Tongue Speaking not needed today

[Ingledsva]

Do you realize that quoting individual's opinions doesn't by itself prove anything about what the text of the Bible says?
If you want to dispute what the Bible says, start by quoting the Bible and giving a sound exegetical explanation of what it says.

I gave you some verses to start with, like 2 Thessalonians 2:9. They prove God draws a distinction for us between genuine and counterfeit spiritual works. Explain why the text doesn't actually say that for us.

Remember: You're the one who challenged my statement that the Bible draws such a distinction, and by extension challenged the scripture I used to draw that conclusion. I furnished scriptural proof to back up my statement. Now the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate from the Biblical text why my thesis statement about what the Bible says is not true....

I felt more needed to be said here.

First off - 2Th 2:9 is a much later Christian text written after Jesus' death. You do not know if it is even authentic.

2Th 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

You should know that Satan is not evil in Tanakh. He is a servant of YHVH. That evil autonomous Satan is a later Christian idea. Satan was the Tester/Adversary. He put stumbling blocks in people's paths, - to see how they handled them. At Judgment He stands beside that person to condemn them - if found wanting - before YHVH.

In fact this is how he first shows up in the Christian Bible, - He tests Jesus to see if he is ready for his mission.

Mat 4:1 Then Jesus was led forth into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to be tested/proved by the devil.

Zec 3:1 And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him.

Psa 109:6 Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand.

Psa 109:7 When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin.

Job 1:8 And said YHVH to Satan, do put your regard upon my servant Job for there is none like him on the earth, a man pious and upright, fearing Elohiym and turning from wickedness.

Rev 12:10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

NOW - back to MAGIC, - Thus your Christian "proof" using Satan, - from writings after Jesus was dead, - is bull.

The idea of SOME MAGIC being stopped has already been discussed.

ONLY SOME KINDS OF MAGIC WERE FORBIDDEN! The others continued.

More from Levite -

"The (in)famous list of forbidden magical practices in Deut. 18:10-13 is directly bracketed by injunctions concerning idolatry and the practices of Egypt and Canaan. It is eminently possible that all the kinds of magic mentioned are prohibited only in the context of idolatrous use."

"By the same token, "useth divination" actually is kosem kosamim; wherein the root of the word, k.s.m. (kuf-samech-mem) seems to stem from an ancient Hebrew root morpheme having to do with dividing things, which seems to indicate that the technical translation of kosem is actually "extispicer," that is, one who divines by means of reading the entrails of living creatures. And indeed the word seems to be used in this fashion by the Rabbis of the Talmud to describe extispicy of a forbidden nature, while extispicy of a permitted nature is not referred to using these words, but with the Aramaic phrase sakin umemashmeshin bi'venei me'ayim ("cutting and moving around the entrails").
"Observer of times" is actually me'onen, from the word anan (meaning "cloud,") which literally translated means "nubilomancer," or one who divines by reading the pattern of clouds.
"Enchanter" is actually menachesh, from the word nachash (meaning "snake") which literally translated means "colubromancer," or one who divines by watching the movements and tracks of snakes.
"Charmer" is actually choveir chaver, which comes from a root meaning "to bind," thus literally translated means "a binder," referring to one who casts spells to bind the will of others to his own commands. ..."

"But as we can see, once the above terms are analyzed, only certain specific magics are forbidden. What is not mentioned is not directly prohibited by the Torah, and the Rabbis of the Talmud are by no means certain what may or may not be prohibited by extension, or even whether what is directly prohibited is always prohibited in every circumstance. We see evidence of this in numerous discussions of magic usage and the relating of stories of the Rabbis encountering or using magic, throughout the Talmud." LEVITE

*

 

[Rise]

First off - 2Th 2:9 is a much later Christian text written after Jesus' death. You do not know if it is even authentic.

We're making some progress now. At least you're attempting to address the scripture itself.

But this was never a debate about whether or not the New Testament scripture is authentic. I said the Bible said something, you claimed it didn't. Now that you've been proven wrong about what the Bible says you're trying to claim that we shouldn't believe that part of the Bible is authentic.

We could certainly have that debate about the authenticity of certain NT books, and I could show why you are historically and contextually wrong, but that would only be a distraction until the main issue is settled - Which is, does the Bible text as we have it say there is a distinction between good and evil spiritual acts, or does it not?

The point I've been trying to help you realize is: None of the sources you quoted disprove my original statement about what the Bible says. They actually don't even have any relevance to it because they don't deal with the scriptures being debated. If anything, your claim that the Jews believed that some magic was acceptable and others weren't would only be supporting my thesis statement that a distinction is drawn in the Bible between demonic spiritual power and God's power.

