempt whatsoever to demonstrate that he or anyone else has these powers. I do not mean that he will not tell us lies about people that he has seen who had these powers. I mean that he will not make any attempt to arrange for any of us to see these powers for ourselves with our own eyes. So again I say to Brother Kelley, SHOW US THE PANTHER! I really like your analogy as you can see, for it show the only way to settle this issue. If Brother Kelley does not demonstrate these powers or find someone he knows has these powers to demonstrate them to us we will know that he is a deliberate liar making claims that he knows to be untrue.

Also notice that we have found the real reason that he wants us to allow him and others to manipulate our emotions in worship. He cannot actually demonstrate that the Holy Spirit is doing miraculous things through him or anyone else so he wants the right to excite the emotions of the unlearned and make them believe that their own emotions are the Holy Spirit moving and working in their lives. He wants to work them up as the Pentecostals do so that he can convince them that they have had some kind of supernatural experience and think that they have seen miracles by the hand of God. Brother Kelley has a lot in common with Simon in Acts 8. He likes magic tricks and wants to have the real power from God to do miraculous things but since God has denied those gifts to him he wants the next best thing. He wants the ability to delude his congregation into believing that they are experiencing the power of the Holy Spirit by manipulating their emotions and working them up into a frenzy of emotion in the worship. I say this to all of you because this thread demonstrates the real purpose behind those who want to direct the emotions of the church and just why they want to do it.

Then Brother Kelley simply ignores all of the arguments that have been made with the general accusation that we are making assumptions with these words:

We are at an empass. Your "seemingly" biblical evidence proves not your point. It may lend you some evidence to your cause. But, there is a point that Lee, Danny, Scott and others have to make an assumption. If Paul said that the gifts died when the canon of the NT is finished or when the last of the Apostles die, then there is no argument- then they are no longer available. But, we do not have that. What you have are several scriptures that lend to some weight, but they in themselves are not conclusive concerning the matter. Thus what you have to go on is a theological ASSUMPTION! Lee, you in your mind think that you have given me all the evidence needed. But, what I want you to admit is that your conclusion is an assumption made from some biblical evidence. It is a theory, but it is not proof. It it were a matter of black and white then, I would totally agree with you. But, this area is not nor will it ever be black and white. This issue will only be resolved till the Lord comes back.

Now here he thinks, we are at an impasse. No Brother Kelley, if you cannot demonstrate these powers exist today we are at a checkmate. For you have no where to go to prove that you or anyone else have these gifts. You complain about assumptions yet you are calling upon us to ASSUME that you or anyone else has these powers today when no one has ever demonstrated that they have them. You want us to just take your word for it and assume that you are right because you are a preacher and preachers do not lie. Well, preachers do lie and you are one of them because you claim to have the gift of tongues and cannot demonstrate that it is true. You claim to have seen miraculous healing but you cannot demonstrate that it is true. Where is the "panther" Brother Kelley? Show it to us. It was your analogy that suggested that a demonstration would convince us all so we wait for your demonstration! Ha! I am amazed at the pathetic lengths false teachers will go to tell their lies! And that they do so consciously and deliberately in the face of God himself with no fear of the fact that they will lose their souls for such. All liars shall have their part in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone. There shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. I do pray that God will turn these men from their evil ways.

Brethren, Notice the difference in the way in which those whom we know had miraculous powers spoke of that matter. Paul said, My speech and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in DEMONSTRATION OF THE SPIRIT and of POWER. That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men but in the POWER OF GOD. (1 Cor. 2:4). Here we see the difference between those, like the apostle Paul, who actually had miraculous gifts and those, like Brother Kelley, who merely claim in words that they have such gifts. Paul came speaking and preaching and establishing that God sent him by DEMONSTRATION of the Spirit and Power of God. So, If Brother Kelley had these miraculous gifts, he would not have to argue with us about the matter. He could preach as Paul did with DEMONSTRATION of the Spirit and Power of God. This would end this controversy if Brother Kelley would simply do as Paul did. Paul did not merely stand up and merely claim as Brother Kelley does to have miraculous powers from God. He demonstrated in such a way as to leave no doubt whatsoever among his hearers that God was working through him revealing His word. God worked with the early Christians confirming His word with signs following (Mark 16:17-20). So again we call upon Brother Kelley to show us the Panther! Do as Paul did. DEMONSTRATE the Spirit and power of God. We do wait for Brother Kelley to end this controversy BEFORE THE LORD COMES. But notice he tells us that this issue would not be resolved until the LORD COMES. Now why is that Brother Kelley? If you were to show us the panther by DEMONSTRATING you miraculous powers from God this issue could be resolved without waiting for the Lord to return. But the reason that we will have to wait for the Lord to return is because we will not see any miracles until Christ returns. That miracle is the only one that he has promised those of us who live after the death of the apostles and those upon whom the apostles laid their hands. No one else was given those powers as we have proven from the scriptures in the several posts that Brother Kelley wisely ignores.

Then you complain of my charges against you as follows:

Lee, you have charged that I have not seen miracles such as presented in the NT. How do you know if I have or have not. For example, I have personally seen people who have been prayed for and have had hands laid upon them... healed of their sickness. I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Lee, you again make judgmental statments and assumptions that are not conclusive. In order to be conclusive you must weigh the evidence (all of the evidence) and then decide. You must 'test the spirits' and find out if they are real or not. But, that involves you (being objective) and talk with people who have first hand knowledge of these happenings.

You ask how do I know if you have or have not seen such miracles. First, I know that Gods word teaches that they have ceased and therefore you cannot see what God is no longer doing. Second, it is a good question that you ask. If you were one who was a genuine possessor of miraculous powers such as tongue speaking you would not have to ask such a question. It would be all too easy for you to demonstrate to all of us that God is with you in this special way. But the simple fact that you ask this question is proof that you do not have miraculous powers and that you have never seen such things happen. I do not believe that you are merely self deceived. I believe that you are a deliberate and habitual liar. And I will continue to believe that until you prove by demonstration that you speak in languages that you have never studied. And that you bring this person whom you claimed to have healed the sick out to demonstrate that he has these gifts and power from God. Claiming to be doing miracles is very different from those who demonstrate such powers to us by simply doing them. Where is this proof. You claim it but you cannot demonstrate it. Why? The reason you cannot demonstrate these powers is simply because you do not have them. You are therefore lying and the fact that this is something that you cannot avoid being cognizant of is proof that you are a deliberate liar.

Yes I have made the charge that you have not seen miracles such as those presented in the New Testament and I repeat the charge now. You have not seen any such thing and you will not see such things because the word of God has clearly shown that those powers were given through the lying on of the apostles hands (Acts 8: 14-24; Acts 19:1-6; Romans 1:11; 2 Tim. 1:6;). And the word of God shows us when they would cease to exist. (Joel 2:28-31; Daniel 9; 1 Cor 13:8-11; Eph. 4:11-17, 30.). But you could show that I have completely misunderstood these passages with one simple demonstration of your powers or the powers of anyone else. I have not heard of anyone being rqaised from the day these days. I know that you have never seen any such thing and neither has any one else. But you claim these things are happening today. How ridiculous can one be to make such an outlandish claim without being prepared to PROVE that such claims are true? Your only so-called miracle that you have personally experienced is that you survived a car accident! Ha! Now that only proves that you do not know what a miracle really is. Compare such a thing with the raising of Lazarus to life after he had been dead for four days. There is no comparison. So again I say, SHOW US THE PANTHER, Brother Kelley.

You say:

You must 'test the spirits' and find out if they are real or not. But, that involves you (being objective) and talk with people who have first hand knowledge of these happenings.

Now this is exactly what I am doing in this thread Brother Kelley. I am testing the Spirits. I do this because the scriptures says, Beloved believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God because many false prophets have gone out into the world. (1 John 4:1). The only means we have of testing these spirits today is to make them prove their claims and comparing their teaching with the doctrine of Christ our Lord found in the pages of the New Testament. But you tell us to test these spirits by being objective and talking to people who have experience in these things Ha! Their so-called EXPERIENCE is the matter under question Brother Kelley! That is like telling the sheep to talk with the wolf concerning what is good for the sheep because he has experience in sneaking up on them. Ha! WE doubt that they have such experiences, Brother Kelley. If I found some one whom I believed to have actually had these experiences I would most likely have already given up my position now wouldnt I? Because my contention is that no one is having these experiences? No, we are not going to yield to these liars one single point until they DEMONSTRATE that they have these powers. Then we would know that they have such experience and could learn from them. But so long as they do nothing more than claim to have these powers and claim that they have seen these experiences they cannot be trusted. The word of God is our source of information on these things and it teaches that these powers were given only by the lying on of the apostles hands. Therefore we doubt your false claims and demand that you demonstrate that you have these powers. So again we wait for you to show us the panther! You will not demonstrate any such powers because you do not have them. You will not find anyone else who will demonstrate such powers to us for they do not have them. But we are open to any that want to demonstrate these gifts for us to see and examine in the light of Gods word.

Then Brother Kelley again mentions assumptions without specifying any particular assumption that we have made so that we can examine it and see if it is in fact a real assumption as follows:

All I have seen from some, is the assumption that the gifts ceased. Some may cite texts to try to prove their point, then make the assumption that 2x2=10. The data is incomplete and inconclusive. Those on the non gifts side must admit that they make such claims based on assumption. It is the same argument that I make above, when I made statements like the "movement is dead" which was an assumption on my part, whether right or wrong.

Brother Kelley we have cited text from the scriptures that we are fully convinced proves our point that Miraculous gifts ceased. But you have ignored all of them without dealing specifically with any of the arguments that we have made from them. Face our arguments, Brother Kelley. Take them one by one and answer them and we will reply. I want all of you to notice that you have not touched upon them in the least and all you do is claim that we have made nothing but assumptions. You do not even attempt to prove your assertion that we have assumed anything. All you do is assert it. It is your hope that you can ignore the arguments until all have forgotten what they were and then you merely assert that they are full of assumptions. You show from this that you do not know the difference between an assumption and a NECESSARY inference. In the case of the Gifts being given through the lying on of the apostles hands it is clearly stated that such was how they were given in Acts 8:14-24; 19:6). There is no assumption about it. We are told that Simon saw that, through the laying on of the apostles hands the Holy Spirit was given. (Acts 8:18). That is no assumption it is a clearly stated fact. In Acts the 19th Chapter we do not assume that this gift of speaking in tongues was given through the Laying on of the apostles hand. It is plainly stated.

You tell us that we must admit that we make claims based upon assumption. No, Brother Kelley, we do not have to admit any such thing until it is proven to be the truth. You have ignored all of our arguments and therefore have not PROVEN that we make such claims based on assumption. It is your responsibility to PROVE that such is the case before we can be expected to have any reason to admit it.

But, speaking of claims based upon assumption. You have made claims that are based upon pure lies. You claim to have miraculously spoken in tongues. This is a deliberate lie and you know it and so does God. You do not prove that you have done such a thing you merely expect us to assume that you are telling the truth. Now for someone that does not want us to believe something based upon assumption this is strange indeed that you would expect us to assume that you have spoken in tongues just because you make that outlandish claim. Prove it Brother Kelley! All you need do is demonstrate your power. Show us the panther! You are a deliberate liar in this matter. Those claiming to heal others could have deceived you but this claim that you have spoken in tongues is a deliberate Lie. In fact it is what we call here in the south a flat footed lie. Now I do not care if any of you do not appreciate my calling anyone a liar. So cry about it all you want. Until Brother Kelley demonstrates that he does in fact speak in a language that he has never studied I will perceive of him as a deliberate liar. Most false teachers are deliberate liars. SO either show us the panther Brother Kelley or continue to lie hoping that the weak and frail among us can be deceived into believing your lies. I am appalled by such deliberate lies among those who claim to serve Christ our Lord!

But, I will end this post by saying that we will not just assume that you have the powers that you claim to have nor will we assume that you have seen miracles as you have falsely claimed to have seen. We will accept a demonstration of such power as evidence that you are telling the truth. Otherwise, you are a liar just like all of the others who make such claims without demonstrating that they are true. I appreciate your analogy for it did remind me that this issue is not only a matter for argumentation but it is an issue that could easily be resolved by a clear demonstration. Show we wait for you to show us the panther Brother Kelley. If you cannot do that then you are a liar. That is pure and simple and you should be ashamed of yourself for fabricating such deliberate lies.

Our God will judge you for those lies, Brother Kelley. I urge you to repent before you face God in the judgment.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 07, 2000

Some people (more than one) in this forum seem, to me, awfully quick to call others liars. I wonder what they mean by that. In normal usage (check most dictionaries), the primary or first definitions of "lie", "liar", etc., carry the connotation of DELIBERATE deception.

I really doubt that when AKelley and his friends "spoke in tongues" they really had the spiritual gift that goes by that description in the New Testament. Even if we lay aside, for the moment, the question of whether or not such gifts exist at all today, the "real" gift was the gift of speaking in real languages which could be understood by real people, including (especially!) non-Christians and not merely those with a special "gift of interpretation".

If AKelley would like us to believe that he and his compatriots really have the Biblical gift, they need to not only demonstrate that they can babble strange sounds (pagans can do that!), but they need to also provide someone who can identify the language(s). I agree with Lee's challenge on this. Show us the panther! But show us the whole beast, tail and all, and not just the shadow in the bushes.

On the other hand, even if he/they cannot prove that they really have the Biblical gift of languages, I have no doubt that they themselves TRULY BELIEVE that this is what they have and that their strange sounds really are the "tongues" that the Bible speaks of. That would mean that when they say it, they are not guilty of DELIBERATE DECEPTION, which, to me, means that they are not actually liars -- only misled and in error.

-- Anonymous, July 07, 2000

Amen, Benjamin.

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

From the Miracles vs. Providence thread:

I repost this from earlier on in this thread (forgot to note the date and don't want to scroll up again)): Concerning the gifts: the most excellent gift is the gift of prophecy, and I don't mean fortune-telling.

Prophecy, as you know, is the bearing of a message from God, whether about the past, present or future.

Just following that passage in I Corinthians 13, we come to I Corinthians 14: 1-5: [AMPLIFIED]

1. Eagerly pursue and seek to acquire this love -- make it your aim, your great spiritual quest; and earnestly desire and cultivate the spiritual endowments, ~ [NAV]: 'GIFTS'~ especially that you may prophesy -- that is, interpret the Divine will and purpose in inspired preaching and teaching.

2. For one who speaks in an [unknown] tongue speaks not to men but to God, for no one understands or catches his meaning , because the (Holy)Spirit utters secret truths and hidden things [not obvious to the understanding.]

{Connie's interpretation: This is not the same 'Speaking in Tongues' as at Pentecost where everyone heard in his/her own language. Those were different existing languages, each hearing in his/her own. My son and his wife are Charismatics and would not like the appellation 'charismaniacs; we are not, but these gifts are for the end times. [IMHO] Once when I was invited to a shower at their church ~ New Covenant Christian ~ I allowed them to pray for me, because I was having some trying times. (If they're not against us, they are FOR us ~ right?} Anyway, they call that kind of 'tongues' a spiritual 'prayer' language meant only for God's ears unless there is an interpreter. And that is what these verses here say. Let me say, also, that it was a very beautiful sound with a lyrical beauty. I had never heard it before, or since.

I was concerned when they were getting involved with this, but my son said: "Mom,~ it's a gift of God, not a ton of bricks!" I am waiting to hear more from God on this subject, but no dead gospel is going to convince me that it isn't for our time. (I don't use the term 'dispensation' ~ although I have.)

The verses right after the place where the tongues of fire are alighting on the heads of the believers, with the reference to Joel 8 (I think) I include the end times to mean up to the time of Christ's return.} [IMHO]

Can anyone explain the meaning of these verses in light of your understanding on the gifts, especially 'speaking in tongues' or don't you recognize that form of worship ~ and if not, why not? (By the way, we don't have the practice in our church, either.)

Wanting to know as much as I can about what my Lord has in store for us ~ the ones who believe in Him, I am:

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), March 31, 2000.

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

A little further on in the same thread:

In that portion you referred to, that was a direct quote from the Scripture. I will copy it here:

Just following that passage in I Corinthians 13, we come to I Corinthians 14: 1-5: [AMPLIFIED]

1. Eagerly pursue and seek to acquire this love -- make it your aim, your great spiritual quest; and earnestly desire and cultivate the spiritual endowments, ~ [NAV]: 'GIFTS'~ especially that you may prophesy -- that is, interpret the Divine will and purpose in inspired preaching and teaching.

2. For one who speaks in an [unknown] tongue speaks not to men but to God, for no one understands or catches his meaning , because the (Holy) Spirit utters secret truths and hidden things [not obvious to the understanding.]

Verse two says this is an unknown tongue not to men, but to God.

The verses in Acts 2:4-8, say:

4: And they were all filled --diffused throughout their souls -- with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other (different, foreign) languages, as the Spirit kept giving them clear and loud expression (in each tongue in appropriate words).

5: Now there were then residing in Jeruslem Jews, devout and God- fearing men from every country under Heaven.

6: And when this sound was heard, the multitude came together and they were astonished and bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in his own (particular) dialect.

7: And they were beside themselves with amazement, saying: "Are not all these who are talking Galileans?

8: Then how is it that we hear, each of us in our own (particular) dialect to which we were born?

In the first instance, it was a language only for God's ears ( a prayer language) and in the second it is a language which each person heard in his/her own language.

The first language (in the order shown above, not in the order it happened [I've forgotten that]) is for the end times, and the second was a miracle for Pentecost. Now, keep in mind that my church is not Charismatic, but for people to ignore what is the clear happening of Scripture is unusual to me.

There was a 'speaking in tongues' via a prayer language to God alone ~ I Corinthians 14:1-5 and a 'speaking in tongues' in foreign KNOWN languages ~ a miracle which is not repeated in our time. (Acts 2:4-8)

Also, the opening verse of I Corinthians 13 starts out: 'If I [can] speak in the TONGUES of MEN AND EVEN OF ANGELS ...' {Plural ~ two different forms of 'tongues'}.

My printer is having a nervous breakdown, and I haven't read the entire thread, so I'll get back after I've read the remainder.

Also, of course, this one was addressed to the Corinthians ~ a church being given church doctrine by none other than the Apostle Paul.

In Him,

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), March 31, 2000.

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

On this whole "prove it or be called a liar" idea - -

I do believe that the miraculous sign gifts have gone, long ago. However, Lee, and whoever else asks for proof, it seems to me to be kinda stupid to, in this forum, demand proof of something that happens or happened to someone. How exactly would one go about proving it to your satisfaction, short of being in your presence when it happens?

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

Brother Ben:

I agree with you Brother Ben that we should see this panther the whole of him, tail and all as you say. This is an issue that could be easily resolved by demonstration. But those who believe that they possess these miraculous gifts only want to resort to argumentation and shrink from any real attempt at demonstration. It is interesting that there were no arguments in the New Testament about the reality of the miracles that happened among them. Arguments were useless because the demonstration of those powers was so strong and compelling and so open for all to see with their own eyes that no intelligent person could argue against them. Those miracles are one of the reasons that we know that the scriptures came from God. These false pretentious claims of men to be doing miracles today as they did in New Testament times weakens the case made by the miracles of New Testament times. They deceive people into believing that the Miracles in the New Testament were as much a farce as those fake miracles and delusions of our day.

I also know what you mean by the following statement:

On the other hand, even if he/they cannot prove that they really have the Biblical gift of languages, I have no doubt that they themselves TRULY BELIEVE that this is what they have and that their strange sounds really are the "tongues" that the Bible speaks of. That would mean that when they say it, they are not guilty of DELIBERATE DECEPTION, which, to me, means that they are not actually liars -- only misled and in error.

I agree with you that many who believe that they speak with tongues are honest people who have been misled by deliberate deceivers and are in error. I have been able to convince several in Alabama that they were deceived and they no longer believe that they actually spoke in tongues as those in the New Testament did. When their experiences were compared with those of the New Testament it was easy for them to see that they were not alike in any way whatsoever. So once they were able to stop examining the scriptures in the light of their experience and began examining their experience in the light of the Word of God they were able to correct this egregious error.

But this does not negate the fact that they were being deceived by deliberate liars who were constantly manipulating their emotions and using intensely emotional worship services to make them feel that they had experienced something from the Holy Spirit. These men, we put to the test and they tried to avoid it but we would not allow it and they tried every trick they could devise to prevent our reaching these precious souls with the truth. In the process, which took several months, they proved themselves to be deliberate liars. I have accused Brother Kelley of being one of those deliberate liars because he has the same marks of the same beast that I have fought before. I know and respect the fact that you and others would not go so far as to accuse him of being a deliberate liar. But I believe that he is and will continue to believe it and will continue to accuse him of it so long as he continues to lie. You may be more kind in your approach to these things and I do believe that you are never wrong to be kind. But for me there is times to distinguish deliberate liars from those poor souls that they deviously deceive and lead away from the truth. These men are destroying the souls of good people with their lies. If one says something that is so blatantly false I will call him a deliberate liar until he proves either that he is speaking the truth or that he honestly made an error. In which case I would apologize for saying that he deliberately lied. For you see, you are willing to assume that he is sincere and thereby give him a measure of credibility, which he will use to propagate his lies. I am not willing to do that. I will give such a one no credibility whatsoever and if he proves to be an honest and sincere but misled individual I will apologize to him. But Brother Kelley is not being led he is attempting to lead others into this false doctrine. I have several reasons to think him a deliberate liar and none to make me think he is a sincere honestly misled individual.

Your approach is probably more comfortable to you and everyone else in the forum. But I do not care to be comfortable myself nor do I have any desire to make anyone in this forum feel comfortable when a false teacher, deliberately or otherwise, is threatening the souls of sincere human beings with LIES. It is possible for a lie to be told without it being done so deliberately. But the damage caused by that LIE will be severe and the sincerity of the liar has no effect upon the terrible results. If an honest man is accused of deliberate deception and all he need do is demonstrate the truthfulness of his words he will be happy to do so and once he is proven to be truthful those who accused him of deliberate deception own him an apology. But a dishonest man will run from and avoid any effort to scrutinize his false claims and will avoid all attempts to demonstrate the truthfulness of them. In such a case he will have shown that he was in fact a deliberate liar. We will wait to see which one brother Kelley turns out to be. But I am fully convinced that Brother Kelley is a deliberate liar in this matter and I will continue to think so until he PROVES otherwise.

I do however regret that such a position is uncomfortable to you and others in the forum. But that is how I see it and I will not be swayed by my regret that it makes you and others feel a little uneasy. And I will tell you that you and I have already had a lengthy discussion about our approach to these things. I will not repeat that discussion. I respect highly the way you do things but I cannot and will not do them the same way. I will make these false teachers angry and you can comfort them but I will not change my course in this matter. You believe that Brother Kelley is honest but deceived. I believe he is dishonest and is the deceiver. That is the way it stands and there is no need to expect it to change. I agree with you and do not doubt that many sincerely BELIEVE that they speak in tongues. But I can and do doubt that ALL that make these claims sincerely BELIEVE that they speak in tongues. Some know that they are not really speaking in tongues and deliberately take advantage of those who are easily lead by emotional manipulation and deliberately deceive them. I have seen it enough to know that such is the case. We are even told by the scriptures, Try the spirits whether they are of God because MANY false prophets have gone out into the world (1 John 4:1). So many deliberate false teachers have gone out into the world and I believe that Brother Kelley is one of them. In order for anyone to be misled they must have someone to mislead them. Those who do the misleading are deliberately doing so. I believe that Brother Kelley is in that category. He is one of the deceivers. He is not one of the deceived.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

Brother Sam:

You have said:

On this whole "prove it or be called a liar" idea - -

I do believe that the miraculous sign gifts have gone, long ago. However, Lee, and whoever else asks for proof, it seems to me to be kinda stupid to, in this forum, demand proof of something that happens or happened to someone. How exactly would one go about proving it to your satisfaction, short of being in your presence when it happens?

The scriptures say:

Prove ALL things and hold fast to that which is good.

Beloved, believe not every Spirit, but TRY the spirits whether they are of God for many false prophets have gone out into the world. (1 John 4:1).

Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ HATH NOT GOD: He that abideth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son. If anyone come to you and bring not this doctrine, RECEIVE HIM NOT into your house neither BID HIM GODSPEED: For he that biddeth him Godspeed is a partaker of his evil deeds. (2 John 9-11).

And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved Brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote epistles, speaking in them of these things; wherein are some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and unsteadfast wrest, as they do the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, KNOWING THESE THINGS BEFOREHAND, beware lest, being CARRIED AWAY WITH THE ERROR OF THE WICKED, ye fall from your own steadfastness. (2 Peter 3: 15-17).

Brother Sam:

These were my exact words concerning this matter:

We can meet in any hospital in the country and you can bring this so- called miracle worker with you and we will simply help some of these good people that desperately need healing and at the same time see this panther of miraculous gifts for ourselves! Then, just to make sure there is no doubt left in anyones mind we can meet at the local grave yard and bless some fortunate family by raising someone form the dead since this is also a miracle that occurred in the New Testament, including the book of Acts. Then we would all have seen the panther for ourselves and this controversy would be over. No one doubted that the apostles did these very things because they were not done in a corner but were designed to be a demonstration of Gods presence with these men. SO what do you say Brother Kelley? Are you prepared to give us a demonstration and show us before our own eyes this panther of miraculous gifts. We cannot take your word for it. So we wait for you to show us this panther! Otherwise, Brother Kelley, your so-called analogy has no significance whatsoever for this discussion.

Now Brother Sam, I have not asked Brother Kelley to show proof of what happens or happened to him. I have asked him, in harmony with his own analogy that he offered us, to show us the panther. He claims to possess the miraculous gift of tongues and that he has witnessed the miraculous healing of others. This means that he should be able to demonstrate these powers and that he knows someone who should be able to also demonstrate these powers to us. If you will read my post again you will notice that I offered to meet him in any hospital in the country and he can bring his known miracle worker to that hospital and we will see a demonstration of such power. I also offered to meet him in a graveyard so that we can see a demonstration of the raising of the dead that we read about several times in the New Testament.

Now he brought up this idea that we cannot say that these powers do not exist because the panther just might surprise us one day. I responded appropriately saying that he claims to be the panther because he claims to have these gifts and that he claims to know other panthers so he should be able to demonstrate those powers for us. I did not say for him to demonstrate anything that happens or happened to him. So, you have misread my post in that matter. It is possible, for one with genuine miraculous powers from God to demonstrate them to us in this forum. I have even seen them pretend to do so through the television for years.

So what I asked of Brother Kelley is not STUPID as you claim. If I had asked what you thought I had asked it would have been stupid. But I made no such request. I demand a demonstration of the powers that he claims to possess and the powers of those whom he claims to possess miraculous power to heal. I made a specific suggestion as to how such could be done. I suggest that you go back and read the post again and see if you can find the words happens of happened to you in that post. Those are your words not mine. I clearly used the word demonstration over and over again. If you are going to be critical of what I say at least try to get the facts straight.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

From above:

As in everything you have ever posted Connie.....I ask...."What's your point??"

-- Danny Gabbard, Sr. (PYBuck12pt@cs.com), July 08, 2000.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Thank you, Danny.

I am praying for you, your family, and your congregation.

Clothed in Christ,

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

As I read the Bible, belief that the Spiritual gifts ceased or continued in no way affects a person's salvation. What ever happened to "in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, love"? Or have we abandoned the principles of unity which the Restoration movement was founded upon?

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

Brother John:

You have said:

As I read the Bible, belief that the Spiritual gifts ceased or continued in no way affects a person's salvation. What ever happened to "in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, love"? Or have we abandoned the principles of unity which the Restoration movement was founded upon?

Now, just how you read from your Bible that belief that spiritual gifts ceased or continued in no way effects a persons salvation I cannot tell. Just what portion of the Bible teaches that what we believe about these things cannot effect a persons salvation? This is your conclusion based upon your inability to see just how this doctrine can affect a persons salvation.

The scriptures teach us:

Put away lying Ephesians 4:25

I hate EVERY FALSE WAY Ps. 119:104

The Lord hateth a liar and a false witness.  These six things doeth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an ABOMINATION unto Him: A proud look, A LYING TONGUE, and hands that shed innocent blood, an heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that SOWETH DISCORD AMONG BRETHREN. Proverbs 6:17

Ps. let the lying lips be put to silence Ps. 31:18

Trust not in lying words Jer. 7:4

And then shall that wicked be revealed whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and LYING WONDERS.  And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that PERISH; because they received not the love of the truth that they might be SAVED. And for this cause God shall send them a STRONG DELUSION that they might BELIEVE A LIE: That they all might be DAMNED who believed not the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thess. 2:8-12).

There is no doubt that these lying wonders are going to affect the salvation of those who believe them. These lies are used to draw people away from the truth unto fables.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lust shall they heap unto themselves teachers having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall be turned unto fables (2 Tim. 4:3,4).

It seems, over the last few months, that every time a discussion in this forum reaches a certain point, especially when it is very demanding, someone always pops in with this ridiculous comment that such and such an issue does not affect a persons salvation. It seems as though many in this forum think that they can know that it is ok to believe any lie so long as it does not affect our salvation. Beware Brethren. A lie can cost you your soul. It would be interesting to see some of those who make this absurd comment to give us a list of subjects wherein it is perfectly all right for us to believe a lie. If Gods word has spoken on a subject it is not a nonessential. And the restoration movement was not established upon our treating any matter found in the word of God as a non- essential. The correct statement often used in the restoration movement was. In matters of faith, unity. In matters of opinion liberty, in all things Charity. But remember, this matter of opinion is related to matters, which God has not spoken about. No opinion of man is equal to the word of God. This issue fits into the category of matters of faith for it is a matter that God has spoken upon. In this matter we must have unity. And anything that God has revealed to us in his word pertains to life and Godliness (1 Peter 1:3). SO enough of this constantly telling us Oh, well this does not really matter anyway because it does not affect our salvation. Then if these matters do not affect our salvation let us restrict our discussion to only things that do affect our salvation. But then we would have a BIG problem to make a list of things that matter to God and things that do not matter to God. For the only way we can know that is through what he has told us in his word. So we would have to have a discussion concerning what matters to God and what does not matter to him and I can assure you that somewhere in the very middle of that discussion some person would "pop in" with the comment "whether we know what matters to God or not does not affect our salvation". Ha! If God has spoken it ALWAYS matters and our response to what he has spoken will surely affect our salvation. He that rejecteth me and receiveth not my words hath one that judgeth him. The words which I have spoke shall judge him in the last day (John 12:48). God who at sundry times and in divers manners spake unto the fathers by the prophets hath in these last days spoken unto us BY HIS SON. (Heb. 1:1) For Moses truly said, a prophet shall the Lord our God raise up unto you of your own brethren, like unto me; Him ye shall hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass that every soul that shall not hear that prophet, shall be DESTROYED from among the people. (Acts 3; 22,23).

So let us hear what God has to say on any subject with the understanding that we cannot neglect these things without affecting our salvation. How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation; which at first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was CONFIRMED unto us by them that heard him; God ALSO BEARING them WITNESS both with SIGNS AND WONDERS AND WITH DIVERS MIRACLES, and GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ACCORDING TO HIS OWN WILL: These gifts of the Holy spirit were given according to Gods own will. It was his will to give them through the lying on of the apostles hands (Acts 8:14-24;Acts19: 6; Romans 1:11; 2 Tim. 1:6) and it was according to his will that they should cease to be given when the prophecy of Joel was completely fulfilled and when the apostles died and those upon whom they laid their hands died. (Joel 2:28-30; Acts 2:14; Eph. 4:11-17, 30; 1 Cor. 13:8-13). These are the things that God has to say about this subject and we cannot ignore these things as if his words are non-essentials that have nothing to do with our salvation. The truth has everything to do with our salvation. Sanctify them through thy truth, thy word is truth. We are saved by grace trough faith. For by grace are ye saved through faith (Ephesians 2:8,9). Yet, faith comes from the teaching of the word of God. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. (Romans 10:17). SO when God has spoken upon a subject our faith depends upon what he has said about it and our salvation depends upon what we believe. Believing a lie will cause one to be damned. (2 Thess. 2:8-12). Now, we may disagree about something God has said because either some or all of us misunderstand it but to claim that it is not essential to our salvation to study Gods word and understand his will in matters upon which he has spoken is completely false! SO enough of this nonsense that this subject or any subject upon which our Lord has spoken is not essential to our salvation!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

So, then, let us rewrite the old saying.

"In essentials, unity (or else!); In non-essentials (wait a minute ... there is no such thing ... never mind); In all things, judgement."

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

Lee,

Your experience on the matter seems to have been different from mine. I do know that some of those who claim to be "miracle workers" and "healers" have been caught perpetrating deliberate fraud. But in my own experience, I have never yet met anyone who claimed/claims to "speak in tongues" (including -- perhaps especially -- those who were teaching about it) who did not honestly believe that what he/she was doing was exercising the gift described in the Bible, and that what he/she was teaching was the same. Since that has been my experience, I tend to assume this is the case with any "tongues-speaker" unless I see conclusive evidence to the contrary. I haven't seen such evidence yet with Bro. Kelley. I think he is mistaken, but sincerely mistaken.

Connie,

Do you remember what the square brackets mean in the Amplified? It shows explanation by the translators of things they felt were not clear enough in the original -- because what is said within the square brackets is not in the original! The word "unknown" in I Cor. 14:2 (etc.) is NOT in the original Greek. (It is also inserted in the KJV, or at least some editions of the KJV, but it is usually in italics, which denotes the same thing as the square brackets in the Amplified -- that the word/words was/were inserted by the translators or editors and were not in the original.)

