Disciple vs. Apostle

[Major]

Hello Robin;

I never heard of these. Please share a little more?

What is the Toronto blessing? Is it similar to the Azusa Street Pentecostal Revival of 1906?

And Hottentot? Were these a people from another country?

God bless you, brother.

On January 20, 1994, a Pentecostal pastor named Randy Clark spoke at the church and gave his testimony of how he would get “drunk” in the Spirit and laugh uncontrollably. In response to this testimony, the congregation erupted in pandemonium with people laughing, growling, dancing, shaking, barking like dogs, and even being stuck in positions of paralysis. These experiences were attributed to the Holy Spirit entering people’s bodies. The pastor of the church, John Arnott, referred to it as a big Holy Spirit party. The moniker “Toronto Blessing” was given, and the church was soon in the international spotlight.

When this “blessing” is held to the light of Scripture, however, it can scarcely be called such. Absolutely nowhere in Scripture can one find a precedent for what was happening at the Toronto Airport church. The nearest that Scripture comes to describing the paralysis and bizarre behavior prompted by the Toronto Blessing are its documented effects of demonic possession (see Mark 9:18).

The Toronto Airport church became known for its congregants’ emotional outbursts and odd psychological displays. Pastor Arnott began focusing almost exclusively on “the party of the Holy Spirit.” Experiences were being held in higher esteem than Scripture. This was even too much for the extremely charismatic Vineyard Movement, which severed ties with their Toronto Airport church in 1995, prompting the name change to Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship.
Source.....https://www.gotquestions.org/Toronto-blessing.html

I do not want to offend anyone reading what we post, but anyone can go to "YOU TUBE" and search Toronto Blessing and watch for yourself.

Hottentot (n.)​

1670s, from South African Dutch, said in old Dutch sources to be a word that means "stammerer," from hot en tot "hot and tot," nonsense words imitative of stammering.

 

[Major]

Hello Major, I didn't think that you were being "corrective" of me, simply that you corrected a factual error that I made. I wrote "the 12" with the intention of defining the Apostles as a particular group among the other disciples, so I, in that sense, conveyed what I was intending to convey. Nevertheless, there were only 11 Apostles around at the time of His Ascension, not 12, so I was thankful that you pointed that fact out to me/us (a fact that I knew to be true, but stated incorrectly anyway).


I appreciate the encouragement to be sure, but if you know (or even feel) that I am mistaken about something/anything in the future, I would prefer to be told about it if you have the time to do so. I'm here to learn from others, and also, whenever I can, to be helpful to others, but I never wanted factual incorrectness (or any other kinds of mistakes/errors) to be in the mix too IOW, I will appreciate getting your help whenever you know or feel that I may be in error somehow.


Agreed, as were the miracles that the Lord Jesus performed before men.

We are told in stories like Lazarus and the Rich Man that it's God's word, not miracles, that leads people to salvation, and the evidence for this is somewhat overwhelming when you also consider what happened during events like the Exodus, because Israel not only crossed the Red Sea on dryland the same 'year' that they built and worshipped the Golden Calf, I've read that they actually may have done so within the same 'month'

That seems somehow impossible to me, so if you know that the actual facts of the Exodus timeline are different than that, please don't hesitate to let me know. I mean, how could ANYONE forget something that they lived through that was that WONDROUS and AMAZING (and I'm sure frightening) to behold in less than a year, or even worse, in less than a month?? Thanks


I agree again.


Agreeing yet again, especially concerning the RCC's doctrine of apostolic succession.

I believe that I differ from you a bit in this however, that the sign gifts are still in operation wherever/whenever they need to be, particularly on the mission field when (for instance) a brand-new people group is discovered living in the jungle somewhere, and living as if they were still in the stone age (without any knowledge of others, much less of the Lord Jesus, w/o a written language, and w/o any modern conveniences, such as a basic knowledge of modern medicines/health care). So, at least part of today's mission field may not be at all unlike the situation that the Lord and His Apostles faced in the 1st Century.