If you can't deal with these verses then your entire premise is undermined (the idea that all magic is basically the same, or from the same source).
That's why I said that if you cannot deal with these scriptures then there's no point in debating further because your entire premise is undermined by what the Bible plainly says.

More BULL - I have provided the JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA, and Bible MAGIC verses.

"The Enclyopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic, and Mysticism", which you referred to, is only the work of one man.
As I said, you commit a logical fallacy by thinking you can quote any source written by a Jew and claim their opinion is the final authority on what the Bible says just because they are a Jew.
And again, you further are mistaken because you don't seem to realize that Jews, depending on sect, derive thier beleifs from a variety of nonbiblical sources. You're making a basic logic error when you read a Jewish opinion on any subject and assume it is based solely on the Bible. Chances are it is not. So such opinions arent even likely to be relevant to a discussion of what the Bible alone says.

If that source is supposedly so authoritative on what the Bible says, then you should have no trouble using it to find actual Biblical scriptures that disprove the idea that the Bible does not draw a distinction between genuine and counterfeit spiritual acts.
But you won't find any. I doubt that is a position the author even tries to take.

The 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia completely disagrees with what you are claiming. In it you find the article writers conclude from their study of scripture that the Bible says "magic is akin to idolatry". They define magic as "occultism" and say that such practices are forbidden in the Bible.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10264-magic

I can back up all those conclusions using Biblical scripture, some of which I have already listed. I don't need to quote a third party's opinion of what the scripture says, but I do so to help you understand the error of relying on any one man's opinion of what the Bible says instead of reading the scripture for yourself.

If you want to make a claim that the Bible reaches a different conclusion about such acts, then you're going to need go to the scripture to prove it.

You should know that Satan is not evil in Tanakh. He is a servant of YHVH. That evil autonomous Satan is a later Christian idea. Satan was the Tester/Adversary. He put stumbling blocks in people's paths, - to see how they handled them. At Judgment He stands beside that person to condemn them - if found wanting - before YHVH.

Another topic I could debate with you and show you why you're wrong, but to go that direction at this point would only be a distraction from the main issue: Does the Bible (which includes the NT) say there is a difference between genuine and counterfeit spiritual operation, or does it not?

You're again trying to divert away from the main point by claiming some books of the Bible are not authentic (in this case, most of the NT), so you can just throw out the parts of the Bible that clearly prove your position is wrong.


You've also got a much bigger problem on your hand than just 2 Thessalonians 2:9.
I already quoted almost 60 passages of scripture that all demonstrate this same concept from OT to NT.
I could go even deeper and broader with scripture if I needed to, but if you can't even tackle a single verse without dismissing it as not real scripture then what hope do you have of dealing with the nearly 60 I already posted that show there is a distinction made between true and false spiritual works?

Here's the list again:

John 4:22
John 4:24
Deuteronomy 12:6

Not everyone who thinks they are worshipping the one true God are.
You can't do whatever you want and then claim you're doing it for God.

Acts 2:38
John 15:4
Matthew 7:16
1 John 2:2-4
John 14:23
John 15:16
Matthew 7:22
Deuteronomy 13:2-4
2 Corinthians 11:4
Acts 2:8
Acts 1:4-5
Acts 1:8
Acts 2:3-4

You must be in Jesus, obeying and abiding, to recieve the Holy Spirit.
That is judged by fruit.
Not everyone who appears to be doing supernatural works is in Jesus.

1 Corinthians 12:4
1 Corinthians 12:10

The gifts of the Holy Spirit come only through the Holy Spirit.

Scripturally, no one moves in any genuine gift of the Holy Spirit without the Holy Spirit.
Those who have the Holy Spirit are, by any Biblical definition, Christians.
You either have the Holy Spirit or you are operating in a counterfeit spirit.

-------------------

Satan counterfeits and deceives:
2 Corinthians 11:13-15
Galatians 1:8
1 Timothy 4:1-2
2 Peter 2:1
2 Thessalonians 2:3-4
Revelation 12:9

Not everyone who thinks they are worshiping God, are:
John 4:22
John 4:24

Not all who appear to operate in the gift of Knowledge or Prophecy are actually operating in the Holy Spirit.
Deuteronomy 13:1-3
1 Kings 22:23
Jeremiah 14:14
Jeremiah 23:9-11
Jeremiah 23:16-18
Jeremiah 23:21-22
Jeremiah 23:33-36
Jeremiah 5:11-13
Lamentations 2:14
Ezekiel 13:6-7
Matthew 7:13
Matthew 20-23
Matthew 24:3-5
Matthew 10-11
Acts 16:16
As we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners much gain by fortune-telling.
Acts 16:18
And this she kept doing for many days. Paul, having become greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.