Certainly the context shows that he is talking about using particular languages that were unknown TO THE HEARERS. But inserting the word "unknown" with the word "tongue" leaves the impression of a language that is unknown to any human being, whereas Paul's clear meaning is simply of a language unknown to the hearers. If someone spoke to me in French, s/he would be speaking to me in a "tongue" unknown to me, but not an "unknown tongue", since millions of people do understand it.

Could you (and AKelley and anyone else who thinks these passages are speaking of anything other than known languages) try an experiment? TRY to put out of your mind any idea that the tongues referred to in Acts 2 and I Cor. 12 to 14 were anything other than known languages, and re-read these passages with the "known languages" meaning in mind. It may take several times of re-reading, and you may need to think of specific languages (German, French, Chinese, Korean, Tagalog, etc.), both known and unknown to the people around, but I think you will eventually see that it will all make sense. In fact, I think it makes much more sense reading it this way than any other way.

In the past -- perhaps because of the inserted words in some translations, perhaps because I went to college at the height of one wave of "charismatic renewal" when many (incl. Pat Boone) were claiming to "speak in tongues" -- I used to read it with the idea that MAYBE some people were given the gift to speak tongues that really were unknown on earth. Reading it that way, there were bits that didn't quite make sense, e.g. the apparent contradiction in I Cor. 14:22-23. But after I completely put that idea out of my mind and re-read it with the idea in mind that these could only be known human languages, then it made more sense, and makes more sense each time I re-read it.

Working in churches where several different languages are spoken and not everyone understands everyone else's language has helped promote this insight. For example, we sometimes have misunderstandings because of people speaking in front of others in languages some of the hearers don't understand.

As for "the tongues of angels" in I Cor. 13:1, I think Paul is indulging in a bit of intentional hyperbole. Have you ever known anyone who could "fathom ALL mysteries"? Have you ever known -- or ever heard of -- someone actually able to "move mountains" by his/her faith? Paul is saying EVEN IF it were possible for him to do any or all of these things -- understand ALL mysteries, move mountains by his faith, speak in every human languages, AND EVEN speak in the languages of angels -- it would all be useless without AGAPI love. It does not necessarily mean that any human ever has spoken in the languages of angels, any more than the other clauses necessarily mean that some human being actually has fathomed all mysteries and/or moved mountains by faith.

Every other reference to "tongues" in I Cor. 12-14 works just as well if you insert the name of some actual language that you do not know, and think of someone speaking that language coming into a congregation where no one else understands it. It even works with the passages that speak of using the gift to address God. I doubt if we have any Urdu speakers in this forum (it is the language of Pakistan), so let's use the example of Urdu in I Cor. 14:2-5, with just a little "explanation" (in square brackets) to illustrate how I think it fits, in the context. I'm using the NIV as the "base" for this.

"For anyone who speaks in Urdu [when others around do not understand] does not speak to men but [only] to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit. But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. He who speaks in Urdu edifies [only] himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. I would like every one of you to speak in Urdu [or some other language you have never studied -- personal note from Benjamin: I really wish I had this gift in the polyglot congregation I serve], but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in Urdu [or other languages he has never studied], unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified."

I'm sure your son's experience and his wife's is real to them, as I'm sure AKelley's is real to him, and I'm sure they all believe that it really is a gift from God. But I doubt, for a number of reasons, that it is the "real" gift that the Bible talks about. I've had some friends suggest that it is from Satan, to mislead the church. I doubt if that is the case with these or with most "tongues-speakers" that I have known myself, so I think it is most likely some kind of psychological/emotional phenomenon, brought on by the power of suggestion and desire for the gift. Whether it is harmful or not (or possibly even helpful -- though I'm sure some will deny that it could possibly be helpful) depends on the "fruits" in the lives of those who practice it and in the churches they are a part of.

(Parenthetically, I think there is a chance that the so-called "Toronto Blessing" might be from Satan, since I have heard that some of the key leaders fail the test John gives in I John 2:18-25, but this is not true of the "tongues-speakers" I have known personally.)

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

Lee, you are way out of line here. You are declaring that you have the perfect and complete understanding of this topic, and that if anyone disagrees with the way you understand it, then they are liars and bound for hell. You didn't use those words, but the message comes through loud and clear.

You are not allowing for any understanding or interpetation that disagrees with yours. The thing that's really disturbing, however, touches on the upcoming music debate. You declare above that "For the only way we can know that is through what he has told us in his word. So we would have to have a discussion concerning what matters to God and what does not matter to him and I can assure you that somewhere in the very middle of that discussion some person would "pop in" with the comment "whether we know what matters to God or not does not affect our salvation". Ha! If God has spoken it ALWAYS matters and our response to what he has spoken will surely affect our salvation."

Now, follow me here. You have declared elsewhere, and it is clear from your preliminary arguments, that you believe that God has declared specifically what musical worship is and isn't. I'm not here to argue that in this thread.

BUT, put these things together - - - you make it clear here that where God has spoken, on any matter, salvation is involved, and the one who disagrees with you on the matter of miraculous gifts therefore disagrees with God, and is therefore a liar and stands condemned. And you make it clear elsewhere that the music in worship question is one on which God has clearly spoken.

Put them together, Lee. In order to be consistent, you must believe that we who disagree with you on what you see as clearly revealed by God about music in worship are therefore liars and stand condemned before God.

Well, do you? Since you and I disagree on what God has revealed about music, do I stand condemned? Be forthright and honest, and give me an answer.

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2000

How people behave in worship is largely a cultural issue. In Baptist or Pentecostal churches, you will find different worship 'cultures' in different churches. If you go to the big city Baptist church or Church of God Pentecostal church, you may find a very reserved service 9especially among the Baptists.) Go to a country Pentecostal chruch or a predominantly black Baptist church, and the service will probably have a lot of 'amen's and enthusiastic music.

As for the quote from Finney about reverence, I think a lot of this is an issue of the heart. I read some articles on a website the other day that had an insulting attitude toward chruches that used music or had exuberant musical celebration during the church meeting. if we consider that the Psalms command singing, dancing, rejoicing, clapping hands, bowing down, and such things, how can we say that exuberance during a meeting is wrong. Didn't some of the early believers in Jerusalem participate in musical worship in the temple (and probably offered animal sacrifices as well. Paul may have cone to the temple intending to offer a sacrifice. He did cut his hair because he made a vow, and the nazarite vow requires an animal sacrifice.)

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Brother Sam:

You have said:

BUT, put these things together - - - you make it clear here that where God has spoken, on any matter, salvation is involved, and the one who disagrees with you on the matter of miraculous gifts therefore disagrees with God, and is therefore a liar and stands condemned. And you make it clear elsewhere that the music in worship question is one on which God has clearly spoken.

I have made it clear, Brother Sam, that where God has spoken on a subject we must understand his will concerning that subject and believing a lie concerning it may cost us our souls and it therefore can be a salvation issue. I was responding to brother Johns comment that what we believe about this subject does not concern our salvation. But it can concern our salvation because God has told us that these gifts have ceased. When someone believes otherwise and is expecting miracles that person can and often is disappointed when he does not see any real miracles but hears everyone claiming that miracles are happening. That person then does not believe that the false teacher is the liar. They often end up concluding that Gods word is lying and lose faith in the scriptures. Now this would surely affect ones salvation and it all began when he was convinced that the Bible teaches that miracles are happening today.

Now, I have not said anyone who disagrees with me on the matter of spiritual gifts disagrees with God. You falsely accuse me of making that claim. If Gods word teaches that miraculous gifts have ceased and one disagrees with that they are disagreeing with God. And disagreeing with God can affect your salvation. But on any subject I can be wrong. I am willing to be persuaded that I am wrong. I am nothing but a human being as capable of error as anyone in this forum. I believe that the scriptures teach that miraculous gifts have ceased. I also believe that I have made a good case for that position. However, I am willing to be corrected but ignoring my arguments will not correct me. And prejudicial arguments will not correct me. Only the word of God can correct me.

Now, if you will read my words again you will see that I have not called Brother Kelley a liar because his arguments from the word of God are in error. First he has made no arguments from the word of God to establish that miracles have continued unto this day. Second, one could be mistaken in his arguments and not be a liar. I have called Brother Kelley a liar because he claims to have personally experienced the miracle of speaking in a language that he has never studied as they did in the New Testament. Now that is not an argument from the word of God that anyone can be mistaken about. That is a claim of actual experience that he would surely be cognizant of its happening. I believe that he is deliberately lying about that matter. He claims to have seen someone being healed miraculously as it was done in the New Testament. I believe he is lying about that matter. I have not called him a liar simply because he disagrees with what I am fully convinced that the scriptures teach on this subject. I have demanded that he show us the panther in response to his on analogy that indicated that a demonstration would clear up all doubt. Now those are the facts concerning why I call Brother Kelley a liar.

Now your attempt to make it appear that I believe that anyone who disagrees with me personally is considered a liar by me is unfounded and uncalled for in this discussion. Now that is not the truth at all and any anyone with the ability to read can see that such is the case.

Then you try to use this to prejudice the minds of others before the instrumental music debate begins by saying:

Put them together, Lee. In order to be consistent, you must believe that we who disagree with you on what you see as clearly revealed by God about music in worship are therefore liars and stand condemned before God.

Now you try to put this together with the instrument issue. If God has spoken on this subject it is necessary for us to believe what he says about it. But I can be mistaken and if I am wrong I am sure that Brother Jack will correct my errors. I will appreciate it if he does. However, if Brother Jack is wrong I will do my best to correct his errors. But if I am right in saying that God has spoken on the instrumental music issue and we ignore what he has said and follow our own will and walk in deliberate disobedience to Gods commands it can certainly affect our salvation. But simply because you misunderstand what God says does not mean that you are liars and stand condemned before God for deliberately lying. I have never said any such thing about my brethren who believe in the use of instrumental music and your attempt to make it appear that I am saying such a thing appears to be very dishonest. But I believe that it is because you misunderstand what I have clearly said that you make this attempt. I can only assume that you honestly thought that I was condemning brother Kelley as a liar because he disagreed with what I am convinced the scriptures teaches on this subject. But you were wrong about that, Brother Sam. I am calling Brother Kelley a liar because I believe he has deliberately lied about his so-called speaking in tongues and that he actually saw a miraculous healing of the sick. It is my opinion that he is deliberately lying and I have called for a demonstration of these powers that he claims for himself and that he pretends he actually witnessed. Now you would not take that approach and that is your business. I do sincerely believe that he is lying about those things and that is my business. But I have not called him a liar because he disagrees with ME concerning the teaching of the scriptures. I do perceive of him as a false teacher for various reasons and this subject is only one of them.

Then you say:

Well, do you? Since you and I disagree on what God has revealed about music, do I stand condemned? Be forthright and honest, and give me an answer.

Brother Sam, I have never been anything other than forthright and honest in this forum. In fact I am often so forthright and honest as to be down right offensive to you and others. In fact, in this very matter under discussion, I have forthrightly stated that I believe Brother Kelley to be deliberately lying about his so-called experience and his claim to possess the gift of tongues. You are upset because I have been so forthright and honest in my statements concerning it.

I do not believe that my Brethren who use instruments of music in their worship are deliberate liars simply because they disagree with what I believe God has clearly spoken about that matter. I believe that they are sincerely though severely mistaken on the matter. There is a big difference between being mistaken and telling deliberate lies with the intent to deceive. My Brethren who use instruments of music in their worship mistakenly and sincerely believe that God has not spoken on the matter and therefore has left it to our judgment and grants us the liberty to do anything that we want to do in that matter. Despite their sincerity I am convinced that God has clearly spoken on the matter and we must obey what he has said. I hope that I will be able to convince you and the others that such is the truth. But if I fail to convince you it will not be because Brother Jack is a deliberate liar like I believe Brother Kelley to be, nor will it be because My Brethren care nothing about the truth. It will simply be because they still cannot see it. Now I have no way of Knowing how God will deal with those Christians who are sincerely mistaken about things in the judgment. All I know is that we must love him enough to constantly seek the truth and follow it. If I thought that you were deliberate liars in this matter I would easily and quickly tell you such and warn you of your certain condemnation. My willingness to do so is evident in many threads in this forum wherein I have written. But I do not believe that you are deliberate liars, as I believe Brother Kelley to be.

Now man on this earth is required to agree with ME about anything and I have not ever said anything to indicate that they must and your implication that I have said such a thing is not honest. I do not know if you deliberately intended to be dishonest but it is just not honest for you to imply that I have ever said that anyone must agree with me or they are condemned before God. They must believe the truth that God has revealed to us. I could be mistaken and so could they but both of us must agree with Christ our Lord. We had better be busy understanding what the will of the Lord is (Eph. 5:18). Btu the idea that we are to decide what is a salvation issue and what is not before we discuss it is ridiculous. If God speaks we had better listen whether we believe he will condemn us in the judgment or not. For it is not in man that walketh to direct his own steps.

SO, to summarize, I believe firmly that Brother Kelley is lying about his tongue speaking powers and his having witnessed miraculous healing. I believe that we must know, understand and believe all that God has delivered to us thought the Holy Spirit in the apostles and inspired men of the New Testament. I do not believe that My Brethren who use instruments of Music in the worship are deliberate LIARS and I have NEVER said ANYTHING that would cause any HONEST person to think that I believe they are deliberate liars. I do, however believe that they are seriously mistaken and Brother Jack and I will discuss it so that I will have and opportunity to hopefully persuade you to see the truth on the matter. Now why you have brought the subject of instrumental music up in this connection I do not understand unless you are trying to prejudice the case before it goes to court so to speak. Why not leave it out of this discussion and lets deal with the issue at hand.

Now I again state that I believe that Brother Kelley is deliberately lying about his having spoken in tongues and his having witnessed miraculous healing. I have called for a demonstration. I wait for the response.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Lee:

Now, I have not said anyone who disagrees with me on the matter of spiritual gifts disagrees with God. You falsely accuse me of making that claim.

No, Lee, i did not accuse you of making that claim. I specifically said that you did not directly say that. Look again at what I said: You are declaring that you have the perfect and complete understanding of this topic, and that if anyone disagrees with the way you understand it, then they are liars and bound for hell. You didn't use those words, but the message comes through loud and clear.

Look at the last sentence. You haven't said it specifically .. you haven't stated it in words. But, as I said, the message comes thru.

I have called Brother Kelley a liar because he claims to have personally experienced the miracle of speaking in a language that he has never studied as they did in the New Testament.

And that is exactly where you are out of line. You uorself personally do not KNOW what AKelley has or has not experienced. Your understanding of the Scriptures leads you to reject his understanding of what happened to him. But not having been there, and not having the mind of God, you don't know.

It is fine to assert that the miraculous gifts ceased at some time in the past, and to give what you see as scriptural support for that assertion. And it's fine to be so thoroughly convinced of it that you can't think anyone who disagreeing is correct. In fact, I stand with you on this issue. I also believe that the miraculous gifts ended at some point in the first, or early second, century. And I think I can give strong biblical support for that position. In fact, most of my arguments are your arguments as well.

But to say that miraculous signs served their purpose and have gone away is far different than saying that God either cannot or will not use them again, ever. We don't know His mind. We don't understand all His plan. To categorically assert what God will or will not do is not ours to indulge in.

Now I again state that I believe that Brother Kelley is deliberately lying about his having spoken in tongues and his having witnessed miraculous healing. I have called for a demonstration. I wait for the response.

But Lee, YOU CAN'T KNOW if he is lying or not. You can't make that assertion. You can BELIEVE he is lying all you want, but you can't make such a public accusation without proof. How do you propose this "demonstration" be done? Are you willing to travel to where AKelley is? Or to fund his traveling to where you are? This is not the kind of thing one can do over the web.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Sam, If Akelly is going to make these outlandish statements,then he has to be taken to task for them.I believe Lee is 100% correct,people like AKelly, know perfectly well,what they are doing.It will be interesting to here his response.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Paul, I don't see these statements as being anywhere near outlandish. Mistaken, I'll buy and agree with. But not outlandish. Too many folks report the same things. That doesn't make them correct in their assessment of what was happening. But this is far from an unusual claim.

Does it then follow that ANYone who claims to have spoken in (what they understand as) tongues or witnessed what they thought was miraculous healing is necessarily lying about it?

Our job as orthodox believers is not to fling around the accusatin "Liar!", but to show them through the scriptures the truth about what they experience.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

I mean, when Aquila and Priscilla found Apollosteaching a message that was in some ways fine and dandy but in some ways incomplete and incorrect, they didn't run down to their local Bible discussion group and start shouting, "Apollos is a liar! And he'd better come round here and prove he's not!"

No. They took him aside, and taught him better.

When AKelley says that he has spoken in tongues the way they did in the New Testament, we are not called to hop on the net and yell, "Liar! You did not! And if you did, prove it!"

No. We are called to take him aside (as it were, electronically), and teach him better.

That is my whole argument with Lee at this point. well, almost the whole thing.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Sam,I understand what your saying,but it seems to me, that he has heard all the teachings and still refuses to listen.I always try to remain hopeful toward those who those that teach this stuff to others, will cease doing so.For living through a tragic accident or things of that nature,(not to sound unsympethetic)does not a miracle make.I understand that there are those that are truly mistaken, but there has to come a time, after hearing all that has been said and observed throughout ones experiences,that one has to make a distinction between what is true and what is false.Anyway I believe,it is more of a feel good thing to these peaple and the truth doesnt really matter.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Lee, you have been busy! Thank you BROTHER Lee for being so caring, I can feel the love in this forum flowing!

Lee, you assertion is that I am a liar is not so. God is my judge not you. But, I do appeciate your loving gentle way of caring for those within the Church. Regardless of what you or anyone may beleive I am not a false teacher. I pray everyday that I will constantly line what I teach and preach within the scriptural and biblical standard that is presented to is from the apostolic writings (II Peter 1:16-21; II Tim. 3:16).

As to the two charges of "deception" and "Lying" due my experiences, Lee you cannot make that statment, as Brother Sam has pointed out due to you not being there. But, I will tell you more. First concerning the first charge, I never stated that have the gift of speaking in tongues (read my earlier post), I just stated that I have personally experienced them. Lee, I know you will pick me apart- but that is to be expected from you. When I was in my previous ministry, I had witnessed so much evil in Church that I was going to quit the ministry. In fact I have seen fights (almost fist fights) in the auditorium to deacons cursing in board meetings. I have seen my wife verbally attacked and abused. It was a hard time for me! I personally had been praying hard. Everyday I would pray for hours in the auditoruim when no one else was near- I poured my heart out to God! In fact no one knew what I was doing... except myself and the Lord. A dear lady in another congregation, came to me and told me that her son called her (a Christian Church Minister/Missionary), he had a vision of a pastor on his hands and knees crying out to God... he further went on to say that in his vision that minister had talked with his mom. He also stated that that minister felt it was his own fault that his ministry was in such turmoil. She then called me up and told me about her son's dream. It was exactly what happened. I knew that the Lord used that man to reveal to me that He is still there for me and loves me. To you that may not be a miracle- but to me it is a Joel type of experience. So many times that type of thing has happened.

I have personally seen people healed. Just recently I have seen one of my church members suffering from severe knee problems. He was prayed for (hands were laid upon- not by me) and he was healed. He is still problem free- psycho-symatic... no! I believe the power of God... not in that faith healer.... but in God! Now I never said I spoke in tongues, I said I experienced it... and I did! It was through a very godly woman in our last church before we left. The woman started to pray a normal prayer for us, but then spoke only some things that only we knew- then she began to speak in tongues (and it was a language- and it was interpreted). Of Satan? Why would Satan do something to help the kingdom of God? As Jesus staed "Can Satan drive out Satan?"

Of course, I am vulnerable to attack by revealing what I feel and know. But, Lee I do believe that the gifts do exist... if that makes me a false teacher to your standards... then there is nothing I can do about it. One thing I have tried to get you to see and understand- I guess I failed in that, is to reveal that you cannot prove that the gifts no longer exist. You can say it is your theological understanding based on some scripture, and maybe it makes perfect sense to you that they no longer exist- but it is an assumption based on your interpretation of scripture. For example- the panther (I am not a prowling false teacher)story was to show how we can make assumptions based on what we may know as fact- but God shows us different. God has shown me different and has blown what I thought was safe "theology" away. It is scary to think that what you may have known or believed in all these years were wrong. They were based on incomplete information. Sort of like the Apostle Paul, when he met Jesus- it blew his old theology away.

Lee, you wrongly assert that I am teaching false doctrine and I will lead people to disregard biblical truth.... MAY IT NEVER BE! Hebrews 12:29 says our God is "consuming fire" and I for one do not want to stand before God to account for leading people astray. Am I a deciever because I feel it is biblical as Sam points out that God can work the same as He did in NT times. Can God give someone the same gifts as in the NT? Yes... He is God. God is sovereign, Holy and Righteous, God never changes- He is everlasting to everlasting... His Kingdom shall not have any end.

And if we can acknowledge that God can, if He so chooses, to allow tongues, healings, prophecy to occur- then maybe just maybe what we may experience is real. I will admit as all who knows this sunject, that you cannot prove that the gifts have continued other that first hand knowledge and experience. But NOWHERE does scripture plainly state that the gifts have ceased. For example, we do know that it is a biblical part of the salvation process that one must be baptized... why... because it is plainly stated in so many scriptures. But, we do not have that in the case of the gifts. All we can go by are some scriptures that show us in certain cases what happened. But is that sound biblical doctrine? I do not think so. I want a "thus saith the Lord on this issue." If there is one I will stop. I am not condemning anyone for not buying my take on the sunject- that is ok- I was once there too. But, please Lee- do not condemn your Christian brother for believing that the gifts can and do exist today.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Today's Christian Standard had an article which basically echoed my personal viewpoint on all of this: namely, that the (for lack of a better term) "administrative" gifts of the Spirit have continued on, as they are still very vital and needed, while the miraculous "sign" gifts have ceased.

Incidentally, at the risk of being called a "liar" by certain members of this forum, I would like to share a personal note. I personally believe I have a gift of the Spirit which is most certainly supernatural, one I can only identify as the "discernment of spirits" mentioned in the 1st Corinthians list. I am able to discern, within moments of meeting someone (I can even do this with people I come across on the Internet), whether or not they are a member of a cult group, and even identify the particular group they are in oftentimes. This is rather eerie even to me, but it is true, and it happens. One time I recall I met someone, and on first meeting I just had to ask them if they were Mormon. It turned out they had been a Mormon but had only recently converted to Christianity.

I have also had encounters with two very definite evil spirits, as in people I have come across who were most definitely possessed. Yes, right here in the good ol' USA. Very unnerving and I hope I never come across another. One encounter was straight out of "The Exorcist" (but without the pea soup). I could literally feel the evil in my own soul. Thats the best way I know of explaining it. Its kind of like a war trauma memory ... not something I wish to remember or talk about much.

I suppose that now I will also be labeled a liar and a false teacher. But I know I do not lie, this happens to me frequently. And I do not teach others how to do it or anything, I just use it in my own ministering. Some may say, "show us the panther," but the Holy Spirit is not a trained animal to do tricks for skeptics. All I can say is that it is a very real thing that is not like "tongue babbling" because the discernments I get are often extremely specific.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Brother Kelly:

I have been out of town for two weeks and I do not have much time at the moment but I have read your last post addressed to me and I can see that you have no intention to show us the panther and that you therefore are unable by demonstration to prove that you or anyone else has experienced miracles today. It was you that brought up the fact that it was possible for us to see this panther. The miracles of the New Testament were a DEMONSTRATION of Gods power to establish that He had sent the apostles to reveal His will to us. Without such a demonstration we could not know today that the scriptures were inspired of God. The Miracles were designed to induce us to believe in Christ. (John 20:30,31). But the so-called miracles that you and others speak of are not capable of demonstration! This is an interesting difference between the false imaginary miracles claimed by men like you today and those of the New Testament times. Those we read of in the New Testament were undeniable! Yours on the other hand are beyond proof and the reach of actual demonstration.

Now, as to my accusation that you have told a lie, I must state here that with your last response you have only confirmed the correctness of my accusation. You are telling lies Brother Kelley and your following words demonstrate this fact. You have said:

As to the two charges of "deception" and "Lying" due my experiences, Lee you cannot make that statment, as Brother Sam has pointed out due to you not being there. But, I will tell you more. First concerning the first charge, I never stated that have the gift of speaking in tongues (read my earlier post), I just stated that I have personally experienced them.

Now I can and have made the statement that you have told a lie and one does not have to be there to see it in order to know that your words are not true. Brother Sam is wrong in stating that there is no way for this to be demonstrated. I have already offered such a way and he has failed to read it. I am constantly finding you consistently contradicting your own words. Now this is clear evidence of your lies. Now to prove this read your following words from your earlier post which I now quote verbatim:

I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Lee, you again make judgmental statments and assumptions that are not conclusive.

Notice that you have not said merely that you have experienced these miracles by seeing them in others. Notice that you say you have not simply experience these miracles within people that you know but MYSELF ALSO You are telling a lie again brother Kelley. In your earlier post you claimed to have not only experienced this gift of tongues within people you knew personally but MYSELF AS WELL. Now you come in here and claim that you have NEVER said that you have the gift of tongues. Brother Kelley, you have said that you have experienced these gifts within yourself as well as observing them within others. But now you claim to have never said those words. Now that Brother Kelley is LYING. It is a deliberate LIE. The evidence of your lying is now obvious to all who can read this forum.

You claim that miracles continue today but the only thing you are able to do is demonstrate that you are a liar. I am not trying to be vicious I am simply stating the truth. You have clearly lied about this matter. Now how could anyone give any trust or credence to your claims of having seen miracles when you cannot even tell the truth about the claims you have actually made in this forum concerning them is beyond my ability to comprehend. If I am to believe a witness I must have reason to believe in his trustworthiness. You have shown that you are lying. Therefore your claims are not worthy of belief.

Now others are not willing to call you a liar and I understand their reasons and accept them. But I am willing to call a man a liar when he clearly tells one. You have without doubt told a deliberate LIE when you claimed to have experienced these tongues not only within those you know personally but within yourself as well. Then you LIED in your last post by claiming to have never said that you have the gift of tongues but that you had only personally experienced them. Now one who has seen such a miracle could say that he had the experience of having seen them but he could not say that he PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED THEM. But when one says that he has experienced them NOT ONLY WITHIN THOSE HE KNOWS PERSONALLY BUT WITHIN HIMSELF AS WELL he is claiming to have the gift of tongues HIMSELF. This is exactly the claim that you made Brother Kelley and instead of showing us the panther and demonstrating your ability to speak in these tongues you come back in here and deny that you have ever made any claim to having experienced within yourself this gift of tongues. You claimed to have seen the panther yourself and when challenged you claim that you have never said that you had seen the panther yourself after all! One confessing to a lie could not have made a clearer admission of lying! Brother Kelley, it is sad for me to have to say that you are a LIAR but it is true nonetheless. You have clearly lied by claiming to have experienced these tongues within yourself and then claiming to have never said that you have the gift within you. None experience the gift of tongues within themselves unless they have the gift of tongues. You claim to have experienced such in your earlier post and now you claim to not have this gift at all. You are lying and there is no question about it to those able to discern facts. It is interesting to note just here that Brother Johns gift of discernment has not worked very well in recognizing that you are lying. So much for the gift that he claims to possess!

I do not have time to write more but I will return for you have lied persistently and I will point to every lie you have told so that others can see it for themselves.

I have not judged you Brother Kelley for you are right that God will judge you for these things. It is he that says all liars shall have their part in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone! I pray that you will repent of your lie and that our God will be merciful and forgive you. I sincerely do not want you to be lost. But you are right in saying that God will judge you and I urge you to keep that fact in mind should you decide to tell us another lie.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 22, 2000

Brother Lee,

Maybe Brother Kelley forgot that he mentioned that he spoke in tongues. Usually the word 'liar' implies that the person who says something false does so intentionally. This looks mroe like a case of someone forgetting what he had said before than intentionally trying to decieve people.

I read a barron's handbook about writing business letters. In it, one of the styles they say to avoid is the 'windbag.' That is a repetive style which uses many sentences to say what could have been said very briefly. Much of your previous post was written in 'windbag' style. There is no need to pick a fight or use inflammatory langague. If you see an inconsistency in someones post, point it out. There is not need for long verbose inflammatory accusations.

In regard to miracles, where does the Bible say that the purpose of miracles was to veify that the Bible record was true. The message preached by those who knew Christ, was borne witness to with signs, wonders, and gifts of the Holy Ghost.

Could the Samaritans watch a video of the miracles done among the Hebrews in Jerusalem? No. When Philip went there, hedid signs wonders and miracles. Was it enough for Paul and Barnabas to simply report the miracles that Jesus did among the Jews, or read to them a written record of the miracles? Paul and Barnabas did miracles that the Gentiles saw. There is a big difference between reading about amiracle and seeing a miracle.

If an athiest asks you why you believe the Bible is true, and you say 'because the Bible was confirmed with miracles' and he asks you how you know that, and you say 'because the miracles are recorded in the Bible.' Suppose he asks you how you know that record is true and you respond, 'because it is in the Bible.' The athiest is not going to be really impressed with your logic.

If you preached the gospel and did a miracle, the athiest may pay more attention to what you say because you did a miracle. Or he might write the miracle off as a spontaneous remission or some sort of fakery.

I don't see anywhere in scripture where it sasy that miracles written about in the Bible confirmed the Bible to people who didn't see the miracles. The disciples preached the gospel with signs following. the people who saw the signs were faced with evidence of God's approval onthe message, whether they rejected it or recieved it.

Another problem with the idea that there are no more supernatural gifts because we have the Bible is that the Bible does not teach that the only reason for supernatural gifts were meant exclusively to confirm the word of god. that is the opinion of later theologians, but not the teaching of scripture. I Corinthians 12 tells us that hte gifts of the Spirit are to profit all of us. Spiritual gifts were given to build up the body of Christ. The gift of healing is a good thing to look at as an example. Healing benefits in a very practical way. If we go up to a person with no legs and say 'You don't need healing because you ahve the Bible' will that help him walk?

Another problem with this view is that it makes the Bible replece its own teachings. The Bible talks about how to function in certain gifts. Because we have the instruciton manual for certain tools, do we not needthe tools anymore?

Another issue is that some divide gifts into 'sign gifts' and 'non- sign gifts.' Sign gifts are all the gifts that are contrary to Englightenment views of the universe and Rationalism. All the gifts that conflict with the modern idea that there is nothing supernatural get put into the 'sign gift' category. The Bible doesn't divide the gifts into these categories. the Bible says nothing of healingand miracles ceasing that I am aware of. Yet cessationists (those who believe the gifts ceased) usually put all these gifts into one category.

The Bible says 'that which is done in part will be done away' but it does not say that that which is in part has already been done away. there is a structural argument to support the idea that 'the perfect' relates to the resurrection. In I Corinthians 13, Paul mentions tongues, prophecy, and the perfect. Later, he talks about tongues and prophecy in chapter 14, and then talks about the resurection in chapter 15.

Another illogical point made by some is that if there is a prophecy today, it should be added to the Bible, and if someone receives a prophecy, he is guilty of adding to the Bible and guilty of the plagues of Revelation. First of all, it is likely that the warning at the end of Revelation applies to the book of Revelation. Some say III John was written after Revelation anyway.

A major problem with the idea that all prophesying is adding to the Bible is the fact that not all prophecy is in the Bible. Not even all of Jesus' actions could be recoded, John wrote, and in these last days, God has spoken to us through his Son. (Hebrews 1:1-2.) The bible makes references to prophecies that are not contained in the Bible. We don't know what words King Saul prophesied. The Bible makes reference to the book of Iddo the seer in a recommendary way.

We read of countless prophets whose prophecies were not recorded in the cannon of Scripture. The scripture records one prophecy from the prophet Micaiah, and yet the passage makes reference to other prohecies uttered by him against the king of Israel, but doesn't give us quotes of what Michaiah said. A 'cannon' is like a measuring rod to measure other things by. We don't read about anyone in the Bible thinking that all of God's revelation was recorded in this Bible, nor does scripture teach that all revelation is recorded in scripture. The faith has already been passed down to us, but there are many little revealtions that are not as siginificant for the whole chruch as those recorded in scripture. Saul went to Samuel to ask where a donkey was. Just think how many trucks we would need to carry the Bible around if God had included in it every little revelationhe gave through prophets just in Old Testament times!

Therefore, the argument 'if you prophecy you should add it to the Bible' just doesn't line up with the word of God.

-- Anonymous, July 23, 2000

Brother Hudson:

You seek to give Brother Kelley a way out of his self-contradiction with these words:

Maybe Brother Kelley forgot that he mentioned that he spoke in tongues. Usually the word 'liar' implies that the person who says something false does so intentionally. This looks more like a case of someone forgetting what he had said before than intentionally trying to decieve people.

If you would read much of the arguments between myself and Brother Kelley you will find that he has a terrible habit of self contradiction as you have seen in his previous post wherein he claimed to have experience of the gift of tongues within himself in one place and denied it altogether in another. Now such behavior is not a simple matter of forgetting what one has said. If one is bold enough to claim that they have experience of a miraculous gift within themselves it is not likely that they will forget that they have made such a claim. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that Brother Kelley knew full well that he had made this claim and he was counting on the certain possibility that most of us would have forgotten his exact words. In fact he was so confident that we would forget what he had said that he even referred us to what he had said and quoted only part of his word for us. No, Brother, he did not forget. He lied and did so deliberately.

