Christ or faith the Savior?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

You have added additional tests along this discussion. Does someone get a pass by meeting the requirement(s) of just one test or all of them?

I only added the test of sonship. But the first two are the best I think as they test the spirit from God or not. Tests of fruit or behavior are no where near as reliable. Paul could easily have proposed these sorts of tests for the Corinthians but he didnt. In their case..the Jews appeared to prophesy by the Spirit but they reviled Jesus so it was prophesy by demons. Behavior wise..both false and genuine may have appeared similar so the only reliable test was whether they honored Christ.

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I only added the test of sonship. But the first two are the best I think as they test the spirit from God or not. Tests of fruit or behavior are no where near as reliable. Paul could easily have proposed these sorts of tests for the Corinthians but he didnt. In their case..the Jews appeared to prophesy by the Spirit but they reviled Jesus so it was prophesy by demons. Behavior wise..both false and genuine may have appeared similar so the only reliable test was whether they honored Christ.

What exactly do the first two tests prove? Hypothetically, if I say "Jesus is Lord, Jesus came in the flesh and is God, WL/LSM's teachings are very wrong", does it mean what I say is from spirit of God?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

What exactly do the first two tests prove? Hypothetically, if I say "Jesus is Lord, Jesus came in the flesh and is God, WL/LSM's teachings are very wrong", does it mean what I say is from spirit of God?

The tests prove if someone has the Spirit of God. The tests are not a test of doctrine or teachings. If we meet those tests, we can be confident that we have God's Spirit, and we don't have to worry about attracting a demon that pretends to be Jesus or the Holy Spirit - we have God's protection and if we ask for the Spirit we won't get a stone. If we pray to and in the name of Jesus, God will not allow a demon to respond and pretend to be Jesus.

[Evangelical]

Jo S's teaching is misguided and wrong. So far they have claimed, corporate prayer is not allowed, cannot say the name of Jesus or same thing more than 3 times that is chanting= eastern religion, cannot sing or shout (what about worship?), short repetitious phrases not allowed, and be careful of doing that because you might get one of the many "other Jesus's" or "other spirits" if you do.

They wrote:
God is a person. Who in solemn communication between each other expresses thanks or requests help by the use of short repetitious phrases? What then makes you think God wants to be communicated to in such a strange manner?

When he demonstrated prayer in Matthew 6:9-13 and in John 17:20-23, it was not done in a repetitious manner. It was not sung nor was it shouted. Neither did he teach us that prayer should be preformed by crowds in unison.

In contradiction to the claims made, it is fairly easy to show from the bible various examples of corporate, short, and singing or shouting prayer:

Short prayer:

Acts 7:59 While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit."

Loud prayer:

Acts 760 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

Singing prayer:

Eph 5:19 Sing and make music from your heart to the Lord,

Corporate prayer:

Acts 4:24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said by the Holy Spiri

Matt 18:19-20
Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

Acts 12:5
So Peter was kept in prison, but earnest prayer for him was made to God by the church.

Acts 1:14 All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer,

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The tests prove if someone has the Spirit of God. The tests are not a test of doctrine or teachings. If we meet those tests, we can be confident that we have God's Spirit, and we don't have to worry about attracting a demon that pretends to be Jesus or the Holy Spirit - we have God's protection and if we ask for the Spirit we won't get a stone. If we pray to and in the name of Jesus, God will not allow a demon to respond and pretend to be Jesus.

Did you wonder why you couldn't give a simple yes or no answer to my question? Because those "tests" you mentioned are not what you think. They are very specific to the situation the apostles were facing at their time. You have over-generalized them as if they apply to all situations.

If the tests were really what you said, probably the LC should change saying 5 times "Oh Lord Jesus" to saying 5 times "Jesus is Lord" in order to be sure they are in the spirit.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

Did you wonder why you couldn't give a simple yes or no answer to my question?

No, I didn't wonder. Your post had two questions. I was addressing your first "What exactly do the first two tests prove?" Your second question was rhetorical and was answered by my response to the first:

"The tests prove if someone has the Spirit of God. The tests are not a test of doctrine or teachings."


For example, if someone asked two questions:

"How do I get to the park?" "don't you think parks are nice places?"

Obviously someone would answer the first question as that is what they really want to know. Why would I simply answer "yes" or "no" to the second question and not tell them how to get to the park?