Not everyone who appears to operating in a gift of signs and wonders is doing so by the Holy Spirit.
Matthew 24:24
Matthew 25:25
Exodus 7:11, Exodus 8:18
2 Thessalonians 2:9

Although some have been given supernatural strength by the Holy Spirit, not everyone who appears to have supernatural strength does so by the Holy Spirit:
Judges 14:6
Luke 8:29

God draws a distinction between the way pagans worship, and the way His people are to worship. What they were doing was not acceptable.
Deuteronomy 12:4
Matthew 6:7-8

We must spiritually discern the difference by the Holy Spirit.
1 John 2:22-26
1 Corinthians 2:14
1 Thessalonians 5:20-21
1 John 4:1
1 Corinthians 14:29

Ultimately satan, despite appearing to have some power, has no power when it comes to those empowered by God:
1 Kings 18:28-29
Exodus 8:18
Luke 10:19

This theme and pattern is well established all throughout scripture.

 

[Ingledsva]

We're making some progress now. At least you're attempting to address the scripture itself.

But this was never a debate about whether or not the New Testament scripture is authentic. I said the Bible said something, you claimed it didn't. Now that you've been proven wrong about what the Bible says you're trying to claim that we shouldn't believe that part of the Bible is authentic.

We could certainly have that debate about the authenticity of certain NT books, and I could show why you are historically and contextually wrong, but that would only be a distraction until the main issue is settled - Which is, does the Bible text as we have it say there is a distinction between good and evil spiritual acts, or does it not?
The point I've been trying to help you realize is: None of the sources you quoted disprove my original statement about what the Bible says. They actually don't even have any relevance to it because they don't deal with the scriptures being debated. If anything, your claim that the Jews believed that some magic was acceptable and others weren't would only be supporting my thesis statement that a distinction is drawn in the Bible between demonic spiritual power and God's power.

If you can't deal with these verses then your entire premise is undermined (the idea that all magic is basically the same, or from the same source).
That's why I said that if you cannot deal with these scriptures then there's no point in debating further because your entire premise is undermined by what the Bible plainly says

"The Enclyopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic, and Mysticism", which you referred to, is only the work of one man.
As I said, you commit a logical fallacy by thinking you can quote any source written by a Jew and claim their opinion is the final authority on what the Bible says just because they are a Jew.
And again, you further are mistaken because you don't seem to realize that Jews, depending on sect, derive thier beleifs from a variety of nonbiblical sources. You're making a basic logic error when you read a Jewish opinion on any subject and assume it is based solely on the Bible. Chances are it is not. So such opinions arent even likely to be relevant to a discussion of what the Bible alone says.


If that source is supposedly so authoritative on what the Bible says, then you should have no trouble using it to find actual Biblical scriptures that disprove the idea that the Bible does not draw a distinction between genuine and counterfeit spiritual acts.
But you won't find any. I doubt that is a position the author even tries to take.

The 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia completely disagrees with what you are claiming. In it you find the article writers conclude from their study of scripture that the Bible says "magic is akin to idolatry". They define magic as "occultism" and say that such practices are forbidden in the Bible.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10264-magic

I can back up all those conclusions using Biblical scripture, some of which I have already listed. I don't need to quote a third party's opinion of what the scripture says, but I do so to help you understand the error of relying on any one man's opinion of what the Bible says instead of reading the scripture for yourself.

If you want to make a claim that the Bible reaches a different conclusion about such acts, then you're going to need go to the scripture to prove it.

Another topic I could debate with you and show you why you're wrong, but to go that direction at this point would only be a distraction from the main issue: Does the Bible (which includes the NT) say there is a difference between genuine and counterfeit spiritual operation, or does it not?

You're again trying to divert away from the main point by claiming some books of the Bible are not authentic (in this case, most of the NT), so you can just throw out the parts of the Bible that clearly prove your position is wrong.

You've also got a much bigger problem on your hand than just 2 Thessalonians 2:9.
I already quoted almost 60 passages of scripture that all demonstrate this same concept from OT to NT.
I could go even deeper and broader with scripture if I needed to, but if you can't even tackle a single verse without dismissing it as not real scripture then what hope do you have of dealing with the nearly 60 I already posted that show there is a distinction made between true and false spiritual works?

Here's the list again:

More Bull!

Love how you take things out of context to try and prove your point. LOL! The Bible only condemns certain Magic while allowing other Magic. This has been shown by the actual words used. The remaining ones are no different then the forbidden, - as I have pointed out over and over.

I referred to JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA, not the book The Enclyopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic, and Mysticism in that sentence.