It appears that you would like to make him seem to be honest but forgetful only because you agree with him that these miracles, as seen in the New Testament, continue today. The fact is that none of us have seen any such miracles occur today including yourself and Mr. Kelley. This argument is not so much one of argumentation as it is of demonstration. If any of us were to see someone rose from the dead we would have no doubt that the miracles of the first century continue today. I have no doubt that we will see the dead raised again when Christ our Lord returns. For at that time we will see the demonstration of Gods power. But until then we will not see such things. Those who claim to have seen miracles are either lying or they are deceived. I am convinced that Brother Kelley fits into the category of liars. You may not agree but I cannot pretend that I do not see his lies just to prevent you from accusing me of being unkind.

Then you tell me how to write a business letter:

I read a barron's handbook about writing business letters. In it, one of the styles they say to avoid is the 'windbag.' That is a repetive style which uses many sentences to say what could have been said very briefly. Much of your previous post was written in 'windbag' style. There is no need to pick a fight or use inflammatory langague. If you see an inconsistency in someones post, point it out. There is not need for long verbose inflammatory accusations.

I have never pretended to be some kind of great writer. In fact I fully admit that I have no talent or skill in this area. But I am doing the best that I know how to do in speaking for the truth. But I am clear about one thing. I am not writing a business letter. I am writing to defend what I believe to be the truth concerning the teaching of Gods word and to resist those who oppose that truth. You denominate my style as a windbag style. But you do not specifically prove that it is such. You merely assert it. You are welcome to that opinion. I am not offended by it in the least. But you cannot call it contradictory writing, now can you? It may be windy but it blows in the same direction! This cannot be said of Brother Kelleys more refined writing now can it?

But I hope that you are aware that such has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand. It is possible that some of you who are inspired and guided miraculously by the Holy Spirit, as Brother Kelley claims, could at least be able to remember what you have said so as to not contradict yourselves. Now on the ground that you think Brother Kelley has simply forgotten what he has said you give up the miraculous guidance that he claims to have. If he were, in fact, being lead miraculously by the Holy Spirit he would be consistent in all that he says and would not forget and contradict himself.  But the comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, whom the father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and shall bring TO YOUR REMEBERANCE, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 14:26) Howbeit when he, the Spirit of Truth, is come, he shall guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak and he will show you things to come. (John 16:13). One sure sign that someone is telling a lie, and is therefore NOT BEING LEAD BY THE HOLY SPIRIT, is self contradiction. This cannot be excused on the grounds of a faulty memory of one who possesses the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit and is being lead directly by Him. You accuse me of picking a fight which is completely untrue. I have not picked a fight with anyone. I have simply pointed out in this thread several glaring and absurd contradictions made by brother Kelley and I have called for him to demonstrate the truthfulness of his claims. I have called him a liar because I believe that his words themselves are sufficient evidence of deliberate lying. I believe sincerely that he is a deliberate liar and I have said so. He has done nothing to rebut that accusation but complain that I have made it. You also have done nothing to refute my claim that he has lied but complain that I have accused him of it and in doing so I am doing nothing more than picking a fight. Why is it the person who is self-contradictory and is apparently lying to us is not picking a fight by telling lies? Yet the person who sees those lies and points them out and proves them to be lies is the one picking a fight. If you tell lies in the Name of Christ you are picking a fight with every faithful Christian living. So do not be so shocked that they are rebuked by them and labeled as a LIAR. The apostles and first century Christians were more than willing to do such things.

Your responses in your article to several interesting arguments made by some who agree with me that the miracles have ceased are interesting. But I want to state that you are not responding to any arguments that I have made thus far. I do not have the time at the moment to go into each of them but I want to be clear that several of those arguments are not stated in the way in which I would make them. If you wish to discuss this subject with me then respond to arguments that I have actually made instead of generic arguments that you assume the entire classes of those who hold that tongues and prophecy have ceased are making. In fact I do not think that any of the arguments that you assign to this class are made in the exact manner in which you state them.

Be all of that as it may, I will discuss this subject with you but I will not respond to defend arguments that I have not made in my own words. If you would like for me to start over again from the beginning and argue that tongues and prophecies have ceased I will be happy to do so in another thread. But in this thread, I am focused upon the fact that Brother Kelley has made claims that are not true and that he has severely contradicted himself. And that this is inconsistent with his claim of divine guidance by the Holy Spirit. He has claimed to have experience of the gift of tongues within himself and then he has claimed that he never made such a claim. I am waiting for him to show us the panther. The miracles of the New Testament were verifiable. And if any claim to have these miraculous gifts they should be able to demonstrate that they have them. Brother Kelley has made such a claim and being unable to show us the panther or demonstrate that he has such gifts he has now sought to cover up the fact that he made such a claim. This is not the way those who actually possessed those gifts in New Testament times behaved.

The arguments that you ascribe to me that you think I would make to an atheist are nothing more than your imagination. I would not argue as you seek to leave the impression that I would argue with such a person. But you may want to keep our Brother Thomas in mind when criticizing those who demand proof and demonstration of the facts before believing them. Some call Him doubting Thomas but the scriptures nowhere accuses him of being doubtful. Our Lord gave him the proof that he sought and he fell down at the Lords feet and cried my Lord and my God. It is interesting that those who claim to have these gifts today are constantly arguing but never demonstrating the power they claim to have among those who doubt their claims! Why so much argumentation when one demonstration would suffice? You say that an atheist would see a miracle and deny it. You do not know this to be the truth. If an atheist saw miracles such as those found in the New Testament I do not believe that he would doubt it.

If I were one who possessed miraculous spiritual gifts, I would not waste any time on making empty claims of such gifts on an Internet forum. I would simply exercise those gifts and all who witnessed the miracles that I had performed by the power of God would be affected by those gifts in the way in which God intended. There would be no need to argue whether they have ceased or continue. It would be obvious to all who saw them that God was with me. But this nonsense of making nothing more than claims of experiencing miraculous gifts within myself and thereby placing myself in the position of having to exercise that gift for no greater purpose than proving that I am a possessor of such is ridiculous and completely out of harmony with how the New Testament teaches for these gifts to be exercised in the church by those who posses them. The fact that none posses these gifts today is a strong argument that they do not exist today. Brother Kelleys statements concerning these gifts are wrong even if he did in fact have such gifts. Most of those whom I know that claim to have such gifts are not even Christians because they have never obeyed the gospel of Christ! They are not even in Christ but they claim many miraculous things. Ha! Miracles are not mere claims but are in fact actual demonstrations of Gods power.

So for now I wait for Brother Kelley to show us the panther and explain his glaring self- contradictions in the light of his claimed guidance by the Holy Spirit.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 23, 2000

Link,

I do not approve of Lee Saffold being so quick to label people liars, and I have remonstrated with him about this in the past. I also feel he wastes a lot of time belabouring this point that could be better spent addressing the issues rather than attacking the character of the one he disagrees with. However, in this case I think he has a point and that your defence of AKelley is merely "playing with words" and not really very helpful.

(A disclaimer first. I haven't had time to go back and check whether or not AKelley actually said the words that Lee S. quotes, or what the context of the quotation is -- and I know from experience that sometimes things may SEEM to mean one thing, when jerked out of context, that was NOT the intended meaning, and was CLEARLY not the intended meaning if one will only examine the context more clearly. For now I am just assuming that Lee has quoted them correctly.)

Lee quoted one sentence from AKelley in which he seems to be saying that he has personally experienced "speaking in tongues", whereas in a more recent posting he denies that he has ever done this himself. It is possible that when he says he has "personally experienced" speaking in tongues, he means something other than that he has done this himself (although it surely doesn't sound that way in the sentence quoted). If you wanted to defend him, you might have suggested other possible meanings for "personally experienced". But you don't.

Instead you suggest that perhaps, when he wrote the later message, he forgot what he had said in the earlier message. That argument might work for some things. For example, if he was involved in some kind of negotiations and had made an offer at one point, or agreed to an offer from someone else, and then later makes a different offer, forgetting that he had made the earlier offer, etc. But are you suggesting that he would be given a gift from God to "speak in tongues", would exercise that gift, and then would forget whether or not he had done so? Has he spoken in tongues, or has he not? If he has not, but claims that he has, he is lying. If he has, but claims that he has not, he is lying. (Actually, I at least -- and I can't speak for Lee -- would say that if he thinks he has, he is mistaking some other kind of experience for the real Biblical gift, but that's another issue.) So the issue is less a matter of, "has he contradicted himself?", and more a matter of, "which time was he telling the truth (as he understood it), and which time was he lying?"

BTW, changing the subject entirely, a "cannon" is a type of large gun. The word that comes from the word for "measuring rod" and means the accepted collection of inspired scriptural writings is "canon" (with a single "n"). Besides yourself, I have noticed several other writers in this forum confusing the two words.

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2000

Brother Ben:

I have heard your admonitions and appreciate them and will promise to be careful to remember them in the future. But this case is different. I am not convinced that there is any way in which Brother Kelley can be telling the truth. However, in the interest of fairness and in response to your disclaimer, which I know quote, I will give the complete context of Brother Kelleys, words so that you can examine them for yourself. Your disclaimer was as follows:

(A disclaimer first. I haven't had time to go back and check whether or not AKelley actually said the words that Lee S. quotes, or what the context of the quotation is -- and I know from experience that sometimes things may SEEM to mean one thing, when jerked out of context, that was NOT the intended meaning, and was CLEARLY not the intended meaning if one will only examine the context more clearly. For now I am just assuming that Lee has quoted them correctly.)

In order to save you the time of searching for the words that I have quoted from Brother Kelley I now quote in full his entire post dated July 06, 2000 in this very thread. His exact words, which I have copied and pasted to this post, are as follows:

Lee, let me tell you an analegy based on a true story. I gentlman in our churc had a conversation with a game warden who adamately denied the presence of a "long tail cat" or panther in our part of Missouri. The Game warden said that they no longer exist. He cited his graphs, charts and his rule books. The warden told the fellow, that all the evidence pointed to a conclusive proof that they no longer exist. Well, several weeks after the man in our congregation had the conversation with the warden, he decided to go dear hunting with a friend not so far from here (only ten miles away). The two men sat in a tree stand all night long in order to to spot a dear at the crack of dawn. Both men, heard something stirring in the woods but they never could get a good look at it. Both men dozed off in the wee hours of the morning, when they awoke, they heard a heavy breathing and growling sound from the tree limb behind them. As they turned around they saw, a panther- staring them face to face. The two men were so scared that they jumped down and ran to their truck. THey jumped in side and waited a while. THen the panther lazily walked up to their truck, and sat in the bed and then on the roof. After a few hours the panther strode off into the forest. Those men were scared, frightened and they knew beyond a shadow of doubt that the panthers (or at least one) were still in the area and probably never left. You can try to reason with these men concerning the long tail cat, and try to proof to then with all the evidence that you can muster, but reality is that they have experienced it to be real. We are at an empass. Your "seemingly" biblical evidence proves not your point. It may lend you some evidence to your cause. But, there is a point that Lee, Danny, Scott and others have to make an assumption. If Paul said that the gifts died when the canon of the NT is finished or when the last of the Apostles die, then there is no argument- then they are no longer available. But, we do not have that. What you have are several scriptures that lend to some weight, but they in themselves are not conclusive concerning the matter. Thus what you have to go on is a theological ASSUMPTION! Lee, you in your mind think that you have given me all the evidence needed. But, what I want you to admit is that your conclusion is an assumption made from some biblical evidence. It is a theory, but it is not proof. It it were a matter of black and white then, I would totally agree with you. But, this area is not nor will it ever be black and white. This issue will only be resolved till the Lord comes back.

Lee, you have charged that I have not seen miracles such as presented in the NT. How do you know if I have or have not. For example, I have personally seen people who have been prayed for and have had hands laid upon them... healed of their sickness. I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Lee, you again make judgmental statments and assumptions that are not conclusive. In order to be conclusive you must weigh the evidence (all of the evidence) and then decide. You must 'test the spirits' and find out if they are real or not. But, that involves you (being objective) and talk with people who have first hand knowledge of these happenings.

All I have seen from some, is the assumption that the gifts ceased. Some may cite texts to try to prove their point, then make the assumption that 2x2=10. The data is incomplete and inconclusive. Those on the non gifts side must admit that they make such claims based on assumption. It is the same argument that I make above, when I made statments like the "movement is dead" which was an assumption on my part, whether right or wrong.

-- AKelley (wwjdkelley@hotmail.com), July 06, 2000.

You can find this quotation if you scroll up in this thread to the date of July 06,2000. You will find that I have simply copied and pasted Brother Kelleys exact words as he wrote them in his own post of this date. I have even copied and pasted the date and Brother Kelleys email address that is included at the end of all post that are written in this forum which identifies the post as belonging to and having been written by the person named. I do this so that none can say that I have taken him out of context in this matter. It is obvious to anyone who is able to read that Brother Kelley claimed to have experienced the gift of tongues within him. He said this in response to my charge that he had not seen miracles such as presented in the NT. His obvious intent was to refute that charge and his words are in the context of an attempt to refute my contention that he had not seen miracles such as those found in the NT. Hence the reason for his bold claim that he now denies having made.

I hope that this will be helpful to you in determining if there is any reason, after reading the entire context of his words, to believe that I have in any way deliberately or otherwise misrepresented his words.

I do not think I have done so but I submit this for your review and for others to see just how bold was the affirmation of spiritual gifts and how deliberate was the denial of that affirmation shortly after being challenged to provide a demonstration!

Now I am not asking anyone to join with me in calling Brother Kelley a liar. But I have surely given good reasons for my having done so and I do not intend to retract those accusations in the least for I sincerely believe that they are true.

But I do ask that everyone notice what happens when people make claims of having spiritual gifts and having the ability to heal by the power of God when they are called upon to demonstrate their powers. Today we get nothing but arguments and denials. The one thing we never get is an actual demonstration. Most of the claims of raising the dead are down in AFRICA where verification from those of us in the U.S. is impossible! There is a graveyard in Atlanta and I invite anyone who claims to have the miraculous gifts that the apostles possessed to come to Atlanta and meet me in that Graveyard and raise the dead. Raising only one will be sufficient. I will even pay that persons expenses to come and perform this miracle. I predict for everyone just now that not one person in the entire world will accept this offer! Now, Brother Sam should be happy because I have given a way for those who believe that they have the Miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit a practical way to demonstrate their powers and I am doing it at my own expense. I will film it and put the action on the Internet for the rest of you to see for yourselves. Just imagine what a wonderful affect this might have upon this UNBELIEVING WORLD! So where is this miracle worker? Maybe Brother Link would like to come raise the dead for us? Maybe Brother Kelley at least knows someone who has this power as those of the New Testament possessed? Brother Kelley was on his way to gaining these powers until he was asked for a demonstration and now he denies even the one's that he claimed to have. Our modern miracle workers are nothing but frauds, pure and simple. Those in this forum are no exception! Some may be deceived but they are perpetuating a fraud and their being deceived does not change this fact in the least. But some are deliberate liars and it is my opinion that such is the case with Brother Kelley. I do not take any special pleasure in pointing to this fact but a fact it is none the less. Now I have attended several so-called healing meetings and I have yet to see even one single person healed of anything. I have seen an old palsied lady leaving the building shaking even more than when she came into the building and claiming all the while as she was leaving that she had be healed. Those who perpetrate these lies on such poor unsuspecting people and take their money from them will pay in the judgement!

This false doctrine has tragic results down here in the south, even to the point of people being deceived into handling poisonous snakes and dying from being bitten. Some have even been allowed to die because the pastor told them that it would be an indication of a lack of faith to call a physician to one who had been stabbed in the parking Lot by a thief. That person was allowed to bleed to death while they prayed expecting some great miracle by the power of God. These liars will pay in the judgement.

Now some are even claiming that we have apostles today. If you find one that is an Apostle of Christ today that has the same powers of those apostles of the New Testament then send him to Atlanta. If there is a man living today that has been chosen by Christ as an apostle and therefore has seen Christ alive after his passion by many proofs. And if there is one to whom Christ has actually appeared and he is full of the Holy Spirit and power then let him come to Atlanta. And I will pay his fare and we will go to the graveyard and see if he is in fact an apostle of Christ. For I will wait for him to raise even one person from the dead. If he does not do so then I will expect him to reimburse me for my expenses and pay his own fare back home! All of this TALK about the miraculous is meaningless. Where is the demonstration of it? I can assure you that Brother Kelley will not be demonstrating anything verifiable as being a genuine miracle comparable to those we read about in the New Testament!

God is able to do whatever he wants to do but he does not have to do what he has always done. He made one man from the dust of the ground and has not repeated that miracle since. He made one woman from a mans ribs and has not repeated it since. He established one Church miraculously and arranged for its natural perpetuation throughout all of the following ages and he did so though manifold miracles, signs, wonders, and mighty demonstrations of His power. He established His kingdom, the church, once and will not establish it a second time, according to his promise. (Matt.16:16-18). These miracles were done in the miraculous establishment of the Church and now the Body of Christ continues to compound and grow through the natural means of preaching the gospel of Christ.

Those expecting miracles are not interested the great spiritual object of Gods scheme of redemption, which is to save that which was lost (Luke 19:10). They are interested in satisfying their carnal desires for power. Much like Simon who wanted to buy the gift of God with money these want those gifts that Simon received by the laying on of the Apostles hands for the same reason only they do not offer money.

I have to go for now since I am at work. But I am certian that my above quotation of Brother Kelleys words in their entirety will show that I have not taken him out of context in the least.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2000

Lee, it is impossible to debate you... not because you are right nor are your arguments superior in any way; but for the very reason that when someone questions your belief system you lash out at them. You have called my integrity into question, the Bible has much to say about a good name and that I should and will defend. I have been absent from this forum for two weeks, for I was on a much needed vacation.

I first want to apologize to any contridictions that I have made in this thread. I am not a great debater, maybe I need to leave it to others who are better at that. I have NEVER intentionally tried to do that.

As for the charge that I am a liar, deceiver, and false teacher - these labels came from Lee- and I beleive no one else has made those statements. These statements if you check the record came long before my "expereince" comment.

Lee bases my decieivng and false teaching due to my belief in the existance of the spiritual gifts and that I believe that they never ceased nor died with the Apostles. This is a theological stance that I have made. Unless I am shown a "thus saith the Lord" and a book chapter and verse for their ceasing then I will not back down. If this makes me a false teacher to Lee and others, then so be it. I have repeatedly asked for an admission from Lee and those who oppose my view to at least say that they make a theological assumption, but that asspumption is just that- therfore it is ok for others to at least believe that they (the gifts) still can continue on. I do not claim to know all the answers, but all I plead for is the right as a Christian Church Pastor to beleive in their existance and that it is not a closed case. Maybe my reasoning is weak and shallow- but if we can at least acknowlege that God can do what he wants to do- then maybe it is possible for God to allow the gifts to continue. Which many claim to expereince each and every day.

Now, I claimed to "experience" the gifts- I at my first post when I stated this did not reveal the qualifiers for this expereince or the details, which caused Lee to "jump" all over me with waves of assualt, calling me a liar for my expereince. Please check the record- even Lee's lengthy post. In Lee's mind- someone is a liar and deciever if they believe in the gifts existance. Then I had to respond- in a later post I related a story of what personally happened to me within one of my ministry's. That was only one expereince that I revealed, not all. In that responce I stated that I never said that I spoke in tongues, but that I experienced it. Where does it say in the "rules of the forum" that I have to give all my personal experiences???? I stated one, after my (I admit vague) statement. Does one's expereince always mean that it happened to them directly or can it mean that they are within the situation with other who expereinced it. Plus, in that situation it was interpreted, thus adhering to biblical guidlines. Lee, can you call me a liar for saying that I expereinced this? I was there I saw and heard- you were not- but due to your close mind and spiritual heart- you cannot except this - thus you label me a liar.

Lee, you have a serious ego problem. I have seen this over and over in this forum for the past year. If someone does not jive with your ideals or your doctrine you verbally abuse them as you have done with me.I really will pray for you. I once really respected you for your adherance to what you beleive- even though I may disagree with you. For example I think you are dead wrong on the musical issue, but I at least can respect your opinion. I cann't say that right now. In fact, I feel you are much a false teacher as you say I am. I feel it is down right wrong to dogmaticly deny the existance of the spiritual gifts. In fact you have abused me and my expereinces and you have abused my right to state those in this forum. One example, I told of the real true example of my friend and church memeber being healed at a service. Did I ever say that a faith healer healed him? Did I ever say that? No, I said he (my friend) went forward, was prayed for and the power of the Lord healed him. And he is still healed to this day. But, what does Lee do- he blast me and tells that he wants to see the "panther" and me to bring the "faith healer" to a hosptial to heal people. Lee, like many times you take things out of context!!!! How can I debate you or anyone debate you if you constantly take things out of context?

You may feel like it is a defeat on my part, but I will no longer respond to your post.... I have too my ministry to do and too little time to name call as is your custom. If people in this forum do not agree with my position that is fine, I am a big boy. But, it does bother me when pharisees try to smere my reputation even when I am no longer responding. But I guess that is the nature of the beast.

-- Anonymous, August 01, 2000

Lee,

I've seen gifts of the Spirit at work that you would put in the 'miraculous gifts' category, and have even practiced some of them. I could easily forget if I had mentioned the fact in such a long winding conversation as this. The following statement just doesn't add up: ". If one is bold enough to claim that they have experience of a miraculous gift within themselves it is not likely that they will "forget" that they have made such a claim. "

To those of us who have experienced these things from time to time, and already believe that the spiritual world today functions like it did in the first century, spiritual gifts are a fact, and it is as easy to froget relating a story that contains mention of a spiritual gift from I Corinthians 14 as it is to forget relating about a simlar story that did not involve one of these gifts. Try seeing things from another person's perspective instead of your own.

Your problem is that you are judgemental and you are quick to judge others. This is a character problem that you need to deal with with the Lord. 'He shall have judgement without mercy on him that hath shown no mercy.' You need to be more merciful and less judgemental.

You should read his own statements about what he meant by 'experiencing' a gift, and then apologize to him and ask forgiveness from the Lord.

You wrote: "In fact he was so confident that we would forget what he had said that he even referred us to what he had said and quoted only part of his word for us. No, Brother, he did not forget. He lied and did so deliberately."

I had a friend who, when someone tried to sell him something at a rediculously high price said 'Either he is stupid or he thinks I'm stupid. Either way, I don't want to do business with him.' These messages are posted on a big web page. It is really easy to scan conversations for certain words. I don't think Brother Kelley is so stupid as to forget that.

You write, "The fact is that none of us have seen any such miracles occur today including yourself and Mr. Kelley."

So, anyone who claims to have experience contrary to this is automatically a liar? Your attitude reminds me of the saying "I've already made up my mind. Dn't confuse me with the facts."

The fact is that miracles do occur from time to time. I've already posted what experience I've had witnessing miracles- per se, though I've had more experiences with other I Corinthians 12 gifts, and it would probably take volumes for me to adequately relate the experiences. (And no, not all of these were me doing the gift.

"If any of us were to see someone rose from the dead we would have no doubt that the miracles of the first century continue today. "

You overestimate the power of a miralce to produce faith. Israel saw miracles and did not believe. Pharoah was skeptical. If you saw a resurrection from the dead, as your heart is set right now on the issue, you'd probably just think it was a trick and not believe it, becuase you are convinced that it is a fact that miracles do not occur today. I've never seen anyone literally raised from the dead, btw. This type of miracle isn't even recorded as occuring that much in the book of Acts. I can think of one occurance.

I recall the words of Abraham to the rich man in the parable. They have Moses and the prophets. They would not believe even if one rose from the dead.

You have what the Bible teaches about miracles. Just believe that.

As for the 'windbag' style comment, the example in the Barrons book ws of someone complainging over and over again, in a frustrated tone, of how terrible it was that that there were no paper towels in the bathroom, when a one sentence message would have sufficed. You wrote paragraphs in an accusatory manner about Brother Kelly. If you was an inconsistency it would have been better to point out what you considered to be inconsistent and ask for a response from him, instead of making yourself look the way you made yourself look with that long message.

If you are pasionate about the truth, be passionate about the people for whom the truth was given as well, and treat them with respect.

The Bible doesn't guarantee saints a perfect memory. If you think that is what it means to be led by the Spirit, then which category do you fall into 1) You have a perfect memory 2) You are led by the Spirit

You need to be consistent with your own teachings. Remember that they who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God.

It is you, and not others, who relates having a perfect memory with being led by the Spirit. Bro. Kelley and I are free to be human. The scriptures you quoted spoke of the Spirit bringing to memory the words of Christ, not our own words. Jesus told the apostles not to worry what they were to say before governors and kings for His sake. He did not guarantee them they would never make an error in speech, stumble, stutter, or sneeze.

I didn't mean to imply that you had made all those arguments. I did want to give some generic comments on the issue. Sorry if I did not make that clear.

"He has claimed to have experience of the gift of tongues within himself and then he has claimed that he never made such a claim. I am waiting for him to "show us the panther". The miracles of the New Testament were verifiable. And if any claim to have these miraculous gifts they should be able to demonstrate that they have them. Brother Kelley has made such a claim and being unable to "show us the panther" or demonstrate that he has such gifts he has now sought to cover up the fact that he made such a claim. This is not the way those who actually possessed those gifts in New Testament times behaved."

You make some assumptions: 1. That those who exercised spiritual gifts in the scriptures could do so at will. 2. That all who exercies these spiritual gifts did so up to the same 'level' that the aposltes used them.

Even Paul seems to have experienced an ebb and flow of the gifts.

Furthermore, I don't see the apostles 'showing the panther' (whatever that means) to skeptics. Jesus didn't give the Pharisees a sign when they asked for one except for the sign of the prophet Jonah. He didn't do miracles for Herod. I don't see any evidence that He told the soliders who was smiting Him. He didn't come down from the cross and save Himself in that way as He was taunted to do. He could nto even do many mighty works in His own hometown bcuase of hteir unbelief.

You think that those who have experienced these gifts are either deluded or lying. And you expect to be shown the panther! You need to go to the Scriptures and study, instead of asking to see miracles. Believe first, and then maybe you will see.

Occasionally, Jesus may treeat someone like He did Thomas, who said he would not believe unless he put his fingers and hand in the wounds. Christ appeared to Thomas, and said be not faithless but believing.

This issue is not the resurrection of Christ, but is an important issue of how God operates. God worked miracles int eh church in the scriptures, and the Bible shows this as the way God operated. If you believe God is not willing to operate that way, the burden of proof is clearly upon YOU to prove that from the scriptures- not from your own skepticism and lack of experience.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

I think it was Benjamin on this thread that said someone made reference eariler to 'two or at the most three' tongues refering to sentences spoken.

That's interested. A retired Greek professor email pen-pal suggested something similar. He thinks there may be an ellipses in the verse, and it doesn't make sense for 'tis' (one) to speak 'two or three.' He thinks the 'two or at the most three' may refer to an omitted concept of 'logos' or rather 'logoi.' 'Logos' can refer to an entire treatise, or perhaps in this case, 'message.' The book of Luke is a logos.

Based on analogy to that, he thinks that 'Let the prophets speak two or three' may refer to the prophets speaking two or three messages.

Do you have a quote or reference for the other guy with a similar view? Maybe he talked about it with the guy I know about on B Greek.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

Lee, You need to be careful about your offers. My folks live near Atlanta. I live in Indonesia. You weren't clear that the person who came had to be successful at raising the person in the graveyard from the dead. So all I'd have to do was go to the graveyard and I'd get a free plane trip to Atlanta? Well, I still don't think I'd take you up on it.

If you want to mention Simon the sorcerer- he wanted to buy the power of the Holy Spirit with money. How far away is that from wanting to pay to get to see a miracle?

I realize you probably offer this as an empty challenge just to bolster your argument. I think you would be far better off just to go with what the Bible has to say about miracles to get an idea about God's power and the kind of things He is willing to do out of His mercy, and just go with that, instead of challenging people to do miracles with skepticism and unbelief.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

Since the topic of this thread seems to have metamorphosed from emotion in worship into a discussion of miracles in general and healing in particular, perhaps the following story might be appropriate.

I haven't had a tremendous amount of personal experience with claimed miraculous healings today -- at least not with those that were done through people claiming to have gifts of healing. I have seen some answers to prayer that seemed pretty miraculous. But my wife did have one experience that seems worth mentioning here.

A few years ago a Filipina who was a part of our church here in Hong Kong was diagnosed with a form of non-Hodgkins lymphoma. (I'll call her "Jan", which is similar to the nickname she went by.) The doctors didn't hold out much hope for her recovery, but they did the best they could. The whole church was praying for her. My wife was visiting Jan in the hospital 2 or 3 times a week and of course prayed for her when she was there. Whenever I visited I also had a prayer with her and for her.

Several months into Jan's illness, after she was already VERY sick, some acquaintances brought in a woman they knew from some kind of Pentecostal or Charismatic church who claimed to have the gift of healing. She visited Jan 3 or 4 times. My wife only ran into this other woman once. Most of the other woman's visits didn't happen to coincide with those of my wife. One time my wife was asked to stay away because the other woman was going to be there.

On the one occasion when this other woman and my wife happened to be there at the same time, the other woman was exuberant and was telling everyone that Jan had been healed! Jan still had all the symptoms, but if she just trusted God, the symptoms would go away. Soon after that the healer quit visiting Jan. Jan died a couple of months later.

Although my wife was only there for one of this woman's visits, Jan and her relatives told us some of what had gone on in some of the other visits. They said that the woman had "forced" them to speak in tongues. (Jan's husband came from some kind of Pentecostal background, so this wasn't completely foreign to them. But "forced" them to do it ....!?!) She also told them that she couldn't heal Jan -- whether this was before or after the time she said she had healed Jan, my wife can't remember. But the reason the woman gave for why she couldn't heal Jan was that there was something "demonic" about my wife! Either she had a demon or she herself was a demon! -- we can't remember which.

Funnily enough (Ha!), (a) I've never seen anything demonic about my wife, who has always seemed quite dedicated to Christ, and (b) it seems to me that Christ, his apostles and others with special gifts in the first century seldom had problems with casting out demons who interfered with their work.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

Benjamin,

There are plenty of quacks out there. In the first century, there were even teachers going around trying to get money and satisfy their lusts. Jesus warned of false prophets doing signs and wonders.

But there were also true prophets and true teachers going around in those days. That is why we have to be discerning. Jesus told us to beware of false prophets, and that we would know them by their fruit. This would hardly have been necessary to say if all prophets were false. If someone claimed to be a prophet, we could just say he were false if that were the case. Jesus said we would know them by their fruits. Paul also said not to despise not prophesyings but to prove all things and to hold fast that which is good.

Of course, not all who heal or claim to are or claim to be prophets. But we see in the New Testmaent that there are genuine gifts of healing and miracles, and false workers can try to do the same thing. Apostles were casting out demons, but the secen sons of Sceva tried to do the same thing.

False prophets and miracle workers might have an easier time working their way in among groups of believers who actually believe in the functioning of the gifts of the Spirit than those who do not. The New Testament gives us certain solutions for fasle teachers- being wise and discerning, etc. and does not teach us to deal with the situation by not believing in the gifts anymore, or by forbidding the operationg of the gifts of the Spirit.

The Saducees might be compared with cessationists and the Pharisees with non-cessationists for the purpose of my analogy. The Saducees acknowledged the Torah (first 5 books of the Bible) as being inspired, but didn't pay so much attention to the other books. The Pharisees believed in more or less the OT canon, plus a lot of other traditions. the Pharisees believed in the resurrection of hte dead, spirits, and angels.

Paul was able to divide the Sanhedrin over the issue of the reusrrection while debating before them. Some Pharisees suggested that an angel might have appeared to Saul.

While most Jews in Israel were probably not Pharisees, and certainly not Saducees (Zadokites)- since most weren't kohen- many of them may have believed in miracles. But not every rabbi going around trying to cast out demons or do some great work was genuine. Not everyone who claimed to be sent by God was sent by God.

I suppose one could just take the Saducee stance and be terribly skeptical of the supernatural, but that wasn't ture either.

The ability to know the truth lay in reckognizing when the Lord was really working and when He was not.

I don't think all theologically off-balance people who believe in healing fit the description of the false teachers in II Peter 2. Some may be Christians who are just wrong or goofy. There are plenty of other people who are off-balance, but happened to be interested in things other than healing.

Sometimes God heals in spite of the goofiness of people, and there are 'balanced' people out there preaching and praying for the sick.

Benjamin, If bad experience like this encourage you to not believe in the possibility of the operation of certain of the gifts of the Spirit today, really examine what you are basing your beliefs on. I reckognize that you seem to be open minded, and willing to examine your views in light of the scriptures.

Our beliefs are very much influenced by our experiences and what we have been taught through the years. When someone enters a group of Christians with certain ideas, he might not agree with the ideas of that group, but as he gets 'socialized' to become a part of the group, he is more likely to open up and accept that groups beliefs. That is the way people are. In the church, if we hold to and practice the truth, this can be a positive thing. On the ohter hand, our beliefs, teachings, and actions, can be a stumbling block for others. Even Barnabas began to follow Peter's example of not eating with the Gentiles. (Christians ate a meal together when they met back then.) No wonder Paul said to hold to the traditions he had passed down.

Your negative experiences concerning those who believe in the gifts might make you lean toward a cessationist position. I think this is the case with a lot of people who have run into 'charismaniacs' who talk about healing, but never actually do it, or who say 'shandai shandai shandai shandai' and call that speaking in tongues. This is a natural human reaction, but is it really objective?

