| Poster | Thread |
| | 1 Corinthians 14:1 - Gifts?? | | Many of you on this site are so incredibly knowledgeable in the Scriptures. I am studying this out myself, but I would value input from those of you who would care to comment.
1 Cor. 14:1 (KJV) Follow after charity, and desire spiritual [gifts], but rather that ye may prophesy.
When I look in the interlinear, "gifts" is not there. It would seem that it should read "desire that which is spiritual" or something like that. Why was the word gifts inserted here?
I'm not trying to prove or disprove anything. Just looking for truth.
Dani |
|  2007/5/10 19:52 | | KingJimmy
Member
Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC
| | Re: 1 Corinthians 14:1 - Gifts?? | | It's simply an insert by translators to help bring clarity to the sentence's flow. Translating it word for word, one could also say: "...and desire spiritual [things]." Then one could ask, what spiritual things? And in the context of the passage, it is easy inferred the "things" he is talking about in this passage are the gifts of the Spirit.
_________________
Jimmy H
|
| | 2007/5/10 20:38 | Profile |
| | Re: 1 Corinthians 14:1 - Gifts?? | | I've been struggling with questions like this myself.
I think it helps to keep the scripture in context by remembering that Paul was writing to former polytheists in Corinth who, I've read elsewhere, worshipped Diana before Jesus.
Consider four chapters before the scripture you cited Paul speaks of his liberty to partake of food offered to idols... to win the heathen to his cause... and to refrain from eating things sacrificed to idols if there's someone nearby he knows might be offended - like a Jew (I COR 10:27).
"Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God: [b]Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they might be saved.[/b]" (I COR 10:32-33)
If Paul was interacting with the idolatrous heathen, and desperately trying not to offend them by refusing what they offered foodwise - it follows that he was exercising grace, by letting some of their idolotrous behaviour slip, to win them to Christ's cause.
The infamous Oracle of Delphi was the center of the Cult of Diana. There, a virgin priestess would do certain drugs and/or breath in sulfuric fumes from a crack in the ground below the temple. She would foam at the mouth, utter words (prophecy) that no one could understand - but her priests would decipher and interpret.
Therefore, to appease the new converts, he allowed them to speak in tongues:
"He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the whole church." (I COR 14:4)
But with subtlety suggests:
"...if I know the not the meaning of a voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me." (I COR 14:11)
He points out the vanity of speaking in unknown tongues:
"For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also." (I COR 14:14-15)
He then points out that speaking in unknown tongues was a sign for the Jews, not for them, and therefore, they should focus on prophecy, not tongues:
"In the law it is written, WITH MEN OF OTHER TONGUES AND OTHER LIPS WILL I SPEAK UNTO THIS PEOPLE; AND YET FOR ALL THAT WILL THEY NOT HEAR ME, SAITH THE LORD. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe." (I COR 14:21-22)
Which takes us back to Acts, where the apostles, and the believers...
"...were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because every man heard them speak in his own language." (ACTS 2:4-6)
(Consider the difference between speaking in unintelligable glossolalia vs. speaking the gospel and it comes out in Mandarin for a Chinese fellow, or Swahili for an African woman.)
Then, subtle Paul once again states the dangers of these (meaningless) kinds of tongues again,
"If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?" (I COR 14:23)
He again points to the superiority of prophecy ( the preaching of scripture, exhorting and encouraging the believers),
"But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all..." (I COR 14:24)
But, since these ex-cultists still hold to these bad habits, he suffers them to continue speaking in tongues, but only in order, and only with an interpreter (I COR 27). Otherwise, whoever wishes to speak in tongues must remain silent (because it's meaningless gibberish).
Would the Holy Ghost be making all these people speak chaotically meaningless gibberish - in the presence of God (who is not the author of confusion? For...
"...God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints." (I COR 14:33)
To tie all of this in with Diana, and her virgin priestesses-turned-Christians, near the end of the chapter he says,
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." (I COR 14:34-35)
Of course, someone is bound to point out that Paul spoke in tongues,
"I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue." (I COR 14:18-19)
Being a learned Pharisee, and a free Citizen of Rome I assume he knew Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, and maybe a few other languages - probably far more than any of the folks at Corinth. Being Christ's ambassador to the Gentiles, who knows how he could speak while under the influence of the Holy Ghost?
