Comments on: The ‘Haves’ and the ‘Have nots’ http://www.veitchsmith.com/2008/05/21/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/ articles on Christianity, lifestyle and more... Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:38:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: When churches go wrong at Fiona Veitch Smith http://www.veitchsmith.com/2008/05/21/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/#comment-388 When churches go wrong at Fiona Veitch Smith Mon, 02 Jun 2008 19:31:18 +0000 http://www.veitchsmith.com/?p=48#comment-388 [...] The ‘Haves’ and the ‘Have nots’ [...] [...] The ‘Haves’ and the ‘Have nots’ [...]

]]> By: Fiona http://www.veitchsmith.com/2008/05/21/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/#comment-349 Fiona Thu, 22 May 2008 08:37:46 +0000 http://www.veitchsmith.com/?p=48#comment-349 I agree Nick, the terminology is confusing and often divisive. My preferred term is a 'release of the Spirit'. I do not use the terms you referred to - I mention them in the previous post as 'what some people refer to' or words to that effect. The fact remains that some people, myself included, have a tangible experience as the gifts of the Holy Spirit are 'released' in our lives. But as I spoke about last week with the dam analogy, for some people there is a damming up of what, as I agree with you, is already there - I agree too that the HS comes on us at conversion and that's what the NT teaches. I do not believe that the release of the charismata in people's lives should bring division or for that mattter that it 'invariably' has, it is just how it is handled by those on both sides that causes the rifts. By denying the validity of other people's experience or, worse, labelling it hysterical, unbiblical or demonic (as some 'have-nots') do, just makes things worse. But as I say in this post, I don't believe there really are 'have-nots' as some people just naturally operate in their gifts in a quiet way. My intention with this post was to confess the wrongs perpertrated by people who have experienced what I have experienced and hopefully bring about healing. I agree Nick, the terminology is confusing and often divisive. My preferred term is a ‘release of the Spirit’. I do not use the terms you referred to - I mention them in the previous post as ‘what some people refer to’ or words to that effect. The fact remains that some people, myself included, have a tangible experience as the gifts of the Holy Spirit are ‘released’ in our lives. But as I spoke about last week with the dam analogy, for some people there is a damming up of what, as I agree with you, is already there - I agree too that the HS comes on us at conversion and that’s what the NT teaches. I do not believe that the release of the charismata in people’s lives should bring division or for that mattter that it ‘invariably’ has, it is just how it is handled by those on both sides that causes the rifts. By denying the validity of other people’s experience or, worse, labelling it hysterical, unbiblical or demonic (as some ‘have-nots’) do, just makes things worse. But as I say in this post, I don’t believe there really are ‘have-nots’ as some people just naturally operate in their gifts in a quiet way. My intention with this post was to confess the wrongs perpertrated by people who have experienced what I have experienced and hopefully bring about healing.

]]> By: Nick Collins http://www.veitchsmith.com/2008/05/21/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/#comment-348 Nick Collins Thu, 22 May 2008 08:19:39 +0000 http://www.veitchsmith.com/?p=48#comment-348 I'm worried about the 'special blessing' / 'baptism in the holy spirit' / other title. Mainly because the New Testament knows nothing about it. Not only that, but it invariably has a history of bringing division between Christians, meaning that the Holy Spirit is definitely not involved (or is silenced). Yes, there IS a baptism WITH the HS in the NT, but it is invariably a part of conversion - never post conversion. THAT really goes back to circa 1890. Sure, God can bestow new gifts (even the more dramatic ones) at any time - but to call it 'the baptism with the Holy Spirit' is to abuse the term. Rather in the same way that 'anointed' is terribly abused to the point of becoming meaningless - but that is a further story! I’m worried about the ’special blessing’ / ‘baptism in the holy spirit’ / other title. Mainly because the New Testament knows nothing about it. Not only that, but it invariably has a history of bringing division between Christians, meaning that the Holy Spirit is definitely not involved (or is silenced). Yes, there IS a baptism WITH the HS in the NT, but it is invariably a part of conversion - never post conversion. THAT really goes back to circa 1890.

Sure, God can bestow new gifts (even the more dramatic ones) at any time - but to call it ‘the baptism with the Holy Spirit’ is to abuse the term. Rather in the same way that ‘anointed’ is terribly abused to the point of becoming meaningless - but that is a further story!

]]>