If one does not believe that God might be willing to work miracles because 1) he hasn't seen miracles in his own church (the One True Church [TM]) 2) he has had bad experiences with those who claimed to do miracles

is that really being objective? Is it really arriving at doctrinal conclusions based on scripture?

[I'm not saying that you, Benjamin, think your church is the only church, but there are some with that attitude, and even many of those who don't may tend to think their type of church is somehow superior.]

Suppose one sees no miracles in his own 'one true church' experience. He sees some nut case talking about raising the dead, but who can't heal the common cold teaching weird stuff. Then he comes to I Corinthians 13, and just has the feeling that 'the Bible' fits into the perfect. This 'interpretation' may be motivated by the fact that he hasn't seen any real miracles, and those talking about miracles are theologically off-base.

There are plenty of theologically off-base charismatics around teaching goofy or even damaging doctrines. But that doesn't mean God doesn't really do miracles.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000

Brother Link:

You have said:

Lee, You need to be careful about your offers. My folks live near Atlanta. I live in Indonesia. You weren't clear that the person who came had to be successful at raising the person in the graveyard from the dead. So all I'd have to do was go to the graveyard and I'd get a free plane trip to Atlanta? Well, I still don't think I'd take you up on it.

It is apparent that you cannot read my words any better than you are able to read the scriptures. Notice what I said in my offer:

I will even pay that persons expenses to come and perform this miracle.

I even was clearer when I said : For I will wait for him to raise even one person from the dead. If he does not do so then I will expect him to reimburse me for my expenses and pay his own fare back home!

Now it is clear from these two statements that the only way you will get a FREE ticket to Atlanta is if you actually perform the miracle of raising the dead. If not your expenses are your own to bear.

But then, anyone claiming to have miraculous powers such as those found in the book of Acts should not have a transportation problem in the first place! For we read of the miraculous transport of Phillip from Gaza to Azotus after the baptism of the Eunuch with these words:

And when they were come up out of the water, THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD CAUGHT AWAY PHILLIP so that the Eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing. But Phillip WAS FOUND at Azotus: And passing through he preached in all the cities until he came to Caesarea. (Acts 8:39,40).

Thus, if the SPIRIT OF THE LORD is doing the same miracles today that he did in the book of Acts, as was claimed by Brother Kelley whom you attempt to defend, then you should not need a ticket to Atlanta in order to come and raise the dead. All you need do is ask the SPIRIT OF THE LORD to catch you away and miraculously transport you to Atlanta in the same way that he transported Phillip to AZOTUS!

I only made the offer of transportation because in a previous post someone, I believe it was Brother Sam, asked if I were going to pay the expenses for someone to come demonstrate their power in Atlanta. But if you could read you would have seen clearly that I would not pay for that transportation if the miracle were not performed. Now you act as if your only reason for not coming to Atlanta to raise the dead is that you do not think I am sincere in the offer that I have made. These were your words

Well, I still don't think I'd take you up on it.

Well, does this mean that you believe that you have been given the power to raise the dead but you will not take me up on the offer to come to Atlanta just because you do not want to take my money from me? Ha! I doubt very seriously if that is the case! You just do not have such powers from God, now do you? Your very need for transportation is proof that God is not willing to transport you miraculously as he did Phillip. So this is another Miracle found in the book of Acts that is not happening today. Is God able to do it? Yes he most certainly is able. Is he willing to do it? It does appear that he is not willing to do it. Now you cannot even get God to miraculously transport you to Atlanta much less then are you able to convince him to raise the dead through you.

Now, Brethren, we do not see anyone accepting the offer to come to Atlanta and demonstrate that they have the power that the apostles demonstrated. Paul did not just do a bunch of talking about these things. He told the Brethren at Corinth, And my preaching was not with enticing words of mans wisdom, but in DEMONSTRATION of the SPIRIT AND OF POWER. That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men but in the POWER OF GOD. (1 Cor.2:4,5). So the apostle Paul had no problem with DEMONSTRATING THE POWER OF GOD that was working within Him. This was Gods deliberate intent and promise. (Mark 16:17-20; Heb.2: 3,4). But all Brother Link and Brother Kelley are able to do is TALK. And Brother Kelley is unable to talk without lying, as I have proven beyond doubt that he has done, and he refuses to even attempt a serious explanation of his diametrically opposite statements. Unless he is able to reconcile them he has without doubt lied in one of the two opposite statements that he made. If he really believes that the miracles of the book of Acts are still happening today as he claims to believe then he would be more careful about not telling the truth for he must remember that Ananias and Sapphira died for lying to the Holy Spirit. It would therefore be very dangerous for him to lie about having miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit when in fact he does not have them. But he has nothing to fear because he knows that those miracles are not being done today. In some congregations this lying to the Holy Spirit in their giving money might almost wipe out the entire congregation! Brother Link and Brother Kelley, on the other hand, claim to have powers that they do not have but I cannot tell just yet whether Brother Link is self deceived or deliberately lying. All I know just now is that he is unable to demonstrate the power of God, as Paul was more than willing and able to do among the Corinthians who had Spiritual Gifts.

Brother Link, in Samaria, Phillip, by the power of God did many wonders and signs and multitudes believed BECAUSE OF IT! (Acts 8:6,7,11).

Even Stephen is found doing great wonders and signs. (Acts 6:8).

As you can see there is a vast difference between men like Paul, Stephen, Phillip, and Peter who DEMONSTRATED THE POWER of God and Men like you and Brother Kelley that only talk about the power of God.

You act as if raising the dead is not a good test since it only happened once in the book of Acts. Now Peter raised Dorcus from the dead in Acts 9:32-35). Some believe that Paul raised Eutychus from the dead (I am one of them) and if they are correct then that is at least twice that we find the raising of the dead in the book of Acts. However, even though he was taken up dead, if Pauls words indicating that his Life is in him meant that he was not really dead then we only have the one case as you state. However, one instance is enough to establish that raising the dead was a miracle that happened in the Book of Acts and unless you are willing to say that all of the miracles continue today EXCEPT the miracle of raising the dead your point that it only happened once in the book of acts is meaningless. For it did happen once and if All of the miracles found in the book of Acts continue today and you have the same powers as the apostles then we should expect that you could raise the dead, by the power of God as well as they.

Then you say that I am offering an empty Challenge with these words: I realize you probably offer this as an empty challenge just to bolster your argument.

Have no doubt about the fact that my challenge is not empty. It is your response to it that is empty. I am very sincere when I challenge anyone in the world to come to Atlanta and demonstrate the power of God as Paul and Peter did in the Book of Acts and RAISE THE DEAD. If you agree to come I will ensure that the News Media knows that you are coming to demonstrate the great power that God has given to you by raising the dead in a graveyard here in Atlanta Georgia. I am sure that your family will be so proud of you and it would be a great opportunity to visit them while demonstrating the great power of God.

No, I offer this as a test of anyone who claims to have such powers and the offer still stands and it is obvious that you are not willing to accept the offer. You would rather make empty sounds in the air about having these powers than to actually demonstrate them. Jesus did show himself alive after his passion to Thomas even though it appeared that he was lacking in faith and lingering in doubt. You can call me a Thomas. I believe very much in the miracles of the scriptures but I do not believe that you or Brother Kelley has any of these powers from God. Therefore your effort to depict me as an unbeliever is absurd. There were those who pretended to be apostles of Christ and Christ praise those who tested them and found them wanting. You are severely wanting Brother Link. It almost reminds me of an old song that says, Jesus walked on water and I know that is true but sometimes I think that preacher man would like to do a little walking too! I know the miracles of the scriptures are true but the false claims of miracles today are nothing more than pure frauds. The shame of it all is that is a fraud being perpetuated in the name of Christ our Lord!

You just want to talk but you do not have enough faith that God will do miracles through you as he did through the apostles in the New Testament. The one lacking faith here Brother Link is you. I am convinced that these miracles of the New Testament had a purpose and ended when they accomplished that purpose. But you on the other hand are convinced that they had no specific purpose and that they continue today and that you possess these powers. Now if you have faith in what you CLAIM to be true then you would be willing to come to Atlanta to raise the dead. But you just do not believe that God will raise the dead through you, now do you? You just do not BELIEVE IT, now do you? SO the one without faith here is not Lee Saffold who believes very much that Christ was raised from the dead and that the Apostles of Christ also raised the dead and that God has the same power today that he had then to raise the dead. I simply agree with you in believing that he is not WILLING to raise the dead through you or anyone else as he did in the book of Acts through the apostles. For the reason you do not come to Atlanta to raise the dead is simply because you do not BELIEVE that God will do such a miracle through you, now isnt that true?

Now this attitude of yours is very different from that of the Old Prophet Elijah who challenged the prophets of Baal. Hear his prayer to God:

And it came to pass at the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice that Elijah, the prophet came near and said, Lord, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, let it be known this day that thou art God in Israel, and that thou I am thy servant, and that I have done these things at thy word

Then God miraculously sent fire from heaven that consumed the burnt sacrifice and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. And when all of the people SAW IT they fell on their faces: and they said, the Lord He is the God; The Lord He is the God

This was a deliberate DEMONSTRATION that was intended to show that God was the God of Israel and that Elijah was his servant! And this demonstration was done in the presence of many unbelievers who were serving the false god, Baal.

But you do not have the faith that Elijah had to ask God to show that he is has given you miraculous powers. And you merely talk and make the excuse that miracles cannot be done by God because of the presence of unbelief! You and Brother Kelley are all talk and no action. If you really believe that spiritual gifts exist today and that God is doing miracles through the use of those gifts and that you possess these gifts then you would have no fear to pray that God would work such a miracle through you that would demonstrate to all that you are His servants in this capacity. Paul demonstrated such, Peter Demonstrated such and God was willing to perform a demonstration through Elijah to show that He was God in Israel and that Elijah was his servant. But he has not and he will not do any such thing through you or Brother Kelley, or anyone else in our day.

So we wait for someone to accept this challenge. Where is the man? It is not Brother Link or Brother Kelley. So where is one who has the powers that God gave the apostles today?

I have said this once before with these words:

So where is this miracle worker? Maybe Brother Link would like to come raise the dead for us? Maybe Brother Kelley at least knows someone who has this power as those of the New Testament possessed?

So tell us Brother link, would you like to come visit your family in Atlanta and raise the dead while you are here. I will make sure this is a BIG NEWS event so that if God has given you such powers the cause of Christ can be greatly benefited by the exercise of this gift. You know, Paul told Timothy to stir up the gift that was in him which indicates that he had some control over this gift and the use of it. Pauls admonitions to the Corinthians concerning the use of their gifts would have no meaning whatsoever if they did not have any control over when and where and how they would exercise or use them. Paul even said,  And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. So, we wait for you to accept this challenge to raise the dead. If you do raise the dead it will be at my expense. If not, you will pay for your own plane ticket as I have already stated so clearly that anyone could understand.

I doubt very seriously that you will accept this offer because you are all TALK and no POWER.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 06, 2000

Brother Kelley: You have claimed to have experienced the gift of tongues within yourself with your following words: I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Lee, you again make judgmental statments and assumptions that are not conclusive. Then you have claimed that you never stated that you have the gift of tongues with these words: First concerning the first charge, I never stated that have the gift of speaking in tongues (read my earlier post), I just stated that I have personally experienced them.

Now all we want you to do is to tell us just which statement is the truth as you understand it and which one is a deliberate lie? For it is certain to any thinking person that both of these statements cannot be the truth.

SO did you tell the truth when you claimed to have experienced tongues not only within people that you knew personally but within yourself as well or did you tell us the truth when you claimed that you have NEVER STATED THAT I HAVE THE GIFT OF TONGUES?

Which one is the truth as you see it and which one is a lie? You can repent of having told a lie but you cannot escape the simple fact that you have told one in this matter.

I urge you to repent of the lie, whichever one is the lie, and seek to stand by the one you believe to be the true, as you understand it.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 06, 2000

Brother Danny:

I appreciate your kind words from your last post. I apologize for not responding sooner but I have had some trouble getting on the forum the last few days. It seems that all I could get was the message this page cannot be displayed every time I tried to reach the URL.

I appreciate your willingness to contribute to the cause of having those who claim to have these miraculous powers to demonstrate their powers by raising the dead as both the apostle Paul and Peter did in the book of Acts.

I agree with you that it would be a good idea to raise someone like Brother A. Campbell, whom I think would be in a state of absolute shock to see the condition of the restoration movement today! He would most likely be appalled at the state of affairs at Bethany College.

However, it might be good to raise the Apostle and tell them that we just no longer have confidence in their written word and that we need a living apostle to guide us today! This is what it appears Brother Link would like to become among us. He seems to be trying very hard to become an apostle of Christ in the exact same sense, as the ones that Christ chose to be Apostles.

Be all of this as it may, I hope that you and the others have noticed that no one has accepted the challenge that you and I have offered to come and raise the dead like the apostles did in the book of Acts. It is certain that Brother Kelley will not accept this offer for when he was asked to demonstrate his gift of tongues he suddenly forgot that he had claimed to have such gifts! Ha! The memory is affected by stress isnt it! But lies are uncovered by demands for proof! Brother Link will not accept this offer either since he does not have any faith in what he claims to believe. He claims to have miraculous gifts and that we have apostles today, though he has been unclear as to exactly what he means by such claims because he wants to test the water before jumping in. It seems that the waters appear to be just too cold for him to go all the way to claim that we have apostles in the exact same sense as those chosen by Christ such as Peter, James, John, and Paul who was the last of all and born out of due time (1 Cor. 15:8).

So we just wait for a demonstration. It will not happen. The reason it will not happen is simply because that which is perfect (whatever anyone thinks it might be) has already long since come and that which is in part has been done away. (1 Cor 13:8). I am fully convinced that that which is perfect is the complete or total revelation of Gods will. It is the faith once delivered (Jude 3), which contains all things that pertain to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3). It is the perfect (or complete) law of liberty (James 1:18-25). But regardless, the fact that none are able to demonstrate these powers today is evidence that whatever the perfect is it has come and the miraculous gifts have ceased. If none are able to demonstrate these powers how can any make claims that they exist and continue today! Mere claims are not sufficient proof of anything. Such powers were demonstrated in the New Testament, so much so that the world could not contain a complete record of all of them (John 20:30, 31). Paul clearly demonstrate these powers (1 Cor. 2:4,5).and we therefore do not read of any arguments in the New Testament that such things did not exist for they were done so often and in such public view that it was impossible to deny that they happened. Such is not the case today.

I pray that our Lord will bless you and Jenny, and you entire family.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 06, 2000

Lee,

Your messages reveal a lot about the problems in your character. Please try to write in a mature, Christian manner, and then more people might be able to receive what you write. You should write to edify people not to entertain yourself by being contentious. Your posts are unedifying. Contentiousness is right in that list of sins in Romans 1, right after Paul's treatment of the issue of homosexuality.

My message about paying the airfare was tongue in cheek. I may have left out a smiley. I probably missed a couple of lines in one of your posts scrolling down or something. But your challenge does leave a loophole in it. Any dishonest con-man on the Internet could read your message, take you up on the challenge, let you pay for the ticket, and then just not reimburse you!

You wrote, "Brother Link and Brother Kelley, on the other hand, claim to have powers that they do not have but I cannot tell just yet whether brother Link is self deceived or deliberately lying. "

"For it did happen once and if All of the miracles found in the book of Acts continue today and you have the same powers as the apostles then we should expect that you could raise the dead, by the power of God as well as they. "

"You would rather make empty sounds in the air about having these powers than to actually demonstrate them."

If I were to be like you, I could follow your example and write 20 repetitive paragraphs to call you a LIAR LIAR LIAR for insinuating that I claimed to have the same powers the apostles did.

Your reading way too much into my comment about not coming to Atlanta.

Where did I ever claim to have the 'power' to raise the dead. I blieve that God can raise the dead today, as he did inthe book of Acts. But even in the book of Acts, we don't see this on every page.

You act as if the apostles always did miracles purely at will. On one occasion, Paul had a crippled man stand and be healed when he saw that he man had the faith to be healed. In Ephesus, God did extrordinary miracles through the hands of Paul. These miracles were beyond the normal ones. If miracles were completely under Paul's control, why didn't Paul always do extra-ordinary miracles? Why do we see at times that God granted miralces to be done? The 12 had done a lot of miracles, but after a persecution, we read in Acts 4 that he apostles prayed that God might stretch forth His hand to do signs and wonders. Then, we read about great miracles, people wanting Peter's shadow to fall on them so that they might be healed. This idea about the apostles just automatically doing miracles for anybody is your idea, not the plain teaching of scripture.

God was behind Elijah offering that sacrifice. Elijah didnt' go up to that mountain _in spite of God_ and make God do a miracle because He was a prophet.

You need to read your Bible. I Corinthians 12 shows us that gifts are distributed. Someone might be able to speak in tongues, but that doesn't necessarily mean he can raise the dead or automatically transport himself to Azostus or Atlanta.

Take a look at that passage. We don't see Philip willfuly engaging his spiritual teleportation powers and making himself appear in Azostus. The Lord put him there. Let's apply your challenge on modern believers to the apostles. Do you think htey could willfully transport themselves? Why then, did they take boats all over the place? If Paul didn't want to sail in the winter, and he could do miracles, why didn't he just transport himself to Rome using the miraculous powers under control? You can think of those questions yourself. They don't bother me, becuase I don't think that because Philip was transported once, the apostles could transport themselves.

Did you add the challenge about transporing oneself just in case someone actually wanted to take you up on the airfare to Atlanta?

You wrote:

You need to understand your Bible.

The fact that the dead were raised on occasion does not mean that all the apostles could or would always raise the dead. Do you think if someone obnoxiously wrote the apostles an unbelieving challenge to pay boatfare if one of them came to his city and raise the dead, that the the apostles would have accepted the challenge? If Jesus could not do many mighty miracles in Nazareth becuase of their unbelief, do you think someone would come to Atlanta to raise the dead while you stood there and scoffed?

A lot of your repetetive inflammatory message is based on the false presupposition that AKelly and I claim to be able to raise the dead. I dont' claim to have all the gifts of the Spirit, and I don't see AKelly claiming that either. Biblically, I don't see spiritual gifts as something that are only controlled by the will of man. God's sovereignty and leadership was involved.

Do you think Peter could just have visions whenever he wanted to, or did God have to give them. Could Agubus legitimately prophesy anything he wanted to, or did he need to get the message from God? The Spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. But that doesn't mean the prophets were free to make up anything they wanted and prophesy it. In I Corinthians 14, Paul was dealing with the issue of prophets needing to fall silent and let another continue prophesying.

Not all gifts are the gift of prophecy, and the Bible does not teach that all gifts are 100% under the control of the person with the gift. If Paul could get a 'word of knowledge' any time he wanted to, why did he just hope to go visit the Romans. Why didn't he just use his gift and 'know' it? Why would he plan to meet the Corinthians, and then not make it? Why didn't he just read the future?

You wrote, "I am convinced that these miracles of the New Testament had a purpose and ended when they accomplished that purpose. But you on the other hand are convinced that they had no specific purpose and that they continue today and that you possess these powers. "

I supose I could follow your example and call you a LIAR for making this claim. I believe that miracles had many purposes. One of hte purposes of miralces was to attract attention to the Gospel. Miracles opened up new areas to the Gospel. Christ did miracles out of compassion.

The reasons for miracles I believe in are based on scripture. What is your reason for miracles? If you believe that the ONLY reason for miracles was to confirm the truth of the New Testmaent cannon of scripture, then your beliefs contradict the teaching of scripture.

I notice you quoeted the verse about Paul's preaching being with the demonstration of the Spirit and of power, rather than being in words of man's wisdom. - If you do any preaching, which category does your fall into?

"However, it might be good to raise the Apostle and tell them that we just no longer have confidence in their written word and that we need a living apostle to guide us today! This is what it appears Brother Link would like to become among us. He seems to be trying very hard to become an apostle of Christ in the exact same sense, as the one's that Christ chose to be Apostles. "

Where do you get this stuff? I believe in the apostolic gift of planting churches as soemthing for this day and time. I have not tried to do what you accuse.

I remember the verse in Romans 2, where it says that those who judge do the same things. You pick apart brother Kelley's message, accusing him of being a liar. I don't blame him for not responding to you.

You show your own lack of integrity with quotes like the one above. You who accuse others of being LIARs.

You really need to repent. You come across as a man writng more for your own entertainment than to build up other people. In fact, you attack rather than build up in these messages. I suppose you can deceive yourself and say that you are concerned for the truth above all else, while you falsely accuse and attack men for whom the Truth was revealed.

"But regardless, the fact that none are able to demonstrate these powers today is evidence that whatever the "perfect" is it has come and the miraculous gifts have ceased."

Your logic is flawed. It's like the person who did not believe there were any Missouri panthers because he had not seen any. 'If I haven't seen it in my church or my experience, it must not be real.'

Furthermore, your statement has no basis in scripture. The Bible doesn't say anything about 'miraculous gifts' ceasing when 'the perfect' comes. It does speak of 'the imperfect' ceasing. Paul said 'know we know in part, but then I shall know even as I am known' (paraphrased.) The gift of 'miracles' is not mentioned in regard to the perfect. You are making theological assumptions. Saying 'the perfect' has come does say anything about whether miracles have ceased.

One occurence of a genuine miracle in modern times proves that miracles continue on. You living your whole life and never seeing a miracle doesn't prove anything except that you haven't seen a miracle. I've seen the effects of God healing people. I've witnessed other gifts in operation more, but I wrote in another thread, or maybe this one, about the girl that when to my school when I was in the 8th grade whose crossed eyes were healed in one night.

You wrote: "Paul clearly demonstrate these powers (1 Cor. 2:4,5).and we therefore do not read of any arguments in the New Testament that such things did not exist for they were done so often and in such public view that it was impossible to deny that they happened. Such is not the case today."

There are many cases where we read about Paul entering a city and preaching and there was no mention of miracles. On one occasion, he did a miracle (when he saw that the man had faith to be healed) and the group wanted to sacrifice to him and Barnabas. Eutychus was raised up (maybe from the dead, maybe preserved from death) in the presence of believers.

If you saw a genuine miracle from God- for example someone with blind eyes healed, wouldn't you reason it away somehow? Maybe you would think the person was originally wearing colored contacts and it was all a scam. If you couldn't reason it away, maybe you could try to attribute the miracle to the power of Satan. People can always find ways to deny these things.

On another topic:

"those chosen by Christ such as Peter, James, John, and Paul who was the "last of all" and born out of "due time" (1 Cor. 15:8). "

Look it up in Greek, 'born out of due time' means prematurely born, rather than born too late. Christ appeared to Paul, but you have to take it into context of the list he was referring to. Christ appeared to John, most book daters would hold, after Paul. John saw Jesus as recorded in the book of Revelation.

-- Anonymous, August 07, 2000

Lee, There is a mistake in my previous message: a 'You wrote:" with no quote following.

Danny, "Your whole line of thinking is along the childish line of "Can God make a rock so big He can't pick it up?"

Can you illustrate the problem with my line of reasoning, rather than just making such an assertion.

If I met someone who raised a dead person a day here in Indonesia (I have never met such a person, to my knowledge), do you think I would even mention Lee's challenge? Even if I had raised the dead myself, I would be wise not to take Lee up on his challenge. What good would it do to perform miracles just for Lee's satisfaction. We see inthe scritpures in Jesus ministry that miracles were given in response to people's faith. When Jesus wanted to raise the dead, he put forth the scoffers. I don't see where he went to a scoffers house who didn't believe in miracles just to prove Himself. Herod had hoped to see a mriacle, but did Jesus appease him? Is it fitting for a Christian to cheapen miracles to do them for someone's entertainment? Christ also could not do many mighty miracles because of someone's unbelief.

Lee, you should keep in mind what you are scoffing about. I don't claim to have any power in myself to do miracles, and I don't even claim to have been used in that gift. I believe that God can do miracles, and that He sometimes does. That is what I believe in. If you want to scoff and challenge, keep in mind the power I am talking about is the power of God, operating according to the will of God.

Would you say to God, 'Show me a mriacle, and prove yourself?' Keep that in mind, because, if you are wrong (and you most certainly are) then your scoffing is out of line.

There is something else you should think about in regards to the perspective of someone who believes in miracles. We also believe that God can lead and direct individual believers. For example, I prayed about it and before I got my current job, and sensed the Lord telling me to interview, and later got an assurance that the job would be mine. I prayed and prayed and prayed until I sensed the Lord speaking to me about whom I should marry.

I, and a lot of other people who believe in miracles, don't believe miracle workers just go around doing miracles like Superman flies. the will of God is involved in all of this. Jesus didn't walk on water every day to satisfy the curiosity of onlookers. He did what He saw His Father doing. Christ came as our example.

Something else you need to keep in mind- even if there were someone who regularly raised the dead, that does not mean that he even necessarily has gifts of healing like the Twelve apostles did. Apostles like Paul had a great number of gifts working in them. Other miracle workers in the church may have not have done as many miracles as the apostles did. The apostles prayed for God to do signs and wonders in Acts 4. There was even an ebb and flow of miracles in there ministry. Your challenge does not take into account a lot of teachings of scripture about miracles, and it proves nothing.

You have absolutely no scriptural evidence that miracles owuld end in the I century. I Corinthains 13 doesn't say miracles will end. If miracles and other gifts you don't believe in occuring today ended when the New Testmaent was completed, why did they continue on in the history of the church after the first century? Church history does not fit your belief. If you are serious about researching this issue, go down to the library, use interlibrary loan, and get _The Spirit and the Church: Antiquity_ by Burgess. it is the first volume.

Link

-- Anonymous, August 07, 2000

Link,

You said, "Look it up in Greek, 'born out of due time' means prematurely born, rather than born too late. Christ appeared to Paul, but you have to take it into context of the list he was referring to. Christ appeared to John, most book daters would hold, after Paul. John saw Jesus as recorded in the book of Revelation."

I did -- look it up, that is. What I found is interesting. You are partly right, though not, I'm afraid, to the extent of supporting the point you seem to be trying to make .... Except I'm not really sure what that point is. Perhaps you could clarify. What is your point in bringing this up? -- not just this once, but at least a couple of times in different threads.

-- Anonymous, August 08, 2000

Bejamin,

the main reason I bring it up i sbecause people try to use the KJV of the verse to argue for the idea that Paul was born late- the last apostle born in a time when there were no other apostles being born. The Greek shows that Paul was like a premature infant.

Premies might not have had a high survival rate back then.

-- Anonymous, August 09, 2000

Link,

As for Paul being born "late", isn't that what he himself says? -- "LAST OF ALL he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born."

As for the word itself, you are choosing the most "positive" of several possible definitions, seem to be attaching a "time" element that isn't really there in the original (I realise that you are doing this in reaction to others who are doing the same thing on the other side, but "two wrongs don't make a right"!), and you may be reading into it our modern 20th Century situation regarding premature births. As you said, "premies" didn't have a very good survival rate back then.

Rather than "premature birth", most of the sources I consulted gave the meaning of the word as "miscarriage", "abortion", etc. One even suggested "monster" as a possible meaning in some contexts. The emphasis seems to be NOT on the time element (in either direction), but on something that is born not properly developed, a "misfit", something one would not normally expect to survive.

In what way was Paul a "miscarriage", or a "misfit"? He gives part of the answer clearly and directly himself -- "LAST of all he appeared to me also, AS TO one abnormally born" -- AFTER "all the apostles"! Secondly, if we think about it in reference to the idea that a "miscarriage" is "not properly developed", Christ had appeared to EVERYONE ELSE in that list in the 40 days between his Resurrection and his ascension. Paul is the ONLY one in this list to whom Christ had appeared "abnormally" and "out of time", by appearing to him separately after the ascension. (He did appear AGAIN to John, but John didn't base his apostleship on that later appearance.)

-- Anonymous, August 10, 2000

I have to concur with Benjamin. Although the term apostle is used of many in the New Testament, it appears there was a specific office to which only the Twelve and Paul belonged. The qualifications for this office are found in the first chapter of Acts, where Peter says, "Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John's baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection." Paul was the last Apostle chosen for this special office, abnormally called due to special revelation of His resurrection on the road to Damascus.

-- Anonymous, August 10, 2000

John,

Notice that Paul himself did not fit the requirements Peter listed. At least, it is extreeeeeeeeemly unlikely to think Paul was with the Lord since the days of John the baptist, then persecuted the church probably decades later as a 'young man.'

Benjamin. Your reading into my posts some things I did not actually say. When you asked me to intepret the passage, I pointed out that premies had low survival rates back then. The word of God often is very deep. there may be something prophetic to the fact that Paul was prematurely born. I agree that the most straight-forward interpretation of the text seems to be that Paul seem to be that Paul was like a premature baby in that he was unlikely to make it, but he did survive.

After Paul was called, there were other apostolic teams going around doing the work of the ministry. Paul was not the last to see the Lord. John sawhim later. And he was not the only person other than the 12 to be refered to as an apostle. There are apostles other than Paul and the 12 mentioned in this very passage! Jesus appeared to 'all the apostles' after appearing to the 12 and before appearing to Paul.

The most straightforward way of interpetatin I Thesalonians 2:6-7 is to see Timothy and Silas as apostles. Unless you want to say that Paul, Silus, and Timothy were just 'like' apostles of Christ. Do you think they were just acting like apostles?

Paul wpoke of 'we' refering to apostles, and said that they worked with their own hands. In the same epistle, he mentions that he and Barnabas worked for a living, while other apostles received support. THe 12 probably all received support. Paul and Barnabas worked to support themselves as they traveled. So who are the 'we' apostles? IT is unlikely that it refered to the 12. Some say that it refers to Paul, Apollos, mentioned in the chapter. It may refer to Paul, Silas, and Timothy. After all, who else had the Corinthians met? Why would he refer to 'we apostles' about other apostles they had not met, who didn't fit the entire description in the passage (working with their own hands.)

Where is the definition of "12 + 1" for apostles in the Bible? Patristic writings at least acknowledged the 70 as apostles as well. The '12+1' may have even become popular inthe post-Reformation era. But where is the scriptural support for this category?

'The 12' get a category of their own. Paul, according to his own understanding in I Corinthains 15, was not one of the 12. There were apostles other than the 12 that Jesus appeared to before his ascension mentioned in that same chapter. Jesus appeared to Paul. Scripture also refers to Barnabas, Silas, Timothy, and others. Barnabas traveled, preached, appoitned elders- apostolic work.

If you create a '12+1' category, what good does that do, since Barnabas did the same type of work?

-- Anonymous, August 10, 2000

I wanted to respond to something that E Lee Saffold wrote above.

Lee wrote,

Brother Kelley has said:

>>>>>The Lord and His mighty HS are working on me. The Spirit indeed is revealing to me each and everyday that there is more and more to experience in my Christian walk.

Now I never thought that I would hear Brother Kelley claim to be inspired! But he has surely done so with these words. Notice how he speaks of the Spirit revealing. He is telling us here that he is receiving revelations from God. So if those revelations are being written down in this forum then Brother Kelley is writing inspired scripture!<<<<<<<

Is it profitable to tear someone's words apart for no reason like the above quote? I know this is an old quote, but it shows some of the problems with this thread, and the attitude that has been displayed in some of the messages.

There were prophecies written down that were not recorded in scripture. The Bible even makes reference to the book of Iddo the seer. Bro. Kelly's claim in no way implies that his writings should be added to the canon of scripture. I can see why he didn't want to continue the discussion with Lee.

Lee, what you think about Paul's prayer: Ephesians 1:17 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:

Do you disagree with Paul and think that it is a BAD thing to have the Spirit of revelation. Do you think it is bad to be led by the Holy Spirit, and not just interpret the Bible with our own mind. Instead of just reading the Bible, we should do what the Bible says,a dn seek to have what the Bible teaches we should have. What good is it to say that we have to JUST go by the Bible, and the Bible is all we need, when the Bible tells us other things we need, like LOVE, and the guidance of the HOLY SPIRIT.

Most people, when they say that all you need is the Bible, don't mean that you don't need to have the things the Bible teaches us to have. Having love is not a challenge to the authority of scripture. Neither is having guidance from the Holy Spirit. Neither is genuine the operation of the gifts of the Spirit.

-- Anonymous, August 10, 2000

Brother Link:

You seem to have some problem with the words, which I have written, which I now quote:

Now I never thought that I would hear Brother Kelley claim to be inspired! But he has surely done so with these words. Notice how he speaks of the Spirit revealing. He is telling us here that he is receiving revelations from God. So if those revelations are being written down in this forum then Brother Kelley is writing inspired scripture!

Now anyone who is able to think can see exactly what I meant by what I said. Notice that I said IF the things that GOD supposedly revealed to Brother Kelley were being written in this forum then Brother Kelley would be writing inspired scripture. The word scripture simply means writing. If God revealed something to Brother Kelley and he wrote those revelations down then the things that he wrote would have been inspired of God for they came from God.

Now, please note that I said nothing about them being added to the Canon. But if they were inspired and God revealed them to Brother Kelley and told him to write them down then they would be writings that were inspired by God. That is what I said and it is true if God revealed those writings that they would be inspired scripture as much as anything written in the word of God. Now you know and I know that Brother Kelleys words in this forum were not revealed to him from God for he has so severely contradicted himself that he cannot escape the fact that he has lied. God does not reveal lies.

Then you ask:

Is it profitable to tear someone's words apart for no reason like the above quote? I know this is an old quote, but it shows some of the problems with this thread, and the attitude that has been displayed in some of the messages.

It is your opinion that I have torn Brother Kelleys words apart for no reason. You assume this but do not prove it. I have challenged his words in their context.