I, for one, think this scripture is taken way, way, way out of context by those who would make it doctrine.
That's my understanding. I hope it helps. But don't take my word for it - and no one else's, either. Read your Bible. Do your own research. And pray to Jesus that the Holy Ghost reveals the truth to you.
God Bless You in your search, brother. |
| | 2007/5/10 21:44 | |
| | Re: | | Corey H said Quote:
Then, subtle Paul once again states the dangers of these (meaningless) kinds of tongues again,
"If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?" (I COR 14:23)
He again points to the superiority of prophecy ( the preaching of scripture, exhorting and encouraging the believers),
"But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all..." (I COR 14:24)
But, since these ex-cultists still hold to these bad habits, he suffers them to continue speaking in tongues, but only in order, and only with an interpreter (I COR 27). Otherwise, whoever wishes to speak in tongues must remain silent (because it's meaningless gibberish).
Would the Holy Ghost be making all these people speak chaotically meaningless gibberish - in the presence of God (who is not the author of confusion? For...
"...God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints." (I COR 14:33)
Bro Corey, where did you get the idea that uninterpreted tongues is "meaningless gibberish", or "chaotic"? I find it even more strange that you suggest that Paul allowed the Corinthians to carry on this, frankly and obviously demonic, aspect of heathern practice! Eating food offered to idols was a different matter, and could be allowed as long as the person wasn't being tempted back into idolatry.
In 1Corinthians 12 he makes a clear distinction between the "heathen" version of tongues and the Holy Spirit inspired version. There is no suggestion that any of it is gibberish, only that one must take heed to the [i][b][u]spirit[/u][/b][/i] that is operating in the utterance.
[i][color=000066]"Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be ignorant: 2 You know that you were Gentiles, carried away to these dumb idols, however you were led. 3 Therefore I make known to you that [b]no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit[/b].
(The New King James Version)
[/color][/i]
In other words, "tongues" spoken by someone under demon influence is totally different from an utterance in the HOLY Spirit. Someone inspired by an alien spirit is also not willing to worship Jesus as Lord. As you say, the Corinthians would have been familiar with this false tongues, and needed to know how to distinguish between that and the genuine. Which is one of the aims of 1Corinthians 12-14.
Of course, any foreign language will seem "meaningless gibberish" if you don't understand it. That's why, as you mentioned, Paul seeks to regulate the use of this gift when there are those present who would find this confusing or disturbing. And with interpretation, as you say, the church is built up.
It sounds as if you have never heard (or maybe never really [i]listened[/i] to?)someone exercising the genuine Holy Spirit gift. There are words, phrases, sentences, intonation and expression, change of pace and emphasis. In fact, just like any regular language would sound if you didn't understand it.
I have only heard demonic tongues once or twice, but it was so horrible I didn't want to listen long enough to notice if there were words in it. There probably were!
I suppose someone [i]trying[/i] to do what they imagined was speaking in tongues might start spouting gibberish, or copying other people's words. But that's not true tongues.
In Him
Jeannette
|
| | 2007/5/11 18:54 | |
| | Re: 1 Corinthians 14:1 - Gifts?? | | Quote:
dclovesjesus wrote:
Many of you on this site are so incredibly knowledgeable in the Scriptures. I am studying this out myself, but I would value input from those of you who would care to comment.
1 Cor. 14:1 (KJV) Follow after charity, and desire spiritual [gifts], but rather that ye may prophesy.
When I look in the interlinear, "gifts" is not there. It would seem that it should read "desire that which is spiritual" or something like that. Why was the word gifts inserted here?
I'm not trying to prove or disprove anything. Just looking for truth.
Dani
I have posted this before but for the new ones perhaps it is time to post it again.
FWIW, I know this is the way to satisfaction.
