Without my Bible study tools in front of me, I believe they both refer to a more 'spoken' word/message of God. They seem to be interchangeable, as you show in your post.īut I would also note that these two words do not usually refer to a 'written' form of God's word. I have become more aware that the two words - logos and rhema - are not so distinguishable as we charismatics have made them out to be in the past. I would highly recommend buying this book. Update: I've recently added a review of 'Post Charismatic?' on my new blog CharisMissional here.
But looking at the verses here this argument sounds sensible.Īs this appears to refute such a popular idea I just wondered if anyone out there had any thoughts on this and what the implications might be. A quick look at some of their other position papers reminds me that I wouldn’t agree with everything they say. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Timothy 3:16, 17). Whether the Word is written or spoken does not alter its essential character. The Word of God, whether referred to as logos or rhema, is inspired, eternal, dynamic, and miraculous. The distinctions between logos and rhema cannot be sustained by Biblical evidence. abideth for ever.” In verse 25, “the rhema of the Lord endureth for ever.” Again in Ephesians 5:26 believers are cleansed “with the washing of water by the rhema.” In John 15:3 believers are “clean through the logos.” In verse 23, it is “the logos of God which. This can be seen in passages such as 1 Peter 1:23 and 25. In the New Testament the words rhema and logos are also used interchangeably. Yet in the Septuagint it is translated rhema in verse 1 and logos in verse 2. For instance, the word dabar (translated, word of God) is used in both Jeremiah 1:1 and 2. In the case of the Septuagint both rhema and logos are used to translate the one Hebrew word dabar which is used in various ways relative to communication. …the distinction is not justified by usage either in the Greek New Testament or in the Septuagint (Greek version of the Old Testament). The second, to that which is presently spoken…. The first, it is claimed, refers to the written word. Here is McAlpine’s quote in bold which I have set in context to show more of the Biblical justification in the paper.Ī distinction is generally made… between the words logos and rhema. In arguing that the common distinction between logos and rhema does not do justice to the Biblical text he quotes from an Assemblies of God Position Paper on Positive Confession. But in doing so he also argues that this distinction between logos and rhema is inappropriate and that these two words are used almost interchangeably in the Bible. He then explains the dangers of this idea of positive confession and shows how this is not what the Bible teaches.
McAlpine then goes on to show how rhema has been used by the Word of Faith movement to mean words spoken in faith that call things into existence. It is a ‘now’ ( rhema) word that is found in the ‘written’ ( logos) word of God. From across the denominational spectrum, stories are told of reading a well known passage of Scripture, when suddenly, a certain verse or phrase seems to jump off the page, and the reader knows without doubt that the Holy Spirit is speaking through that verse or phrase. Many Christians are familiar with the concept of a ‘ rhema word’ from Scripture, even if they have not used that term to describe it. In this book Rob McAlpine describes rhema like this: I have been reading ‘ Post Charismatic?’ - an excellent critique of some of the excesses in the charismatic movement. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Bible Words says that rhema (as distinct from logos) is not the whole of the Bible but individual scripture that the Spirit brings to our remembrance. One of the Greek words for “word” in the New Testament is logos another is rhema. One of the major Pentecostal denominations has a very different understanding of this word to many evangelicals and charismatics.
0 kommentar(er)
