Featured Muslim have dreams about Christ

"Saving people in dreams". I never said that. You are ignoring what you, yourself said:

Yet we see in Acts 2 that dreams have been used for His purposes.

 

No one believes that. It is a sad and false caricature of a view different from your own.

 

Well some have told us about Jesus appearing to the American Indians here in America. Of course that was before the Lamanites and Nephites came here. No need to put God in a box.....we are told.
When God said not to add or take away from the word that was most likely just a suggestion.
Missionaries no longer need the Great Commision....they just need to roll some film.

 

Never (with intention) mentioned evolution. Agreed with the principle with an analogy. Put your big boy pants on and read carefully Rev.

 

Your comparison with Mormonism is invalid. What Mormons claim and what we are talking about are two completely different things.

No one is adding or taking away from scripture. Those who advocate the position you oppose are using scripture to demonstrate the possibility of Jesus and the Spirit working outside the bounds of human agency and the express witness of the scripture. Just as Abraham was made right with God long before there was scripture, circumcision, the Law, the incarnation of Jesus, etc., those outside the realm of a human/scriptural witness can also be saved. (Genesis 15, Galatians 3, Romans 4) If you deny that possibility, YOU are ignoring (taking away) scripture.

No one has said this. Why don't you stick to the issue without trying to tar your opponents with falsehoods.

 

Baptist Believer

Why would you say it is not valid?
Several Mormons say they also were given a burning in their bosom to confirm it was all true. Do you doubt this?
On what basis do you doubt this as you suggest the very same thing?

What if Mormon missionaries roll this video instead??? [warning 2nd commandment violation depicted}

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meld4HYgJEM

while we are at it...break out the popcorn;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VKT4hrBTuk

 

Again apples and refrigerators

 

RM

Once you go outside of scripture how can anyone take a stand? it all becomes subjective experience. How can someone deny the Mormon, or the R.C. who says the Virgin Mary is showing up all over the place?

 

The experience has to be measured against scripture. If it lines up with scripture then we can know it is authentic. Joseph Smith not only claimed and experience but denied scripture as well. The R.C. who worships Mary cannot back up their claim with scripture.

When someone says they had a vision that told them about God and what is in the vision lines up with what we know about God from scripture and God is glorified in the hearts of man then we can know it was from God.

If someone has a vision, like Joseph Smith, and that vision does not line up with what we know about God from scripture then we can know it is a lie and not from God.

However, to just be against any and all visions without any consideration of whether it lines up with scripture is against scripture.

All this hysteria over visions kind of reminds me of a church in Florida. Some years back there was a very godly and talented singer who was asked to sing a special during the service. While he was singing he held the mic in one hand and lifted up his free hand in the air when he it a long note. This offended some people and he was never allowed to sing again because they did not want "charismatic activities".

The opposition to the possibility of God revealing Himself through a vision to people who have never heard the gospel before is much like that church. They were so afraid of "charismatic activities" that they over reacted to the lifting up of a hand while singing. Much in the same way some folks on this board are so afraid of things like visions that they over react to any report or possibility.

 

Let me define free will for you per theopedia...

Now, here's theopedia's definition of synergism...

In your and your fellow non-Cal's view, God can not save you until you choose to. If someone dies lost, it was because God tried and they chose to die that way. God couldn't save them because they failed to submit. Thereby, your view impugns the sovereignity of God...

 

...and I openly challenge you to support your conclusion to the argument which you've presented above, here: http://www.baptistsymposium.com/for...-forum-guidelines-and-permission-requirements

 

For one the theopedia def is lacking. Two it does not say that and neither have I. No one says God cannot do anything. What we do believe is that is the way God designed it. Your false caricature has now become childish. Do not tell me what I believe. That is the height of arrogance.

 

Well then....YOU tell me what 'free will' means. And don't tell me about arrogance. You're the epitome of it.



You rip that passage in Acts 2 all to shreds to support this mystical way. That passage was referring to Jesus' crucifixion and His subsequent resurrection.


It says He would pour His Spirit upon all flesh. If that's literally the case, that's universalism.

God designed salavtion via the gospel and there's no other way to Christ than through it...

 

Hebrews is quite clear. Everything we need to know about God and salvation are in the Bible. It is God's final word and revelation to man. There is no such thing as new revelations such as tongues, words of faith, words of knowledge, visits from angels with new revelations, or in this case dreams. The charismatic denominations are famous for claiming gifts of the Holy Spirit that have ceased. Muslims are saved like everyone else, by grace through faith. Referencing Jesus Christ in the Koran is ridiculous. Christ is also mentioned in history books. Neither leads to salvation. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. That would be Holy Scripture, not the Koran, history books, or Superman comic books.

 

Uh no, arroagance is telling people what they believe. You cannot tell me what I believe. That fact that you would argue with me over what I believe is ...well there are no words for it.

