Tongues

[CoreIssue]

With the controversy around this gift it warrants study.

In the Pentecostal and similar Movements you hear about tongues as a sign, unknown tongues, ecstatic utterances and so on.

But do these claims hold up under Biblical scrutiny?

But the more serious problems arise in the interpretation of the twenty-one references to tongues in First Corinthians chapters 12-14. There are those who tell us that the tongues in First Corinthians are ecstatic utterances not known in any country on earth. They base their conclusion on the term “unknown” which appears in I Corinthians 14:2, 4, 13, 14, 19, and 27. But the reader of this chapter in God’s Word must not fail to observe that the word “unknown” in every place where it appears is in italicized letters, which means that it does not occur in any Greek manuscript but was inserted by translators. The Holy Spirit did not direct Paul to write that the tongue is unknown.

Again, we find the KJV as the souce and justifcation for claims that do not bear up under examination.

The intent of the KJV writers was not to say an unknown language on the earth but to say a language unknown to the speaker.
(1) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is synonymous with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is unscriptural teaching which says that all who are baptized by the Holy Spirit will speak in tongues.
(2) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is an evidence of being filled with the Spirit.
(4) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is an evidence of one’s faith.

No. I do not agree with everything stated about tongues here. But yes, I do agree with at least these points stated above.

Speaking in Tongues (http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=393)

[Neachley]

I don`t believe the translators of the KJV got it wrong. However, in general, I do agree with the article. When I first became a Christian I was led to believe that you were only really `born again` if you spoke in tongues. Now I`m not convinced, and I`m not sure that the gifts still exist as they did.

I know many conservative Christians (of which I am one myself), who don`t believe in tongues, and others who do.

So the question is: are tongues still around today or did they die in the first century?

[Brandli5]

I myself have not even spoken in tounges. But I have heard people who spoke in tounges and another person tell the church what it meant.

I have to say that the holy spirit was there that day, the entire church fell quiet and the person sounded as if they were speaking on a mic. The person who interupted the other said after I asked her that she heard the holy spirit tell her what the meaning of the tounge spoken was.

I do think gifts do not go away and they are still around today. Some times a person can come up to me in church and they tell me what I prayed for and tell me its going to be alright. And the thing is I never tell anyone what I am going to pray for, or told them my problem. God is good, and he does still work through people. THe holy spirit is the same today, tommrow and forever.

[CTZonEdit]

This is the problem with a lot of Pentecostal and charismatic churches. They put on a show, and play tricks with scripture.

The incidents of tongues in the bible are not for showing off and playing games. They were for examples, to show the new believers that this was God at work thru the Holy Spirit. Powerful representations of the HS at work.

Today you are not going to find that same type of manifestation, not in the last days.

Here is the thing with a gift, especially powerful ones such as prophecy, healing, tongues, or spiritual awareness. The ones that have it do not show it off and bark to audiences like a circus emcee. Anyone doing this in this manner needs to be seriously investigated and questioned for truth. Its not something that is a game, or a show, or some act to fleece the flocks.

[CoreIssue]

I will just add here that the word unknown does not appear in the ancient manuscripts.

Tongues means one speaks in a language they have not learned. It does not mean a tongue no one knows about existing. Or that is not spoken on the earth.

CTZ covered the rest of my thoughts.

Gifts are never exercised wthout a very good reason.

[Neachley]

But does tongues still exist today, and do the other gifts mentioned in Corinthians? How do we know if they are genuine or all show?

[CoreIssue]

But does tongues still exist today, and do the other gifts mentioned in Corinthians? How do we know if they are genuine or all show?
Yes. They exist.

Every Christian has at least one gift.

How do we know if legit? I refer, again, back to what CTZ said. And add by their fruits.

[firstlove]

Yes, tongues "exist" today-When we are baptised in the Holy Spirit we speak in tongues as the Spirit enables us to speak-this was the initial evidence of the baptism then-Acts 2:4, Acts 10:46, Acts 19: 6--and it still is. This however, is not the gift of tongues-the gift of tongues-like all of the Spiritual gifts-are for the church gathered-and are used like Brandli5 said. Each in turn and let one interpret so that the church can be edified.

