duly noted.
no, you said "menerjemahkan nubuat". itu yang saya tekankan.
Hope it’s clear now?
both.
i was being sarcastic.
Semua doa ditujukan kepada Allah. Bukan kepada orang lain, atau kepada orang-orang suci. Tetapi apakah orang yang kita lagi doakan bisa mengerti apa yang kita doakan dan apakah mereka bisa mengikuti apa yang kita lagi doakan?
I'll tell you this, ketika orang mendoakan saya dalam bahasa Roh, artinya saya ga tau apa yang dia omong, saya ga ikut berdoa sama-sama, saya ga merasa diberkati atau dibangun. tetapi ketika seseorang mendoakan dengan bahasa yang kita sama-sama kenal, artinya saya tahu apa yang dia omong, dan saya ikut berdoa bersama, dan saya bisa mengaminkan apa yang dia katakan, dan kita sama-sama diberkati. Begitu juga saya mau buat ketika mendoakan setiap orang. bukan tiba2 burst into other tongues (or it might be false). My brother reported to me anak cell group saya pas satu kebaktian pas doa tiba-tiba berdoa dalam bahasa roh (or it might be false) sambil pegang dia, ngomong di kupingnya, seketika konstrasi kakak saya buyar. Nope itu tidak membangun kakak saya.
Entah dengan praktek doa karismatik bahasa roh di luar PKK yg aku ikuti (i.e. Komunitas Tritunggal Maha Kudus).
Dalam KTM, biasanya orang yg didoakan dalam bahasa roh adalah saudara2 yg familiar dgn bahasa roh ini. Kalopun kami mendoakan orang di luar komunitas kami yg tidak familiar dgn bahasa roh, dan kami hendak mendoakan dalam bahasa roh, pasti akan kami beritahu di awal bahwa kami akan berdoa dalam bahasa roh.
Kalo orang itu tidak suka didoakan dgn bahasa roh, atau orang itu tidak percaya akan bahasa roh, ya kami akan mendoakan dgn cara biasa (atau jika berbahasa roh hanya akan diucapkan dalam hati).
Btw, dalam PKK, sekalipun kami berdoa dalam bahasa roh, pasti ada doa yg menggunakan kata2 yg dimengerti. Bahasa roh hanya menjadi sebagian dari doa itu, karena kami memberikan proporsi yg seimbang antara berdoa dgn budi dan berdoa tanpa menggunakan budi (doa bahasa roh).
If you think you are smarter than Apostle Paul, you can cross out that 1 Corinthians 14:9-11 from your Bible.
Wow… what a harsh statement!!
I don’t have any slightest intention to reject Paul’s teaching. Amen to these verses!!!
What I do intend to say is, that this verse has been used out of context to forbid speaking in tongues.
If you do your hermeneutics, you will understand that Paul was against glossolalia in Corinth because they have abused the gifts and make it as a source of schism. The verses in
1 Cor 14 were intended to control the use of glossolalia in church meetings, as it could be a stumbling stone and create schism for the church. BUT, on the other part of his epistle, Paul also urged us to follow after spiritual gifts, including speaking in tongues. When it is used properly, the gifts will edify us.
read again
Reply #272:
Anda katakan bahwa tidak tertulis bahwa setelah bahasa roh akan muncul karunia nubuatan.
Reply #281:
Aku uraikan ayat 1-5 dari perikop
1 Korintus 14.
Aku simpulkan bahwa dalam bahasa roh, selain berbicara ttg hal2 yg hanya dimengerti Allah, juga terkandung nubuatan2.
Reply #285
Anda hanya mengulang uraianku ttg ayat 1-5, lalu Anda bilang tidak salah, tapi juga
kurang tepat.
Sudah aku baca ulang, aku masih tidak mengerti, apa yg Anda maksud sbg kurang tepat?
so, pintu untuk "karunia menerjemahkan bahasa Roh", bukan "karunia-karunia lainnya".
Pintu utk karunia2 yg lainnya
yang berkaitan dgn bahasa roh, misal: membangun diri dengan kata2 rahasia yg hanya dimengerti oleh roh dan Allah, bernubuat dalam bahasa roh, menerjemahkan nubuat, dsb.
right...
Matthew 3:11
I (John the Baptist) indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he (Jesus) that cometh after me is mightier than me, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.
anda mengimani ayat ini sebagai kebenaran?
Amen to this verse!!
But does this literally mean that Jesus will baptize us with Holy Spirit and fire, as we were baptized using water? IMHO,
NO!!
In all 4 gospels (Matt. 3: 11; Mark 1: 8; Luke 3: 16; John 1: 33) it was John Baptist saying those words, and we can see that the framework is eschatological. According to Matthew and Luke, this promise is immediately followed by a verse about final judgment, thus John the Baptist was following the prophecy from the Old Testament. In this perspective, “baptism with Holy Spirit” is not something that Jesus does, but it is something to do to emphasize that He has come. When we were baptized by the mean of water, in the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, we are truly baptized and fully filled with Holy Spirit.
The Lord only gives one instruction regarding baptism, by water and in the name of the Most Holy Trinity.
After His resurrection, He fully grants Holy Spirit in every baptism for every each of us. There is no second baptism (in catholic faith) as “baptism in holy spirit”.
but is it good hermeneutics?
I can disagree with a lot of people but I still can see if their opinion still works if I see it from their point of view.
I do not condemn any teaching as heresy, but to judge, to remind, in love as a brother in Christ.
We (catholics) do acknowledge infallible teaching from the Church, so we can remind our brothers who stray away from the true teaching, to remind them the danger of heresy whenever they stray too far from the infallible teaching of the Church. As long as any doctrine doesn’t against any of the infallible teachings, we can’t say it as heresy.
But what about you? If you said that my interpretation is wrong (i.e. heresy), by what basis you can say that my hermeneutics is not good enough, or that your hermeneutics is better than mine, or vice versa?
silahkan. itu dapet dari notes temen di facebook