tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31142535.post115876674999495201..comments2023-07-24T09:45:37.392-04:00Comments on Barque of Peter: Tongues, Cessationism, and the Charismatic Movement (Part 3)Gregoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03982931507445593579noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31142535.post-1159366605601143372006-09-27T10:16:00.000-04:002006-09-27T10:16:00.000-04:00Hey Hidden One, good comments. Your first point i...Hey Hidden One, good comments. Your first point is well-taken. I may be guilty of <I>desiring</I> to find fault with Strauss at that moment. :)<BR/><BR/>Eisegesis is just what you deduced it to be: reading your own interpretations into a passage. It is the opposite of "exegesis", or "pulling things out" of the passage--letting the words speak for themselves, rather than approaching the text with a preconceived theological stance and forcing the text to "fit".<BR/><BR/>As for seeking the Spiritual Gifts, we should a) be open to all that God wants to give us; b) desire to be used by Him in the best possible way, and c) seek the best gifts for a particular situation.<BR/><BR/>Now, obviously, finite man cannot know all the variables as to what the "Best Gift" in a particular instance would be. Paul seems to propose a general rule of thumb with prophecy, since it is the direct word of God to the Church in their language. However, as I point out in my essay, Tongues, with an interpretation, is equal to prophecy. And it may very well be that a message in tongues, that is then interpreted, might go farther to convince a particular person or people of the truth, than simple prophecy. On the other hand, prophecy might be better. The "best" gifts are the ones best suited to a particular situation, not an absolute listing, as Strauss wants it to be.<BR/><BR/>Personally, in our day and age of relativism and pluralism, my personal opinion of which gift is best, is the discernment of spirits (which also seems to be the most overlooked of the gifts). But that's just my opinion.<BR/><BR/>The point is, contrary to Strauss' statements, we <I>are</I> encouraged to seek gifts, and since Paul never says <I>not</I> to seek a particular gift, it is not wrong or improper to seek any and all of the gifts. That doesn't mean we'll get them, but it is our act of being open to the Spirit.<BR/><BR/>What is <I>wrong</I>, is despising any Gift that God would choose to give, and despising all the gifts together.Gregoryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03982931507445593579noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31142535.post-1159319709967799272006-09-26T21:15:00.000-04:002006-09-26T21:15:00.000-04:00"'Because they were carnal, "babes in Christ" (3:1..."'Because they were carnal, "babes in Christ" (3:1), their exercise of the gifts were self-induced by fleshly energy, not by the Holy Spirit. All Christians do not use their gifts properly, so that a Christian's use of a gift might not be in accord with the Word of God. Mistakes can be made by any of us in the exercise of a gift.'<BR/><BR/>Here I see a slight dilemma of logic. In the passages pertaining to the spiritual gifts, Paul does not claim of the Corinthians that their gifts were false, or not of the Holy Spirit. How, then, if they are true spiritual gifts, can they be considered "self-induced"? How can a spiritual gift be manifested by fleshly energy? Strauss seems to correct himself in the next sentence, admitting that the gifts are genuine while the motives behind their use is improper."<BR/><BR/>I ead that as 'their excersizes (uses) of the gifts were self induced (they chose to use them) by fleshly energy. (because of their desires, not the Lord's.)<BR/><BR/>"'It is a sin for any Christian to seek for signs before he will believe God's Word.'<BR/><BR/>I'm somewhat curious about which passage of Scripture supports that claim."<BR/><BR/>Me, too, cause that's what I was taught as a Protestant way-back-when. Conversely, if there was Scripture which was adamantly against such...<BR/><BR/>"And those who, receiving admonitions such as this, therefore bottle up their doubts and fears, become atheists, because certain leaders in the Church have never let them grow up beyond the babe-in-Christ state that Dr. Strauss condemns so eagerly."<BR/><BR/>The other response is to simply ignore questioning or illogically hold onto misinterpetations. Been there, doen both. Lots.<BR/><BR/>"This is expressly contrary to St. Paul's writing: In 1 Corinthians 14:1, St. Paul expressly tells us that we should pursue spiritual gifts--"especially that you may prophesy." So according to Dr. Strauss, it is wrong that we tell the Holy Spirit which gift to give us, but according to St. Paul, we should be asking God to give us whichever gift He wants--but especially the gift of prophecy. Which is it? I would hope the answer is obvious."<BR/><BR/>Are you saying that we should ask Him for the Spiritual gift He wants to give us...and/or maybe one we want, (and prophecy is the best of them?) I'm confused.<BR/><BR/>"This is a blatant eisegetical abuse of this passage!"<BR/><BR/>Well, guess this is my New Word of the Day...what's it mean?<BR/><BR/>"Paul is indeed encouraging them to seek the best gifts, and chapter 13, the "better way", is Paul's argument for why certain gifts are better than others--because of the love for the Church that they communicate by directly edifying it."<BR/><BR/>So we are supposed to ask for certain gifts, more valued than the others. Can we ask for lesser-valued gifts, too? I don't know much about the 'value' of gifts, or even what they all are, so I'm unsure on this point.<BR/><BR/>"I agree with this, insofar as it is understood that "God's Word" does not necessarily equate to The Bible Alone, since the Bible itself nowhere teaches that principle, and moreover refers to other sources as "The Word of God"."<BR/><BR/>Ah, but how important and odd a thing that sounds to someone raised Protestant! (Though I certainly do agree.)<BR/><BR/>"Because after the return of Christ, faith will become sight and hope will become experience--but love will still continue."<BR/><BR/>That makes a lot mroe sense than the argument I gave not-so-long ago...<BR/><BR/>"To arrive at this conclusion is a major display of eisegesis."<BR/><BR/>My illiteracy will be my undoing.<BR/><BR/>"This again is eisegesis, reading into the text. "<BR/><BR/>Perhaps tis a hint towards the meaning...which makes sense.<BR/><BR/>"Judging by the level of biblical literacy demonstrated in this article, not very well..."<BR/><BR/>Now now, that was mean. Perhaps not unjustified, but mean. ;)<BR/><BR/>And so I come to the end of my commentary.<BR/><BR/>~The Hidden One~Hidden Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06042188431683942338noreply@blogger.com