[b]JESUS CHRIST, THE BAPTIZER
THERE WAS A MAN SENT FROM GOD, whose name was John. .. . The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.... And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining upon him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God (John 1:6, 29, 3234).
Every one of the four Gospels spells out Johns declaration, I indeed baptize you with water; he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. When the Pharisees asked, Why baptizeth thou? he replied, That he should be made manifest.. . therefore I am come baptizing with water (John 1: 25, 31). Furthermore, John assured them that he was sent to baptize with water (vs. 33). It was his ministry. This fact was recognized to such an extent that he became known as John the Baptist.
I doubt whether one could find a ten-year-old in Christendom that has not yet learned about John the Baptist. All through the ages, generation after generation, men have learned of this great prophet, but they know him by what he did and not by what he said or prophesied. Yet we know that he was both prophet and baptizer.
In recent times I have been astonished to find that very few Christians have ever heard that Christ is the baptizer in the Holy Ghost. They know Him as the Lamb of God, as Saviour; and as the Son of God, our Lord; but they are unfamiliar with the fact that He was announced to the world as the One to whom God gave the ministry of baptizing with the Holy Ghost.
Jesus Christ is both Saviour and Baptizer. We have no doubt that He is as much the Saviour today as when He died on Calvary as the Lamb of God. Even so, He is still the Baptizer in the Holy Spirit as much as He was when He commenced this ministry on the Day of Pentecost, for He is the same, yesterday, today and forever.
I have just traveled in seven countries and addressed over 300 ministers belonging to seven of the major classical Protestant churches. During these three months I have read a great variety of ecclesiastical writings, touching upon almost every subject and event between Easter and Pentecost. From Ascension to Pentecost. I have listened to many radio talks in several languages. Not once did I hear a minister, see in a paper, or hear over the radio any mention that Christ baptized with the Holy Spirit. In conversations many that questioned me or spoke to me expressed some surprise at my strong emphasis upon the message that Christ is the Baptizer in the Spirit. I have heard much about the work of the Spirit, about receiving the Spirit, and even about the coming of the Spirit, but nothing is ever said about being baptized with the Spirit.
The first intimation in history that a baptism with the Spirit was a possible event in the life of a human being came from John the Baptist. However, he did not announce the experience but rather the one who gave such an experience. He announced that the Baptizer was coming. He clearly states that God had told him that Christ would be the Baptizer with the Holy Ghost. He also assures us that the image for this act of Christ was his own act of baptizing in the river. From the very beginning, therefore, all Johns converts fully expected an experience that would be as overwhelming as their baptism in the river. These converts had an encounter with the baptizer and not with water or even the river. What they were to expect was an encounter with the Baptizer in the Holy Spirit and not with the Spirit or with the work of the Spirit in their lives.
For every baptism there must be an agent to baptize, and an element with or into which to baptize, and finally a candidate to be baptized. Such a candidate must present himself and ask for baptism. Then there must be a total and complete surrender to the baptizer and not to the element in which he baptizes. The baptism in the Holy Spirit is an encounter with Christ, the Baptizer. The candidates are those who have already had an encounter with Him as the Lamb of God, the Saviour, who took away all their sin and made them worthy temples of the Holy Spirit.
The disciples who left John and followed Christ that He might baptize them with the Holy Spirit discovered that He was full of the Spirit. They saw His miracles to prove it and heard His word to confirm it. Then He gave them power and authority to cast out devils and heal the sick, but that was not the baptism in the Spirit that they expected. Finally they saw Him weak and as a Lamb led to the slaughter, and He opened not His mouth. He died on the cross and was laid in the tomb, and no one had been baptized in the Spirit. What about Johns prophecy? Was it all mythical or mystical?
In the evening of that first Easter day of Resurrection, He suddenly and unexpectedly appeared in their midst. Then He breathed on them and said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. This was after He had explained, As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. But how did His Father send Him? First He came, born of the Spirit (Luke 1:35), and then He was endued with the Spirit (Luke 4: 1) to commence His earthly ministry. So here the disciples became the very first members of a new body, the church. He breathed eternal life into them. Calvary, the all-effective altar of God, had dealt with the sin question, and those who were dead in trespasses and sin now could receive the life-giving, regenerating Holy Spirit. This was for them the occasion where they were baptized into one body by the Spirit (I Cor.12:13).