The two things that they oft times do seem to have is plenty of superstitions and deadly skills with spears


You may also be interested to know what MacArthur actually teaches about "the perfect", that,

​

Verses 9, 10 indicate that what will abolish knowledge and prophecy is “that which is perfect.” When that occurs, those gifts will be rendered inoperative. The “perfect” is not the completion of Scripture, since there is still the operation of those two gifts and will be in the future kingdom (cf. Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17; Rev. 11:3). The Scriptures do not allow us to see “face to face” or have perfect knowledge as God does (v. 12). The “perfect” is not the rapture of the church or the second coming of Christ, since the kingdom to follow these events will have an abundance of preachers and teachers (cf. Is. 29:18; 32:3, 4; Joel 2:28; Rev. 11:3). The perfect must be the eternal state, when we in glory see God face to face (Rev. 22:4) and have full knowledge in the eternal new heavens and new earth. ~MacArthur, J., Jr., ed. (1997). 1 Corinthians, Word Pub.​

​

Sproul, on the other hand, does teach that "the perfect" refers to the Lord's Second Coming, while also making mention that some believe it to be the completed NT Canon.

I was surprised to read what they both believe now.

Blessings to you in Christ!!

--Papa Smurf

You said................
"I believe that I differ from you a bit in this however, that the sign gifts are still in operation wherever/whenever they need to be, particularly on the mission field when (for instance) a brand-new people group is discovered living in the jungle"

That is and has been a common reason to accept the speaking in tongues so as to not upset those in the Pentacostal faith who insist on doing so.

I for one do not agree as what you have then is the TEMPTING of God.

In essence we are saying that ....
IF God wants those people to hear the gospel and be saved, He will then activate or allow the English language to be understood in the native language!

That is TEMPING God! IMHO! Anyone is free to disagree but remember if you do YOU will be the 1st to do so!

Every denomination I know of, even the AOG require their missionaries to be able to speak the native language of the country that they are going to.

 

[Origen]

I believe that you will find that TELEIOS is translated as perfect, complete, or mature.

Those are possibilities.

Also, When describing things instead of people, the gender will almost always be neuter or, in one instance, feminine gender.

You have now modified your claim.

In post 15 you stated:

The neuter gender can only refer to a thing,

Your claim was that the neuter CAN ONLY refer to a thing. The words τέκνον (i.e. child) and κοράσιον (i.e. girl) are clearly persons (not things) and they are neuter. The word δαιμόνιον (i.e. demon) also is neuter.

My only concern is the Greek grammar. Your claim above claim is too rigid (i.e. CAN ONLY).

Let me give another example, πνεῦμα ἅγιον (i.e. Holy Spirit). It is neuter. A word with the neuter gender may refer to a person as my examples clearly show.

In #1 and # 2 above we see that played out. Point was that Jesus is never referred to in the Feminine which would rule Him out as the "Perfect in verse #10.

I never claimed it was Jesus.

 

[Major]

Those are possibilities.


You have now modified your claim.

In post 15 you stated:

Your claim was that the neuter CAN ONLY refer to a thing. The words τέκνον (i.e. child) and κοράσιον (i.e. girl) are clearly persons (not things) and they are neuter. The word δαιμόνιον (i.e. demon) also is neuter.

My only concern is the Greek grammar. Your claim above claim is too rigid (i.e. CAN ONLY).

Let me give another example, πνεῦμα ἅγιον (i.e. Holy Spirit). It is neuter. A word with the neuter gender may refer to a person as my examples clearly show.


I never claimed it was Jesus.

I never said that you did claim it. It was just a comment. Thanks for your information. All of that is good to know.

"Can only....Almost always".....OK you win!

Now as for the conversation in view,
Verses 11 of 1 Cor. 13 describe the knowledge we will have in the period of the completed Canon or the post-canon period of the Church Age.

!3"10 then says......
"…but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away."

The conjunction of contrast, “but,” the Greek word, DE δέ, presents a contrast between the pre-canon period and the post-canon period of the Church Age. From verse 9, we understand that believers in the pre-canon period had limited knowledge as compared to later, after the canon was complete. Those believers did not have all the information yet because the Scripture was not yet complete.

“But,” presents the contrast between the partial knowledge in the pre-canon period with full knowledge now. Unfortunately, just because the full knowledge, the entire realm of doctrine is available, it doesn’t mean that everyone understands everything, it just means that it is all available in writing.