You do not particularly like my attitude because you have judged me as being judgmental and cannot see that you cannot do so without being guilty of the very crime that you accuse me of having committed. You cannot judge me as being judgmental without being judgmental yourself in the process. I have always contended that it is not wrong to make judgements concerning the doctrine that any teacher is trying to propagate. That applies to me as well as anyone else. I do not mind that you have judged me, as having a judgmental attitude for I do not believe it is wrong to have such an attitude toward those who put themselves forward as teachers. For our Lord told us By their fruits ye shall know them. But you on the other hand condemn making judgements of others. I understand your reasons for doing so but then you turn around in practice and make judgments concerning just whom, in your opinion is judgmental and thereby violate your own principles. You judge my attitude because you object to the fact that I make judgments of others doctrine. I can only see through this that you and I are alike in practice. We are both judgmental, now art we? The difference is that you think it is wrong to be judgmental and I see that it is right. So you are right to judge me and I do not complain but you are surely inconsistent with your own principles in making those judgments.

Then you make an assertion that you do not prove as follows:

There were prophecies written down that were not recorded in scripture. The Bible even makes reference to the book of Iddo the seer. Bro. Kelly's claim in no way implies that his writings should be added to the canon of scripture. I can see why he didn't want to continue the discussion with Lee.

Now does the Bible tell us that Iddo the seer was without doubt inspired of God? Just because one is referred to as a seer does not necessarily mean that God actually inspired him? I did not say that Brother Kelley made any such claim that his writings should be added to the canon. I simply said IF God actually inspired what he wrote then his writings would be inspired scripture. Now whether those inspired scripture should be added to the canon of Scripture or now I had nothing to say. You drew that conclusion for me. Now, if he wrote down what was proven to be words that were inspired of God, I would ask one to explain why we should not accept his inspired writings as a part of the canon of inspired scripture. Your feeble attempt to explain how God's inspired words, when written down, are not all to be a part of the "canon" is pathetic.

Then you asked me what I think of Pauls prayer:

Lee, what you think about Paul's prayer: Ephesians 1:17 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:

Well it is obviously inspired since it is a part of the inspired canon of scripture. Second, it is exactly what one would expect an apostle to pray concerning those Ephesians who had spiritual gifts through the lying on of his hands. (Acts 19:1-6) and who lived during the time when Gods will had not been completely revealed and the only way they had of knowing what God wanted them to do was through receiving such wisdom and partial revelations. (1 Cor. 13:8). Once the complete revelation of Gods will came Pauls prayer had been answered. Now that Pauls prayer has been answered we have knowledge of him through those things that God revealed to us in the inspired scripture. (2 Peter 1:3;Jude 3; 2 Tim. 3:16).

Your implication that Paul was praying for all Christians at all times including those of us living 2000 years later is a total misuse of this scripture. Yes this passage has application to us but it is not a prayer directly for us. We have now the inspired scriptures and the completed revelation of Gods will and we received it through those very gifts that the Ephesians and others received through the laying on of the apostles hands.

Today, we benefit from that same spirit of wisdom through those very revelations of the knowledge of him that were received through the apostles and other inspired writers of the New Testament. If you want knowledge of Him today the word of God sufficiently provides all that pertains to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3).

Then you asked me:

Do you disagree with Paul and think that it is a BAD thing to have the Spirit of revelation.

No, it is not Paul that I disagree with. It is you and Brother Kelley that I disagree with. It is not a bad thing to have the spirit of revelation it is a bad thing to claim to have the spirit of revelation when in fact God has not given you such a spirit. It is a bad thing to be deceived and deceive others in these matters. The gifts were given for the purpose of revealing and confirming the very word of God upon which our faith is built. They accomplished their purpose and none have been given those gifts today. (Mark 16:15-20; Heb.2:3,4; John 20:30,31; Acts 1:8; 2 Peter 1;3; Jude 3; 1 Cor. 13:8-11; Eph. 4:11;) The house has been built and you seek to continue to climb around on the scaffolding. The problem is that you are unaware that the scaffolding has been removed. Now you know full well that I have never said that having the spirit of revelation is a bad thing but you imply that I may think such. It is claiming to have such when you know that you do not have it that I believe is a bad thing. I also believe that being deluded into believing that you have such a gift when, in fact, you do not have it is a bad thing. The gifts that the Ephesians received through the laying on of Pauls hands (Acts 19:1-6) was a good thing and we have the word of God today because of these miraculous gifts and the miraculous confirmation those gifts provided for the word of God.

Then you asked:

Do you think it is bad to be led by the Holy Spirit, and not just interpret the Bible with our own mind.

It certainly would not be bad to be led by the spirit in any case. But the fact is that the Holy Spirit is guiding us through the word of God. The Bible is written to man and appeals to our own minds. God addressed the Bible to our minds and it is reasonable that we should use our own minds to understand it. But you appear to be asserting that the Holy Spirit interprets the scriptures for us. If this were true there would be no need for the canon of scripture for the Holy Spirit could just guide us without it to the right path. Tell us just what is the purpose of the word of God if we are being lead directly by the spirit of God? If the Spirit of God is leading me to do the will of God why would I even need to read the word of God? Is it possible that the Spirit of God will give me knowledge of the will of God without the word of God? If everyone who claims to be so lead by the spirit of God to interpret the word of God are in fact so being led then how is it they hold diametrically opposed interpretations of the word of God? If you say that some are following the spirit and others are not then how do you know which ones are following the spirit and which are not? Is it only those who agree with you that are following the spirit? The Mormons claim similar leading from the spirit. How do you know that they are not being lead by the spirit?

So you see, it is not bad to be led by the spirit but there are many false prophets gone out into the world claiming to be led by the spirit and they are not. You and Brother Kelley claim powers that you do not have and you claim leading of the Holy Spirit that you cannot demonstrate that you have. Now that is a bad thing! We are told to try the spirits (1John 4:1). You and Brother Kelley have been tried and found wanting. SO it is not the leading of the Holy Spirit to which I object, instead I object to false claims of such direct and miraculous leading as you and Brother Kelley assert for yourselves!

Then you assert:

Instead of just reading the Bible, we should do what the Bible says,a dn seek to have what the Bible teaches we should have.

No faithful Christian is just reading the Bible as you claim. They are reading and faithfully obeying it and teach all that it teaches daily. If God has promised something to us that we should have he will give it to us and nothing that we think will prevent his doing so. You obviously are referring again to the gifts that were given through the lying on of the apostles hands. These are not gifts that we are taught by the word of God to seek. The Christians living during the days of the apostles(who were laying hands upon people to confer these miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit), certainly were to seek these gifts from God through the apostles. Thus the reason that the Apostle Paul gives them advice concerning the gifts that they should seek.

Now Christians are to seek the word of God that was revealed and confirmed by these miraculous gifts. So the idea that we are being taught by the scriptures to seek miraculous gifts is just not the truth. We must remember that the word of God was written to the Christians of the first century that actually had miraculous gifts that they received through the laying on of the apostles hands (Acts 8:14-18; 19:1-6). Words written to those who had spiritual gifts do not have the same application to those of us today who do not have spiritual gifts.

Then you asked:

What good is it to say that we have to JUST go by the Bible, and the Bible is all we need, when the Bible tells us other things we need, like LOVE, and the guidance of the HOLY SPIRIT.

The Bible does not tell us that the Holy Spirit guides us apart from the word of God. Therefore we do not need anything to guide us except the word of God. In fact we are told that the word of God is sufficient and thoroughly furnishes the man of God to all good works. (1 Tim. 3:16,17). The word of God is powerful and capable to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart (Heb. 4:12). Therefore the word of God is sufficient and we do not need any direct and miraculous guidance from the Holy Spirit in order to know God and obey him and be faithful to him. WE are led by the Spirit through the word of God to love. (1 John 2:4,5). Notice verse 5 says, but whoso keepeth his word, in him hath the love of God been perfected. The guidance of the Holy Spirit is the word of God. WE do not need anything other than the guidance provided by the Holy Spirit through the word of God. If it were not for the word of God you would not even know that there is anything like the Holy Spirit. (Acts 19; 1-6). If you did not have a Bible you would not even know anything about the Holy Spirit. You are claiming that we are to seek some guidance of the Holy Spirit apart from the word of God. But this ignores the fact that the very purpose of the word of God is to guide us. (Ps. 119:11) Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path way. So it is good to say that we just have to go by the Bible since we do not have anything else to go by.

Your claims of a direct guidance of the Holy Spirit are without any evidence to support it. I would like to see you prove anything about this guidance without using the objective word of God to prove it. If you did not have the bible you could not even attempt prove that the Holy Spirit existed much less could you prove anything about how he guides us. You could CLAIM that anything is true but you could not prove it to be true without objective evidence. Subjective assertions of the Guidance of the Holy Spirit is useless for it cannot be verified apart from objective evidence which demonstrates in an objective way that can be examined by all that you have such guidance. Mormons claim to have the same guidance of the Holy Spirit that you claim to have and neither of you can give objective evidence that the Holy Spirit is guiding you. The reason this is the case is simply because neither of you are being so lead by the Holy Spirit. How would you prove that the Holy Spirit is not leading them directly as they claim? Why should we believe you and not believe them? Without objective evidence nothing you offer from subjective feelings and internal emotions would prove anything!

You see you want to say these things about the spirits guidance. But you cannot prove anything about his guidance without going to the guidance that he provided in the scriptures. This alone shows that the Holy Spirit does not guide us apart from the word of God.

Most people, when they say that all you need is the Bible, don't mean that you don't need to have the things the Bible teaches us to have.

Then you say:

 Having love is not a challenge to the authority of scripture. Neither is having guidance from the Holy Spirit. Neither is genuine the operation of the gifts of the Spirit.

No one has ever said that having love is a challenge to the authority of the scriptures. In fact the reason we have love is not because the Holy Spirit subjectively moves us to love but because the Holy Spirit through the word of God has guided us or commanded us to love one another. (1 John 2:4,5). WE do have guidance from the Holy Spirit and no one has denied that we do have guidance from the Spirit. The Holy Spirit Guided the Apostles into all the truth (John16: 13; 14:23) and He guides us through that same truth. But your contention that we are guided directly and miraculously by the Holy Spirit today is not taught anywhere in the word of God. Therefore it is contrary to the very guidance which the Holy Spirit has given through the Apostles.

Then you say:

Neither is genuine the operation of the gifts of the Spirit.

Now just here I agree that the genuine operation of the gifts of the Spirit is what is at issue. We do not have the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit today and therefore they are not genuinely operating today and we have given you and brother Kelley ample opportunity to DEMONSTRATE their Genuine operation today but you have failed miserably by refusing to even attempt a demonstration. It is the genuine operation of the gifts of the spirit that are at issue, Brother Link and your assuming that they are genuinely operating today without proving that they are so working that is the problem. We do not believe they are working without having evidence that they are genuinely doing so.

If the Holy Spirit is guiding us apart from the word of God then why does he allow you and I to disagree over this matter? Why doesnt he just come directly to me and guide me directly apart from the word of God and show me that I should not be against your teaching? Why do you try to convince me from the word of God when the Holy Spirit could correct me by moving me in the opposite direction without the word of God? Why are you being lead by the Holy Spirit in the opposite direction of your fellow Christians and He is leaving the rest of us in error? It does surely seem that Brother Danny was right about the elitism of those who make such claims of direct guidance of the Holy Spirit. It does appear that you think that God is leading you and the rest of us just do not want or do not have enough faith to allow God to lead in our lives.

Well my lunch break is over and I must return to my work.

I do pray that God will abundantly bless you and your family in all good things and that he will guide you through the word of God to greater knowledge of the truth.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 10, 2000

Link, it is better not to argue with Lee- his mind is closed. The Apostle Paul states in I Timothy 6:20b that, "Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith." This thread has truly benefited anyone (at least to my limited knoweldge).

Lee, has consistantly slandered anyone who opposed his incorrect view that the gifts have ceased. Although he has repeatedly wanted me or anyone else to show him the "panther" he still has not proven that the panther does not exist. Paul told timothy that people will "turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths" (II Timothy 4:4). It is shameful when Christians will accuse one another of lying and twist words to make it appear as such... when there never was ANY false deception.

Link, it just seems to me that no matter how you try to reason it out, there will always be some who will refuse to listen, even if it is truth. They will not hear, due to their traditions, man made teachings, and dead works. One things is for sure, nothing gets some more upset in this forum, than to argue for the existance of the gifts and the use of piano or even LOUD praise music with an assortment of instruments!

I will pray for you and yours that the Lord will graciously increase His "Leading" in your life so you can win the masses for His names's sake and the gospel .

-- Anonymous, August 10, 2000

Now we see that Brother Kelley feels slandered as his following words indicate:

Lee, has consistantly slandered anyone who opposed his incorrect view that the gifts have ceased. Although he has repeatedly wanted me or anyone else to show him the "panther" he still has not proven that the panther does not exist. Paul told timothy that people will "turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths" (II Timothy 4:4). It is shameful when Christians will accuse one another of lying and twist words to make it appear as such... when there never was ANY false deception.

But it is clear in this case that it is Brother Kelley that has "turned his ear away from the truth" for he has made two diametrically opposed statements as follows:

On July the 6th 2,000 Brother Kelley said:

I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Lee, you again make judgmental statments and assumptions that are not conclusive.

Then on July the 9th 2,000 Brother Kelley said:

First concerning the first charge, I never stated that have the gift of speaking in tongues (read my earlier post), I just stated that I have personally experienced them.

These two statements are totally opposite of one another. First Brother Kelley tells us that he PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED THE GIFT OF TONGUES. He makes it clear that he did not merely experience it within people that he knows but within himself as well. Now he has not explained just how it came about that he personally experienced the gift of tongues within himself without having the gift of tongues.

Then he came along three days later and stated, I never stated that I have the gift of tongues.

Now this is, as Brother Ben so ably pointed out, a matter of when he was telling the truth, as he sees it, and when he was lying. We have repeatedly asked brother Kelley to explain how both of these statements could be true but he has failed to do so. We now ask him when did he tell the truth, as he believes it? Did he tell the truth when he said I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within others but within himself as well? Or did he tell the truth when he claimed that he NEVER stated that he had the gift of tongues? So do tell us Brother Kelley, when were you telling the truth and when were you lying. For it most certainly appears that you have lied in one of these two statements.

Now, this is not slander. It is a simple statement of the facts and a simple examination of Brother Kelleys own words. Now no one has taken his words out of context. I have even written the context of his words out in full for the benefit of all to see in the second time that I questioned him about this matter.

So we see that Brother Kelley wants to convince you that there is no need to argue with Brother Lee because he has his mind made up but he was willing to argue with me at length until he came upon such a terrible contradiction that he cannot explain. So it is clear that the problem is not that Brother Lees mind is all made up but that Brother Kelley just cannot answer the question or resolve this contradiction.

He has not stopped discussing this matter because he does not like my attitude because he and I have argued over several things at length in this forum and my attitude, which he never liked, did not cause him to withdraw from the discussion. He has withdrawn simply because his lies have been exposed beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt among those who are able to think and honestly reflect without any bias and he has no answer.

Brother Link tried to rescue him from this pathetic situation by claiming that he merely forgot what he had said before. Brother Ben gave a sufficient answer to that nonsense. So, I have repeatedly given my reasons for believing that the miraculous gifts ceased when the last apostle died and those upon whom they laid their hands upon died. I can repeat the arguments again, and again, and again if necessary and will be happy to do so as I have the time. But if I were like Brother Kelley I could just as easily take his escape mechanism and claim that he and Brother Link have their minds made up and are unwilling to even consider the arguments that have been made so there is no use arguing with them. But that is not what I will do. I will contend for the truth, as I see it, so long as I am able in mind and body to do so. I will do this because I care about these things and the souls of my Brothers and sisters in Christ. So, Brother Kelley, you have not been slandered but you have been caught in a lie and I cannot pretend that you have told the truth when it does appear that you have not done so.

You have tried to leave the impression that I have "twisted your words to make it appear that you were lying with these words:

"It is shameful when Christians will accuse one another of lying and twist words to make it appear as such... when there never was ANY false deception."

I have not twisted your words, Brother Kelley. I have merely QUOTED then exactly as you stated them and have put them side by side and the contradiction is obvious to anyone including Brother Link, who agrees with you and Brother Ben who is immently fair to both sides of any issue and Brother Danny who happens to agree with my position. The contradiction is there and you have shown that even you are keenly aware of the contradiction in that you have even tried to apologize for it thinking that your apology will excuse you from the requirement to either explain how they are not contradictory which you apology already admits or to admit that you did not tell the truth in one of those two statements. Brother Kelley you must realize by now that we are no longer at the point where I have merely ACCUSED you of lying. Rather we are at the point where I have proven beyond doubt that you have lied and you have no answer.

Those were your statements and both of them cannot be true. It is not my fault that you cannot keep your story straight. I have only pointed out the obvious contradiction and have asked you which statement is the truth. This would not be considered slander by any court of law in this land. If you have been slandered then you slandered yourself because you have without doubt left a distinct impression that you are not telling the truth. I have only noticed that fact and pointed it out to you and everyone else in this forum. So, it is your responsibility to take corrective measures such as repentance and reformation. Accept some responsibility for your words in this forum and stop trying to blame others for your self contradictions and lies. You should repent of the statement that is not the truth as you know it. I have no need to repent for having pointed out that you are not telling the truth with your words and will never believe that you have told the truth in this matter.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 10, 2000

Lee,

I'm considering bro. Kelley's advice. This is a public forum, so others can read and be instructed. I think I will continue for a while longer. Others may read, after all.

Lee,

Your assumption that the gifts have ceased is not based upon scripture. Beleiving that 'the perfect' refers to the completion of the canon is a human assumption. The scritpure does not teach that. It is plugging in (eisegeting) an idea into the scripture to arrive at your preconceived conclusion. It is making an assumption. Based on your HUMAN ASSUMPTION, you consider those who actually have experienced these gifts to be delluded or liars. This type of eisegesis can also cause others to fall into the trap of despising prophesyings, and dismissing them out of hand instead of 'proving all things.' It is also used by many as an excuse to disobey the actual commands of scripture- 'forbid not to speak with tongues.'

Disobeying scripture based on theological speculation.

Earlier you wrote: "Now in two places in the Book of Acts it is made clear that these miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were given only through the laying on of the apostles hands. (Acts 8:14-22) and that none else had any Part or lot in that matter). "

Here you misinterpret the scriptures. The Bible does not say that no one else had any 'part or lot in this matter.' The scripture says that Simon the sorcerer did not have any part or lot in the matter. And Peter, in the scripture says why, too. The reason is not because Simon wasn't an apostle. The reason was that his heart was not right before God. Quote the whole verse instead of yanking part of it out of context to try to prove a point the verse does not make. You should have more respect for the word of God than that. If gifts were only given through the apostles hands, then Peter passed up a great opportunity to point that out. Instead, the reason he gave for Simon having no part in the matter was the condition of Simon's heart.

The Bible does not teach that gifts were only given through the laying on of the apostles hands. That is just bad logic. Showing that gifts were given through the laying on of the apostles hands at times does not prove that gifts were ONLY given through the laying on of the apostles hands.

People die from car accidents. That is a true statement. Showing that a few people died from car accidents and then saying that people die in crashes, and saying 'Therefore people ONLY die in car crashes' is just plain illogical.

Gifts were not given ONLY thorugh the laying on of hands of the apostles. The Bible does not neatly divide gifts into miraculous ones and non-miraculous ones. If gifts- charismata- concrete manifestations of God's grace- were given ONLY through the laying on of hands of the apostles, do you believe there are any gifts of teaching, administration, etc? Why is it just the gifts that you don't believe in being given today that were given through the laying on of hands of the apostles. How convenient. I can't help but notice that the Bible doesn't teach that only certain gifts were given through the laying of hands of hte apostles. The Bible doesn't teach that gifts were only given through the laying on of hands of hte apostles.

The Bible says that the gifts of the Spirit are distributed as He wills, not as Paul willed. What do you say to I Corinthians 14:13, which advises saints to pray to be able to interpret a message in tongues. Notice that the gift of interpretation of tongues is listed in I Corinthians 12. Paul says to pray to be able to interpret. He does not say to pray for an apostle to arrive in town and lay hands on you so that you may interpret. Think about that.

The Bible disproves your position that gifts were given ONLY through the laying on of the apostles hands. Timothy received a gift through prohpecy with the laying on of hands of the elders. A gift! You might say his gift was not of the kind given through the laying on of the apostles hands, but my Bible uses 'gift' for both kinds of gifts. You can make categories using your own human reasoning, but that is not authorative like scripture.

Paul wrote in Romans 1 that he would like to impart a spiritual gift to the Romans. But we read in chapter 12, that the Romans had spiritual gifts, including prophecy. Paul wrote that we have gifts differing according to the grace given unto us.

Just think about that. The Romans had received grace and gifts from God. Paul didn't have to be there for this to happen. God COULD give gifts through Paul, an apostle. That was ONE OF the ways He gave gifts. But that was clearly NOT the ONLY way.

God even used the laying on of hands by prophets and teachers to separate Paul and Barnabas for ministry. No apostles had to be involved, because God was in it.

Lee, Show us the panther! Show us the verse of scripture that says that God does not give gifts today. The Bible teaches that God gives gifts to the church. Unless there is some scriptural evidence that God changes His mode of operation, then there is no reason to believe that God would not give gifts. If you believe that God WILL not give gifts today, what is your basis for it? You should not have a theological theory that puts God in a box. You should not try to limit God to say that God will not do this or that UNLESS YOU HAVE SCRIPTURE TO PROVE IT. You don't have the right to limit God. God says what He will or will not do.

So, unless you have some scripture to prove that God does not give out such gives, you should at least allow for the possibility that He might choose to do so, even if this is not a common thing in your experience.

The belief that gifts have ceased at the completion of the canon is based on a _human interpretation_ not on something in the text of Corinthians. There are a million other things that could fit in there. In fact, chapter 15 talks about our state in the resurrection, which fits well with the ideas in I Corinthians 13. This idea is consistent with the way Paul expands on different threads in his epistles. It is consistent with Paul's other 'long thoughts' in other epistles. It comes from the actual text of the book, I Corinthians. _Guessing_ that the perfect is the canon is not grounds for not believing in the gifts anymore.

The Bible clearly shows that gifts were given by God, and the scriptures do NOT teach that gifts were given only by the laying on of the hands of Paul or the 12.

So the Burden of Proof is on YOU to show us that the gifts have ceased- from scripture. I should not have to find someone to fly over there and raise someone from the dead.

In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus we read that the rich man's brothers would not believe even if one rose from the dead. They have Moses and the prophets.

Well, this is not about the resurrection of Christ, but it is still an important issue. You have the Bible. You should be convinced about miracles from the Bible. The Bible shows us how God operates.

Why is it when I show verses like I Corinthians 14:13 and other verses that show that your position is false, you don't respond to these points? I pointed out your own inconsistency- saying things about what I said that were not true. If you weren't so into rhetoric and tearing other people's arguments apart, it wouldn't bother me that you misunderstood something I said.

But since when someone else mistypes and forgets about it, you call him a LIAR, you should hold yourself to the same criterea. You should admit that you are also a LIAR or you should just quit being so proud and obnoxious and apologize to Bro. Kelly for your behavior. You should learn to love, go to where your brothers are, and share life with them, instead of writing messages full of rhetoric which you use as weapons in discussions against others.

I used to write like that, using other people's arguments agianst them, and getting a kick out of making a grandious argument. It was a carnal thing. God convicted me of it, and I had to repent of it. I had to start to learn to write in a way that edified others.

Stop being proud. Stop entertaining yourself. Cut out the sophistry and cheap rhetoric.

Btw, I didn't directly say that you said Kelley was adding to the canon. That did seem to be the direction you were going in. If that was not your point, why did you make such a big deal about what Bro. Kelley wrote. He wrote about the Spirit guiding him, a Biblical concept. You were the one who drew the conclusion that his words on the forum were inspired. He did not say that. then you used your own conclusion as a weapon on your discussion. This type of childish rhetoric is not edifying. Bro. Kelley been really reasonable and mature in this discussion. You haven't. You should learn from him, even if you do not agree with every aspect of his theology.

Btw, I think there is a difference between making a good righteous judgement and being 'judgemental.' You jumped all over Bro. Kelley using a bunch of sophistry to justify yourself. Bro. Kelley hasn't claimed to be infallible. If he wrote a sentence poorly or wrongly, and then forgot about it, you should cut him some slack. If he is a liar for doing that, you are a liar, too. I already demonstrated your 'LIE' above. You have yet to answer it. Does that prove you are a liar?....realistically, people can state their ideas poorly, misunderstand others, and forget what they wrote. It is not mature or wise to jump all over people who do that. You have to cut people some slack for human error. These things are not always intentional sin. If you were more interested in really discussin the truth instead of smashing others in arguments using cheap rhetoric, maybe you could do that. You should give people the benefit of the doubt when they make an error.

You insinuate and draw conclusions when you write, sometimes falsely, and state these things as facts. Either admit that you are a LIAR, or be a normal, reasonable, mature human being and apologize to brother Kelly for your childish rhetoric and immature behavior.

Support your beliefs with scripture. If the gifts ceased, the burden of proof is on your to PROVE it from scripture (not eisegete it inot a passage.) Otherwise, the 'null hypothesis' or the 'default' belief should be that God still gives out these gifts _as He wills._

It may not be your will for Him to give out these gifts, but He gives them out as HE wills.

-- Anonymous, August 10, 2000

Lee,

I'm considering bro. Kelley's advice. This is a public forum, so others can read and be instructed. I think I will continue for a while longer. Others may read, after all.

Lee,

Your assumption that the gifts have ceased is not based upon scripture. Beleiving that 'the perfect' refers to the completion of the canon is a human assumption. The scritpure does not teach that. It is plugging in (eisegeting) an idea into the scripture to arrive at your preconceived conclusion. It is making an assumption. Based on your HUMAN ASSUMPTION, you consider those who actually have experienced these gifts to be delluded or liars. This type of eisegesis can also cause others to fall into the trap of despising prophesyings, and dismissing them out of hand instead of 'proving all things.' It is also used by many as an excuse to disobey the actual commands of scripture- 'forbid not to speak with tongues.'

Disobeying scripture based on theological speculation.

Earlier you wrote: "Now in two places in the Book of Acts it is made clear that these miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were given only through the laying on of the apostles hands. (Acts 8:14-22) and that none else had any Part or lot in that matter). "

Here you misinterpret the scriptures. The Bible does not say that no one else had any 'part or lot in this matter.' The scripture says that Simon the sorcerer did not have any part or lot in the matter. And Peter, in the scripture says why, too. The reason is not because Simon wasn't an apostle. The reason was that his heart was not right before God. Quote the whole verse instead of yanking part of it out of context to try to prove a point the verse does not make. You should have more respect for the word of God than that. If gifts were only given through the apostles hands, then Peter passed up a great opportunity to point that out. Instead, the reason he gave for Simon having no part in the matter was the condition of Simon's heart.

The Bible does not teach that gifts were only given through the laying on of the apostles hands. That is just bad logic. Showing that gifts were given through the laying on of the apostles hands at times does not prove that gifts were ONLY given through the laying on of the apostles hands.

People die from car accidents. That is a true statement. Showing that a few people died from car accidents and then saying that people die in crashes, and saying 'Therefore people ONLY die in car crashes' is just plain illogical.

Gifts were not given ONLY thorugh the laying on of hands of the apostles. The Bible does not neatly divide gifts into miraculous ones and non-miraculous ones. If gifts- charismata- concrete manifestations of God's grace- were given ONLY through the laying on of hands of the apostles, do you believe there are any gifts of teaching, administration, etc? Why is it just the gifts that you don't believe in being given today that were given through the laying on of hands of the apostles. How convenient. I can't help but notice that the Bible doesn't teach that only certain gifts were given through the laying of hands of hte apostles. The Bible doesn't teach that gifts were only given through the laying on of hands of hte apostles.

The Bible says that the gifts of the Spirit are distributed as He wills, not as Paul willed. What do you say to I Corinthians 14:13, which advises saints to pray to be able to interpret a message in tongues. Notice that the gift of interpretation of tongues is listed in I Corinthians 12. Paul says to pray to be able to interpret. He does not say to pray for an apostle to arrive in town and lay hands on you so that you may interpret. Think about that.

The Bible disproves your position that gifts were given ONLY through the laying on of the apostles hands. Timothy received a gift through prohpecy with the laying on of hands of the elders. A gift! You might say his gift was not of the kind given through the laying on of the apostles hands, but my Bible uses 'gift' for both kinds of gifts. You can make categories using your own human reasoning, but that is not authorative like scripture.

Paul wrote in Romans 1 that he would like to impart a spiritual gift to the Romans. But we read in chapter 12, that the Romans had spiritual gifts, including prophecy. Paul wrote that we have gifts differing according to the grace given unto us.

Just think about that. The Romans had received grace and gifts from God. Paul didn't have to be there for this to happen. God COULD give gifts through Paul, an apostle. That was ONE OF the ways He gave gifts. But that was clearly NOT the ONLY way.

God even used the laying on of hands by prophets and teachers to separate Paul and Barnabas for ministry. No apostles had to be involved, because God was in it.

Lee, Show us the panther! Show us the verse of scripture that says that God does not give gifts today. The Bible teaches that God gives gifts to the church. Unless there is some scriptural evidence that God changes His mode of operation, then there is no reason to believe that God would not give gifts. If you believe that God WILL not give gifts today, what is your basis for it? You should not have a theological theory that puts God in a box. You should not try to limit God to say that God will not do this or that UNLESS YOU HAVE SCRIPTURE TO PROVE IT. You don't have the right to limit God. God says what He will or will not do.

So, unless you have some scripture to prove that God does not give out such gives, you should at least allow for the possibility that He might choose to do so, even if this is not a common thing in your experience.

The belief that gifts have ceased at the completion of the canon is based on a _human interpretation_ not on something in the text of Corinthians. There are a million other things that could fit in there. In fact, chapter 15 talks about our state in the resurrection, which fits well with the ideas in I Corinthians 13. This idea is consistent with the way Paul expands on different threads in his epistles. It is consistent with Paul's other 'long thoughts' in other epistles. It comes from the actual text of the book, I Corinthians. _Guessing_ that the perfect is the canon is not grounds for not believing in the gifts anymore.

The Bible clearly shows that gifts were given by God, and the scriptures do NOT teach that gifts were given only by the laying on of the hands of Paul or the 12.

So the Burden of Proof is on YOU to show us that the gifts have ceased- from scripture. I should not have to find someone to fly over there and raise someone from the dead.

In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus we read that the rich man's brothers would not believe even if one rose from the dead. They have Moses and the prophets.

Well, this is not about the resurrection of Christ, but it is still an important issue. You have the Bible. You should be convinced about miracles from the Bible. The Bible shows us how God operates.

Why is it when I show verses like I Corinthians 14:13 and other verses that show that your position is false, you don't respond to these points? I pointed out your own inconsistency- saying things about what I said that were not true. If you weren't so into rhetoric and tearing other people's arguments apart, it wouldn't bother me that you misunderstood something I said.

But since when someone else mistypes and forgets about it, you call him a LIAR, you should hold yourself to the same criterea. You should admit that you are also a LIAR or you should just quit being so proud and obnoxious and apologize to Bro. Kelly for your behavior. You should learn to love, go to where your brothers are, and share life with them, instead of writing messages full of rhetoric which you use as weapons in discussions against others.

I used to write like that, using other people's arguments agianst them, and getting a kick out of making a grandious argument. It was a carnal thing. God convicted me of it, and I had to repent of it. I had to start to learn to write in a way that edified others.

Stop being proud. Stop entertaining yourself. Cut out the sophistry and cheap rhetoric.

Btw, I didn't directly say that you said Kelley was adding to the canon. That did seem to be the direction you were going in. If that was not your point, why did you make such a big deal about what Bro. Kelley wrote. He wrote about the Spirit guiding him, a Biblical concept. You were the one who drew the conclusion that his words on the forum were inspired. He did not say that. then you used your own conclusion as a weapon on your discussion. This type of childish rhetoric is not edifying. Bro. Kelley been really reasonable and mature in this discussion. You haven't. You should learn from him, even if you do not agree with every aspect of his theology.

Btw, I think there is a difference between making a good righteous judgement and being 'judgemental.' You jumped all over Bro. Kelley using a bunch of sophistry to justify yourself. Bro. Kelley hasn't claimed to be infallible. If he wrote a sentence poorly or wrongly, and then forgot about it, you should cut him some slack. If he is a liar for doing that, you are a liar, too. I already demonstrated your 'LIE' above. You have yet to answer it. Does that prove you are a liar?....realistically, people can state their ideas poorly, misunderstand others, and forget what they wrote. It is not mature or wise to jump all over people who do that. You have to cut people some slack for human error. These things are not always intentional sin. If you were more interested in really discussin the truth instead of smashing others in arguments using cheap rhetoric, maybe you could do that. You should give people the benefit of the doubt when they make an error.

You insinuate and draw conclusions when you write, sometimes falsely, and state these things as facts. Either admit that you are a LIAR, or be a normal, reasonable, mature human being and apologize to brother Kelly for your childish rhetoric and immature behavior. I doubt you act like this all the time in your conversations with other people. If you did act like this- jump all over other people for minor erros in a converation, forgetting what they said, and calling them LIARS to their face, someone would probably slap you upside the head eventually. There are Proverbs about that.

Support your beliefs with scripture. If the gifts ceased, the burden of proof is on your to PROVE it from scripture (not eisegete it not a passage.) Otherwise, the 'null hypothesis' or the 'default' belief should be that God still gives out these gifts _as He wills._

It may not be your will for Him to give out these gifts, but He gives them out as HE wills.