But John said that God had said that Jesus would baptize with the Spirit, not that He would give the Spirit. I wonder how these disciples thought and felt about all these strange things? However, a few weeks later Jesus again spoke to the same men to whom He had said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Now He confirms Johns message. He says to them, John truly baptized with water: but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence (Acts 1: 5). Here Christ accepts and confirms the same image that God had given to John, a baptism in water and a baptism in the Holy Spiritindeed a river baptism, but the river of life must first begin to flow upon earth.
Several predictions were confirmed on the Day of Pentecost. The Father gave the promised Holy Ghost, who was heard as wind and seen as fire. Jesus began to baptize in the Spirit and fire. The immediate consequence of this baptism was that the candidates began to speak with other tongues as Jesus had promised (Mark 16: 17). Then the Holy Spirit began to convict of sin, righteousness and judgment as Peter preached to the multitude (John 16:8). But the record says, They were all filled {overflowed] with the Holy Ghost, and [of which was] they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance (Acts2:4).
It seems that from this very day onward much more emphasis was given to the experience of the disciples than to the act of Jesus the Baptizer, and the whole controversy began to revolve around glossolaliaspeaking with other tongueswhich was the very simple consequence of this baptism in the Spirit. The Holy Spirit was the gift and tongues was the consequence. These tongues were a manifestation of the Holy Spirit and not a manifestation of the ecstasy of the human spirit. Speaking in tongues by the Holy Spirit or, as Paul puts it, Praying with the Spirit, is an act of the Holy Spirit upon the human spirit which transcends the understanding (I Cor.14: 14, 15).
Thus it seems clear that on the day of Pentecost the spirit of the disciples was baptized into the Holy Spirit and their bodies were filled with the Holy Spiritoverflowed with the Holy Spirit. The fact that they commenced to speak with the Spirit was proof of this overflowing.
In our day many pray for an infilling, an experience, instead of seeking the Baptizer. They ask the Holy Spirit to fill them when they should be asking Christ to baptize them. The baptism will produce the filling. This filling of the body by the baptism of the human spirit into the Holy Spirit produces an overflowing (see John 7:38) which causes the vocal organs to go into action and speak a language that is unknown to the candidate. He may be fully aware of what he is doing but does not know what he is saying (I Cor.14:14).
On the day of Pentecost God gave the Holy Spirit and Christ then baptized His followers into the Spirit, and they began to speak with other tongues as the spirit gave them utterance (Acts 2:4). About 10 years later, according to Acts 10:4446, when the Apostle Peter dared to preach to the Gentiles for the first time (Acts 11:19), these same Gentiles received exactly the same experience that the apostles and the disciples of Christ had on the day of Pentecost. The record says, And they of the circumcision [Jews] were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God (Acts 10:46). The Jewish Christians in Jerusalem objected to all this. (Acts 11:2). Then Peter in his defense said, And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost (Acts 11: 15, 16). In other words, it was the same Baptizer who baptized into the same element, with the same consequences. The consequences were what convinced the Jewish Christians that the experience of the Gentiles was valid, for they heard them speak with tongues (Acts 10:46).
From this record it is quite clear that during the first decade Peter and the church in Jerusalem believed that Jesus is the Baptizer in the Holy Spirit and that speaking with tongues was the immediate consequence or confirmation of this baptism. During this last decade in our time the Christian world has become more conscious of the Holy Spirit and many are reaching out for His power and a charismatic ministry. However, it seems to me that unless the church once again lifts up Christ as the Baptizer, many will seek the blessing from the Holy Spirit and fail to find it because He will always honor Christ.
