西元1-4世紀正統教會記載的靈恩現象紀錄

[Geigemachen ()]

※ 引述《jerryen (肚咕求睡)》之銘言：
: 我今天和一位弟兄請教關於靈恩運動與方言的事情
: 這位弟兄和我分享說
: 靈恩運動是20世紀才有的事情
: 之前是沒有這種事情的
＂靈恩現象＂早在西元1-3世紀的初期教會就有了，
＂靈恩運動＂要怎麼定義又是另一個問題了。

正統教會即使反抗極端靈恩運動－孟他努主義時，也沒有反對＂靈恩現象＂，
而是反對＂正統教會認為不正常的靈恩現象＂

初期正統教會中的靈恩現象的見證人(先不算與孟他努派有關聯的)
西元150年時的殉道者游斯丁，西元180年時的愛任紐(使徒約翰的學生的學生)，
西元200-258年間時Novatian，西元360年的Hilary of Poitiers等人。

到了四世紀，靈恩現象變少，正統教會中著名的字義解經講道者，
西元344-407年間的金口約翰(音譯屈梭多模，東正教與天主教推崇的聖徒)，
敘述靈恩現象變少的跡象，並且反問以前有的靈恩現象怎麼現在沒了？
他認為因為信徒的忽視以及停止使用靈恩恩賜，才讓靈恩現象罕見。
（我簡稱為＂靈恩怠惰論＂）

西元354-430年間的奧古斯丁，首次立論認為靈恩現象只限於使徒時代，以後會終止，
也就是＂靈恩終止論＂。

我認為靈恩派教會常見的敗筆之一是忽視教會歷史，明明早期教會有很多對靈恩現象
的正面記載，卻不去閱讀。＂靈恩終止論＂也就似乎聽起來很正統似的，
＂早期教會靈恩現象之見證＂或是＂靈恩怠惰論＂反而很少被人提及，
常常被評論成是邪魔歪道似的。

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossolalia#Church_practice
A.D. 100 to 400

References to speaking in tongues by the Church fathers are rare. Except for
Irenaeus' 2nd-century reference to many in the church speaking all kinds of
languages 'through the Spirit', and Tertullian's reference in 207 AD to the
spiritual gift of interpretation of tongues being encountered in his day,
there are no other known first-hand accounts of glossolalia, and very few
second-hand accounts among their writings.[34]
What we do have are general remarks that Christ had given the gifts of the
Spirit to the church, and that the gifts in general remained in the church.
For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to this present time. (Justin
Martyr, c.150)[35]

Now, it is possible to see amongst us women and men who possess gifts of the
Spirit of God. (Justin Martyr, c.150)[36]

The Fathers also recount the lists of gifts of the Spirit recorded in the New
Testament.
This is He who places prophets in the Church, instructs teachers, directs
tongues, gives powers and healings, does wonderful works, often
discrimination of spirits, affords powers of government, suggests counsels,
and orders and arranges whatever other gifts there are of charismata; and
thus make the Lord’s Church everywhere, and in all, perfected and completed.
(Novatian, c.200-c.258)[37]

For God hath set same in the Church, first apostles…secondly prophets…
thirdly teachers…next mighty works, among which are the healing of diseases…
 and gifts of either speaking or interpreting divers kinds of tongues.
Clearly these are the Church’s agents of ministry and work of whom the body
of Christ consists; and God has ordained them. (Hilary of Poitiers, 360)[38]

There is one instance of a Father apparently recording that he had heard some
in the church speaking all kinds of languages through the Spirit:
In like manner we do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess
prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and
bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare
the mysteries of God. (Irenaeus, c.180)[39]

Tertullian in an anti-heretical apologetic alludes to instances of the
'interpretation of tongues' as one among several examples of 'spiritual
gifts' common enough in his day to be easily encountered and provide evidence
that God was at work in the church:
Let Marcion then exhibit, as gifts of his god, some prophets, such as have
not spoken by human sense, but with the Spirit of God, such as have both
predicted things to come, and have made manifest the secrets of the heart;
let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer -- only let it be by the Spirit,
in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture, whenever an interpretation of tongues
has occurred to him; let him show to me also, that any woman of boastful
tongue in his community has ever prophesied from amongst those specially holy
sisters of his. Now all these signs (of spiritual gifts) are forthcoming from
my side without any difficulty, and they agree, too, with the rules, and the
dispensations, and the instructions of the Creator; therefore without doubt
the Christ, and the Spirit, and the apostle, belong severally to my God.
Here, then, is my frank avowal for any one who cares to require it.
(Tertullian, c.207)[40]

There were unorthodox movements that may have engaged in glossolalia. For
example, Montanus was accused (by his opponents) of ecstatic speech that some
have equated to glossolalia:
He became possessed of a spirit, and suddenly began to rave in a kind of
ecstatic trance, and to babble in a jargon, prophesying in a manner contrary
to the custom of the Church which had been handed down by tradition from the
earliest times. (Eusebius, d.c.339)[41]

Their hostility to such a practice demonstrates that the mainstream (the
anti-Montanists) regarded it as false, and would never have practised it.
Indeed, "after the first or perhaps the second century, there is not record
of it in any Orthodox source, and it is not recorded as occurring even among
the great Fathers of the Egyptian desert, who were so filled with the Spirit
of God they performed numerous astonishing miracles, including raising the
dead".[42]
Chrysostom regarded the whole phenomenon of 'speaking in tongues' as not only
something that was not practised in his own day, but was even obscure.
This whole phenomenon [of speaking in tongues] is very obscure, but the
obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their
cessation, being such then as used to occur but now no longer take place. And
why do they not happen now? Why look now, the cause too of the obscurity hath
produced us again another question: namely, why did they then happen, and now
do so no more? (Chrysostom, 344-407)[43]