Jesus is the One who baptises us in the Holy Spirit-and He is the same forever. Peter even said, "for this promise is to you to your children and to all who are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call"

[CoreIssue]

Yes, tongues "exist" today-When we are baptised in the Holy Spirit we speak in tongues as the Spirit enables us to speak-this was the initial evidence of the baptism then-Acts 2:4, Acts 10:46, Acts 19: 6--and it still is. This however, is not the gift of tongues-the gift of tongues-like all of the Spiritual gifts-are for the church gathered-and are used like Brandli5 said. Each in turn and let one interpret so that the church can be edified.

Jesus is the One who baptises us in the Holy Spirit-and He is the same forever. Peter even said, "for this promise is to you to your children and to all who are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call"
No. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit is not a separate act from repentence and being born-again.

They are one and the same.

The Bible clearly tells us all enter the Body of Christ via the Baptism.

In example, at Pentecost, only those in the room spoke in tongues. Yet hundreds received the Holy Spirit.

In other NT examples, some spoke, not all.

There is only the gift of tongues. Sign of tongues is an invention.

No Apostles taught or encouraged the 'sign' of tongues. Ever.

[firstlove]

I disagree-the Bible says, that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is seperate from salvation-you may be thinking of the baptism BY the Holy Spirit-which is the Holy Spirit placing us into the body of Christ at the moment of salvation. Jesus is the One who baptises IN the Spirit.
In the example in Acts 2 the Bible says, they were ALL filled and they ALL spoke in tongues-
In EVERY example we're given of people receiving the Holy Spirit in this way-if we are told what the initial physical evidence of that baptism was-tongues are there, period.

[CoreIssue]

OK. Post where the Apostles ever taught it or encouraged your claim.

You cannot. Never happened. Never taught.

And what of those with gifts, like discernment of spirits, prophecy and such, who never spoke in tongues?

Those examples say the Holy Spirit came upon them. Others say the Holy Spirit came upon them, but with no tongues.

Nope. You are trying to take events, where tongues, like all other gifts, were used to serve the purposes of God, and turn it into another event.

Again, where was this ever preached, taught or encouraged? Never is the answer.

[firstlove]

OK. Post where the Apostles ever taught it or encouraged your claim.

You cannot. Never happened. Never taught.


1. Paul, speaking to the Ephesian believers in Acts 19---"have you received the Holy Spirit SINCE you believed?"---they hadn't-and when they did they spoke in tongues---Acts 19:6

2. Peter, speaking of the gentile believers who had just began speaking in other tongues-What is to stop these being baptised in water-for they received the Holy Spirit just as we have? How did they know this? The Bible is plain, "for we heard them speaking in tongues and glorifying God".

And what of those with gifts, like discernment of spirits, prophecy and such, who never spoke in tongues?

What of it?

Those examples say the Holy Spirit came upon them. Others say the Holy Spirit came upon them, but with no tongues.

No-sorry, you haven't given scripture that shows anything other than what I've stated-the initial physical evidence of the baptism in the Spirit is speaking in tongues as the Spirit enables you to speak.

Nope. You are trying to take events, where tongues, like all other gifts, were used to serve the purposes of God, and turn it into another event.

Again, where was this ever preached, taught or encouraged? Never is the answer.


No, I'm not trying to 'turn it into another event"--I'm just reading the Word, and believing it all. Again, read the scripture and you will see that the baptism in the Spirit was not only preached, taught, and encouraged---but JESUS Himself told the disciples to not even begin their earthly ministry until they received this power from on high-and when they did, just like all the other times that we are told of the evidence-the first physical evidence was that they spoke in tongues as the Spirit enabled them to... Acts 2:4

[CoreIssue]

No. You are totally hung up on a untaught doctrine. Totally.

Your examples do not support your claims.

They do support that tongues is a gift and that these were times that gift had a purpose. As all gifts have a purpose.

You didn't answer my challenges, meaning you cannot, because I am correct. Never taught.

The Bible does not, anywhere, distinquish between born again and gifts of the Holy Spirit. It says ALL have gifts. ALL in the Body.

The Holy Spirit Baptism IS being born-again. From there, the Holy Spirit determines who gets what gifts and how they will be used within the Body.

Until you can actually answer my challenges, you have said nothing. Just thrown out assumptions.

Yea, I know all the Pentecostal claims. And they are bad doctrine. As with Joel 2 and all the rest.

Everyone leaves out facts that totally deny the claims.