“The perfect,” the nominative neuter singular adjective of TELEIOS τέλειος is not a reference to Jesus Christ as some teach. I realize that you did not claim that but many do. Others claim the PERFECT is the eternal state. I think that with the proper study anyone can find out that Jesus is never referred to in the neuter gender. The neuter gender can only refer to a thing, in this case, the completed Scripture.

 

[Origen]

"Can only....Almost always".....OK you win!

I am not trying to win anything. If I gave that impression, I apologize. That was not my intent.

Once again my point had to do with Greek grammar and the claim concerning the neuter gender.

Now as for the conversation in view,
Verses 11 of 1 Cor. 13 describe the knowledge we will have in the period of the completed Canon or the post-canon period of the Church Age.

You take the substantival adjective (i.e. τὸ τέλειον) as a reference to the post-canon period. The pre-canon verse post-canon view is one interpretation of the substantival adjective that some have suggested. However, there is nothing in the text itself that suggests that must be the case, certainly not the neuter gender.

“The perfect,” the nominative neuter singular adjective of TELEIOS τέλειος is not a reference to Jesus Christ as some teach. I realize that you did not claim that but many do. Others claim the PERFECT is the eternal state. I think that with the proper study anyone can find out that Jesus is never referred to in the neuter gender. The neuter gender can only refer to a thing, in this case, the completed Scripture.

In Wallace's Greek grammar, he remarks in regard to the neuter:

Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: an Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), p. 314, n. 7.

In other words, the neuter gender in and of itself does not rule out "the coming of Christ" as a reference for the substantival adjective. The fact is there is often more than one usage for a grammatical construction.

By the way, I do not suggest that your view is wrong or right. I simply point out the facts in regard to the grammar.

 

[Major]

I am not trying to win anything. If I gave that impression, I apologize. That was not my intent.

Once again my point had to do with Greek grammar and the claim concerning the neuter gender.


You take the substantival adjective (i.e. τὸ τέλειον) as a reference to the post-canon period. The pre-canon verse post-canon view is one interpretation of the substantival adjective that some have suggested. However, there is nothing in the text itself that suggests that must be the case, certainly not the neuter gender.


In Wallace's Greek grammar, he remarks in regard to the neuter:
View attachment 9298
Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: an Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), p. 314, n. 7.

In other words, the neuter gender in and of itself does not rule out "the coming of Christ" as a reference for the substantival adjective. The fact is there is often more than one usage for a grammatical construction.

By the way, I do not suggest that your view is wrong or right. I simply point out the facts in regard to the grammar.

We can go back and forth over this for a long time.

You said...............
"By the way, I do not suggest that your view is wrong or right. "

Wonderful. Then we are in agreement!

 

[Papa Smurf]

You said................
"I believe that I differ from you a bit in this however, that the sign gifts are still in operation wherever/whenever they need to be, particularly on the mission field when (for instance) a brand-new people group is discovered living in the jungle"

That is and has been a common reason to accept the speaking in tongues so as to not upset those in the Pentacostal faith who insist on doing so. I for one do not agree as what you have then is the TEMPTING of God. In essence we are saying that ....
IF God wants those people to hear the gospel and be saved, He will then activate or allow the English language to be understood in the native language!

Hello again Major, that (which is in bold above) is actually the very thing that I've been trying to talk about (or meant to anyway ), not the kind of "speaking in tongues" that we typically find in America's charismatic and Pentecostal churches today (which is often a heretical practice, sadly). I have clearly been doing a poor job communicating that to you, so I will try to do a bit better in the future.

That said, a new people group (who speak in an "unknown" tongue, like Motilone and Huaorani) being able to hear and understand English speaking missionaries in their native tongue, would certainly be a miraculous sign to them, just like it was for those who listened to the Apostles on the day of Pentecost ten days after the Lord's Ascension.

This could work the other way around as well, IOW, God could make it possible for missionaries to understand and speak Motilone or Huaorani, which would also be a miraculous sign to the Motilone and/or the Huaorani people.

Every denomination I know of, even the AOG require their missionaries to be able to speak the native language of the country that they are going to.