Interesting that you take one section of one article - which I mentioned by the way, - those certain Magic which were forbidden, - while other Magic was not. But leave out what else it says -

"More abundant information is found in post-Biblical literature, especially in the Babylonian Talmud, where the great number of the passages alluding to magic furnishes incontrovertible evidence of its wide diffusion. It was, however, only the practise of witchcraft which was prohibited, for a knowledge of magic was indispensable to a member of the chief council or of the judiciary, and might be acquired even from the heathen"

LOL! You can quote a hundred verses and it will not change one iota, - what the Jewish Encyclopedia, and other Jewish sources tell us, - only certain magic was forbidden, - and other MAGIC continued.

You are just repeating yourself.

*

 

[Rise]

So, the onus is on you to prove your original claim about what the Bible says in a way that is consistent with the Bible:

Actually all you have provided is one translation of the texts.

Both the Hebrew, and early Christians , performed all kinds of "magic." The only difference being the name of the God they called on.

You originally tried to claim that what Christians did was no different than the magic any other occult or pagan group throughout history has, and tried to even claim the scripture backs up your claim.

As I've shown now, the scripture is very clear that there is a difference in the nature, the quality, and the source of what followers of God do vs what everyone else does. Your only response has been to throw out any scripture that disagrees with your conclusion.

Whether or not you want to believe the scripture is your choice, but don't make claims about what scripture says that you aren't capable of backing up.

The Bible only condemns certain Magic while allowing other Magic.

"More abundant information is found in post-Biblical literature, especially in the Babylonian Talmud, where the great number of the passages alluding to magic furnishes incontrovertible evidence of its wide diffusion. It was, however, only the practise of witchcraft which was prohibited, for a knowledge of magic was indispensable to a member of the chief council or of the judiciary, and might be acquired even from the heathen"

This underlines for us a fundamental error in your premise.
You're making reference to Rabbinical thought that draws from nonbiblical things like the Talmud, Mishna, and Zohar for their conclusions, and then making the mistake of claiming whatever conclusions they have reached represents the result of strait Biblical exegesis. The truth is that not all Rabbinical thought is drawing it's conclusions solely from the Bible.

Remember, this debate started on the premise of you trying to challenge what the Bible says. This was never a debate about what the Talmud, Mishna, or Zohar says.
There's a lot of things in those that would contradict the Bible. Traditional orthodox Judaism doesn't even see the Bible as their primary authority for determining what is true, but sees the Rabbi's conclusions and the traditions of previous Rabbi as the final authority (not unlike Catholicism putting the authority of their leaders and their traditions above what the Bible says). This is a big issue that Jesus rebuked the Rabbis over (Mark 7:13).



Even the Talmud doesn't support what you are claiming. It says, as quoted by the Jewish Enyclcopedia (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10264-magic):
The people, who cared little for the views of the learned, were devoted to witchcraft, though not so much as the Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans. "Adultery and sorcery have destroyed everything"; the majesty of God departed from Israel and His wrath came upon the world when the "wizards" became too numerous

I already provided many OT scriptures to prove my point. That article backs up my conclusions about the OT by also citing their own OT scriptures to conclude that "magic is akin to idolatry" and that such practices are forbidden in the Bible.

The article goes on to further conclude that magic and monotheism are essentially contradictory, which goes back to magic's association with idolatry. It cites the historical influence of magic on Judaism as evidence of foreign influence from Egypt and Babylon, rather than being something which arises out of the Bible itself, which would be consistent with what the Bible tells us. The Bible records that Israel had a consistent history of falling into idolatry, drawn into it by foreign nations, and then coming out of it only to fall back into it.

So, we've already established that the Bible makes a clear distinction between God ordained spiritual activity and that which is done by other means (idolatry), and even the Talmud recognizes that Israel was judged for the later. Whether you want to argue that the Rabbinical writings allow some kinds of magic over others is not really relevant to what you tried to debate even if it were true, because you tried to challenge what the Bible itself says.

 

[Ingledsva]

So, the onus is on you to prove your original claim about what the Bible says in a way that is consistent with the Bible:

You originally tried to claim that what Christians did was no different than the magic any other occult or pagan group throughout history has, and tried to even claim the scripture backs up your claim.

As I've shown now, the scripture is very clear that there is a difference in the nature, the quality, and the source of what followers of God do vs what everyone else does. Your only response has been to throw out any scripture that disagrees with your conclusion.

Whether or not you want to believe the scripture is your choice, but don't make claims about what scripture says that you aren't capable of backing up.




This underlines for us a fundamental error in your premise.
You're making reference to Rabbinical thought that draws from nonbiblical things like the Talmud, Mishna, and Zohar for their conclusions, and then making the mistake of claiming whatever conclusions they have reached represents the result of strait Biblical exegesis. The truth is that not all Rabbinical thought is drawing it's conclusions solely from the Bible.