No. You are not just reading the word. You are reading only those parts that you can spin to satisfy what you want to find. And ignoring the rest.

Experience does not prove your doctrine. Mormons did the same things, long ago. Pagan, Mystics and others claim what you claim. Even do the slain in the spirt (not in the Bible).

Grabbing a couple of events, from the NT and building a doctrine, around it, not supported by the Bible, is proof of nothing.

Where did the Apostles teach it or encourage it? They encouraged all we were suppose to do. So, why not this?

And don't claim it is a special revelation issue to the elite. That is nonsense.

[firstlove]

Sorry, I disagree with your unscriptural doctrine. You haven't shown anything I've stated to be untrue. You've only given your beliefs-which I believe don't happen to line up with scripture.

The Holy Spirit baptism DOES NOT happen automatically at salvation-I've already given you scriptural proof of at least two instances where SAVED people-washed in the Blood of the Lamb-received this baptism. You cannot see it because you are bound by your own incorrect doctrine...and most likely going by your own experience-which, I find very odd-but that's what your doing-the same thing your accusing me of.

Then we have Acts 8-people saved AND baptised in water, both men and women--yet STILL did not receive this baptism, and they did not until the APOSTLES--came and ministered to them.

Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For He had not fallen upon any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

So, while your "doctrine" may make you feel better, it isn't scriptural. I don't argue that this MUST be called "the baptism in the Spriit", although that's what Jesus called it. The Bible calls it different things-but it IS a specific happening in the life of a believer-and when it happens-the initial physical evidence is 'speaking in tongues as the Spirit enables us".

I believe that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is an experience separate from salvation. All believers receive the Holy Spirit at their new birth, but scripture seems to indicate that their is an anointing, infilling, empowering, baptism (or whatever you like to call it) of the Holy Spirit that can only occur to people who are saved already"

[CoreIssue]

You didn't address my points.

You just keep repeating your claims.

Now, I want to know where the Apostles ever taught or encouraged this.

You have been challenged and are just preaching at me.

I gave additional verses to refute you. You have given nothing but doctinal rhetoric, in return.

I suggest you review the board rules. When challenged, you must deal with the challenges, not preach.

So, answer the challenges:
1. Where did the Apostles teach your doctrine?
2. Where did the Apostles ever encourage your claim?
3. 1st Timothy 12 says we are ALL baptised by one spirit into the Body of Christ. No such thing as 2 separate baptism. Just a claim of yours.

Post something other than events in Acts and laying your doctrine upon them. Nothing in Acts says one word of this being anything other than unique events for a purpose. The silence, in the rest of the NT, on this evidence claim, but much said on the gift, stands against you.

Answer the challenges with proof texts or admit you have no such proof. That your doctrine is purely what you believe, without any actually Biblical verses stating it, flatly and bluntly.

[firstlove]

You didn't address my points.

You just keep repeating your claims.

Now, I want to know where the Apostles ever taught or encouraged this.

You have been challenged and are just preaching at me.

I gave additional verses to refute you. You have given nothing but doctinal rhetoric, in return.

I suggest you review the board rules. When challenged, you must deal with the challenges, not preach.

So, answer the challenges:

Hmmm, I did that already, sorry you missed it in my previous posts-but here you go.

1. Where did the Apostles teach your doctrine?


Acts 8-people saved AND baptised in water, both men and women--yet STILL did not receive this baptism, and they did not until the APOSTLES--came and ministered to them.

Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For He had not fallen upon any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts 19:6- And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”

When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. Now the men were about twelve in all

Acts 10:46-the Jewish believers were astonished that the Holy Spirit fell on the gentiles--and how did they know this.....obviously from Peter's words----"for we heard them speaking in tongues and glorifying God".


2. Where did the Apostles ever encourage your claim?

See above;)

3. 1st Timothy 12 says we are ALL baptised by one spirit into the Body of Christ. No such thing as 2 separate baptism. Just a claim of yours.

I do agree that "by one Spirit we were all baptised into one body" is correct, and happens the moment we are saved-the Holy Spirit places us into the body of Christ....you'll get no argument there-but this does not negate the Fact that Jesus Christ is the One who baptises in the Spirit-and another Christian baptises us in water.....so do you believe in water baptism or not?

