John Smithson wrote:
>>>I attend regular, normal churches -- Baptists,
>>>EV Free, Four Square, Assembly of God --
>>>that sort of thing. Absolutely no one I know
>>>believes that the Spirit's presense [sic] in our lives
>>>supercedes [sic] the need for exegetical and
>>>contextual studies.
David Miller wrote:
>>Are you sure that you have discussed this
>>with everyone in these Christian sects?
John Smithson wrote:
>"I believe I said "No one I know ..."
>I do not see the question above as being
>pertinent to the discussion. Agreed?
What I meant was,
Ahh, So I was correct ???
are you sure that you have discussed this with everyone
you know?
Honestly, it seems to me that should have been easy enough to say the first time.
The relevance of my question is that you seem to assume that
everyone you know in these sects of Christianity does not believe this
premise. Have you actually discussed this particular subject, or do you
just assume that they believe like you do?
I know how they arrive at conclusions that regard the Message. No one I know speaks alla Allah. All of them rely on study, counsel, prayer, seeking the Lord's will -- all of it works together --- all of it is an _expression_ of Community --- all of it is a testimoney to the reltational construct of "truth." Not one has ever said, "The Lord has given me the proper interpretation of the bibliblcal record in this case."
John Smithson wrote:
>I did not speak to the importance or the
>comparative importance of the Spirit's
>presense [sic].
Ah, sorry John. I had the wrong understanding of the word "supersede,"
thinking that it meant that something was more important than another. I
just looked the word up in the dictionary and see that it means to replace
something less efficient. Thanks for the clarification.
So I am right, again ?????
You are probably right, however, concerning the fact that
It does seem, however, that many so-called "Spirit filled" churches allow
Bible studies to be superseded by that which would produce actual
experience.
nobody would articulate the teaching that the Spirit's presence should
replace Bible studies.
Most definitely.
David Miller wrote:
>>1 John 2:27
>>(27) But the anointing which ye have received
>>of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any
>>man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth
>>you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and
>>even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
John Smithson wrote:
>This makes no claim as to how this anointing works
>and, consequently, cannot possibly be used to establish
>the opinion that our understanding of the written word
>is revelatory in nature and, hence, infallible...........imo
I certainly was not using this passage to argue for infallible understanding
of Scripture. What I think the passage teaches is that the presence of the
Spirit is necessary for us to walk in the truth, and the teachers within the
community of believers is secondary and even unnecessary. This is not to
say that the anointing of the Spirit replaces the teachers.
If it makes them "unnecessary," it replaces the very need for their existences AND, in this case, makes the writing of I John senseless. There is no escape, David. The inescapable need for expressed community is taught many places in scripture. It all bagan with "it is not good for man to be alone."
Teachers are
helpful, placed within the body of Christ to perfect us, but they are not to
be relied upon exclusively for truth because there are false teachers.
Who in the world is arguing this?
Our
reliance is upon the anointing and not teachers.
False. It is upon BOTH......... yeah, and even more.
John