To get the baptism in the Spirit everyone must seek an encounter with the Baptizer, who began this ministry on the day of Pentecost when He truly came back in the Spirit to baptize His disciples. He is the same, yesterday, today and forever (Heb.13:8).[/b]
David Duplessis .......[Mr. Pentecost]
|
| | 2007/5/11 19:21 | | UniqueWebRev
Member
Joined: 2007/2/9
Posts: 640
Southern California
| | Re: Prophecy and Tongues | | This is a very critical discussion to me, and I have questions.
I can speak in tongues, and sing in tongues, and they are two different languages. I can't understand a word of the spken tongues, but I asked God to understand what I sing about. The language changed, and seems now to be some form of archaic French, so that I, with some traiing in that language, at least catch the drift of the songs.
Yet, I am rarely prompted of the Holy Spirit to speak or sing in tongues, and I never force the issue. I find singing in tongues to be a great way to sing to God when I've run out of praise songs, or are tired of them, and I am waiting for something, like a tow-truck, and I'm freezing - it seems to block out my physical sensations to a degree - weird!
I know that tongues for me is mere edification of myself, or praise of God, and not the Holy Spirit engendered multi-language understanding that we believe tongues was like that day on Pentecost. Yet I wonder why Paul wanted us to speak in tongues alone - God know's my heart, the Holy Spirit already speaks to God for me, so why tongues?
As for the glossalalia, I got that thrown at me at my baptism, and the devil used it to scare me away from the church and draw me into the occult. Consequently, I see little benefit in it for myself.
Tongues as prophecy must be something different, but I've never heard of an instance of it happening to anyone I know at any church. Does it really happen often, or is it a rare thing?
And on top of those questions, is the ability to interpret dreams part of prophecy? For often, when people tell me their dreams and visions, I instantly hear an interpretation of it. But I have never prayed for prophetical gifts, so I don't understand why this happens to me.
Any ideas on all of this? I'd be grateful to know more on the topics.
Blessings,
Forrest
_________________
Forrest Anderson
|
| | 2007/5/11 19:21 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Quote:
UniqueWebRev wrote:
This is a very critical discussion to me, and I have questions.
I can speak in tongues, and sing in tongues, and they are two different languages. I can't understand a word of the spken tongues, but I asked God to understand what I sing about. The language changed, and seems now to be some form of archaic French, so that I, with some traiing in that language, at least catch the drift of the songs.
Yet, I am rarely prompted of the Holy Spirit to speak or sing in tongues, and I never force the issue. I find singing in tongues to be a great way to sing to God when I've run out of praise songs, or are tired of them, and I am waiting for something, like a tow-truck, and I'm freezing - it seems to block out my physical sensations to a degree - weird!
I know that tongues for me is mere edification of myself, or praise of God, and not the Holy Spirit engendered multi-language understanding that we believe tongues was like that day on Pentecost. Yet I wonder why Paul wanted us to speak in tongues alone - God know's my heart, the Holy Spirit already speaks to God for me, so why tongues?
As for the glossalalia, I got that thrown at me at my baptism, and the devil used it to scare me away from the church and draw me into the occult. Consequently, I see little benefit in it for myself.
Tongues as prophecy must be something different, but I've never heard of an instance of it happening to anyone I know at any church. Does it really happen often, or is it a rare thing?
And on top of those questions, is the ability to interpret dreams part of prophecy? For often, when people tell me their dreams and visions, I instantly hear an interpretation of it. But I have never prayed for prophetical gifts, so I don't understand why this happens to me.
Any ideas on all of this? I'd be grateful to know more on the topics.
Blessings,
Forrest
Would you accept it from me if I contributed? I have seen the good, bad and the ugly and it hasn't change my opinion one wit as to what Paul meaant for us to understand as a venue of intimacy with the Father.. If I said nothing else, that should be enough. |
| | 2007/5/11 19:29 | | UniqueWebRev
Member
Joined: 2007/2/9
Posts: 640
Southern California
| | Re: | | Yes, dear Brother, I would.
I may have strong opinions about your style, and questions about your motives, but since I instantly go to God on spiritual pride, and know how deadly it is in me, I never hold a grudge.
By the way, I spent hours talking to talking to God about both recent posts, and yes, I did fly off the handle.