Remember, this debate started on the premise of you trying to challenge what the Bible says. This was never a debate about what the Talmud, Mishna, or Zohar says.
There's a lot of things in those that would contradict the Bible. Traditional orthodox Judaism doesn't even see the Bible as their primary authority for determining what is true, but sees the Rabbi's conclusions and the traditions of previous Rabbi as the final authority (not unlike Catholicism putting the authority of their leaders and their traditions above what the Bible says). This is a big issue that Jesus rebuked the Rabbis over (Mark 7:13).



Even the Talmud doesn't support what you are claiming. It says, as quoted by the Jewish Enyclcopedia (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10264-magic):
The people, who cared little for the views of the learned, were devoted to witchcraft, though not so much as the Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans. "Adultery and sorcery have destroyed everything"; the majesty of God departed from Israel and His wrath came upon the world when the "wizards" became too numerous

I already provided many OT scriptures to prove my point. That article backs up my conclusions about the OT by also citing their own OT scriptures to conclude that "magic is akin to idolatry" and that such practices are forbidden in the Bible.

The article goes on to further conclude that magic and monotheism are essentially contradictory, which goes back to magic's association with idolatry. It cites the historical influence of magic on Judaism as evidence of foreign influence from Egypt and Babylon, rather than being something which arises out of the Bible itself, which would be consistent with what the Bible tells us. The Bible records that Israel had a consistent history of falling into idolatry, drawn into it by foreign nations, and then coming out of it only to fall back into it.

So, we've already established that the Bible makes a clear distinction between God ordained spiritual activity and that which is done by other means (idolatry), and even the Talmud recognizes that Israel was judged for the later. Whether you want to argue that the Rabbinical writings allow some kinds of magic over others is not really relevant to what you tried to debate even if it were true, because you tried to challenge what the Bible itself says.

LOL! There is no difference in the MAGIC of the Bible, and the MAGIC of other religions.

And witchcraft is a specific word - I showed the definitions, - and what was forbidden, - and AGAIN that other MAGIC was NOT forbidden and continued.

And again your religious book saying certain magic is OK by God and - SOME - other is evil because another God says it is OK, changes nothing, as it doesn't for the other religions that used magic.

And then there is that third group again - Magic not forbidden, and having nothing to do with YHVH, - which the articles talk about.

You just keep - barking at the moon.

*

 

[Rise]

LOL! There is no difference in the MAGIC of the Bible, and the MAGIC of other religions.

A statement that can neither be proven nor disproven if you are unable to define what exactly "magic" is.
If I define magic a different way, then I can disprove your statement by my own definition of what qualifies as magic.

And again your religious book saying certain magic is OK by God and - SOME - other is evil because another God says it is OK, changes nothing, as it doesn't for the other religions that used magic.

That may be your opinion that there is no difference between what is being done, other than an arbitrary prohibition, but that's not what the Bible says.
As I already demonstrated for you with dozens of scriptural references (and which still you have not attempted to dispute on a scriptural basis):
1. There is a difference in the source: That which comes out of the power of God vs the power of demon idols.
2. There is also a difference in quality. All throughout the Bible, the supposed power of idols, men, and demons are shown to have no power in comparison to the one true God.
3. There is a difference in motive. Those who align themselves with the will of God, to do the will of God, vs those who serve selfish motives or the will of satan.

And witchcraft is a specific word - I showed the definitions, - and what was forbidden, - and AGAIN that other MAGIC was NOT forbidden and continued.

Quibbling over the definition of the word "witchcraft" won't change any of the three factual conclusions I just gave you about what the Bible says about the difference in source, quality, and motive for various spiritual activities.

 

[Ingledsva]

A statement that can neither be proven nor disproven if you are unable to define what exactly "magic" is.
If I define magic a different way, then I can disprove your statement by my own definition of what qualifies as magic.



That may be your opinion that there is no difference between what is being done, other than an arbitrary prohibition, but that's not what the Bible says.
As I already demonstrated for you with dozens of scriptural references (and which still you have not attempted to dispute on a scriptural basis):
1. There is a difference in the source: That which comes out of the power of God vs the power of demon idols.
2. There is also a difference in quality. All throughout the Bible, the supposed power of idols, men, and demons are shown to have no power in comparison to the one true God.
3. There is a difference in motive. Those who align themselves with the will of God, to do the will of God, vs those who serve selfish motives or the will of satan.



Quibbling over the definition of the word "witchcraft" won't change any of the three factual conclusions I just gave you about what the Bible says about the difference in source, quality, and motive for various spiritual activities.