The passage that I quoted was referring to how that what they had seen just prior to the message Peter preached was of God. The speaking in tongues. That speaking in tongues on the day of Pentecost was a "mystical" as anything else.

Well I did not say it God did. You will have to take it up with Him. However, your interpretation of that passage is in error. Most likely caused by an errant view of the sovereignty of God.

[/quote]God designed salavtion via the gospel and there's no other way to Christ than through it...[/QUOTE]

Tell me how a messenger of God, an angel, delivering God's gospel via a dream or vision is not through the gospel. Tell me how an vision from God giving a truthful and biblical message about Christ is not the gospel.

See you are not arguing with me about the gospel but about how it is to be delivered. It appears that you are trying to make the case (very poorly) that God only uses man to deliver the gospel and that is is impossible that God would use a dream or vision to do so. However, you have not actually made the case nor have you acutally dealt with any of the scripture I have provided you have only made claims about my interpretation of it. That is not dealing with the scripture.

Break it down, using scripture, and show why it is an impossibility that God would not present the gospel to someone via a dream or vision. Please refrain from just making claims about what I have said or about scripture. Actually break the passages down.

For instance:

Acts 2:15-21

Act 2:15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
Act 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
Act 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
Act 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
Act 2:19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
Act 2:20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

Peter begins by referring to what just happened in v.15. This was a reference to the speaking in tongues and the response to that "mystical" action by the people int he crowd. Their response was that they thought the disciples might be drunk because what was going on was out of the norm for them and in fact very "mystical". V. 15 is a transitional statement that ties everything that was written before v. 15 to what Peter is about to say.

Peter found it necessary to show them not only that they were not drunk (a claim made prior to v.15) but instead what they were witnessing was a "mystical" move of God that was predicted in the scripture (Joel 2:28).

Up to this point (vs.15-21) Peter has not yet begun the message of Christ and His resurrection. In these verses Peter lays the ground work for where this message comes from. To do so he quotes scripture (Joel 2:28). This was necessary because of the audience he was speaking too. Those who were there that day were Jews who had come to Pentecost. Their understanding of the Messiah needed to be addressed and all that occurred up to the point was a precursor to make the message clear and show God was in the message that was about to be delivered.

So now we see that vs.15-21 are in fact talking about the "mystical event" that just occurred where people heard the gospel in their own language even though the people speaking the message did not know the languages being heard.

So what we see here in acts 2 is that the message preached in the beginning through the "mystical event" of tongues and the message Peter preached has a transitional event between the two whereby Peter addresses the "mystical nature of the speaking in tongues.

So, while it is true that the message of Acts 2 being preached was about Christ and His resurrection the context of this passage is the coming of the Holy Ghost and the events that surround that very "mystical" event.

 

Convicted,

I am on the same page as the Rev. I honestly and intellectually hold to the "free will" of mankind, particularly with regard to salvation and his distinction between what God can or cannot do vs. the way He has "decided" that it will be done. I proudly (not arrogantly) claim the title of synergism, truly I cannot understand how anyone could be anything but a synergist.

 

It is in the realm of possibility given Scripture that God could use the medium of dreams to impart the Gospel to an individual if He chose to do it that way. It would certainly be outside the norm, but not impossible. Now, if that dream/angel has a message, or reveals anything of God that is not already in the Bible, then it is not of God, because the Bible is our final authority and revelation. All supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased with the end of the apostolic age. One can see the gifts in Paul's earlier writings and they are not mentioned in his later writings. That would include tongues, healings, prophecy, word of knowledge or faith, raising people from the dead, miracles and other such nonsense that has made lots of TV evangelists rich. (1 Cor 13:8) God can still do these gifts on an individual basis (God can do anything) but imparting the supernatural gifts to humans ceased long ago.

 

I have already made that clear in subsequent posts.

There is nothing in scripture that suggests that.

I'm sorry that is not a very good argument.

I do not support that behavior. They are a false claim made, in most cases, to make riches for the ones claiming to to them. What goes on in churches in this regard is nothing more than the lust of the flesh looking for an experience over scripture.

Again there is nothing in scripture that makes such a claim.

 

I certainly agree with your last paragraph. However Cor 13:8 makes it clear the gifts have ceased. I think aside from that, there is not one documented case of any of them occurring in modern times. When I speak of gifts, I speak of an individual human having the gift, not God imparting the gift on individuals. That fact alone makes the charismatic movement a cult. You may not like the argument, but you cannot find the supernatural gifts mentioned in Pauls later writings. Anyway, most of your posts I do agree with, and you seem solid in Scripture to me.

 

I disagree. It is my position that passage is talking about the return of Christ. The reason for this is verses 9-12. We do have the word but we do not see yet in the manner described in those verse. That will only occur when Christ returns.