Originally Posted by A little brother

Because those "tests" you mentioned are not what you think. They are very specific to the situation the apostles were facing at their time. You have over-generalized them as if they apply to all situations.

Nonsense. In that case we could say that Jesus's fruit test in Matthew was specific only to the Pharisees and Scribes he was speaking about. Cursing Jesus or not, is general, not specific. If it were specific, then it means that there are cases where a person can curse Jesus "by the Spirit". As this cannot be the case, it must be a general test.

Originally Posted by A little brother

If the tests were really what you said, probably the LC should change saying 5 times "Oh Lord Jesus" to saying 5 times "Jesus is Lord" in order to be sure they are in the spirit.

That's a good point. Sometimes we do say "Jesus is Lord" corporately and in unison and it's something a newcomer might be encouraged to say to see if they are a believer or not. But I think Lord Jesus means the same thing and part of it is in how you say it. If a person said the "Lord" part quickly or only mumbled it then it might indicate something. That is why there is an emphasis on the Lord, as in Loooooord Jesus.

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Nonsense. In that case we could say that Jesus's fruit test in Matthew was specific only to the Pharisees and Scribes he was speaking about. Cursing Jesus or not, is general, not specific. If it were specific, then it means that there are cases where a person can curse Jesus "by the Spirit". As this cannot be the case, it must be a general test.

Is this your way of using the scripture to explain the scripture? You took an irrelevant section and then apply the generality to the specific verses we were discussing. You should know better who is speaking nonsense.

My previous question was meant to let you understand the "test" is specific as to who is behind the saying of "Jesus be cursed" and "Jesus is Lord", nothing more. If I say "Jesus is Lord, and WL/LSM's teachings are very wrong", the "test" does nothing on discerning whether the second part is from the Holy Spirit or not.

Originally Posted by Evangelical

That's a good point. Sometimes we do say "Jesus is Lord" corporately and in unison and it's something a newcomer might be encouraged to say to see if they are a believer or not. But I think Lord Jesus means the same thing and part of it is in how you say it. If a person said the "Lord" part quickly or only mumbled it then it might indicate something. That is why there is an emphasis on the Lord, as in Loooooord Jesus.

Great, you have just proved yourself wrong by telling me Paul's test is not enough - You have to say it a certain way. You should not mumble, you have to place emphasis here and there. That is something you added on top of Paul's words.

BTW, in my locality, I don't think I have ever heard the saying of "Jesus is Lord" corporately and in unison in the past few years. But I certainly won't use your "tests" to judge the situation.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

My previous question was meant to let you understand the "test" is specific as to who is behind the saying of "Jesus be cursed" and "Jesus is Lord", nothing more. If I say "Jesus is Lord, and WL/LSM's teachings are very wrong", the "test" does nothing on discerning whether the second part is from the Holy Spirit or not.

I agree that the test does nothing on discerning about the second part, but I already said that here:

The tests prove if someone has the Spirit of God. The tests are not a test of doctrine or teachings.

Let's break it down :

"The tests prove if someone has the Spirit of God." - this is what the test is about. I never talked about using the test for doctrine or teachings, only you have. I have clearly stated many times that the test is about what kind of spirit a person has.

"The tests are not a test of doctrine or teachings." - This is where I agree that the test does nothing on discerning about the second part, as if the first part was not clear enough already.

This problem is not because I could not answer yes or no to your question, but because you cannot comprehend that I already answered your question sufficiently.

Originally Posted by A little brother

Great, you have just proved yourself wrong by telling me Paul's test is not enough - You have to say it a certain way. You should not mumble, you have to place emphasis here and there. That is something you added on top of Paul's words.

BTW, in my locality, I don't think I have ever heard the saying of "Jesus is Lord" corporately and in unison in the past few years. But I certainly won't use your "tests" to judge the situation.

My point was that we must be able to hear it clearly - it was about how the test is applied, not "adding to it". It does not say those who "mumble under their breath that Jesus is Lord" does it? It is the same when taking an oath or "swearing on the bible" or getting married - no judge or wedding celebrant is going to accept an incoherent mumble.

Anyway your bias is noted, as you ignore some obvious unscriptural things Jo S said for example about corporate prayer or loud or singing prayer not being allowed but pick apart how I think Paul's test should be applied. That is, you seem fixated on technicalities about scriptural tests but ignore clear unscriptural things another posted has stated that in my view are more of a concern than "chanting" to Jesus.