LOL! Magic has a specific definition - which I have already posted,

1 a : the use of means (as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces b : magic rites or incantations. 2 a : an extraordinary power or influence seemingly from a supernatural source b : something that seems to cast a spell : enchantment. (note that supernatural source which would include YHVH or other Gods)


as do the actual Hebrew words - which again, I posted, and again I posted the JEWISH info that OTHER MAGIC (not forbidden, and from Pagan sources, not YHVH - as per the article,) continued.

"More abundant information is found in post-Biblical literature, especially in the Babylonian Talmud, where the great number of the passages alluding to magic furnishes incontrovertible evidence of its wide diffusion. It was, however, only the practise of witchcraft which was prohibited, for a knowledge of magic was indispensable to a member of the chief council or of the judiciary, and might be acquired even from the heathen"

*

 

[Rise]

an extraordinary power or influence seemingly from a supernatural source

Ah, finally a clear definition.

That is what I suspected. Your definition of magic is so broad that it automatically encompasses everything that is supernatural in origin.

Your definition, at that point, is not a useful definition for describing what we see Bible - Where we see there are different sources for the supernatural, different qualities, and different motives behind it. Your definition is so broad that you may as well just say there exists in the Bible examples of "the supernatural", because at least then you won't be using a loaded term like "magic" that carries with it many assumptions.

Any discussion you would attempt to have concerning what the Bible says about the supernatural would have to take into account what the Bible says regarding those differences.
To ignore that is to cease to have a discussion about what the Bible actually says.

as do the actual Hebrew words - which again, I posted, and again I posted the JEWISH info that OTHER MAGIC (not forbidden, and from Pagan sources, not YHVH - as per the article,) continued.

"More abundant information is found in post-Biblical literature, especially in the Babylonian Talmud, where the great number of the passages alluding to magic furnishes incontrovertible evidence of its wide diffusion. It was, however, only the practise of witchcraft which was prohibited, for a knowledge of magic was indispensable to a member of the chief council or of the judiciary, and might be acquired even from the heathen"

You're posting a reference to a conclusion about what the Talmud says, which in this case is not based on what the Bible itself says.
As I pointed out, you are making a fundamental mistake if you try to have a discussion about what the Bible says by referring to people's summaries of what the Talmud says.


You're also ignoring some very important information on that article:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10264-magic

This is their conclusion about what the Bible itself says (with scripture references):

"In the Bible"
Jewish magic is mentioned as early as Deut. xviii. 10-11, where various classes of diviners, astrologers, and exorcists are named, their ceremonies being forbidden as idolatrous (comp. II Kings xxi. 6; II Chron. xxxiii. 6). Nor is there any doubt expressed as to the actual potency of magic, and the magician, who may misuse it, is accordingly feared and abhorred (Micah v. 11 [A. V. 12]; Jer. xxvii. 9; Ex. xxii. 17-23; et al.). The commonest form of magic was the love-charm, especially the love-charm required for an illicit amour. Such magic was practised especially by women, so that magic and adultery frequently are mentioned together (II Kings ix. 22; Nah. iii. 4; Mal. iii. 5). The law (Ex. xxii. 17 [A. V. 18]) which punishes sorcery with death speaks of the witch and not of the wizard. This was correctly interpreted by the Talmud (Sanh. 67a) as implying that magic was practised chiefly by women, and the context of the passages in Exodus which mention sorcery clearly shows that it was associated with sexual license and unnatural vices (Blau, "Das Altjüdische Zauberwesen," pp. 17-18, Strasburg, 1898; see Witchcraft). The frequency of allusions to it in the Bible indicates that the practise of magic was common throughout ancient Israel.

"Jewish sources of Magic"
The diversity existing within ancient Jewish magic and the essential contradiction between witchcraft and monotheism are in themselves evidences of foreign influence on the system. The scholars of the first centuries of the present era refer frequently and unanimously to Egypt as the original home of magic arts (Blau, l.c. pp. 37-49). In the Bible the real homes of all varieties of witchcraft are given as Egypt (Ex. vii. et passim) and Babylon (Isa. xlvii. 9-15). It is very probable that in this respect both countries influenced Israel, and their political power and high civilization made it inevitable that that influence should be deep, although the lack of historical data renders it impossible to determine its extent or trace its course.

That article, even says of the Talmud:
The people, who cared little for the views of the learned, were devoted to witchcraft, though not so much as the Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans (Blau, l.c. pp. 17 et seq.). "Adultery and sorcery have destroyed everything" (Soṭah ix. 13); the majesty of God departed from Israel and His wrath came upon the world when the "wizards" became too numerous (Tosef., Soṭah, xiv. 3); Simon b.