-- Anonymous, August 10, 2000

Brother Link:

You claim that I have lied about something and that you have pointed it out and I have not answered it with these words:

I already demonstrated your 'LIE' above. You have yet to answer it.

How about pointing specifically to the words that I have said which you can prove beyond doubt is a deliberate lie and I will answer it. If you prove that I have deliberately lied, as I have proven that Brother Kelley has deliberately lied I will be very quick to repent of it. But thus far you have not demonstrated any lie that I have told as you falsely claim. All you have done is try to manufacture a lie with these words:

Why is it when I show verses like I Corinthians 14:13 and other verses that show that your position is false, you don't respond to these points? I pointed out your own inconsistency- saying things about what I said that were not true. If you weren't so into rhetoric and tearing other people's arguments apart, it wouldn't bother me that you misunderstood something I said. But since when someone else mistypes and forgets about it, you call him a LIAR, you should hold yourself to the same criterea. You should admit that you are also a LIAR or you should just quit being so proud and obnoxious and apologize to Bro. Kelly for your behavior. You should learn to love, go to where your brothers are, and share life with them, instead of writing messages full of rhetoric which you use as weapons in discussions against others.

Here you wish to call me a deliberate liar because said things about what you said that were not true. Then you admit that it is possible that I misunderstood what you said by saying,  If you werent so much into rhetoric and tearing other peoples arguments apart, it would not bother me that you MISUNDERSTOOD SOMETHING THAT I SAID. Now which is it Brother Link? Did I deliberately lie about something you had said or did I misunderstand something that you have said? In either case you have not DEMONSTRATED that I have deliberately lied about anything that you have said.

You have not shown any inconsistency in anything that I have said either. But you think you have done so and you claim that I have not responded. I have responded as much as I have the time to respond but I have not seen any place where you have shown any inconsistency that would stand the test of scrutiny by anyone that is honest and fair minded. Certainly you cannot point to a contradiction that is so clearly impossible to explain as the one that Brother Kelley has made.

First you try to defend Brother Kelley by saying that he forgot what he had said. Then you now say that he merely mistyped. It seems from this that you are trying to say that Brother Kelley intended to say something other than what he typed. Then why hasnt Brother Kelley immediately spoke and said this is a clear contradiction because I made a typographical error. He has not done so because he knows that he did not mistype. He said exactly what he meant to say and his words are not true in one of the two statements that he made. He has lied and it is now simply a matter of which statement is the lie and which one is the truth as he sees it? Now I know that it bothers you that the man who agrees with your position has been caught in a deliberate lie but accusing me falsely of deliberately lying is not going to help redeem him from his sin.

But do not expect me to apologize to brother Kelley for pointing out that he has lied to us. He is the one that has told a lie and therefore the one that needs to repent and apologize. I do not owe him any apology and one is therefore not forthcoming from me.

SO just what is your proof that I have deliberately lied about anything in this forum?

I know that you might like to slap my face because I have shown that Brother Kelley has lied. You are welcome anytime to come to Atlanta and slap my face if this will help you feel better but it does not change the simple fact that Brother Kelley has lied. As soon as you have slapped my face I will simply turn the other cheek and tell you one more time that Brother Kelley has lied. Now you have not said that you would like to slap my face but the thought of someone doing such a thing to me has crossed your mind. And you bring it up in this forum so it causes me to think that you might like to do this to me or you would like to hear that someone has done that to me. I cannot think of any decent reason that you would mention this slapping business. If someone deliberately lies to me I tell him or her, face to face, that they have done so. I have not been slapped yet.

This is all of the time I have to write. I do pray that God will bless you and your family.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

Lee, you need to listen to Link and quit being so arogant! You may be a good leader in the Seals but you are a poor responder to our comments. I will answer this one last time and try to make my point clear.

Both of the statements are true!!! Yes they are true!!! How can this be? The July 6th statement was true- I have experienced the gifts- but let us pick my words apart further. Did I say which gifts? It was tongues. Did I say how I expereinced them... no! But later I did explain as to how they were experienced. What does "I myself as well" mean? Does it mean I accually spoke in tongues? Or something else? In order to know that you must know my background and my intent and the context. Which I do not give... I just merely state that I have experienced them. Does this mean deception on my part? No. Maybe in complete reasoning- for I should have qualified my statment... but deception... no!

Now when I stated on July 9th, I told you that "I never stated that I have the gift of tongues"... which is true. Where do you read in the July 6th account that I said that I speak in tongues? Nowhere is it found. I did not misquote myself, nor was I lying. I simply stated the fact that I experienced them. Then I am quoted as saying that I never stated to you that I said I spoke them. So again, (I posted this reasoning before) what does expereinced mean? Does it mean that I have to accually talk in them? Whether or not I speak in tongues is irrelevant at this point- the simple argument rest in my words "expereinced" for I never once told you or anyone else in this forum that I spoke in tongues. My statement on July 6 does not say that. What can be seen by all in this forum is the simple fact... I experineced the gifts of tongues. How did I expereince them... one instance I did post. Did post all my expereinces... no. Do you or anyone else need to know those experiences... no. For this argument rest in my words or lack of them.

I would like to repent for not giving a complete and thorough explaination of my experiences when I make statments as such... I know I must back them up and qualify them. But to accuse me of a liar for something I never said... is at best inconceivable!

I am tired of trying to explain myself to you, not because I am a liar trying to avoid the truth; but that this argument is going nowhere fast. Why don't we agree to disagree and leave it at that!??

Yours In Christ AKelley

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

Lee,

You wrote, "Brother Link and Brother Kelley, on the other hand, claim to have powers that they do not have but I cannot tell just yet whether brother Link is self deceived or deliberately lying. "

I have not claimed powers I do not have at any point during this discussion. The above statement that you wrote is a lie.

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

Kelly and Lee,

Kelley,

I think Lee picked on the wording where you said something about experiencing the gifts 'within yourself.' You may have even said experiencing tongues 'within' yourself. My guess is this misunderstanding is based on your use of 'within yourself' in that one quote Lee has from you up on the top of the page. It was completely rediculous for him to say you were trying to trick everyone into thinking you are lying, since this is all on one web page for everyone to look up and see. If you hadn't spoken in tongues, as you said later, then your use of 'within' was very poorly, if not innaccurate wording. But for Lee to call you aliar because of that is just plain obnoxious.

Lee,

I don't want to slap you in the face, but I grew up in the south, and I know there are some places where people can get in a fist fight for behaving as you have, picking people's words apart and calling other people liars. In some mountain regions them's fighten words. It is not sane and reasonable to say that bro. Kelley has definitely lied based on the information you have presented. I don't blame him for refusing to respond to your behavior. That is the way a lot of people respond to this kind of situation. Some people don't believe in defending themselves. Others do.

I would guess the way you deal with people in real life is different from the way you deal with people on the internet. If you got out of the city and started calling Georgia boys LIAR really loud (caps is the equivilent of shouting) without good evidence like you've been doing around here, you'd get popped in the mouth. And if he popped you, what could you say. If you called him a liar again, you'd be asking for it again. there is a Proverb that talks about that sort of thing.

Actually, your behavior reminded me of a Proverb about the mouth of a fool asking to be slapped. I'm not directly accusing you of being a fool, but your style and accusations on here have clearly been foolish, and you really need to examine yourself and pray about these things.

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

Lee,

Some loose ends,

I didn't say you lied according to the definition I gave- telling falsehood with the intention to decieve. I gave examples of tearing your words apart. You have written many things that are clearly false, but you probably believe them all. I could pick apart your phraseology and the way you word things all day long and accuse you of being a liar if I wanted to. For example, I could give commentary on the following quote:

"But all Brother Link and Brother Kelley are able to do is TALK."

Suppose I were to seriously write the following commentary.

"You brother Lee must repent, for you are clearly LYING. It is obvious that Kelley and I have demonstrated the ability to TYPE or by some other means convey our thoughts on the Internet. In fact, I know that I have demonstrated my ability to type because I am typing now. But you do not know for certain whether or not I am actually a mute. Therefore you are a LIAR and must repent. Since you are a LIAR, your testimony is not true."

Now, if I were to seriously write something like that, others would consider it rediculous, unedifying, and obnoxious. Here I 'speak as a fool' or more accurately, 'write as a fool' to make a point. You should try to understand what people are saying, not pick their words appart and accuse them to feel like you are winning in the debate. I really doubt you go around acting like this when you actually avhe to confront people face to face.

Other loose ends- The fact that some people who claim to be led by the Spirit today come to conflicting viewpoints does not prove that the Holy Spirit does not lead. Some people claim to be correctly interpreting the bible and come to different conclusions, and that does not mean that there is no such thing as interpreting the Bible correctly in modern times. If such claims bother you, consider that maybe one person is right and the other is wrong, or maybe both are wrong. if it really bothers you, pray to God about it. Job had a lot of concerns about the way things worked that bothered him. But your whole line of reaosning doesn't prove anything about the continuance of the gifts of the Spirit. There may have been false prophets and teachers in the first century that claimed to be led of the Spirit in interpreting the Bible, when actually they were not. That doesn't take anything away from those who _were_ led by the Spirit.

Revelation from the Spirit is a part of every Christians life. It may not always be dramatic.

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

You accuse me of lying in the following words:

Lee, You wrote, "Brother Link and Brother Kelley, on the other hand, claim to have powers that they do not have but I cannot tell just yet whether brother Link is self deceived or deliberately lying. " I have not claimed powers I do not have at any point during this discussion. The above statement that you wrote is a lie.

Brother Link, You have claimed to have miraculous powers that you do not have with these words:

I've seen gifts of the Spirit at work that you would put in the 'miraculous gifts' category, and have even practiced some of them.

Now, I have not accused you of lying because I have not determined that you are deliberately telling us something that you know to be untrue. Or if you have deluded yourself into believing that you have these powers that you say I would put into the miraculous gifts category and that you have actually practiced some of them. With these words you are claiming to have powers that you know that I believe you do not have, and therefore I was telling the truth when I said that you claimed powers that you do not have. But I did not accuse you of lying, as I stated, because I was not sure whether you were self deceived of deliberately lying.

Now Brother Kelley without doubt has made claims of having powers that he latter admits that he did not have with these words:

On July the 6th 2,000 Brother Kelley said:

I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Lee, you again make judgmental statments and assumptions that are not conclusive.

Then on July the 9th 2,000 Brother Kelley said:

First concerning the first charge, I never stated that have the gift of speaking in tongues (read my earlier post), I just stated that I have personally experienced them.

Now Brother Kelley also made claims of having experienced the gift of tongues within himself and later denied having said that he had the gift of tongues. He has claimed powers for himself that he latter admits that he does not have and denies that he ever even claimed such gifts.

I have called Brother Kelley a liar because he has clearly lied in this case. His lies are obvious and undeniable. Your efforts to defend his lies are useless for there is no defense. These two opposite statements cannot be reconciled as both being the truth. At least one of them is not the truth and Brother Kelley knew that it was not the truth when he said it.

Therefore my statement that both you and Brother Kelley have claimed gifts that you do not have is the truth as I see it. Therefore that statement was not a lie but rather a statement based upon claims of having miraculous gifts of the Spirit made by both of you and that I am convinced that you do not have such powers.

Then in a later post you say:

I didn't say you lied according to the definition I gave- telling falsehood with the intention to decieve.

No, Brother Link you simply said that I lied. Yet in another of your post, dated July 23rd, you said the following:

Usually the word 'liar' implies that the person who says something false does so intentionally.

Now which is it,Brother Link? Do you believe I actually deliberately lied or do you not believe that I intentionally lied with these words of mine that you have quoted? Do mean to tell us that you think that I lied without having any deliberate intent to do so?

It is clear that you cannot make up your own mind whether I lied or not. When you decide let me know and I will answer it again. But it is clear that I did not lie about the claims that you and Brother Kelley have made concerning the miraculous powers that both of you have claimed to possess and I have said that you do not have such powers. Now that is clearly the truth and we have given you ample opportunity to demonstrate these powers that you claim to have but you refuse to even agree to prove to us that you have them. Even if the scriptures taught, which they do not, that miraculous gifts were to continue until the end of time it would not prove that you and Brother Kelley actually have the powers that you claim to have. Therefore I have again been correct in stating that you do not have powers that you claim to have.

So, you can try again for this statement is surely not a deliberate lie as you have falsely claimed.

As far as your concern that some good OLE boys here in the south are likely to punch me in the face you need not worry. I grew up in the south and I know these men and they appreciate someone who talks straight to them. And believe me I know exactly how to deal with those who would like to punch me in the mouth. But I only mentioned it because you seemed to be recommending it. I just wanted you to know that you are welcome to come to Atlanta and administer whatever punishment you wish to dish out. But this is probably just more of your talk. But anytime you would like to stop by and slap me just call and I will give you the address and meet you in the parking lot. Ha! I do doubt that the Holy Spirit would be leading you to do such a thing or even to have such thoughts but I can assure you that you may find a need for miraculous powers if you catch me on a bad day! Ha!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

Early this morning I assigned an officer to investigate a disturbance that had taken place. I assigned my best friend for 47 years to this task, a man I baptized 25 years ago.

The incident was between 2 men that escalated to the boiling point. One is known as a drunk with a temper and the other is known to stir. One is a member of the church my wife and I attend.My best friend and I are embarrassed that a Christian man conducted himself in such a manner. We know that in the days ahead we are going to hear,(it doesnt do him much good to go to church) or ( I wouldn't go to that church)etc.. Nothing will be said about the drunk. I guess they are neither one aware of what James has to say about the TONGUE and TEMPER. But I will continue to pray about the situation. I do hope no further harm is done to the churchs reputation because this.

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

Brother Faris:

I sincerely hope that the trouble between these two men will not escalate further. I also pray that the cause of Christ will not suffer from their behavior. You are right that none will notice the drunk's behavior as much as they will notice the Christian man's behavior. Maybe this brother will learn the need to have patience and work to help the one who was drunk. I do know however just how frustrating it can be to deal with an obnoxious drunk and can completely understand how one could be tempted to lose patience with such a one. They both need our prayers.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

Whether or not we have "enough" emotion or "appropriate" emotion in the churches is debatable. But we are certainly getting a lot of it here. The question is, is the kind of emotion being displayed (by both "sides"), and the way it is being displayed appropriate for Christians? And is it edifying? How about some "time out" to read and meditate on Ephesians 4:29-32?

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

Lee,

If you would carefully read my messages, you could see that my questions about whether you would like it if I called you a LIAR based on the same critera were not based on my own criteria of what a liar was.

You have made a number of false statements. I haven't claimed any powers in this discussion that I do not have. God has ministered to others through me through gifts, just as He has with many normal Christians just like myself. that is not a farfetched claim. Even if the gifts God uses may nor be ones you believe in operating today.

Besides, you don't have a single shred of biblical evidence that healing, miracles or any of the gifts the Bible uses 'miracle' to described have passed away, even if you hold to your view on I Corinthians 13. (These aren't the gifts that I';ve operated in that I can recall. I've prayed with a group and I heard the person was healed. He'd had many people pray for him.) You wrote about bro. Kelley:

> These two opposite statements cannot be reconciled as both being the truth. At least one of them is not the truth and Brother Kelley knew that it was not the truth when he said it. <

This is the clincher here. "and Brother Kelly knew that it was not the truth when he said it." Here you assume to have knowledge that you cannot have. Do you think you are omniscient? How could you know Bro. Kelley's heart on the matter. Doyou claimto have a supernatural revelation of the man's heart?

Experiencing tongues 'within oneself' is odd wording. How does one experience tongues within himself? They are spoken out. So if Bro. Kelley later says that what he meant was that he not only knew people who spoke in tongues, but had heard it himself, that sounds like a perfectly good clarification to me.

The fact is, Lee, you are not God. You dont even claim to have gifts of revelation. It is not reasonable to assume that you know what was in Bro. Kelley's heart when he wrote that. It is very easy to write a statement like that and forget about it in a forum like this. It is quite possible he started reading your diatribe about it, got disgusted, and did not read thoroughly.

You didn't even insult me. Why would I want to hit you? I don't hit people when they do insult me. I know there are a lot of people that if you pick there words apart when they mispeak, and call them liars based on flimsy evidence, would get mad at you. And I also know that there are a lot of people that are impolite when hiding behind a PC. If you acted in 'real life' like you do when you are behind a computer, you would be bound to get into all kind of trouble.

There are a lot of good ole' boys back in Georgia that like it told to them straight. There are also a lot of men back home that would get really irritated if someone picked their words apart and called them LIARS, yelling the accusation repeatedly (using caps on the net) especially when they had no intention to deceive.

My point is, treat people with normal human respect when you talk with them on the internet, just like you have to in real life when you have to actually face them.

If you were humble and reasonable, would it be so hard to admit that you cannot know what was in Bro. Kelley's heart, and admit that you do not know that he was trying to decieve. Print out all of your posts and his posts, and give them to a reasonable friend who will tell it to you straight. Ask your friend who has behaved maturely, and who has behaved childishly. Ask your friend if you are reasonable to call this man a liar.

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2000

Brother Link:

Both you and brother Kelley pretend that you have explained his diametrically opposed statements but you have not even come close to dealing with them. You have now offered your third explanation neither of which has helped him at all. You now say: Experiencing tongues 'within oneself' is odd wording. How does one experience tongues within himself? They are spoken out. So if Brother Kelley later says that what he meant was that he not only knew people who spoke in tongues, but had heard it himself, that sounds like a perfectly good clarification to me.

Yes it is odd wording and you have asked the right question, How does one experience the gift of tongues within himself? But you give a miserable and useless answer to the question and Brother Kelley has given no answer to it. He never said that he experienced tongues because he heard it himself. In fact a better way to ask this question would be how does one experience the gift of tongues within oneself without having the gift of tongues within? Neither of you have even thought to explain that obvious question. If the gift of tongues had never been within him how could he have experienced it within himself?

Now I have quoted his words over and over again and I will do it one more time. Brother Kelley was quite clear when he said:

I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Now here he says that HE experienced the gift of tongues and that he did not mean that he only experienced it within other people but HIMSELF ALSO. This would rule out the idea that he simply meant that he heard the tongues that others had spoken but that he had actually experienced this GIFT within HIMSELF. How could he experience this GIFT within himself if he did not have the GIFT within HIMSELF?

I believe that any honest person reading his futile attempts to explain himself can see clearly that this man has lied and cannot get out of the fact that he has done so. I have called him a liar and I will say to all that I have done so because he has without doubt lied in this case and I will never stop calling him a liar until he stops lying. So there is nothing that anyone can do about that. I am not in the least willing to say that Brother Kelley has even attempted to be honest in this matter.

Now I will not continue to quibble with you or anyone else about whether it is right to call a man a liar when he is without doubt lying. I believe it is right to do so and I therefore continue to maintain with all seriousness that Brother Kelley has lied in this matter and that I have offered irrefutable evidence of it and that both you and he have done nothing to resolve his undeniable contradiction.

I do not have time and it is not necessary to continue to repeat all of the evidence that has been given to prove that Brother Kelley has lied. All who read this have enough evidence to decide for themselves concerning this matter. I also have no need to repent for calling him a liar for that is the truth and to pretend that the facts are otherwise would make me an accomplice with him in his lies. We are commanded to lie not to one another. Brother Kelley has lied to us and it is a sin and I hope that he will repent of it. For he does not have the gift of tongues and therefore could not have experienced this gift within himself as he has claimed.

Brethren:

I also want to be clear that I have not called Brother Kelley a liar simply because he disagrees with me about miraculous gifts as he and Brother Link would have you believe. Brother Link disagrees with me about this issue and I have not called him a liar for I have not caught him in what I believe can be proven to be a deliberate lie. But with Brother Kelley I am convinced, and have not yet been convinced otherwise, that he has deliberately lied to us in this forum and he needs to repent of having done so.

Brother Benjamin, as often is the case, is right that we should read the word of God. Here is what is said in the verse that he admonishes us to read:

Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamor and evil speaking, be put away from you with all malice. And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ sake has forgiven you. (Eph. 4:29-32).

Brother Ben thanks for the admonition. I have heard it and will abide by it. You are wise and your spirit and demeanor is worthy of emulation.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 12, 2000

Lee,

Experiencing tongues 'within oneself' is pretty sloppy wording. the most logical, reasonably conclusion, without any input onthe matter from Bro Kelley, imo, is that he mistyped this line. I've never heard of any Charismatic saying he'd 'experienced tongues within himself.' It's odd wording anyway.

You should be _reasonable_ and allow for possibilities. Instead, you started name calling and made stubborn statements about not retracting what you had said. don't be so stubborn and invest so much pride in your statements. Bro. Kelley has dropped out of this conversation because of your attitude. I don't blame him.

it is perfectly logical to think that he might have mistyped that atatement originally. Wouldn't you agree? (Maybe you wouldn't because then you would ahve to admit thatyou are wrong.)

I can't know for sure that Bro. Kelley did not mean to decieve. I can't know for sure that you are honest about being convinced that he was meant to deceive. I just think it is rediculous for him to say in his heart. 'Bwahahahaha, I said I spoke in tongues, and now I will say I didn't. Bwahahahahaha, no one will remember what I said and look up above and read the conversation.' I think it is more likely that that oddly worded sentence was just written badly. We all type badly at times. Most of the time, no one jumps all over us for it.

If you are going to be reasonable, you should at least allow for the possibiltity that Bro. Kelley hadn't spoken in tongues,and didn't meanto imply that he had when he typed that statement. It is quite likely that he refused to respond to you because you were being so insistant that he lied.

Come on. Be reasonable. do you claim to be omniscient. That looks like the most logical scenario to me.

Are you really serious about being convinced that Bro Kelley was intentionally lying? Sometimes I wonder if you are for real. I wonder if you are being honest. I suppose it is possible that you are just unreasonable and what 'you think' quickly becomes what 'you know.'

If you jump to conclusions so quickly, or if you are just being stubborn and maintaining your position, even though you are not 100% sure of it in your heart, remember that God knows the truth. He knows what Brother Kelley thought, and typed. He knows what is in your heart.

remember the words of Jesus that if your brother has something against you, go be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

You shoulnd't put wedges between yourself and your brother by judging them to be a liar without hearing their side of the story first. that's just not right. I just want you to come down from your high horse and admit thatyou don't know for sure what was in Bro Kelley's heart.

You wrote: "I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Now here he says that HE experienced the gift of tongues and that he did not mean that he only experienced it within other people but HIMSELF ALSO. This would rule out the idea that he simply meant that he heard the tongues that others had spoken but that he had actually experienced this GIFT within HIMSELF."'

You wrote 'he did not mean that he only experienced it...."

This is where you assume to much. You assume to know what Bro. Kelley meant. From my standpoint, that sentence he wrote doesn't make an incredible amount of sense. Take out the word 'within' and it makes a lot of sense. Maybe he started to type one thing, but then typed something else. I know I've done that before, and ended up with sentences that didn't make good sense or that didn't say what I meant to say. I've typed 'I' instead of 'he.'

The fact is, you are not God. So you cannot be 100% sure of what he MEANT to say, can you? You can't be any more sure than I can. Do you claim to have some sort of revelation from God that tells you what Kelley meant. So what is it? Are you a charismatic claiming to have revelations of other men's hearts, or do you admit that you cannot know for sure what he meant to write when he wrote that?

If I wanted to tear words apart like you do, i could get all philosophical about how it is possible to experience someone elses tongues within oneself just as it is possible to experience anyone elses words within oneself because perception is largely internal.

Keep in mind that God knows whether Bro. Kelley meant to deceive or not. If he did not, aren'tyou guilty of slandering your brother? You can't be 100% sure that he meant to lie based onthe information given, not and be reasonable and logical about it anyway.

To all, sorry for hammering the point on this thread.

To Lee, i would like to see you change and not be so quick to label people as liars. I would like to see you write more edifying posts. You can't know for sure that Kelly was trying to decieve from his post, so you shouldn't have blasted him with the liar comment.

I had a friend who told me he got into difficulty withother people by obeying 'Do unto others as ye would have them do unto you.' if he sinned or did something wrong, he wanted to be corrected. So if he noticed someone else sinned, had a character flaw, or did something wrong, he woudl correct that person. He found out that many other people didn't appreciate being corrected.

The Bible tells us to goad one antoher on inthe faith. What I would like to see here i some reconciliation. i would like to see you admit that you don't know bro. Kelley's heart, and admit that you were wrong, apologize, and reconcile. I believe that to be the thing to dot aht would be in line with Jesus' teaching. But it will require a bit of humility on your part.

I can also attest to the fact that Benjamin behaves himself well in these forums. We have been having a discussion on other threads where we hold to differing viewpoints, and bro Benjamin has behaved as a gentleman. If you will notice, he doesn't just pick people's words apart to find some basis to accuse them. Instead, he tries to understand where a person is coming from and really communicate. I may hold to different interpretations of certain passages of scripture than Benjamin, but I respect the way he carries out a discussion.

-- Anonymous, August 12, 2000

Link,

Thank you for the kind words. I'm not sure I deserve them. I've been getting a little frustrated with how things are going in some of these other threads, and probably have showed it some -- for which I apologise! I do TRY to be considerate and to give others "the benefit of the doubt."

-- Anonymous, August 12, 2000

Brother Link:

You have said:

You should be _reasonable_ and allow for possibilities. Instead, you started name calling and made stubborn statements about not retracting what you had said. don't be so stubborn and invest so much pride in your statements. Bro. Kelley has dropped out of this conversation because of your attitude. I don't blame him.

I am being reasonable because I have proven that Brother Kelley has lied and anyone with half a brain reading his statement can see that he has lied. If he did not mean to write what he wrote he could have said that this is not what he meant to write and that would be it. But he has not said that. Instead he has said that both of those statements are true. Now that was just ridiculous for there is not the slightest possibility that both of those statements are true. I am not the one being stubborn in this case Brother Link. Brother Kelley has lied to us and I have pointed it out and I was right to do so. There is nothing stubborn about it. Now you may be frustrated that I do not yield to your claim that I cannot know what was in his heart. I have made no statements about what was in his heart. I have shown that it is not possible for him to so contradict himself without knowingly lying in one of the two statements that he has made. That is a fact and nothing you or he has said has changed it. Brother Kelley has dropped out of this conversation because he cannot escape the fact that he has lied and does not want to deal with it. Now you may say that I cannot know that is true. Well, I know it about as well as you can know that he dropped out because of my attitude.

There is not one single scripture that condemns my attitude. It is right to tell a person who is lying that he is a liar. That is not a bad attitude according to the scriptures. If he does not like it then he would do better to just tell the truth. He wants to tell lies and not be caught and reprimanded for lying. Well, in this case he lied, I caught him in the lie and I have reprimanded him for it. That is the way it is now and that is the way it will always be as long as I am writing and responding in this forum. Therefore, if you are going to lie you had better be good at it so that you do not get caught if you do not appreciate being called a liar. For if I catch anyone telling lies to us I will surely make it as clear as I can that he or she is doing so.

I do not care if you like this attitude or not. I will answer to God for my attitude and Brother Kelley will answer for his lies and you will answer for defending his lies.

Then you say:

it is perfectly logical to think that he might have mistyped that atatement originally. Wouldn't you agree? (Maybe you wouldn't because then you would ahve to admit thatyou are wrong.)

It is absolutely illogical and absurd to think that he merely, mistyped" that statement for he still contends that both of those statements are true in the form in which he wrote them. Therefore only an idiot would agree with you on that score. I have never had trouble admitting that I am wrong and if you had been around this forum for any length of time you would have seen me admit to being wrong in this forum and correcting my error as soon as I realized it. But in this matter I am not even close to being wrong. And I will not admit to being wrong just so that all of you can respect me. I care nothing about the respect of man. I care only about the respect and honor that comes from God. God does not honor those who lie and he does not honor those who tolerate those who do lie. So I do not agree that Brother Kelley mistyped his words and neither does Brother Kelley agree that he mistyped his words because he, in his last post, maintained that both of his statements were true as he wrote them. Now if the author of those two statements does not think that he mistyped them then I am not likely to believe that you would know more about it that he does. Then you say:

I can't know for sure that Bro. Kelley did not mean to decieve. Yes you can know that he did intend to deceive, if you were willing to objectively review the evidence, (instead of being so upset that I have called him a liar) The two statements that he made are impossible to reconcile which means that he LOGICALLY must have been lying in at least one of them. The only question is which statement was he telling the truth as he sees it and which one was he lying. However, if you cannot know for sure that he did not intend to deceive then how can you be so sure that I am wrong to draw the conclusion that he did in fact intend to deceive? Must I be wrong simply because YOU cannot know for sure that Brother Kelley did not intend to deceive? Just because you cannot know it does not mean that no one else could know it unless of course you are so arrogant as to believe that anyone that does not reason as you do is wrong. I do know it because it is the only logical conclusion that could be drawn from the very words that he wrote himself. If he did not write what he intended to write he could have simply said so. But he did not. Even to this day he continues to claim that both of those statements are true as they are written. It is too late for him to make that claim now. He has already dismissed that as a possible explanation for his diametrically opposed statements.

Then you say:

I can't know for sure that you are honest about being convinced that he was meant to deceive.

For someone that is so sure that I am wrong you do not seem to be able to know much, now do you? If you cannot be sure of these things then how can you be so sure that I am wrong about Brother Kelley? Suppose that it were even remotely possible that I am right about this matter? Would you ever admit it? Would you then condemn me for calling Brother Kelley a liar for having without doubt told a lie to his Brethren in this forum? If you knew that Brother Kelley had lied what would you do about it? Would you even try to correct him or would you simply say that since he agrees with you on this issue you would just ignore the fact that he had lied? So you can see that it is very possible that you are the one being stubborn and that in the face of the fact that you admit that you cannot know much about either Brother Kelley or me! Now that is amazing. You do not know for sure if Brother Kelley intended to lie and you do not know for sure that I am an honest man but you know without the slightest doubt that E. Lee Saffold is wrong and should apologize to Brother Kelley! Now that is absolutely ridiculous to anyone who can think.

Then you say:

I just think it is rediculous for him to say in his heart. 'Bwahahahaha, I said I spoke in tongues, and now I will say I didn't. Bwahahahahaha, no one will remember what I said and look up above and read the conversation.'

Now such a thing is ridiculous but it is a tactic used by some in this forum and you will see it one day yourself if you watch closely. I cannot know why Brother Kelley felt the need to lie but I can tell from his very words that he has lied in one of those two statements for both of them cannot be true. Yet he continues to maintain that they are both true regardless of how ridiculous and impossible it is for both of those statements to be the truth. I do not believe that Brother Kelley expected anyone to look back at what he had previously said because he knew that most people do not want to go to that much trouble. And believe me when I went looking for his previous statement it was hard to find. He could have simply copied and pasted his previous statement if he really intended for others to see it. He just did not expect that anyone would actually take that much trouble. He was wrong. I took the trouble and his lie is now exposed for all to see.

Then you say:

I think it is more likely that that oddly worded sentence was just written badly. We all type badly at times. Most of the time, no one jumps all over us for it.

Well Brother Kelley does not agree with you and neither do I. He said what he meant to say in both places and he lied in at least one of them. Since you admit that you cannot know if he did not intend to deceive you cannot know that he simply typed badly. I have never jumped all over any one in this forum simply because they type badly. I have not done so in the case of Brother Kelley. He has lied and I have proven that he has lied. That is the simple truth concerning what has happened here in this thread. And you admit that you cannot be sure if he intended to deceive therefore it stands to reason that you cannot be sure that I am wrong about this matter. Yet you talk as if I am totally wrong and you are absolutely right. Now that is what I would call talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Then you say:

If you are going to be reasonable, you should at least allow for the possibiltity that Bro. Kelley hadn't spoken in tongues,and didn't meanto imply that he had when he typed that statement. It is quite likely that he refused to respond to you because you were being so insistant that he lied.

Now, I have been reasonable and I do not have to admit anything in order to be reasonable for you have not shown that such an admission is necessary to good reason. I know for a fact that Brother Kelley has not spoken in tongues and that is the reason that I challenged him on his statement in the first place. But he did in fact mean to imply that he spoke in tongues when he wrote that statement and no one reading it in its context can be REASONABLE and conclude other wise. So if you are going to be reasonable you would have to admit, (because his two statements are diametrically opposed to each other) especially since you have already admitted that you cannot know if Brother Kelley did not intend to deceive, that it is at least possible that Brother Kelley did mean to imply that he had spoken in tongues when he wrote that statement. So, are you reasonable? I doubt it!

Then you say:

Come on. Be reasonable. Do you claim to be omniscient? That looks like the most logical scenario to me.

Now Come on Brother Link, Be reasonable do you claim to be omniscient? This looks like an absurd scenario to me. Ha!

You see, Brother Link, one does not have to claim omniscience to argue from logic! If you use good logic on those two statements you will never be able to reconcile them. They are diametrically opposed to one another so that there is no way Brother Kelley can escape having lied in at least one of them. Read them again. If you were not prejudiced in his favor because he agrees with you about the continuance of spiritual gifts you could see that these two statements made by brother Kelley cannot both be true. You could also see the lack of logic in claiming one moment that this is a poorly typed statement and then arguing in the next that he simply did not intend to say that he spoke in tongues. Then why has he not explained himself instead of maintaining that both statements are true? You say that he probably did not respond to me because I was so insistent that he had lied. With these words:

It is quite likely that he refused to respond to you because you were being so insistant that he lied.