Actually according to the Word there are three baptisms---At salvation, the Holy Spirit baptizes us into Christ's Body; at water baptism, an elder or pastor baptizes us into water; when we are baptized in the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ baptizes us into the Holy Spirit. Salvation occurs when the Holy Spirit is placed into us; water baptism occurs when we are placed into the water; baptism with/into the Holy Spirit occurs when we are placed into the Holy Spirit. These are three distinct types of baptism mentioned in the Bible.


Post something other than events in Acts and laying your doctrine upon them. Nothing in Acts says one word of this being anything other than unique events for a purpose. The silence, in the rest of the NT, on this evidence claim, but much said on the gift, stands against you.

Why can't I use Acts??? Is it because you do not believe that "all scripture is God breathed", or just because Acts shows the beginning of the church...and the rest of the NT is written to Christians who had already received this baptism? At any rate-no the rest of the NT doesn't "stand against me"--it is perfect and written with Christians in mind. Peter (an apostle) also in ACTS-refutes your claim-of this being a unique event--

"for this promise is to you, to your children, and to all who are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call" Acts 2:39

Jesus is the One who baptises in the Holy Spirit-and according to my Bible-He is the same forever...Hebrews 13:8


I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, 'He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit. John 1:33



oops-there you have it a book besides Acts.


Answer the challenges with proof texts or admit you have no such proof. That your doctrine is purely what you believe, without any actually Biblical verses stating it, flatly and bluntly.


Stating it "flatly and bluntly"-you're getting angry doesn't make your point-I HAVE brought forth scripture-where is yours? You are doing exactly what you've said I've done-so I'll say to you....

Answer the challenges with proof texts or admit you have no such proof. That your doctrine is purely what you believe, without any actual Biblical verses stating it, flatly and bluntly.

I understand really, that you are angry, but that doesn't mean I've not answered your challenge-just that you won't accept that answer.

[CoreIssue]

Stating it "flatly and bluntly"-you're getting angry doesn't make your point-I HAVE brought forth scripture-where is yours? You are doing exactly what you've said I've done-so I'll say to you....

Answer the challenges with proof texts or admit you have no such proof. That your doctrine is purely what you believe, without any actual Biblical verses stating it, flatly and bluntly.

I understand really, that you are angry, but that doesn't mean I've not answered your challenge-just that you won't accept that answer.

Not angry at all. Just learned a long time ago those into false doctrine, cults and false religions never say anything of substance. They just try to spin the issue onto the questioner.

So, I cut to the core of the issue.

So, give up on trying semantical game playing. I don't bite.

1st Warning.
Post where the Apostles ever taught, endorsed or encouraged this doctrine you are claiming.


Your passages, in Acts, back your doctrine no more than they back mine. You need further verses to back the claims.

1 Tim 12 back mine. As does the total silence for your claims.

No distinction of by and in the Holy Spirit is made in the Bible.

Post where the Apostles taught or endorsed your doctrine. If it was real they most assuredly would have.

[firstlove]

1st Timothy 12???? Explain that verse to me.

Do it in light of water baptism-which you never answered if you believe in or not. Show how the verse I used ISNT speaking of placing us into the Body of Christ. Here it is for your review...."for by one Spirit we were all baptised into one body" 1 Corinthians 12:13

The disciples received the Spirit in John 20--yet were not baptised in the Spirit till Acts 2.

And yes, there definitely is a distiction-sorry, you don't want to see it---but I already explained for BY One Spirit is different than "Jesus is the One who baptises with the Spirit". Were the Samaratians saved or not before they received this? Give scripture for your answer please.

I can see by your anger, and your threats (the warning), that you just want me to give up so you won't have to really dig into the Word., You really do not have any scriptural arguement with anything I've said-so you've threated to shut me up by banning me.,,but the Word still stands, even Jesus was rejected by the "religious" but if you really discuss this in love, the way you should, you might see that you're the one who has settled for "false doctrine". I stand by what I've written. May you be blessed.

[CoreIssue]

1st Timothy 12???? Explain that verse to me. Show how the verse I used ISNT speaking of placing us into the Body of Christ.

And yes, there definitely is a distiction-sorry, you don't want to see it---but I already explained for BY One Spirit is different than "Jesus is the One who baptises with the Spirit". Were the Samaratians saved or not before they received this? Give scripture for your answer please.