 

[Muffled]

No, these tongue-speaking don't look "like" idiots...

...they are idiots!

I believe I speak in tongues and my IQ is above average.

 

[ukok102nak]

We're making some progress now. At least you're attempting to address the scripture itself.

But this was never a debate about whether or not the New Testament scripture is authentic. I said the Bible said something, you claimed it didn't. Now that you've been proven wrong about what the Bible says you're trying to claim that we shouldn't believe that part of the Bible is authentic.

We could certainly have that debate about the authenticity of certain NT books, and I could show why you are historically and contextually wrong, but that would only be a distraction until the main issue is settled - Which is, does the Bible text as we have it say there is a distinction between good and evil spiritual acts, or does it not?

The point I've been trying to help you realize is: None of the sources you quoted disprove my original statement about what the Bible says. They actually don't even have any relevance to it because they don't deal with the scriptures being debated. If anything, your claim that the Jews believed that some magic was acceptable and others weren't would only be supporting my thesis statement that a distinction is drawn in the Bible between demonic spiritual power and God's power.

If you can't deal with these verses then your entire premise is undermined (the idea that all magic is basically the same, or from the same source).
That's why I said that if you cannot deal with these scriptures then there's no point in debating further because your entire premise is undermined by what the Bible plainly says.



"The Enclyopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic, and Mysticism", which you referred to, is only the work of one man.
As I said, you commit a logical fallacy by thinking you can quote any source written by a Jew and claim their opinion is the final authority on what the Bible says just because they are a Jew.
And again, you further are mistaken because you don't seem to realize that Jews, depending on sect, derive thier beleifs from a variety of nonbiblical sources. You're making a basic logic error when you read a Jewish opinion on any subject and assume it is based solely on the Bible. Chances are it is not. So such opinions arent even likely to be relevant to a discussion of what the Bible alone says.

If that source is supposedly so authoritative on what the Bible says, then you should have no trouble using it to find actual Biblical scriptures that disprove the idea that the Bible does not draw a distinction between genuine and counterfeit spiritual acts.
But you won't find any. I doubt that is a position the author even tries to take.

The 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia completely disagrees with what you are claiming. In it you find the article writers conclude from their study of scripture that the Bible says "magic is akin to idolatry". They define magic as "occultism" and say that such practices are forbidden in the Bible.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10264-magic

I can back up all those conclusions using Biblical scripture, some of which I have already listed. I don't need to quote a third party's opinion of what the scripture says, but I do so to help you understand the error of relying on any one man's opinion of what the Bible says instead of reading the scripture for yourself.

If you want to make a claim that the Bible reaches a different conclusion about such acts, then you're going to need go to the scripture to prove it.



Another topic I could debate with you and show you why you're wrong, but to go that direction at this point would only be a distraction from the main issue: Does the Bible (which includes the NT) say there is a difference between genuine and counterfeit spiritual operation, or does it not?

You're again trying to divert away from the main point by claiming some books of the Bible are not authentic (in this case, most of the NT), so you can just throw out the parts of the Bible that clearly prove your position is wrong.


You've also got a much bigger problem on your hand than just 2 Thessalonians 2:9.
I already quoted almost 60 passages of scripture that all demonstrate this same concept from OT to NT.
I could go even deeper and broader with scripture if I needed to, but if you can't even tackle a single verse without dismissing it as not real scripture then what hope do you have of dealing with the nearly 60 I already posted that show there is a distinction made between true and false spiritual works?

Here's the list again:

~;> great post!!! indeed
and we are greatful for this
if we may say so

by the way
lets get that popcorn and add more butter on it then have some cold drinks and
also put those 3D glasses for a better viewing
as we read this verses
so as it is written
:read:
Exodus 7:10
So Mosheh and Aharon went in to Pharaoh, and they did so, as יהוה commanded. And Aharon threw his rod before Pharaoh and before his servants, and it became a serpent.
11 But Pharaoh also called the wise men and the practisers of witchcraft. And they, the magicians of Mitsrayim, also did so with their magic.
12 And they, each one, threw down his rod, and they became serpents. But the rod of Aharon swallowed up their rods.
13 And Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he did not listen to them, as יהוה had said.


:ty:




godbless
unto all always

 

[Muffled]

~;> great post!!! indeed
and we are greatful for this
if we may say so

by the way
lets get that popcorn and add more butter on it then have some cold drinks and
also put those 3D glasses for a better viewing
as we read this verses
so as it is written
:read:
Exodus 7:10
So Mosheh and Aharon went in to Pharaoh, and they did so, as יהוה commanded. And Aharon threw his rod before Pharaoh and before his servants, and it became a serpent.
11 But Pharaoh also called the wise men and the practisers of witchcraft. And they, the magicians of Mitsrayim, also did so with their magic.
12 And they, each one, threw down his rod, and they became serpents. But the rod of Aharon swallowed up their rods.
13 And Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he did not listen to them, as יהוה had said.