Augustine of Hippo regarded speaking in tongues (that is, xenoglossia) as a
gift for the apostolic church alone, and argued that this was evident from
the fact that his contemporaries did not see people receiving that gift in
their own day.
In the earliest times, "the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they
spake with tongues", which they had not learned, "as the Spirit gave them
utterance". These were signs adapted to the time. For there behooved to be
that betokening of the Holy Spirit in all tongues, to shew that the Gospel of
God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done
for a betokening, and it passed away. In the laying on of hands now, that
persons may receive the Holy Ghost, do we look that they should speak with
tongues? Or when he laid the hand on infants, did each one of you look to see
whether they would speak with tongues, and, when he saw that they did not
speak with tongues, was any of you so strong-minded as to say, These have not
received the Holy Ghost; for, had they received, they would speak with
tongues as was the case in those times? If then the witness of the presence
of the Holy Ghost be not given through these miracles, by what is it given,
by what does one get to know that he has received the Holy Ghost? Let him
question his own heart. If he love his brother, the Spirit of God dwelleth in
him. (Augustine of Hippo, 354-430)[44]

: 另外聖經中所有的方言指的都是人聽得懂的語言(地球上的某種語言)
保羅似乎把部分＂聽不懂的語言＂歸類為＂天使的言語＂

--
     _^_
    6@_@9
    4| |6
   ///||\\

 地球人要小心啊

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.168.167.169
※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 01:24)
※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 01:25)
※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 01:25)
推 zeus1984:睡前誠心推薦這篇文章。
※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 01:27)
呵，多謝，願你平安 :)

※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 01:29)
※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 01:34)
※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 01:37)
推 springxx:講道也是一種恩賜
→ springxx:不一定非要"刻意" 去追求什麼 講方言或什麼醫治才是恩賜
據我觀察到的，常見的靈恩派(如真理堂或靈糧堂)
也不認為"講方言或什麼醫治才是恩賜"，
他們課程的講義也承認講道，傳福音..等等恩賜

→ springxx:尤其現在的靈恩運動 更是一種過頭的現象
2008年底統計全世界靈恩派已經有5億人了，其中有部份是過頭的，
但是＂現在的靈恩運動 更是一種過頭的現象＂用來敘述5億人的集體行為，
恐怕有些一概而論過頭的傾向。
pentacostalism與charismatic movement都被wikipedia區別為不同的運動。
有比較熱中某些教導靈恩機構，評論靈糧堂與真理堂不夠靈恩，自己比較靈恩..
熱中靈恩的程度還是有差別的。

→ springxx:反而強調方言 醫治這類的恩賜 等於是得救的一種保證
推 springxx:這樣就扭曲了福音真正意義是信而得救 不在於那些神蹟奇事
說方言才得救那是真耶穌教會的教導，
據我觀察到的常見的靈恩派(如真理堂或靈糧堂)反而強調＂信而得救＂，
不主張說方言得救。

→ springxx:因為那些恩賜 都是為了造就教會和人的
推 springxx:也不應該分什麼靈恩派 或福音派
其實那是台灣某些人出產的misnomer，靈恩派本來就是evangelical而非liberal

"福音派"的定義
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelicalism

如果不強調聖經的正確性，也沒辦法確信神蹟或靈恩，所以靈恩派很自然地
是evangelical。

→ springxx:生病就要看醫生 不該有什麼 生病就都說是什麼邪靈這類的
我同意不該什麼都怪給邪靈，疑神疑鬼很累人。

推 springxx:那些主張靈恩 都過度解讀恩賜 將講方言視為一種得救證明
除了真耶穌教會，還有強調靈恩的宗派這麼主張的嗎？

→ springxx:與福音分別出來   反而人不是追求真理 而是追求
推 springxx:有沒有神蹟奇事 有些生病也因此反而不去看醫生
→ springxx:這樣的信 不是真信心 而是在測試上帝
有些靈恩派的人的確着迷於測試過頭了，一直這樣測試，也有點乏味。

我讀到有五旬節派人士貼文，認為有些靈恩派太過執迷神蹟，忽視聖經，
劃清界線自己是＂重視聖經研究的五旬節派＂，而非＂靈恩派＂。

※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 04:37)
※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 04:46)
→ Pietro:我是聽過祈禱和經論是信仰的二個翅膀
推 Trunicht:因為靈恩派的上帝比較好用（無誤）
→ Viviak:樓上的XD 靈恩派的上帝比較好用 ~
推 nashno1:不同的解讀得到不同的上帝.........
→ nashno1:偽一神論嗎
推 MoonMan0319:我看到的資料 孟他努是被排擠的?
沒錯，但是被排擠的不是＂所有的靈恩現象＂，而是孟他努派。
由於不少反靈恩人士大量對教會史做出論述，就常常給人錯誤的印象
＂大公教會反孟他努主義就是反對所有的靈恩現象＂。

西元二世紀末，使徒約翰學生的學生愛任紐，曾經寫信向羅馬大主教抱怨孟他努派，
但是建議接納他們留在正統教會中。

西元210年左右，特土良加入孟他努派時已經要離開大公教會(正統)，
因為孟他努派已經與大公教會決裂了。

西元407年，大公教會聖徒金口約翰(東正教與天主教推崇)把＂靈恩現象罕見＂
歸咎於＂信徒忽視與不使用＂，而非＂判定靈恩現象就是異端＂，
還有其他教父的文獻紀錄，就可得知
＂大公教會反孟他努主義，但是並非反對所有的靈恩現象＂。

※ 編輯: Geigemachen     來自: 118.168.167.169      (01/29 15:12)