I can see by your anger, and your threats (the warning), that you just want me to give up so you won't have to really dig into the Word. I stand by what I've written. May you be blessed.
Second Warning.

You are still dodging.

Now post where the Apostles ever taught or endorsed your doctrine.

Post the verses where the Apostles EVER taught or encouraged your doctrine.

All your doing is preaching. Offering NO proofs to back your claim.

You do not understand the transition from the Mosaic to Church covenant, it is obvious.

All OT saints were saved. But no one was born-again until the Resurrection, for the OT saints, or Pentecost, for the Church.

And no one was indwelt, by the Holy Spirit, before Pentecost.

[firstlove]

You do not understand scripture-THAT is what is "obvious" here....Love is patient and kind., your anger is betraying you;

I can see why you have so few posters here.

As far as no one being indwelt by the Spirit before Pentecost-I beg to differ....John the Baptist and his Father for two.

Go ahead and ban me if you must-but it just shows you cannot prove your point with the Word--

[CoreIssue]

You do not understand scripture-THAT is what is "obvious" here....Love is patient and kind., your anger is betraying you;

As far as no one having the Spirit before Pentecost-I beg to differ....John the Baptist and his Father for two.

Go ahead and ban me if you must-but it just shows you cannot prove your point with the Word--
Well, I understand you have to be able to defend and prove your doctrine. Not throw out rhetoric and empty claims, as you have done.

Do you really think you are the first Pentecostal I have debated? Or that any of them offered more than you have?

No. I understand your doctrines. And they are absent of Biblical support.

They are based on assumption and 'personal experience.' None constitute proof.

Not angry. A classical attack the messenger when one does not have an answer.

I asked you for proof and you wanted to lecture and accuse.

God does not indwell an unclean temple. If you had studied in depth, you would know that. It is stated very clearly, literally, in fact.

So, no one could possible be indwelt before the Resurrection.

You do not understand the stated distinction. In the OT it was always said the Holy Spirit came on or upon. Not in.

But in the NT, that changed to in.

You also don't get it that the Church didn't exist until Acts. The Gospels were under the OT Mosaic Covenant.

This isn't the first forum you have come on doing this. Preach with no facts.

So ban you? Yep. Otherwise you will keep preaching and violating a simple forum rule to answer questions with proofs, not claims.

Bye.

[dust]

Looks like you "core issue" are the one who didn't answer the challenges-I just read this thread-and wow!. I might not agree with everything firstove wrote-but it made sense, and was backed with scripture. You need to follow your own rules. I think that other poster needs to wipe the dust off his feet.

[CoreIssue]

Looks like you "core issue" are the one who didn't answer the challenges-I just read this thread-and wow!. I might not agree with everything firstove wrote-but it made sense, and was backed with scripture. You need to follow your own rules. I think that other poster needs to wipe the dust off his feet.
Nope. It wasn't.

Talking about people who were OT saints being introduced to the new Church has nothing to do with claiming Evidence of Tongues.

They were changing Covenants.

Notice all these issues are in Acts? That they occured where the gift of tongues would serve a purpose in witnessing?

And the total disregard for where tongues served no witnessing purposes, so it didn't happen.

A claim as to meaning of the events does not constitute proof.

The proof is in finding such issues outside of where OT believers were first introduced to the Church.

Remember, OT saints didn't know of Christ. But the second they accepted, they became Church and recieved the Holy Spirit.

And NO one received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit until the Resurrection.

Remember, Christ preached to those in Paradise. They accepted and he led them to Heaven, in train.

Living saints didn't receive the Holy Spirit until Pentecost. And then, only those in the Room demonstrated the gift of tongues. NO one else.

But many were born-again, that day.

Tongues as purpose for Christ, not a sign of receiving the Holy Spirit.

Or, do you deny that the incidents of tongues, upon recieving the Holy Spirit were few? Or that in other ones they didn't speak in tongues, but received the Holy Spirit?

If this were a fact, the Apostles would have taught it and encouraged it. They didn't.

That is the issue. Just laying claims of meaning upon an event proves nothing. You have to back it.

I backed mine with 1 Tim. firstlove backed the Pentecostal claim with rhetoric and unbacked doctrinal statements.

Feel free to post verses where the Apostles ever taught this. Good luck, doesn't exist.

[CoreIssue]

By the way, firstlove/dust. Did you really think you could get away with taking another membership?