Of course ... unless the unreached people groups are also an unknown people groups, just like the Motilone and the Hauorani (commonly known as the Aucas) used to be, groups that live deep in a South American jungle somewhere, for instance, groups that no one has ever met or spoken to before, who also speak a language that is all their own/that no one else on the planet knows.

It is these kind of people groups that I had in mind when I spoke of a possible reason for the Lord to continue the use of spiritual (miraculous) gifts today, for the purposes of communication between missionaries and the people that they serve, and for confirmation that they (our missionaries) are who they claim to be.

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

 

[Major]

Hello again Major, that (which is in bold above) is actually the very thing that I've been trying to talk about (or meant to anyway ), not the kind of "speaking in tongues" that we typically find in America's charismatic and Pentecostal churches today (which is often a heretical practice, sadly). I have clearly been doing a poor job communicating that to you, so I will try to do a bit better in the future.

That said, a new people group (who speak in an "unknown" tongue, like Motilone and Huaorani) being able to hear and understand English speaking missionaries in their native tongue, would certainly be a miraculous sign to them, just like it was for those who listened to the Apostles on the day of Pentecost ten days after the Lord's Ascension.

This could work the other way around as well, IOW, God could make it possible for missionaries to understand and speak Motilone or Huaorani, which would also be a miraculous sign to the Motilone and/or the Huaorani people.


Of course ... unless the unreached people groups are also an unknown people groups, just like the Motilone and the Hauorani (commonly known as the Aucas) used to be, groups that live deep in a South American jungle somewhere, for instance, groups that no one has ever met or spoken to before, who also speak a language that is all their own/that no one else on the planet knows.

It is these kind of people groups that I had in mind when I spoke of a possible reason for the Lord to continue the use of spiritual (miraculous) gifts today, for the purposes of communication between missionaries and the people that they serve, and for confirmation that they (our missionaries) are who they claim to be.

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf

Actually brother, I understood what you were saying. It is that I just do not accept it as a reason to accommodate the idea that the practice of tongues is still valid today.

Of course, that is not to say that God can do anything He wants to do.

As always, may the Lord bless you my friend!

 

[crossnote]

If you can imagine yourself back in Old Testament times listening to Jeremiah, Isaiah or one of the Old Testament prophets, it is like that. The Lord is giving his people a message through the prophets. They may not understand it but whatever the message, it will happen, and it is important that we take heed of it and amend our ways accordingly. I don't attend that church now, but I wish I did.
.

I'm still trying to figure out who (if any) are the true prophets today, and are their words as good as Scripture, as it was with the Old Testament prophets?

 

[Major]

I'm still trying to figure out who (if any) are the true prophets today, and are their words as good as Scripture, as it was with the Old Testament prophets?

You can stop figuring brother! There are NO prophets today. They are not needed. What is needed is Bible TEACHERS!

 

[crossnote]

You can stop figuring brother! There are NO prophets today. They are not needed. What is needed is Bible TEACHERS!

That was my point! You point stealer, you. lol

 

[Major]

That was my point! You point stealer, you. lol

It's what I does! I sit, wait and then pounce!

 

[crossnote]

It's what I does! I sit, wait and then pounce!

sooo true

 

[Major]

I admit to struggling with this myself, so let me ask what Jesus meant by this.

And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; (Joh 14:16)

Comforter (G3875) paraklētos

The word here translated in our English Version ‘Comforter,’ and partially introduced into the English language as ‘Paraclete,’ means properly, One called to stand by us for our help, our Advocate, Helper, Representative. ‘Comforter’ is not its meaning. (Popular New Testament commentary)

Jesus said (I will never leave you or forsake you.)

Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee. So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me. (Heb 13:5-6)
.

John uses the same word paraklētos meaning comforter/ advocate/ intercessor in 1 John 2:1 to speak of how Christ, although not on earth, is our advocate in heaven before the Father. The comforter/advocate/ intercessor is about a go-between, or in modern terms a line of communication.

 

[Major]

How do you understand, "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever." (Hebrews 13:8)
.

It should be remembered that the focus of Hebrews is to encourage Jews who said that they were Christians to stay the course and not go back to Jewism. It was to show the superiority of Christ over the Law and rituals.

Using Old Testament Scripture, and examples of faith, the writer showed how the new covenant is not about God changing His mind, or His nature. Instead, it was always God's intent to replace the old covenant.