So, you pray for me, and I'll pray for you.
Please see P.M I am about to send you, and take it into consideration.
Blessings,
Forrest
_________________
Forrest Anderson
|
| | 2007/5/11 21:33 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Quote:
Bro Corey, where did you get the idea that uninterpreted tongues is "meaningless gibberish", or "chaotic"? I find it even more strange that you suggest that Paul allowed the Corinthians to carry on this, frankly and obviously demonic, aspect of heathern practice! Eating food offered to idols was a different matter, and could be allowed as long as the person wasn't being tempted back into idolatry.
Read I Corinthians in context and consider the people he was writing to. They were fornicating, eating foods sacrificed to idols, they were "speaking in tongues" chaotically... He wrote this church twice, and subtely tried to correct their heathen practices. He was not telling the rest of Christendom (us included) to do what the ex-Diana worshippers were doing in the early church in Corinth - he was compromising to win them to Christ. He also absolutely forbid convert priestesses from speaking during the service.
Quote:
In other words, "tongues" spoken by someone under demon influence is totally different from an utterance in the HOLY Spirit. Someone inspired by an alien spirit is also not willing to worship Jesus as Lord. As you say, the Corinthians would have been familiar with this false tongues, and needed to know how to distinguish between that and the genuine.
Are you saying wolves can't say they're sheep? And apostates can't name the name of Jesus?
There are many "alien spirits" calling on the name of our Lord Jesus every day, speaking in tongues, and interpreting all sorts of wonderful blessings that are going to rain down from heaven on the congregation. I've seen it. I've seen people ask Jesus for houses, cars, money, jobs - in essence, I've seen "the abomination of desolation" standing in the pulpits of the West. Lucifer knows the Bible backwards and forwards, just like the pharisees, and just like megachurch pastors. He's well spoken, charasmatic, and well-dressed like them, too. Glossolalia doesn't have to sound like a seance ritual to come from the "Angel of Light".
Whenever I've witnessed glossolalia, it's been menaingless gibberish - and when it's been translated it's been nothing but blessings, profits, and good news.
Quote:
I have only heard demonic tongues once or twice, but it was so horrible I didn't want to listen long enough to notice if there were words in it. There probably were!
I've heard this kind, too. But keep in mind that Buddhists, Hindus and many other mystics speak in types of glossolalia, too - and they don't all sound "evil". Just like Delilah didn't look evil. |
| | 2007/5/12 3:40 | | philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: 1 Corinthians 14:1 - Gifts?? | | The 1 Cor 12 section has these verses...1Cor. 12:1 (KJVS) Now concerning spiritual [i]gifts[/i], brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
1Cor. 12:4 (KJVS) Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.The first of these references does not have the word 'gifts' in the original, but the word 'gift' does appear in verse 4. However the word 'gift' in verse 4 is part of a threefold description of 'the manifestation of the Spirit'...Now there are diversities of [b]gifts[/b], but the same Spirit. And there are differences of [b]administrations[/b], but the same Lord. And there are diversities of [b]operations[/b], but it is the same God which worketh all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. (1Corinthians 12:4-7 KJVS)
In this section Paul is turning from practical and human matters to those which are 'spiritual'. It has become the norm now for Pentecostals and Charismatics to think that when Paul speaks of the spiritual things he is speaking about the 'gifts'. I prefer to think that he is referring to 'gifts and ministries and functions'. To me these are all part of the 'manifestation of the Spirit'.
The key thing is that it is the Holy Spirit, manifesting or revealing his presence in the assembly, this presence is not only seen in what we term 'the gifts' but also in the 'ministries and functions'. All three are 'spiritual things' and all three are the diverse ways in which the Spirit reveals his presence in the assembly.
To make that clear... I think in 1 Cor 12:1 when Paul says 'the spiritual things..' he is not only speaking about the listed 9 'gifts' but to every manifestation of the Spirit, including those manifestations of the Spirit evidenced in 'ministries and functions'.
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
| | 2007/5/12 15:33 | Profile |
|