It is just as likely that he did not respond to me because he knew that he had been caught in a lie and did not know just what to say! In fact, with your admission that you cannot be sure that he did not intend to deceive, it is clear that you cannot be so sure that he refused to respond simply because I was so insistent that he had lied. I was so insistent that he had lied because I was so absolutely correct in my proof that he had lied. None of you have even come close to any reasonable explanation of these self- contradictory statements. The reason is because they cannot be explained on any other basis than the fact that Brother Kelley lied when he made one of them. We may not know which one is the lie and which is the truth, as he sees it, but we know that one of them is a lie. If you were not so prejudiced in favor of Brother Kelley, who agrees with you on spiritual gifts, you could see it.

Then you asked:

Are you really serious about being convinced that Bro Kelley was intentionally lying? Sometimes I wonder if you are for real. I wonder if you are being honest. I suppose it is possible that you are just unreasonable and what 'you think' quickly becomes what 'you know.' Brother Link, I have never said that what I think is the same as what I know. I do not think that Brother Kelley is lying and I have never said that I merely think that he is lying. I have said that I KNOW that he has told a lie because the two statements made by him cannot both be true. One is a lie for sure and he made both statements therefore we can know that he has lied in one of these two statements. So, I did not begin thinking that Brother Kelley had told a lie. I began KNOWING that he had done so. So your question is absurd.

You ask if I am really serious about being convinced that Brother Kelley was intentionally lying? Now, if you do not know the answer to that question by now you are not only deaf but blind also. How many times does one have to say that he is convinced that someone is a liar for you to get the message that he is serious? But just in case you did not hear what I have said I will say it again for you. I am convinced beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt that Brother Kelley has deliberately lied to us in this forum with at least one of the two diametrically opposite statements that he has made concerning the gift of tongues.

Then you say:

? Sometimes I wonder if you are for real

No! I am just one of Brother Kelleys worst nightmares! What kind of stupid question is it to ask if I am for real? Does anyone write in this forum that does not exist? I am very much real and just because you do not like what you see does not mean that it is not real.

Then you say:

. I wonder if you are being honest.

Now here you question my honesty even though you have no other reason to do so than the fact that you do not like my being honest enough to tell Brother Kelley the truth about the fact that I am convinced that he has lied to us! If you were convinced that someone has lied would you be honest enough to tell them or would you shrink from that responsibility just because you did not want to appear to your fellow man as one who was too harsh, unloving, unkind, and quick to judge? No, Brother Link, it is not my dishonesty you are worried about. It is my honesty that bothers you! I will not change to make you feel better for the only one that I care to please is God. What he thinks of me is the only thing that matters. He hates lies more than I hate them. In fact I hate them because He hates them. Lies are an abomination to him. Now if you would like to take a stab at proving that I am dishonest we will all wait to see what you come up with. Then you say:

I suppose it is possible that you are just unreasonable and what 'you think' quickly becomes what 'you know.'

Now it is possible for any man, including you, to be unreasonable. You suppose that I am unreasonable and it is your right to suppose whatever you wish. But supposing that I am unreasonable is a much safer position for you than asserting that I am unreasonable. For it is far easier to suppose than to assert and prove, now isnt it? Now how would you know that what I think quickly becomes what I know? And tell us just how long one must think something before he is justifying in concluding that he knows it? Are you claiming that a conclusion quickly reached is ALWAYS wrong? You have not even reached a clear conclusion about Brother Kelleys intent to deceive and I have been arguing with Brother Kelley in this forum for a long time and I have reached a conclusion based upon the facts in this case. The fact is that the two statements that he made are opposite to each other and a logical person does not have to look at them for several years to see that both of them could not be the truth. Now just because you cannot think logically as fast as others does not mean that the fast thinker is always wrong! Also you do not even really know how many times I have discussed things with Brother Kelley and caught him in such contradictions and how long it took me to finally call him a liar on the basis of his having made such contradictory statements. I have shown him to be contradictory many times in the past before we ever discussed this subject and this is the first time I called him a deliberate liar. I have often called him a false teacher and I guess that that would seem that I was calling him a deliberate liar but some false teachers are not aware that they are teaching false doctrine. But in this case I have called him a deliberate liar for I have proven it to be the case. You think that because a conclusion appears to have been reached suddenly that it is a quick decision that cannot be right. You do not even consider the possibility that what appeared to you to be a quick decision may have been a long time in coming. But you may think that you are omniscient and that you can know these things without looking into them. In fact, some of the conclusions that you have reached concerning me and my attitude were pretty quick in coming so are we to conclude that what you think quickly becomes what you know?

Then you say:

If you jump to conclusions so quickly, or if you are just being stubborn and maintaining your position, even though you are not 100% sure of it in your heart, remember that God knows the truth. He knows what Brother Kelley thought, and typed. He knows what is in your heart.

Now just how do you know that I jumped quickly to any of my conclusions? I am not being stubborn. You think that you are right and I have not convinced you that you are not. Would it make sense for me to conclude from your unwillingness to change that you are merely being stubborn? I have given proof of my conclusions about Brother Kelley and his lie and none, least of all you, have shown that conclusion to be incorrect yet. So I am not being stubborn simply because I do not accept the position of one such as yourself that is not sure his position is correct.

I am simply convinced by the evidence in this matter that Brother Kelley has lied and until I see real evidence to the contrary I will not change my mind about it. That is standing with the facts and upon principles of good reason and logic. It is the truth and I will not move from that truth until I am convinced by good reasonable evidence that my conclusion is wrong. You have not presented any such evidence and if you would like to change my mind on this matter I can advise you that the only path that will reach me is the path of good logic and reason. I have not seen you present any of that yet.

Then you say:

, even though you are not 100% sure of it in your heart, remember that God knows the truth. He knows what Brother Kelley thought, and typed. He knows what is in your heart.

Now who told you that I am not 100% sure in my heart of my conclusions about Brother Kelleys lie? Now who thinks he knows what is in another persons heart? Are you omniscient, Brother Link? I will tell you again; though you appear to be one that has ears to hear but hears not, that I am 100% sure that Brother Kelley lied in at least one of his two diametrically opposed statements. I have no doubt that he wrote exactly what he intended to write in both places and I do not have any doubt that there was not a typographical error and I also know 100% that his words cannot be logically reconciled and that he did not merely forget what he had said previously as you first tried to argue that he had done.

Yes, Brother Link, God does know what Brother Kelley thought. And both God and I know the thoughts that he conveyed by the words that he used. And God knows that brother Kelley has lied in one of those two statements and so does Brother Kelley. That is the reason that I have asked him to repent of those lies because it really does matter to me if Brother Kelley goes to heaven or not and he will not go to heaven telling lies. Now you may not have such a concern for Brother Kelley, but I do and God does as well. It is God that I will face for what I have done in this forum and I will face him without any shame for I have done the right thing in this matter. Now Brother Kelley is angry for I have proven that he has lied and you are angry because I have dared to say that he has lied. But God knows the truth and he sees me trying to tell the truth and help brother Kelley turn from lying. Now you may not like my methods and that is fine but I like the way I am trying better than the way you simply ignore the fact that he has lied and should be corrected. You do not even admit the slightest possibility that he could have lied even though you claim that you cannot be sure that he has not intended to deceive. If you are not sure then you should at least be willing to try and see if it is possible that this obnoxious E. Lee Saffold just might be right in this case!

Then you say:

remember the words of Jesus that if your brother has something against you, go be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

Now if you cannot use the scripture in their proper context do not bother to use them at all. But even if this scripture teaches that I should not correct a brother who has lied to everyone publicly in this forum until I talk with him in private first it would not change the fact that brother Kelley has lied, now would it? If I did talk with him privately first he would have to repent of it publicly and if he did not hear me in private I would have to bring it to the church, now wouldnt I. Now you have this matter against me that I have called Brother Kelley a liar. But you have not gone to be reconciled with me before attempting to correct me in this forum, now have you? So Physician, heal thyself! The fact is that this is a discussion forum and if one tells a lie in it he should be corrected in the very place and time where the public lies was told. (Titus 1:9- 14).

You shoulnd't put wedges between yourself and your brother by judging them to be a liar without hearing their side of the story first. that's just not right. I just want you to come down from your high horse and admit thatyou don't know for sure what was in Bro Kelley's heart

I am not on a horse, high or otherwise, I am standing firm on solid ground. And you just cannot bear the firmness with which I stand. But I will not be moved from this solid ground upon which I am standing.

I havent put a wedge between Brother Kelley and myself. He told a lie and that is a wedge between any Brothers. Now you must be talking about some one else when you say I have not heard his side of the story first for it was because I heard Brother Kelleys words that I have called him a liar. And I have given him ample opportunity to explain his contradiction but he has failed miserably to do so. The lie is the wedge, brother Link, and Brother Kelley is the one that drove it between his Brethren and himself. I am trying to remove that wedge and you are trying to ignore its existence! Just as the Apostle Paul called the entire race of Cretans liars by quoting a poet that said they were always liars He agree with the poet who called them evil beast and slow bellies. (Titus 2:12). I guess someone should have told Paul that he was driving a wedge between his Cretan brethren because he called them liars. Can you find a single passage of scripture that says it is sinful to call a person who has told a lie a liar? You will look long and hard for that one. Now you have not shied from calling me a fool without hearing my side of the story first but you do not conceive that such is driving a wedge between you and your brethren. Again I say physician heal thyself! And there is a passage that condemns calling your Brother a fool. (Matthew 5:22). This verse is very close to the one that says first leave your gift at the altar and be reconciled to your brother and then come and offer thy gift. But I guess you just did not read that far or you we reading to correct Brother Lee rather than edifying Brother LINK!

Then you complain:

You wrote 'he did not mean that he only experienced it...."

This is where you assume to much. You assume to know what Bro. Kelley meant. From my standpoint, that sentence he wrote doesn't make an incredible amount of sense. Take out the word 'within' and it makes a lot of sense. Maybe he started to type one thing, but then typed something else. I know I've done that before, and ended up with sentences that didn't make good sense or that didn't say what I meant to say. I've typed 'I' instead of 'he.'

I do know what Brother Kelley meant by what Brother Kelley said. You are ignoring the context in which it was written. I had said that he had not experienced miracles such as those found in the New Testament book of Acts and his answer was to show me that he had experienced such things and he said that he had experienced the gift of tongues and was particular to not leave me with the impression that he meant that he had only seen people speak in tongues and said that he has not only experienced them within others but MYSELF AS WELL. Now that is a very large typographical error! The fact is he did not make such an error and if he had made such an error he would have gladly admitted such by now in this conversation but he did not make such an admission to a typographical error. SO even Brother Kelley himself does not agree with you that this was a typographical error. Now he would know if he had made such a mistake. You are trying real hard to rescue him from this lie but you are failing miserably! This was not a matter of a mistake in typing and you know it for even brother Kelley has not claimed any typographical mistake, which would have been very natural to immediately do if such a mistake made you appear to be a deliberate liar. But Brother Kelley has not made such a claim because he knows as well as I do that such a claim is absurd and if your were not blinded by prejudice for one who agrees with your position on miracles you would be able to see that it is ridiculous to assign this to a typographical error!

Then you repeatedly show concern that you think that I believe that I am God with these words:

The fact is, you are not God. So you cannot be 100% sure of what he MEANT to say, can you? You can't be any more sure than I can. of other men's hearts, or do you admit that you cannot know for sure what he meant to write when he wrote that?

Now does it logically follow that one cannot be 100% sure of anything unless he is God? One does not have to be God to know when someone has lied to them especially when they make statements that are diametrically opposed to one another such that both cannot be true and one therefore must be a lie. You say that I cannot know what he meant to say. I can know what he said and by that I can know what he meant to say unless he comes around later and tells us that he did not say exactly what he meant to say. What he said was not true. I can also know that he does not claim that he said something other than what he meant to say but only that we have misunderstood what he meant by what he said. It is only you; Brother Link, that thinks that he did not say what he meant to say. Brother Kelley believes that he said exactly what he meant to say and that we have misunderstood him. But unfortunately he cannot explain the contradiction. Do you claim to have some sort of revelation from God that tells you what Kelley meant. So what is it? Are you a charismatic claiming to have revelations

Now just what do you think about that? Did I claim some sort of revelation from God? No, I did not! Given the argument that you and I have had over the fact that spiritual gifts and miraculous revelations have ceased would anyone with half a brain draw the conclusion that I thought that I had some revelation? However, what would you say if I did claim that Brother Kelley was lying and I know it because God revealed it to me? Would you just automatically admit that I am right? And, if you are right about spiritual gifts continuing today, which I know you are not, how would you know that God has not revealed it to me that Brother Kelley lied? Are you claiming that I could have such a spiritual gift and I am too set against spiritual gifts to even realize that I have one! Ha! I know that I do not have spiritual gifts for they do not continue today but you do not know it for you believe that they do continue today and therefore you cannot know if I have a spiritual gift from God that reveals to me that Brother Kelley is a liar. I can tell you that I have no such gift but you cannot know if I am just overlooking a gift that I have and am too dishonest to admit it! Are you now going to tell us that it is impossible for Brother Lee to have a spiritual gift even though they continue today according to your theory? Why would that be, Brother Link? Is this just more of your charismatic elitism seeping out without your control? You think that gifts continue today but no one but those who know that these gifts continue today will be given any gifts from God. I agree with you that I have no miraculous spiritual gifts form God because God is not giving them to anyone including you and Brother Kelley. But you believe that he is giving them today and then you argue that it is impossible that he may have given a revelation to me that Brother Kelley is lying. If I said that I had such a gift you would be happy to agree that Brother Kelley is a liar for I would have to agree with you on spiritual gifts in order to make such a claim. This is evidence that your only reason for defending Brother Kelley is that he agrees with you on this nonsense of spiritual gifts continuing today. Well, I will tell you what everyone one knows, that I do not have any miraculous spiritual gifts just as you and Brother Kelley do not have any! Therefore I do not conclude that Brother Kelley is a liar because God has revealed it to me. I know Brother Kelley is lying because HE HAS REVEALED it unwittingly to all of us himself with his own words.

But be that as it may, I do not need a spiritual gift to know that Brother Kelley has lied in what he said to us. What he intended to say is what he said and what he said was a lie. It is that simple. A lie is not based upon what one intends to say but on what they actually said. If he did not mean what he said he should admit it was wrong and change it. Brother Kelley has done neither. All of us have occasionally said something that we did not intend to say but we usually correct it as soon as we see that we wrote something opposite to what we intended. Sometimes we do not notice before it goes out to the Internet. But when it is brought to our attention we quickly admit that we said something that we did not intend to say. But Brother Kelley has not done that, now has he?

Then you say:

. So what is it? Are you a charismatic claiming to have revelations?

Are you really that stupid? What do you think? Have I ever claimed to be charismatic? Have you and I not argued long enough for you to notice that I am extremely opposed to the false doctrine of the charismatics? Have I claimed to have revelations of any kind? Would you admit that I was right about Brother Kelley if I lied, like he did about the gift of tongues, and told you that I experienced the gift of prophecy and received a revelation that Brother Kelley was lying to us? Again I tell you that no one needs a miraculous gift from God to logically see that Brother Kelley is a liar. In fact, one can be almost as stupid as you have shown yourself to be with this statement concerning me being a charismatic and still see it if he is not prejudiced against the truth. With this statement it does appear that you have jumped onto a high horse with hopes of getting me off a similar horse when I am clearly standing on the ground. I suppose that the charges of arrogance and lack of humility only apply to me. For Brother Link is too spiritually elite to be justly charged with arrogance! Ha!

Then you say:

If I wanted to tear words apart like you do, i could get all philosophical about how it is possible to experience someone elses tongues within oneself just as it is possible to experience anyone elses words within oneself because perception is largely internal.

Now I do not tear words apart and you cannot prove that I do. I examine them and if they are true I accept them and if not I reject and resist them. And you know full well that it is not possible to experience someone elses tongues within oneself! You could not prove that notion if your life depended on it. And even if you could prove such an ignorant idea to be true it would not help your friend Kelley. For he claimed not only to have experienced tongues within those whom he knew PERSONALLY but HIMSELF ALSO. So he completely ruled out that stupidity in his original statement.

There is just no defense of this liar and nothing you can do will help him except being reasonable enough to recognize that he has lied and admonish him to repent.

Then you say:

Keep in mind that God knows whether Bro. Kelley meant to deceive or not. If he did not, aren'tyou guilty of slandering your brother? You can't be 100% sure that he meant to lie based onthe information given, not and be reasonable and logical about it anyway

Yes, God knows that Brother Kelley lied and so do I. This is not some secret that God only knows. I know it also because the evidence proving that he has lied is irrefutable. You have not even come close to explaining away his deliberate lie. There are many liars in the world and God has given us logical minds so that we can catch some of them. Brother Kelley has been caught in a deliberate lie and no matter how much you wish it were not true it is true nonetheless. The information given is more than sufficient to convict Brother Kelley of lying in any court of law in this land and few Juries would find such severe self-contradictions as evidence of honesty and truth. In fact one cannot be reasonable and logical and conclude that Brother Kelley has spoken the truth about these matters. So much for your logical acumen!

Then you say:

To all, sorry for hammering the point on this thread

Oh, Brother Link, we are so touched by your humility!

Then you say to me:

To Lee, i would like to see you change and not be so quick to label people as liars. I would like to see you write more edifying posts. You can't know for sure that Kelly was trying to decieve from his post, so you shouldn't have blasted him with the liar comment.

Now just what makes you think I should be concerned with what you would like to see? How do you know that I have been too quick to label people liars? Especially since you take this one case where I have justly called Brother Kelley a liar and draw the conclusion that I am too quick to call all people liars. How stupid can one be? There are exactly three people that I have called liars since I have been in this forum, which has been over one year. I have called Brother Kelley a liar and two others. And I have justly called them liars. Brother Kelley is without doubt a liar and I have given irrefutable evidence of it. At least you have done an extremely poor job of refuting the evidence!

I have written some edifying post and it is edifying to the church to stop the mouths of those who lie! (Titus 1:9-14).

Yes I can and I do know from Brother Kelleys post that he was trying to deceive us and I have not blasted him by pointing out his severe self-contradiction, which is conclusive evidence that he has lied in one of the two contradictory statements that he has made. It was the right thing in the sight of God to do and as long as I am around this forum all liars had better keep a watch on their lies for when I see a lie I will expose it and the liar with it. Therefore those who claim to be doing miracles today will not get by with their lying arguments from their own experiences. Especially when they cannot and will not demonstrate their powers, as you and Brother Kelley are completely unable to do.

Then you say:

I had a friend who told me he got into difficulty withother people by obeying 'Do unto others as ye would have them do unto you.' if he sinned or did something wrong, he wanted to be corrected. So if he noticed someone else sinned, had a character flaw, or did something wrong, he woudl correct that person. He found out that many other people didn't appreciate being corrected.

Now what on earth does this nonsense have to do with the price of rice in China? Are you trying to tell us that we can get into trouble following the golden rule of our master Jesus Christ? Well, what if practicing the golden rule gets us into trouble? SO What? Few people appreciate being corrected but those who enter this forum to teach others should be willing to take the heat and be corrected for that is what happens here. I suppose that you think that your efforts to correct me concerning calling Brother Kelley a liar is exempt somehow from your own statements! It is funny isnt it just how everything you say applies to me but none of it applies to you! Ha! I have seen you trying to correct all of us ignorant souls here in this forum on many things but you think that I should not correct others as you consistently try to do in this forum. So again we say physician heal thyself. You see, it is that charismatic elitism seeping out again. No one has a right to correct others but those who are charismatic and spiritually elite enough to do such correcting. Since Brother Lee is opposed to these charisma tics he must not be allowed to correct others.

Then you say:

The Bible tells us to goad one antoher on inthe faith. What I would like to see here i some reconciliation. i would like to see you admit that you don't know bro. Kelley's heart, and admit that you were wrong, apologize, and reconcile. I believe that to be the thing to dot aht would be in line with Jesus' teaching. But it will require a bit of humility on your part

Once again who cares what you would like to see here? I do not care in the least. If you would like to see reconciliation then urge the liars to repent and be careful not to lie yourself. Why should I admit that I do not know Brother Kelleys heart in this matter wherein he has lied? Out of the abundance of the heaqrt the mouth speaketh. If he lied with his mouth he lied in his heart. Now we know that his words are lies and therefore his heart lied too. I do not owe Brother Kelley an apology for catching him telling us a lie! SO you do not want to hold your breath waiting for me to apologize to a man who has lied to every one in this forum and has done so deliberately to support the very false doctrine that both you and he are trying to teach. It is fine if you want to teach something that you think is true and others consider false but to use deliberate lies from your own experiences as arguments in favor of such doctrines is sinful. Now the liar is the one needing to repent. I have nothing to apologize for in this matter so I can tell you that Jesus Christ My Lord will return and even then I will not apologize to this liar.

Brother Kelley was wrong to tell this lie and he should admit it and apologize and repent before God for it. It is not in harmony with the teaching of Christ for me to apologize for exposing a liar. Christ did not apologize for calling the Jews liars and accusing them of being of their father the devil. (John 8:44,45). You will never see me apologize to Brother Kelley for exposing his lies. That will never happen my friend for to do so would be to deny the very Lord Jesus Christ himself! All liars, including an impenitent Brother Kelley, will have their part in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone. You can pretend that you do not know that he has lied but you do know and do not care! God is watching Brother Link, and you will give an account for supporting this liar.

Now, Just what do you think humility is in the first place? It would take treason against the cause of Christ for me to apologize to a liar for exposing his lies that he told to further a false doctrine against Christ.

There is no way to faithfully and humbly apologize to a liar for exposing his lies! How ignorant can you be to think that humility will excuse me or anyone else from the responsibility to resist lies and liars! Dont hold your breath waiting for me to make false displays of humility just to make everyone feel good WHILE THEY REMAIN IN THEIR SINS! That just is not going to happen friend!

Then you conclude with this ignorance:

If you will notice, he doesn't just pick people's words apart to find some basis to accuse them. Instead, he tries to understand where a person is coming from and really communicate. I may hold to different interpretations of certain passages of scripture than Benjamin, but I respect the way he carries out a discussion.

I know what is good about Brother Ben and knew it long before you wandered into this forum. You should notice that Brother Ben is convinced that Brother Kelley was not telling the truth in both of the statements that he made. If you were honest you would notice that I do not pick peoples words apart to find some basis to accuse them either. It is interesting just here that you seem to know a lot about my heart and my intentions that you say is impossible for me to know about Brother Kelleys heart. It is interesting just how much one thinks another knows about the hearts of others depends upon whom they are talking about! Ha! Such ignorance is inexcusable!

I do not care if you like the way I carry out a discussion or not. I do what I believe is right and exposing Brother Kelleys lie was the right thing to do and if he tells another lie I will expose it as well. As long as lying continues my efforts to expose it will continue as well. You can like it or not but that is the way it is going to be!

Your Brother in Christ,

E Lee Saffold.

-- Anonymous, August 13, 2000

Since my name is getting thrown around by both sides, perhaps I should again throw in my $2 worth. (I think, in view of inflation, that my comments are worth a little more than 2 cents! Joke!)

He definitely made two statements which SEEM, on the face of it, to be contradictory.

First, he said,

I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well."

Then, later, he said,

"First concerning the first charge, I never stated that have the gift of speaking in tongues (read my earlier post) ...."

But the rest of the sentence, in the later statement, is "... I just stated that I have personally experienced them."

The problem is that "personally experienced" is ambiguous. In what way did he experience them? He eventually clarified this. I can't quote him exactly without more searching than I have time for right now, but I think it was something to the effect that he didn't actually speak in tongues himself, but was present when someone else spoke in tongues. That is certainly a POSSIBLE way of interpreting what he said, and if he says that that is what he meant, I'll give him the "benefit of the doubt."

However, I don't think that is they way most people would understand the first statement. I think most people would understand it in the way that Lee and I both did, i.e. that AKelley was claiming to have actually spoken in "tongues" himself. So he certainly left people with a mistaken impression.

Did that happen through mere carelessness, as Link suggests, or did AKelley actually INTEND to leave the wrong impression? I don't know his heart, and won't attempt to judge, but I would suggest that in his own interests he might search his heart as to just what impression he did intend people to get from what he said. Having done so, he could then clarify to us not only what the actual situation that he described with these ambiguous words really was, but also what impression he intended to give with his first statement.

-- Anonymous, August 14, 2000

Benjamin,

Would you say that Lee is being unreasonable in calling Bro. Kelley a LIAR, repeatedly, based on what information has been presented? Do you think Lee is behaving childishly. If you want to ask Bro. Kelly about this, you might want to email him. He might not be following this thread.

Lee,

You accused Lee of lying because he said that he had experienced tongues, not only others, but within himself also, and for saying he had not spoken in tongues. Where did he claim to have spoken in tongues? You accused Bro. Kelley of laying and insinuated that he was a false teacher way back in June. Later, you find two quotes that don't match up, and instead of pointing out the inconsistency and asking for a clarification, you write a long, inflammatory message accusing him of being a liar, and saying that his testimony is not true. That sounds like a rhetorical trick for trying to discredit your opponent. Maybe you just didn't want to deal with the issues he brought up. maybe you didn't want to admit that you had to make a theological assumption to say that 'the perfect' was the bIble. I don't know your motivations.

Maybe you are just unreasonable and you are able to justify to yourself that bro. Kelly is a liar based on sucyh flimsy evidence. Often people believe what makes them feel comfortable whether it is reasonable or not. You accuse me of defending Kelley because he holds to a similar theological viewpoint. I notice that when he expressed beliefs that you did not hold to, you accused him of lying about the beliefs of the Church of Christ, and insinuated he was a false teacher. Ever here of ad hominem (sp?) I do happen to agree with some things Kelley believes about the issue, but if you had jumped on Ben about some inconsistency to bolster your arguments with a bunch of sophistry, I might would have pointed that out as well.

The last message you posted is full of examples of pulling arguments apart to accuse people. Some of your accusations are a result of your own klack of knowledge of the Bible. For example, I refer to a verse from the sermon on the mount about reconciling quickly with your brother, and you apparently thought that verse was about going to a brother first before bringing two or three witnesses, etc, and accuse me based on your own misunderstanding of the scriputre. Read the quote below:

Me >> "remember the words of Jesus that if your brother has something against you, go be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." <<

You >> Now if you cannot use the scripture in their proper context do not bother to use them at all. But even if this scripture teaches that I should not correct a brother who has lied to everyone publicly in this forum until I talk with him in private first it would not change the fact that brother Kelley has lied, now would it? If I did talk with him privately first he would have to repent of it publicly and if he did not hear me in private I would have to bring it to the church, now wouldn't I. Now you have this matter against me that I have called Brother Kelley a liar. But you have not gone to be reconciled with me before attempting to correct me in this forum, now have you? So "Physician, heal thyself"! <<<<

If you knew your Bible a little better, you might not have made this mistake. The verse about first being reconciled to thy brother is from Matthew 5. You accuse me of not using scripture properly. My point was about speedy reconciliation and the importance of reconciliation. You seem to think I was refering to Matthew 18. Normally, in a conversation, this would be a small thing, but since you use your misunderstanding as a basis for throwing the same taunt at me that was used against Christ "physician heal thyself,' it makes your post look foolish. You bring an accusation against me just because you don't know your Bible well enough. You should at least look up the passage or ask me for a clarification before you try to insinuate that I am being inconsistent. All throughout this discussion, though, you have jumped to making accusations rashly. You are not behaving reasonably, rationally, and many of your messages are written in a clearly, non-Christian manner. In addition to that you are arguing for some unscriptural concepts (for example that gifts were given ONLY thorugh the laying on of the apostles hands) and bashing other people based on these concepts.

If you had just pointed out the problem with Bro. Kelley's post, and sasked him what he meant, that would have been perfectly normal. Instead, you just accused him of being a liar, and added a lot of other bad sophistry (bs.) You had already accused him of lying when he taught theology that did not agree with your own theories.

You write that those who claim to have seen miracles are either lying or deceived. What do you base this on? I Corinthians 13 says the partial will be done away with when the perfect comes. You thinkt he perfect is the Bible. But, as Bro. Kelly pointed out, and you could not adequately answer, the passage does not say that the perfect is the Bible. You just have to assuem that to come up with your interpetation. Even some of the other posters who agree with your position admit that the chapter does not say wha the perfect is on this issue. Interesting that Bro. Kelley would make arguments that you could not answer, and you would turn the discussion to descrediting Bro. Kelley based on weak evidence isn't it?

Furthermore, I Corinthains 13 does nto say that all the 'miraculous gifts' as you put them would cease. Knowledge, prophecy, and tongues, are mentioned in the immediate context, not miracles, healing, and various other gifts of this sort.

Your accusation that those who claim to have seen miracles are either lying or decieved is also based on your assertion that the 'miracculous gifts' were ONLY given but he laying on of hands of the apostles. I posted a message above clearly demonstrating that this assertion of yours was both illogical and unscriptural. You did not post an answer to this. Why couldn't you? We can all be wrong sometimes. So just go ahead and admit that you were wrong on this one.

Was there anything else that served as a basis your assertion that those who claim to have seen miraculous gifts were either deceived or lying? I notice that this was a key point you used in yoru accusatory message directed toward Bro. Kelley when you insinuated tha the was a false teacher on approximately June 24.

You have absolutely no scriptural evidence whatsoever, and have presented none, that miracles and healing have ceased (no matter what you believe about 'the perfect.) Yet if someone claims to have seen a miracle, you think he is either lying or deceived.

What do you hope to accomplish by stating such an opinion, or even holding to it? Kelley is right. You have demonstrated yoruself to be closed minded. I would like to exhort you to open your mind up to what hte word of God teaches, and let go of your prejudices you use as a basis for attackign your brothers. How do you think we who have seen God work in ways that dont' fit with your theology will react to such statements? You certainly won't win us to your way of thinking with such an attitude. Saying that someone is lying is not a good way to persuade them. (You accused Bro. Kelley of lying way back in June.)

If you are not trying to persuade, or not doing so in an effective manner, why are you posting? Are you just doing so for your own enterntainment.

I used to post messages like you. Take for example, the steps in your reasoning for accusing me of charismatic elitism. These steps are your own ideas, not mine. You accuse me based on your own ideas and reasoning, not on my own attitudes or beliefs.

I suspect that other posters on the forum (sorry for naming names. My guess is Benjamin, Kelley) realize that you are not behaving properly. Bro. Keley has apparently chosen to be silent before his accusers. Benjamin is selective with his responses. Some people feel it is better to let a person carry on foolishly and not say anything to him in situations like this. You need to take a good look at yoru heart. You are writing messages full of sophistry, building up grand sounding arguments, and bashing down these straw men, in order to make other people look bad. You are not having a productive discussion that allows others to express their beliefs. If you wanted to teach other people, you would have to use a different style. What you are teaching now is now NOT to act on a forum.

I can understand why some people just ignore you and don't respond much. I am trying to help you, believe it or not. I've written many messages full of the same kind of sophistry, and gradneous arguments trying to make other peole's arguments look stupid. I ended up not being able to use the Internet for 6 months, while God showed me some of the problems with my heart. Then I got on the Internet, and saw one of my former debate opponents using those techniques before,a nd recognized that I had done the same thing. I had to pray and repent about that.

Millions of people could potentially read Internet messages. I was spreading bile out on the Internet. God had put responsibility in my heands, and I was using hte 'net for entertainment, and not edifying other people. There is nothing wrong with enjoying a discussion. But it is not good to enjoy tearing other people down. So I've chosen not to be silent. You need to change.

You should at least conduct yourself with enough politeness to ask for a clarification if someone's words don't seem to agree with one another, rather than jumping on someone and calling him a liar when it conveniently happens to also serve as a nice tool in the debate. You shouldn't write inflammatory messages to other people based on your own misunderstandings of scripture. You should not be so quick to accuse. Many unbelievers are even able to act with this degree of consideration from another human being, even if they have not been baptized into Christ.

>>>Given the argument that you and I have had over the fact that spiritual gifts and miraculous revelations have ceased would anyone with half a brain draw the conclusion that I thought that I had some "revelation"? However, what would you say if I did claim that Brother Kelley was lying and I know it because God revealed it to me? Would you just automatically admit that I am right? <<<<

You should be able to figure out that I wrote that just to illustrate how rediculous it was for you to think you knew Bro. Kelley's heart based on what he wrote. Btw, I don't believe that everyone who claims to have a revelation actually has one. If you claimed to have one, I would probably point out your inconsistency.

Many of the accusations in your previous post were based on your misunderstanding my intentions. I wrote a lot of that as my rationale for continuing my conversation with you up to this point. If you would just asked what I meant, then you might not make so many accusations. But then you would have to be patient and wait. Then you would not enjoy typing in those arguments of sophistry and accusations. You would not get to experience the joy of writing all those bombastic little things you write.

Bro. Benjamin isn't going to judge Bro. Kelley and thinks he should give him the benefit of the doubt. Do you think he is an unreasonable person, now?

It could be that Bro. Kelley has never read your posts in full. I don't blame them. I can understand that. Your posts accusing him don't contain many valid points, and it would have to be uncomfortable to read such vitrol written about onself with no basis. He already said he wasn't going to bebate with you, and it wasn't because your arguments were irrefutable. You can read the message. Just think about the possibility- you spent all that time writing those messages toward him, probably enjoying it as you built up all those arguments of sophistry and it may be that Bro. Kelley did not even read them. We don't know.

Read benjamin's last post with the quotes, and really search your heart on this matter and see if you haven't accused to quickly. Try to be, as James says 'easy to be entreated.'

-- Anonymous, August 14, 2000

Correction above. Lere accused Kelley of lying, not himself.

-- Anonymous, August 15, 2000

Link,

Two things, quickly.