Now, truth does not change and Jesus Christ does not change—and neither does His gospel. God does not change. This doesn't mean we can't come to a better understanding, and it does not mean that God does NOT CHANGE HIS METHODS.

What does not change is His character and morality! In case you did not know it, I am VERY OLD FASHIONED! In other words, if someone claims to know better, or differently, than what the Bible says, or to have a more accurate perspective than writers such as Paul, John, or Peter, that person is wrong. Period. Full stop.

In the same frame of mind we must also realize that God's methods have changed. God once saved man with a BOAT. Now He save us with the Lord Jesus Christ.

God once gave the LAW to convict me of sin Today He convicts man through the Holy Spirit!

 

[Major]

So that is how you understand the unchanging God. Thank you for responding.
.

I did not say that God changes brother! I said that His methods change. How can you deny that?

The fact that God changes His treatment of us in response to our choices has nothing to do with His character.
He is unchanging in His nature, His plan, and His being. He cannot one day be pleased with the contrite and the next day be angry with the contrite. That would show Him to be mutable and untrustworthy.

Can you deny that the first woman was formed in a special way, by a miracle. Gpd took a bone and some flesh from Adam and fashioned a beautiful helper, suitable for the man. Many of us today have wives — yet we still have all our ribs! Isn't that a change????

Can you deny that God came and communed directly with the human family in the garden. He no longer does this. Isn’t it true that he changed how he interacted with humanity?

Can you deny that The Law of God through Moses required Israelite men to be circumcised on the eighth day but He no longer requires that but instead circumcision of the heart. Isn't that a change?

 

[Major]

God has always used different methods, fire, famine, flood, pestilence and other people are five examples. He has also told us he will never leave us or forsake us. and like the father of the prodigal son, he will always welcome us back with open arms if our faith grows dim. His love is unfailing, never-ending ending, and unceasing.
.

That is exactly correct brother and that is actually not the focus of the discussion. All of those things are methods which God has used over time and I agree 100% with you.

However, My whole point is that God never changes but His methods of getting His will done has. That is because sin has affected all of us.

The 1st thing I would say is that originally God spoke directly to man. He came and talked to Adam directly. They walked in the Garden and talked. Then sin separated God from man and God began to speak to men through PROPHETS!

You see.....right there is a change.

Then as time went on God gave His Word to men to write down and now we have His written Word. So there is another change.
God is still the same, His character is the same and He did not change but His way of communication to us did.

Thank you for the comments.

 

[Major]

You know what I think. I am wondering if our two nations have fallen away from God, and things won't get any better until we return to Him as a nation, similar to the Jews. What do you think?
.

I believe that you are from England. You ask an excellent question!

Personally......and this sounds really bad and I am sure some will argue this, but IMHO I believe that we have already crossed the line in the sand. In a sermon delivered in 1989 at Times Square Church in New York City, Pastor Dave Wilkerson proclaimed that America has passed the point of no return in its rebellion against God and has thus been destined by God for final judgment and I must agree with him.

The truth that most of us deny or do not want to even think about is that we are anything but a Christian nation. Our behavior as a nation makes a mockery of Christianity. We lead the world in every abomination known to man — abortion, alcoholism, drug addiction, gambling, divorce, child abuse, violent crime, pornography, and yes, even child pornography. Worse yet, we export our violence and immorality to other countries through our sleazy movies and television programs and the internet. We have become the moral polluter of planet earth.

Now as a student of prophecy, may I say to you my dear brother that the prophetic Word of God says things will grow worse and worse.....not better. There is NO word of revival in the Word of God until we get to the last 3 and 1/2 year mark of the 7 year Tribulation. That is AFTER the church is removed and all hell is breaking loose, then there seems to be a revival among those people who have not heard the gospel.

 

[Major]

Dave Wilkerson is a good man, and I am sure that is correct for the nation was whole, but I thank God for his mercy and pray for revival. In the mee

Consider what has taken place since he gave that sermon in 1989!!!

2 Timothy 3:13 says...........
"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived."

Actually, one of the reason that Jesus comes again is to keep man from destroying all men.

Matthew 24:22..........
"And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened."