Calvin spoke in tongues...

[JFDU]

...according to this.

The "reliable" source is attributed to De Vitam Iohannes Cauvin, Calvin’s biography published posthumously by Theodore Beza.

Has this hit anyone’s radar before? Was Calvin the first charismatic “Calvinist” ? :)

 

[Scott]

Ok, guys, now that we have had so much Christ-like fun...

Alex - Could you kindly list some of the main reasons you believe God designed certain gifts as temporary, with or without Scripture references, as I know sometimes our theological reflections are not formed on Scripture proof-texting alone. It's just for better interaction now.

Appreciate you.

[Norrin Radd]

Alex,

I read through the article at that link.  Frankly, I didn't find it very pertinent, since I and most of the Pentecostals and Charismatics I know personally don't hold the view that both cessationists and "Grudem-ite" continuationists apparently share.

Here is an article by Jon Ruthven that addresses the issue.  (There is at least one typo, occurring early on, a fact which I find nettlesome.  One would think academics would understand the concept of proof-reading.)  Naturally I find some parts of the presentation stronger than others.

[Norrin Radd]

*grumble*

My mistake -- The typo to which I referred was near the beginning of this other article by Ruthven.

[1stjohn]

Poor Beza has only a couple lines for possible support that "Calvin spoke in tongues" Other than that there really is not enough evidence to support the claim.

"Tongues" a very controversial subject, that I find meaningless. 

One way or the other Dialektos or Glossolallia. Charismatic or not. We all worship God differently.

[Marv]

I finally managed to make it through Alex's omnibus reply of a few days ago. Clearly, he spent some time putting it all together and responding to several of us. Several were responding to things I had said. I do have to agree with Scott that most weren't overly substantive.

 

It boils down to a couple of things, I think: Scripture and experience. Scott and I have made a point of presenting Scripture in our little efforts. Alex suggests we have a flawed method. I guarantee you I am not above having a flawed method. Whether I do or not, and what that flaw is, frankly remains to be demonstrated. I'm no judge of my own objectivity (who can be?) but doing Scriptural exposition on the Spirit empowered ministry that continues to include those things written of by Paul and other apostles for the church age is--well, shooting fish in a barrel. All one has to do is elucidate what the passages teach. They are right there.

 

When I point out that I am at a loss to find any passage that teaches a pre-Parousia cessation of any spiritual gift, this apparently is evidence of megalomania in me. Well, I'm sure I'm not above megalomania. But the preferred response would be, rather than cite symptoms of purported disorders, simply to produce the text that does so. This is the (implicit) challenge of our writing. From time to time I've considered some of the often cited ones. It's sometimes difficult to do, because I have such a hard time finding how the passage is even supposed to support cessationism. It helps to have someone spell it out. This will do one of two things (1) make it clear from the Bible or (2) reveal where the logical flaws in the argument are. Up to this point I've seen a boatload of (2), though I welcome some (1) from anyone who can provide it. Still waiting. I'll leave the light on for you.

 

That leaves "experience." This is supposed (by many) to be the domain of the Continuationists, while over and over it seems to be exactly the opposite.

 

I say produce the text. Alex says produce the healing (or what not, if I've properly understood you, Alex).

 

Well, I suppose that's fair enough. If we say it happens, I guess it has to happen sometime somewhere. They do, though it's hard to produce in such a way that they may be examined. Seems to me I had a minor healing over the weekend. Can't state it with scientific precision because I was (a) prayed for (b) used something medicinal and (c) got some application of oils--not that kind, some medicinally oriented stuff as well. I was better the next morning, and I sure felt like I had the flu coming on before. Was this a healing? Who cares? I was well enough to do some important activities over the weekend, and I was certainly grateful to God. Was that an answer to prayer? Well, someone prayed. What they prayed for happened. Who knows, maybe it was just coincidence.

 

It wasn't INSTANTANEOUS however. Not wholly perfect I'd say: still occasionally coughed up this and that.

 

As Continuationists, we read the Scritptures, believe what they teach us, but we only can claim the "experience" that the Holy Spirit provides. Sure we may have misunderstood the passages. Certainly we can have false expectations based on what we think we understand the Bible to have said.

 

But the fact is, in the realm of "experience" Cessationists DO have a type of advantage.

 

They can argue based on what they imagine SHOULD happen. We Continuationist have to go with what actually does happen. Asked to compete with someone's imaginary scenario, we do frequently come up short.

 

 

[Harry]

Lutheran point of view on speaking in tongues.

[Marv]

The luthies need to work on their satire... I mean SNL it's not... if ya know what I mean.

Jus' sayin'.

[JFDU]

Was this satire law or gospel?

U gotta love the logic though. “No orthodox Christian in the last 1,800 years has claimed the ability to speak in tongues”. We haven’t found anybody! That’s like saying “there has never been an instance of a person eating a big mac in a Thai restaurant”