First, you suggested I e-mail Bro. Kelly with my query/suggestion. The info. that came back to me when I posted my message listed his name and e-mail address among those who would receive it by e-mail. So I don't think I need to send it separately. He should already have it.

Second, although I appreciate the implied compliments in what you have said in reference to what I said, I think I'd rather speak for myself when I speak, and be allowed to remain silent when I prefer to remain silent. As "hot" as this thread is becoming, I think I'd rather you'd leave my name out of it for now. Thanks.

-- Anonymous, August 15, 2000

Link and Ben, thank you for your kindness in considering me enocent until proven guilty. My intent as stated earlier in a post, was not to decieve anyone nor to lie to my Christian brothers. Lee, does often make the mistake of glossing over my comments then picks them apart out of an agenda of warfare. Perhaps, I chose poor wording when I posted the phrase "within myself" but, my intent was totally different that what Lee took it as.

Let me clerify some issues, Link you are correct that Lee, is not so much concerned with truth as he is with his own religios tradition and trying to safe guard that tradition. He comes from a strick acapella background that denies the workings of the HS for today- in regards to the spiritual gifts- to Lee they died off with the apostles and are not needed anymore. Thus when I rejected his belief system, he then when on a verbal attack... the posts are here for all to read. Amoung other things he called be a false teacher who was trying to deliberately decieve those weak minded people in this forum. THen when I made the statment bout healings or miracles and such, he labeled me a liar. To Lee, those who claim to have been healed or have the gift of healing are decievers and liars- tongues fall into that as well.

I wanted Lee, to understand that to say that all miracles died with the apostles is an assumption based on his theological standing. It may have some valid points- but it is an interpretation with man made assumptions built in. As will all man made interpretations they have holes where it falls apart. Thus, my understanding and persuasion is just as valid as his. But, that is not how Lee sees it.

When I stated that I experienced the gifts, namely tongues, I did not qualify what I meant, only later did I do that- my mistake. But, my experience not only was external, but also internal. I NEVER spoke in tongues in my experience. Nor did intend to come accross that way. Thus later when I pointed out that to Lee- I was accused of lying. But, I agains state that I never said that. When I first made that statement- Lee jumped all over me and accused me of lying. I tried to explain it to him, but to no avail- he will not listen. Like I said I did not speak in tongues, but I expereinced it through another who did, but the joy and peace and unexplainable power flooded my soul as she (a lady in my previous church) spoke in tongues was undenable. THus I experienced it "within myself" ! But, as always Lee will jump all over my statments here. I guess I cannot help that. But, I beleive that people can still have the gifts of tongues. I beleive it because the word of God states it. I do not beleive that they passed away. Does that make me a flase teacher, a deceiver, and liar? Well, to Lee the answer may be yes, to others including myself ... no.

I once thought like Lee, I was taught that at Florida Christian College, but scince then I rejected that line of reasoning, because it is dangerous. Why? I feel that it leads to being pharisiacal and I do not want to close myself to the HS working today in my life- I an open- but still because of my background only to a point. I am still cautious and weary to excapt anything at face value. The Bible says we must test the spirits, Lee said he tested mine and found me false. But, I could say the same for him.

Well, if you have anymore questions please email me. I am still here merely just listening. Link I think you are very capable to handle Lee's arguments, more than I am.

May the Lord bless you richly, beyond all measure. Yours In CHrist AKelley

-- Anonymous, August 15, 2000

Thank you brother Kelley for clearing that up, and thank you for your kind words.

I can relate to what you wrote. Always trying to interpret the Bible throught the background of one's church, instead of coming to the scriptures with an open mind and a open heart can lead us astray. If one puts his own church's method of interpreting the Bible above what hte Bible teaches itself, this can lead to error. If one believes his church is the only church, and that it is always right, this can reinforce the tendancy to be close-minded as to what the Bible really says.

Sorry if I said your wording was poor. I can see what you mean now. I often make typing errors,a nd probably leave out information I was thinking about.

I hope Lee learns from his mistakes in this forum, and realizes tha the should not jump to conclusions and accuse before finding out what someone else means. Many times I've seen him make assumptions about my own statements, building up long arguments based on little bits of information built on misunderstanding. As things stand now, I just can't take Lee too seriously in these discussions.

-- Anonymous, August 15, 2000

Thank you brother Kelley for clearing that up, and thank you for your kind words.

I can relate to what you wrote. Always trying to interpret the Bible throught the background of one's church, instead of coming to the scriptures with an open mind and a open heart can lead us astray. If one puts his own church's method of interpreting the Bible above what hte Bible teaches itself, this can lead to error. If one believes his church is the only church, and that it is always right, this can reinforce the tendancy to be close-minded as to what the Bible really says.

Sorry if I said your wording was poor. I can see what you mean now. I often make typing errors,a nd probably leave out information I was thinking about.

I hope Lee learns from his mistakes in this forum, and realizes tha the should not jump to conclusions and accuse before finding out what someone else means. Many times I've seen him make assumptions about my own statements, building up long arguments based on little bits of information built on misunderstanding. As things stand now, I just can't take Lee too seriously in these discussions.

I believe any reasonable person who reads the whole discussion will not assume, when he is finished reading, that you are a liar.

-- Anonymous, August 15, 2000

Brother Ben:

I know that you have not had the time to go back and look at the attempted clarifications by Brother Kelley but I will copy and paste them for you to save you the time. But I believe if you examine them closely for yourself you will find that they do not clarify anything concerning his statements, as you seem to have the impression that he did. Now I know that this thread is long and many words have been said and I have not had the time to respond to everything myself. In fact it now takes almost 15 minutes for me to down load this thread. This has given much time for everyone to forget what was actually said. I can understand. But he has not clarified these points in the least and as you said you have not checked these exact words yourself.

He gave us this clarification as follows:

When I was in my previous ministry, I had witnessed so much evil in Church that I was going to quit the ministry. In fact I have seen fights (almost fist fights) in the auditorium to deacons cursing in board meetings. I have seen my wife verbally attacked and abused. It was a hard time for me! I personally had been praying hard. Everyday I would pray for hours in the auditoruim when no one else was near- I poured my heart out to God! In fact no one knew what I was doing... except myself and the Lord. A dear lady in another congregation, came to me and told me that her son called her (a Christian Church Minister/Missionary), he had a vision of a pastor on his hands and knees crying out to God... he further went on to say that in his vision that minister had talked with his mom. He also stated that that minister felt it was his own fault that his ministry was in such turmoil. She then called me up and told me about her son's dream. It was exactly what happened. I knew that the Lord used that man to reveal to me that He is still there for me and loves me. To you that may not be a miracle- but to me it is a Joel type of experience. So many times that type of thing has happened.

Now that example had nothing to do with tongue speaking at all. So how is it that he experienced the gift of tongues within himself when he was not speaking in tongues and no one else was speaking in them anywhere near him, as described in this example? This does nothing whatsoever to explain his statement. For there is absolutely nothing in the example to indicate that anyone including Brother Kelley had experienced tongue speaking as he claimed that he had experienced not only within those he knew personally but himself also.

Then he finally gives an example that gives a brief mention of someone supposedly speaking in tongues in his presence but this does not explain how he experienced it within himself. It only shows that someone he knew personally allegedly experienced it. How do any of these attempts at clarification show how he could have possibly experienced the gift of tongues within himself when one of them does not even have those whom he personally knew speaking in tongues and the other one has someone that he knew personally (even if briefly) according to his claim, speaking in tongues? But nothing is said, not one single word, showing the slightest bit of clarification concerning how he, Brother Kelley, experienced the gift of tongues within himself and not only through the influence of others. Nothing! There is just no explanation of these words that can even come close to clarifying how he could have not been claiming to actually have the gift of tongues. How on earth does one experience the gift of tongues" WITHIN THEMSELVES without being given the gift of tongues? This is pure nonsense that one could exercise within himself or experience within himself the gift of tongues without actually having or possessing that gift.

This is his final attempt to clarify:

I have personally seen people healed. Just recently I have seen one of my church members suffering from severe knee problems. He was prayed for (hands were laid upon- not by me) and he was healed. He is still problem free- psycho-symatic... no! I believe the power of God... not in that faith healer.... but in God! Now I never said I spoke in tongues, I said I experienced it... and I did! It was through a very godly woman in our last church before we left. The woman started to pray a normal prayer for us, but then spoke only some things that only we knew- then she began to speak in tongues (and it was a language- and it was interpreted).

Now notice that in this example we do not have any explanation from Brother Kelley as to how HE experienced the gift of tongues NOT ONLY within people he knew personally but "himself also". All we see here is that a woman began to speak in tongues. He says it was a language and it was interpreted. This may explain how Brother Kelley experienced the gift of tongues within those he knew personally but it does not in the least clarify how Brother Kelley experienced it within himself ALSO.

How do any of these attempts at clarification show how he could have possibly experienced the gift of tongues within himself when two of them do not even have those whom he personally knew speaking in tongues and the third one has someone that he knew personally (even if briefly) according to his claim, speaking in tongues? But nothing is said, not one single word, showing the slightest bit of clarification concerning how he, Brother Kelley, experienced the gift of tongues within himself and not only through the influence of others. Nothing! There is just no explanation of these words that can even come close to clarifying how he could have not been claiming to actually have the gift of tongues. How on earth does one experience the gift of tongues WITHIN THEMSELVES without being given the gift of tongues? This is pure nonsense that one could exercise within himself or experience within himself the gift of tongues without actually having or possessing that gift. I believe if Brother Kelley spent much time down in Florida he knows that the Phrase I have experienced the gift of tongues is used to indicate that the person making that statement is claiming to actually have the gift of tongues. And he should take your advice and examine himself and his heart concerning this matter. But no one so far has given a single decent explanation of this contradiction, least of all Brother Kelley. Now Brother Kelley keeps saying that he did not claim to have the gift of tongues but only that he experienced it. Now that is just not the truth. He did not simply say that he had experienced it he said that he experienced NOT ONLY within people that he knew but himself also. His so called clarifications only mention one person that he knew whom he claims spoke in tongues and absolutely NOTHING about how he experienced it within himself ALSO. So we do not have a clarification. What we have here is and absolutely irreconcilable CONTRADICTION. The reason we have no clarification is the simple fact that there is not anything that Brother Kelley can say to clarify these two diametrically opposite statements made by him.

Now I will finish what I have to say with the numerously repeated and often ignored contradiction that has yet to be explained by anyone.

On July the 6th 2,000 Brother Kelley said: I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Lee, you again make judgmental statments and assumptions that are not conclusive. Then on July the 9th 2,000 Brother Kelley said: First concerning the first charge, I never stated that have the gift of speaking in tongues (read my earlier post), I just stated that I have personally experienced them.

Now the above contradictory statement is without doubt, to anyone able to be HONEST, a clear contradiction in which Brother Kelley spoke what he believed to be true in one place and what he knew to be a lie in the other. The question is only when did he tell the truth as he sees it and when did he lie. For it is not possible for these two statements to both be true.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

TO ALL:

Brother Link has said to Brother Kelley, it seems in an effort to comfort him that everything is now alright now: I hope Lee learns from his mistakes in this forum, and realizes tha the should not jump to conclusions and accuse before finding out what someone else means. Many times I've seen him make assumptions about my own statements, building up long arguments based on little bits of information built on misunderstanding. As things stand now, I just can't take Lee too seriously in these discussions.

I believe any reasonable person who reads the whole discussion will not assume, when he is finished reading, that you are a liar.

Now, I have certainly seen confirmation of what I already knew through many years of experience with Pentecostals. None of them tell the truth about their experiences though some of them are honestly convinced that they are telling the truth, and a few of them usually contradict themselves so severely that they ultimately show beyond doubt that they are deliberate liars. I do not give Brother Kelley any benefit of the doubt for there is no benefit to be derived from doubt for one who so clearly has lied. If he lied this way in a court of law he would surely be convicted of perjury. And if he persisted in such flemsey efforts to escape responsibility for his lies the judge would be so outraged that he would surely send him to jail. No one, least of all me, cares in the least if a companion to a LIAR takes anything that I say seriously. So the fact that Brother Link is not taking me seriously will not keep me "awake at night"! Ha!

I am also convinced that any reasonable person that reads this WHOLE discussion will not assume, when he is finished reading, that Brother Kelley is a liar. For he will KNOW, without the slightest shadow of reasonable doubt, that Brother Kelley is a deliberate liar.

So I will close this chapter, with a quotation from our not so accomplished liar, A. Kelley.

On July the 6th 2,000 Brother Kelley said:

I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well. Lee, you again make judgmental statments and assumptions that are not conclusive. Then on July the 9th 2,000 Brother Kelley said:

First concerning the first charge, I never stated that have the gift of speaking in tongues (read my earlier post), I just stated that I have personally experienced them.

So long as these words are in this thread anyone who can read will know that Brother Kelley intentionally lied in this matter.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 16, 2000

AKelley,

I re-post from above:

[You said:]

Like I said I did not speak in tongues, but I experienced it through another who did, but the joy and peace and unexplainable power flooded my soul as she (a lady in my previous church) spoke in tongues was undeniable. Thus I experienced it "within myself".

I experienced almost the exact same thing when the ladies from my son's and daughter-in-law's church prayed for me. It is sad that people will claim that the personal testimony of a believer is untrue or, even though they are intelligent and aware of what is reality and what is not, they are doubted.

It is insulting, and I wonder where they get the temerity to take a position like that, just to fit it into their erroneous exigesis?

What right do people have to do that?

Sadly,

-- Anonymous, August 17, 2000

Lee, You write:

I do not give Brother Kelley any benefit of the doubt for there is no benefit to be derived from doubt for one who so clearly has lied. 

This is circular logic. You should give him the benefit of the doubt in determining whether or not he has lied. If you had given him the normal human benefit of the doubt, instead of accusing him of intentionally lying, you would not be able to say that he so clearly has lied.

Instead of asking for a clarification about the post, you started accusing him of lying. Shame on you.

Proverbs 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

Akelley wrote, >>> Lee, you have charged that I have not seen miracles such as presented in the NT. How do you know if I have or have not. For example, I have personally seen people who have been prayed for and have had hands laid upon them... healed of their sickness. I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well.<<<

Notice the context was in response to your accusation that AKelly had not SEEN miracles.

The wording of I have personally experienced the gift of tongues, not only within people I personally know, but myself as well is odd. I dont think Ive ever heard a Pentecostal or Charismatic call speaking in tongues experiencing tongues within myself.

You, Lee, have written to Akelley concerning this,

>> You have made claims that are based upon pure lies. You claim to have miraculously spoken in tongues. <

Akelley never claimed to have spoken in tongues. He claimed to have experienced them within himself. So you, who are so familiar with the quotes, claimed that Akelley claimed to have SPOKEN in tongues. And you call him a liar? You made some assumptions, and then accused him of lying. In these discussion, you seem quite ready to grasp at any straw you can find to support your arguments.

I notice you omitted Akelleys explanation from your last post:

> Like I said I did not speak in tongues, but I expereinced it through another who did, but the joy and peace and unexplainable power flooded my soul as she (a lady in my previous church) spoke in tongues was undenable. THus I experienced it "within myself" !<

Lee, you have written that you believe that everyone who claims to have experienced miraculous gifts today is either lying or deceived. Many skeptics examine Biblical miracles with the same bias. You wrote:

You are clearly prejudiced.

>>>> Now, I have certainly seen confirmation of what I already knew through many years of experience with Pentecostals. None of them tell the truth about their experiences though some of them are honestly convinced that they are telling the truth, and a few of them usually contradict themselves so severely that they ultimately show beyond doubt that they are deliberate liars.<<

No wonder you consider them liars. You already consider them to be liars or deceived when they claim to have seen miracles. They may have seen real miracles, but you consider them to be deceived or liars in the first place.

You may believe that assuming that the perfect in I Corinthians 13 refers to the scriptures is a theological assumption. Instead of giving him a good answer, you find an excuse to call him a liar. You asserted that the miraculous gifts were only given by the laying on of hands of the apostles. In this discussion, your assertion has been shown to be illogical and to contradict the scriptures. Scripturally, you have no basis for this prejudice that anyone who has experienced gifts of the Spirit is either deceived or lying. I dont really expect you to answer these points which demonstrate error in your own belief system. I dont expect for you to admit that you are wrong. Instead, Id imagine, if you posted again on this thread, it would be about this distracting issue you have raised accusing someone of lying.

-- Anonymous, August 17, 2000

TO All:

Brother Kelley made an argument from his own experience. Such an argument cannot be examined properly without determining if the person relaying that experience is telling the truth. I did not call Brother Kelley a liar because of any scriptural arguments that he had made for he did not make any that proves that miracles continue today. He merely argued against the arguments that I had made from the scriptures, which prove that these gifts ceased when the prophecy of Joel was fulfilled. They ceased when the purpose for which they were given was completely accomplished, and the means by which they were given was taken away with the death of the apostles through whom they were given. Now that is the gist of the argument which I have given more than once and all who are interested in the numerous passages that I have sited which I am convinced proves this position to be true can read it for themselves on this thread. No one has answered those arguments. Instead they jumped, as Brother Kelley did, to arguments from their own personal experience.

I called Brother Kelley a liar because he made two diametrically opposite statements concerning his experiences and his argument from those experiences, both of which cannot be the truth. He has yet to explain to any of us just how those two statements can both be true and the ridiculous efforts of Brother Link to make excuses for him that are far from being possible has not been helpful in explaining those things.

If anyone wants to argue from the scriptures then they should do so but if they want to support their position from personal experiences then they should expect their personal credibility to come under intense scrutiny. If one knows that their personal integrity will be examined they should at least make a good effort to not contradict themselves as severely as Brother Kelley has done in this case.

I have completely made the case that miraculous spiritual gifts have ceased and have repeated those arguments more than was necessary for anyone to understand that is honest. Now that does not mean that they should be expected to agree but it does mean that the arguments have been stated for all to see. Repeating them is not necessary. I have also shown Brother Kelley to be a liar and continued repeating of this fact is also no longer essential to my original purpose of showing that he did not have enough credibility for us to believe his argument from his alleged personal experiences.

Brother Kelley and Brother Link have both sought to convince us on the grounds of their personal experience. I have examined Brother Kelleys credibility and have found it severely wanting. Brother Kelley brought up the idea of our seeing the panther for ourselves and I asked him to demonstrate these miracles for us but he could not do so. WE have also asked Brother Link to demonstrate his miraculous spiritual gifts to us. We are still waiting for him to Come to Atlanta find any Christian in this world that is willing to claim that he has been given powers similar to those that the apostles had in the Book of Acts. We are waiting for such a one to come to Atlanta and meet me in a graveyard and raise the dead by the power of God like Peter did. But we have heard nothing from either of them but excuses about why they cannot do such things and they do not personally know anyone who can do such things. Then the only thing they have left to discuss is the fact that I called Brother Kelley a LIAR.

I have proven that Brother Kelley is a LIAR and that neither Brother Kelley or Brother Link are able to demonstrate that they possess the powers that both of them have claimed that they have from God in the way of miraculous spiritual gifts. Brother Kelley did claim that he had experienced the gift of tongue not only within those whom he knew personally but within himself also. And when he was asked to demonstrate his powers he suddenly claimed that he never had the gift of tongues but had only experienced them. Which means that in some way he experienced a miraculous spiritual gift within himself, not just through hearing others speaking them but within himself also, without actually possessing the gift himself. We are glad to know that he is at least now clear on the FACT that he does not have such a gift from God!

It stands to reason that if these gifts continue today some Christians would be able to demonstrate that God has given them these powers today. But none have ever done so and they never will. They will only tell us stories that are impossible to verify their truthfulness. Therefore the only thing left is for us to examine is their personal credibility when they relay these so-called actual personal experiences in their efforts to convince us expect miraculous powers that God has never promised to any of us living today. WE must determine whether it is even likely that these stories come from those who are known to be truthful and are knowledgeable enough concerning these gifts to be credible witnesses of what they claim to have seen. We have seen that Brother Kelley has no credibility because he cannot keep his stories straight. And while we have found no reason to doubt Brother Links credibility we have found that he is unable to verify the truthfulness of his claims nor is he willing to demonstrate his powers. Therefore it is not possible to know if his claims and stories are true. Thus we have no reason to accept them especially since we have reasons from the scriptures to doubt that any such miraculous gifts exist today.

SO as I predicted before we shall see nothing but talk out of Brother Link and Brother Kelley about miracles but we shall never see a demonstration of those powers. But even if we had some scriptural reason to think that God might give miraculous powers to anyone today we cannot believe that he has given them to Brother Kelley, Brother Link, or anyone else until we have absolute proof that He has in fact done so. If such persons are unwilling or unable to prove that GOD has given them such gifts they should not expect anyone to believe that he has done so. We should also consider what would be such a persons motivation for claiming miraculous powers for himself that he is unable and unwilling to demonstrate or prove that he has? For if he has such a gift it has a purpose and whether we are aware that he has a gift or not is meaningless to any of us. If he exercises that gift in the presence of us all we will know that he has the gift. But if he does not have any reason to exercise it why is it important that he tell us that he has a gift from God. Is it his only purpose to bolster his own spiritual pride and persuade others to see him as one of Gods special saints? I am convinced that spiritual elitism is one possible motivation for these claims that cannot be verified as being true!

The miracles of the New Testament were not just hearsay miracles but they were demonstrated and verified. If one took all of the miracles out of the book of Acts there would be little left. There is no credible evidence that miracles such as these have ever been duplicated since latter part of the first century and the first half of the second. Which fits exactly the death of the apostles and those upon whom they laid their hands to impart miraculous gifts. We certainly do not see them today. All we have today is mere claims or stories that have no independent verification that some have seen what they would call miracles including such things as the birth of a child! Ha! But we have not seen and PROOF of anyone actually seeing the dead raised or replacing a severed ear, or making the blind to see! We are told to try the spirits whether they are of God for many false prophets have gone out into the world (1 John 4:1). We are told to prove all things and hold fast to that which is good. We have tested both Brother Link and Brother Kelley and have found that neither of them actually have miraculous spiritual gifts, which can be verified by actual demonstration of them. We have found that neither of them even knows anyone that we can verify actually has these gifts today. We have seen neither demonstrations of power nor any willingness to prove that those whom they claimed to have miraculous gifts actually have them. So their argument from their personal experience is a pathetic one that is beyond any possibility of positive proof or verification.

So, we wait for a demonstration, though as I have predicted, we shall not see one from Brother Kelley, Brother Link, or anyone else that they know or have heard actually has these gifts. It is a bit strange that someone would claim that these gifts continue today though they cannot give actual proof that anyone actually has these powers today. All we hear is talk, idle talk but we see no proof or evidence or demonstration. If we do have such gifts today, tell us just who among us actually possesses these powers? Where do they live? Where do they worship? And tell us just how we can VERIFY or prove that they have such powers for ourselves. I for one am not willing to take the word of anyone who like Brother Kelley is constantly contradicting himself.

If these powers exist today they are surely HIDDEN from most Christians! This fact indicates that such an idea breeds spiritual elitism that says I have seen miracles but you have not and if you doubt my word I will tell everyone that you do not have the spirit because you do not show the fruits of the spirit in your life! Which is a stark contrast to the New Testament times when notable miracles were done in the presence of unbelievers and NONE could deny it! This situation is far different from the time when the church actually had been given these gifts through the lying on of the apostles hands!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 17, 2000

Lee wrote,

"But on any subject I can be wrong. I am willing to be persuaded that I am wrong."

I want to call you on this statement. You have been shown to be wrong in this forum on a number of issues. Instead of admitting you are wrong, you ignore points that show you are wrong, and continue to stand by your original viewpoint.

You wrote, They ceased when the purpose for which they were given was >completely accomplished, and the means by which they were given was taken away with the death of the apostles through whom they were given. Now that is the gist of the argument which I have given more than once and all who are interested in the numerous passages that I have sited which I am convinced >proves this position to be true can read it for themselves on this thread. No >one has answered those arguments.

Lee, are you not paying attention to the thread, or just LYING?

You presented texts showing gifts being given through the laying on of hands of the apostles. Then you argued that gifts were ONLY given through the laying on of hands of the apostles.

As far back as June 25th, Connie pointed out to you from Acts, that Cornelius received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues without Peter laying hands on him. I have pointed out that Timothy received a gift with the laying on of hands of the elders. I also pointed you to I Corinthains 14:13, which tells the one who speaks in tongues to pray that he may interpret. (The gift of interpretation received through prayer, rather than exclusively thorugh the laying on of hands of the apostles.) I pointed out that I Corinthians says that he gifts are given by the Spirit as He wills. I also showed you the error of your logic. An example of gifts being given through the laying on of hands of an apostle does not prove that gifts are ALWAYS given through the laying on of hands of an apostle. So when you say that no one has answered your arguments, are you very forgetful, did you mistype and entire sentence are are you JUST LYING. How is it possible that you are not lying here.

Why don't you concede the point? Is the following claim true:

"But on any subject I can be wrong. I am willing to be persuaded that I am wrong."

Stand by your words. Another poster emailed me privately and said that you would never admit that you were wrong to someone that you have chosen to berate. Maybe that poster was right.

If you are not willing to be persuaded that you are wrong on a subject, as you claim you are, you could at the very least refrain from making FALSE statements like the following:

> No one has answered those arguments.

You wrote: >There is no credible evidence that miracles such as these have ever been duplicated since latter part of the first century >and the first half of the second. Which fits exactly the death of the apostles > and those upon whom they laid their hands to impart miraculous gifts.

I suspect circular logic here that probably goes something like this: "Miracles ceased with the apostles. Therefore anyone after the apostles that claims to have done or seen miracles is lying. There is not credible source which refers to miracles occuing after the apostles. Miracles must have ceased with the apostles."

The fact is that there are early church writings which tell us that miracles were done after the first century. You can look up quotes from Ireneaus' _Against Heresies_ in Eusebius _Ecclesiastical History_ for one such list of gifts in his day (including raising the dead, btw.)

You seem to think one has to see a mriacle before he can believe in them. Thomas didn't want to believe the resurrection until he could see-and touch- proof of it.

You challenge people come to raise the dead for you to prove the existence of the gifts. In the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, Abraham told Lazarus that his brothers had Moses and the prophets, and would not believe even if one should rise from the dead. You have the scriptures. Read them. The Bible says- to one is given...the working of miracles. Just believe that. When you hear about amriacle, you shouldn't demand proof that miracles can happen. Take testimony of a miracle as you would testimony of a baptism- out of the mouth of two or three witnesses. Since you reject the scriptural possibility of miracles, you also discount testimony of personal experiences about them.

Jesus didn't go around putting on miracle shows for people merely for their entertainment. He didn't walk across Herod's swimming pool so that Herod could be able to believe in miracles. Jesus' miracles were done for a reason, and they generally accompanied the preaching of the gospel. Even Jesus could not do many mighty miracles in Nazareth because of their unbelief. So don't expect me to find someone for you who has the gift of miracles just to appease a scoffer.

The working of miracles, as other gifts, is a manifestation fo the Spirit, as I Corinthians 12. So don't think either the apostles or anyone else did miracles all the time just for kicks and not because it was God's will. Even the apostles prayed for God to stretch forth His hand to do signs and wonders after they were persecuted. These things weren't like Superman's powers, which they could turn on and off whenever they wanted to.

So what will it be, Lee. Will you be willing to be persuaded that you are wrong. Will you actually admit that you are wrong? Will you retract your false statement that no one has answered your arguments (which you made after accusing someone else of being a LIAR on much flimsier evidence.)

-- Anonymous, August 17, 2000

Brother Link:

you have said:

"Will you retract your false statement that no one has answered your arguments (which you made after accusing someone else of being a LIAR on much flimsier evidence.)"

I do not believe you, or anyone else has answered my arguments. I do not doubt that you THINK you have answered them but you have not even mentioned some of them and you have failed to answer any of the others. SO, I have not told a lie in the least by stating that no one has answered my arguments. For it is my sincere belief that they have not been sufficently answered.

THis is sure a far different thing than claiming to have the gift of tongues within me in one place and then denying that I ever said such a thing in another.

I know that you must try to make me appear to be a liar in order to justify Brother Kelley in his lie. But this is a pathetic attempt on your part to do so! Ha! Simply pathetic.

Now just because I do not believe that you have not answered my arguments does not mean that I am lying just because you have attempted to answer some of them and are convinced that you have actually done so. I am convinced otherwise. So I am at least speaking the truth as i see it.

Now, I would like to see you prove, as I have with brother Kelley, that I intended to deliberately lie.

So, try again, Brother Link! THis nonsense will not work with anyone that has a brain and can read.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, August 18, 2000

It is absolutely obvious that I have answered your arguments. Whether or not you agree with my answers is another issue. But it is obvious that your arguments have been answered. You don't admit to unintentionally typing something false. Instead, you insist that something that is not true is true.

The case for you lying is certainly just as strong, if not many times stronger than the case for AKelley lying. Now, i could be obnoxious about the whole thing about write hundreds of paragraphs repeditively accusing you of lying and assertion that I was sure of the intention of your heart, as you have done to AKelley's post.

You don't hold up to the standard of scrutiny you impose on others. No how much rhetoric you use, or how many times you repeat yourself and your accusations, the facts do not change.

Keep in mind that one of your arguments was that the 'miraculous gifts' were ONLY given through the laying on of hands of the apostles. Connie showed you a very clear case where Cornelius and his men spoke in tongues with the apostles laying hands on them. Did you modify your stance or admit that you were wrong? The suprising thing is, you just continued repeating your earlier stance.

In this thread, when people have challenged your views with good strong arguments, you attack their character using whatever weapons you can design out of the conversations. You will probably answer this post with more rhetoric about the following three topics:

1. trying to justify yourself 2. accusing anther brotherin the forum 3. try to dismiss the obvious facts by calling them 'nonsense' or some other ploy.

I really wonder how you can possibly believe the things you type sometimes. I guess it is possible.

No matter how obvious or small something is, you do not admit you are wrong. This is rediculous.

(To all) I wanted to try to reason with Lee, and maybe open his eyes to what he was doing on this thread. Other posters in this forum perhaps made a wiser decision in ignoring him. There is a group aspect of Christianity, goading one another on, exhorting one another not to sin, and that sort of thing. I'd hoped that others in this forum would have been more firm about challenging Lee. Kelley eventually seemed to think that was the right thing to do. The other posters on this issue agreed that Lee was wrong, but did not rebuke him for it on the forum. Maybe they did through email. I don't know. I've taught everything from pre-school up to the 10th grade. From 6th grade up, most students, if others students stare at them when they are doing something foolish. The fourth and fifth graders were so immature, however, that even when others stared at them, they would sometimes continue in their foolishness.

I wrote earlier that i would speak as a fool, turning Lee's reasoning on himself. Lee, I have not called you a fool, but you have been behaving foolishly. It is good to consider the characteristics of fools, and of the wise- and forsake the characteristics of fools and pursue those of the wise.

Proverbs 26:4-5 says: 4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. 5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

I'm not accusing you of being anything here Lee, btw. But (to all) I started speaking according to verse 5, and it seems I am falling into the situation of verse 4. I could keep this conversation up for a really long time with Lee. I read a post from Benjamin on another thread, that woke me up, so I'll try to close down paricipation on this issue. I just can't take Lee to seriously. I can only pray that he will become aware of what is going on.

Lee, The way you are acting now it is really easy for the Devil to use you when you talk.

Let us consider sometings about the fools versus the wise.

KJV Proverbs 10:18 "and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool."

Four people on this thread either believe that Akjelley did not lie, or are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt:

Proverbs 14:3 In the mouth of the foolish is a rod of pride: but the lips of the wise shall preserve them.

KJV Proverbs 18:6 A fool's lips enter into contention, and his mouth calleth for strokes.

Lee, you should not be so quick to label other people liars: KJV Proverbs 29:20 Seest thou a man that is hasty in his words? there is more hope of a fool than of him.

I challenge you not to return to the habit of accusing Akelley of being a liar: Proverbs 26:11 As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

Lee, I hopeyou have the wisdom to listen to the four people in this forum who disagree with you. (And there haven't been that many more posting since it turned into a thread on lying.) Consider this proverb:

KJV Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.

I read something on another thread about my posts in this forum. I don't know that this is my last post, but I will try to back out- heeding counsel. I hope Lee listens. I don't know if you find it extremely entertaining when a debate turns into name-calling and accusations, but it would be best for us _spiritually_ if we had discussion with a higher level of decency than the discussions found among non-believers. Just based on his current pattern of behavior, I expect a rehash of his previous accusations and try to pick apart this post and others.

Let's just watch and see. Let's just see if he doesn't hammer on his previous accusations and pick apart this post, instead of dealing with previous posts that have shown his views to be illogical and unscriptural. Why don't you surprise us, Lee, by either dropping the thread, or discussing an issue related to the original topic.

In the meantime, I have to be careful. I'm starting to use some of the same tactics Lee is using in his arguments. At first Idid this to point out his folly. I told you all that I was contentious in the past. I found myself today wondering what Lee would say in response to an earlier post that clearly pointed out that he had made arguments that had been answered, and that clearly listed some of his errors in interpretation and challenged him to address them. I'm going to try not to get caught up more in this type of discussion, and just pull out of it. I think I've done nearly all I can do by answering Lee with a style like his own, and I don't want to get caught up into that way of dealing with people again. So, to all, forgive me if I've subjected you to that.

Btw, though, I do wish that everyone would offer some exhortation when they see things getting out of line. I certainly can't do it on my own. sure to goad others on and to encourage them not ot sin.

Link Hudson

Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.

-- Anonymous, August 18, 2000