Local Church Speak - Merged with The Lexicon

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Igzy

If the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets (1 Cor 14:32), that would seem to imply that it is up to the prophets to exercise their spirits in certain ways, either to let loose in tongue-speaking or hold back or choose understandable prophecy or even post on an Internet forum, no?

One of your pet peeves (and I agree with it) has long been that the LC is too passive when it comes to exercising (!) their wills to obey God's commandments. Well, to me this is part of that. Exercising your spirit is just exercising your will to reach out to God in a spiritual manner. I can exercise my will to pet my dog, but I'm not necessarily exercising my spirit as well. But when I reach out to God, it's both, or nothing happens. I don't know how I know what my spirit is any more than how I know what a thought is. But I know it when I experience it.

I take exception to part of what you have said. But at the same time, you have then later redefined things so that they are something else. And that part I somewhat agree with.

There are two problems when thinking about that verse about the spirits of the prophets. First, given the rather large range of what is meant when the word "sprit" is spoken, are we sure that the mention from 1 Cor is consistent in definition to what is being spoken of in the generic declaration that you made? Second, the fact that something is "subject to" us does not make it "exercisable." (And third, but not germane to this discussion, it is not certain that "prophets" refers to more than 2 or 3 people present in a meeting.)

The context of 1 Cor 14 seems to be saying that one who is speaking is not under some spell and unable to simply stop when it is appropriate, nor is someone who is not already speaking simply unable to contain themselves and are therefore compelled to jump up and start speaking without really thinking about it.

Remember the analysis we did some years back where we began to realize that the verses that Nee had derived to prove the functions of the spirit as distinct from the soul and discovered that it looked more like the spirit and the soul were more nearly one, or aspects of the same? While there is surely something more than "soul" at work here, if we cannot define it an isolate it, how can we say we exercise it?

Then you redefine exercise of the spirit to exercise of the will to "reach out to God." Maybe the better way to put it would be to exercise your will to have your mind set on the Spirit. There is something a little hokey about "reaching out." Sounds like a televangelist or something.

But does the Bible really discuss our relationship with God like that of a close friend that we are constantly bumming around with? Or is that a recast of what the Bible actually says into terms that may not actually mirror the relationship actually described.

I have noted in the discussions about abiding that it seems the first step in abiding is believing and obeying. One verse says that if we believe and obey, the Father and the Son make their abode with us. Then shortly after that, abiding is stated in terms of the relationship of trunk and branches of a vine. That relationship is not as some want to think — of resting or being in a house. Instead, it is the fact of being connected. Yet belief and obedience were the starters for the abiding. Maybe the abiding is more about our living than about our spirituality or even "private time."

In other words, the connection with God is about us being better equipped to live the life we were intended for, bearing his image instead of our own or that of the fallen world. It is not about having a great pal that we talk to constantly and have joyous fellowship with. I am not saying that we don't ever get any of that, but just as we are his hands and feet, is our fellowship with God really nonexistent without being part of fellowship with others? And is that nearly irrelevant if it is not lived daily as the image-bearers of God?

Question (not necessarily to be answered here). Where is spiritual warfare actually undertaken?

[Cal]

Originally Posted by OBW

Second, the fact that something is "subject to" us does not make it "exercisable."

Exercise to me just means "use." It doesn't mean to me "have a workout." So if my spirit is subject to me, then I can to some extent use it for what it was meant for. Like "exercise your right to vote."

I know Lee used "exercise yourself to godliness" to justify "exercise the spirit." But it never made sense to me in the sense of "give your spirit a workout." But "use your spirit" does make sense to me.