:ty:




godbless
unto all always

I believe my definition of magic is anything supernatural that requires an intermediary function such as waving a baton, casting a spell or mixing a concoction. Since Moses cast his staff down then it was magic and the Egyptians practiced that form of magic as well. I believe the difference is the source. God was in charge of Moses' magic so his snakes were able to eat the Egyptian's snakes without him having to use magic but the Egyptians magic most likely came from an evil spirit. It reminds me of the line from the movie Labyrinth when the goblins are saying "say the words" and then "no that's not it."

 

[e.r.m.]

If "tongues" were a thing, like any language, there would be some kind of pattern. It would be possible to decipher it with a relatively small sample size. For instance, in English, you have a lot of use of works like "the", "a", "I", "you", "and", so on and so forth.

To someone who has never heard English, or any language remotely like it, they would still be able ti discern certain patterns in the speech. Certain sounds would pop up regularly, in similar contexts.

"Tongues" has literally none of that. There is no pattern. There is no rhyme or reason. It is just gibberish, and it always has been.

That's a good point. Language has structure. Since we are created in God's image, it would make sense that with those who are fluent in tongues of angels 1 Corinthians 13:1, that their language would have structure too.

 

[Nietzsche]

That's a good point. Language has structure. Since we are created in God's image, it would make sense that with those who are fluent in tongues of angels 1 Corinthians13:1, that their language would have structure too.

Which is why 'Tongues' is just gibberish. There is no structure. There is no commonality.

 

[e.r.m.]

Which is why 'Tongues' is just gibberish. There is no structure. There is no commonality.

I take it you've heard this for yourself.

 

[Nietzsche]

I take it you've heard this for yourself.

I have. I've also read papers on it.

I want to make it clear that I do not assume *everyone* who "speaks" in tongues is lying. They probably believe they're doing something 100% legit. But that doesn't change the fact that if "Tongues" were a language, there would be obvious similarities between everyone who "speaks" it. If they were speaking the same language, it would be obvious. But it isn't. There is no similarities between them.

 

[e.r.m.]

I have. I've also read papers on it.

I want to make it clear that I do not assume *everyone* who "speaks" in tongues is lying. They probably believe they're doing something 100% legit. But that doesn't change the fact that if "Tongues" were a language, there would be obvious similarities between everyone who "speaks" it. If they were speaking the same language, it would be obvious. But it isn't. There is no similarities between them.

I'm glad you've researched this so thoroughly and I like what you say. And you made another good implicit point. The tongue of angels would be 'one'.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Chasing experience first or chasing gifts first is a mistake... the emphasis in the Bible is on fruit and not gifts or experience, although they may come and all Christians have one or more gifts sovereignly given by God. I think we should not fall for every supernatural thing hook line and sinker but neither should be limit God in ways he did not clearly limit Himself.

However, God might send dreams and visions to peoples in Israel, Muslim lands or remote places for His own purposes and as far as tongues may sometimes for His own purposes. There are thousands of languages documented by Wycliffe that do not have a Bible

Of course some groups like Mormons and The Way claim to speak in tounges and Evangelicals would discerningly say, they are mistaken as they have a different gospel.

 

[12jtartar]

Nietzsche,
It seems to me that you do not understand what, speaking in a tongue means. Tongues is not meant to be a language itself!!!
To speak in a tongue, you would speak in a language that you do not know, but the person you are speaking to understands that language.
Paul mentioned that he spoke in more tongues than all of the disciples, 1Corinthians 14:18. This was because Paul traveled all over Asia Minor, and could, probably talk to anyone in their own language.
Speaking in tongues is not for today, because there are people that know the truth of God's word in every language, so speaking in tongues to converse with him would not be needed. Tongues were actually done away with in the first century, 1Corinthians 13:8. Speaking in tongues was not for everyone, at any time, in fact it was one of the least important of the great Gifts of the Spirit, 1Corinthians 12:1, 28-30.

 

[Muffled]

That's a good point. Language has structure. Since we are created in God's image, it would make sense that with those who are fluent in tongues of angels 1 Corinthians 13:1, that their language would have structure too.

Have you ever heard Hawaian? It sounds like all vowels. Sometimes tongues can sound like that but my tongue doesn't. And there have been times when my tongue was oriental in sound.

 

[Muffled]

Which is why 'Tongues' is just gibberish. There is no structure. There is no commonality.

My tongue has a translation so the question is why would it look unstructured to you any more than the translation?