Such dishonest. Shame on you.

[InTheWind]

I`ll add this article for consideration for those interested and lurkers.
http://www.havefaith.org/new_page_16c.htm

[Jessie]

By the way, firstlove/dust. Did you really think you could get away with taking another membership?

Such dishonest. Shame on you.

yet they will tallk about gifts this and that, but simple sin reins.....

yes, shame on you.

[a.baker]

What would tongues sound like? Has anyone ever heard someone else speak in it? If so what was happening? Did it come out of no where?

[CoreIssue]

What would tongues sound like? Has anyone ever heard someone else speak in it? If so what was happening? Did it come out of no where?
Tongues is simply someone speaking in a langauge they have never learned.

[Jessie]

dont get tripped up by what most of them will say,
they will say "oh its a heavenly language." I've heard that too many times.

how would they know if it was or not? but they are adament.

not a real language, but a made up one.

[roman8]

I`ll add this article for consideration for those interested and lurkers.
http://www.havefaith.org/new_page_16c.htm

Thank You "ITW" for that link.

last night we were invited to a Saturday evening meeting. There was dinner and music and everything seemed very nice we enjoyed the first part of the evening. Then they had a speaker who talked about the indwelling of the Holy Spirit . He said that unless you speak in tongues you have not been baptized by the HS. His whole focus was on this and healing . He said he would lay hands on anyone who wanted to be baptized in the HS and that after you should not speak in English but in another language , he said that you may even feel you are making it up but assured us that he has the gift to interpret and would tell us if we were speaking in a proper tongue.

Me and my husband sat there and watched people falling to the floor after healing or being so called baptized by the HS . There was this older guy who didnt speak in tongues we watch as sone men took him aside trying to convince him to speak in Tongues. Very odd and uncomfortable felt like we were watching a side show .

This speaker gave all these testimonies of how God had healed people through him and had been given the gift of healing . But there was a very nice man sitting at our table who has very bad arthirtis the worst I have ever seen . Alarge lump on his back his hand so knarled he could hardly hold the fork to eat and could barely walk. No one came over to him to ask him if he wanted healing. My husband said to me as we left , "wouldnt you think if Jesus was there that would have been the first guy he would have touched"?

Any way thanks for this thread i needed it .

[InTheWind]

Your welcome. :hug:
I think that`s terrible and don`t agree with any of their opinons, my bet is their healings and speaking in Tongues is fake also.

[a.baker]

:( Yes that is not good at all.

[aprilallwood]

In my church, we say that when we speak in tongues, it is when we cannot express how much we love God, and don't have the correct words to speak, so we speak in tongues. We say it is our own secret language with God and it is not necessarily an actual language.

[CoreIssue]

In my church, we say that when we speak in tongues, it is when we cannot express how much we love God, and don't have the correct words to speak, so we speak in tongues. We say it is our own secret language with God and it is not necessarily an actual language.
That is not tongues. It is known as an ecstatic utterance, meaning emotionally created noises and sounds.

It isn't a Gift of the Holy Spirit but a purely human issue that is well known.

[monilove]

John the Baptist was born with the HS but I've not read any passages stating he spoke in tongues at all. The experience in Acts was a sign as well as the encounter Paul had with those who only knew of John's baptism. John like the other OT saints could not be placed into the Body of Christ as Christ had not died, resurrected and ascended yet. There is only one sacrifice for all sin and that was the pure blood of Christ Jesus. The disciples could not be indwelled in the Gospels because Christ had not yet gone to the Cross. They were not in the dispensation of Grace. In Acts tongues was a sign which Paul under the HS' inspiration wrote in his epistle the Jews' required. All thru their history God had to show them something in order for them to believe. The tongues written in Acts was a sign to the Jew's that Christ was the messiah and that the HS now indwelled those who would believe. That was the purpose. After the tongues, the Jews were now interested in what they had to say because it was miraculous that these unlearned men were speaking in the languages of the Jews present. After Peter sees they are ready to listen what does he preach? That Jesus was the Messiah whom the Jews killed. The Jews' reaction was to feel sorrow and ask What must we do Peter?The beginning of repentance.
Pauls early experience with tongues again was used as a sign to Jew's that yes indeed God was now filling Gentiles with the same HS He'd offered to the Jews. Gentiles were dogs and outcasts. So when Paul began to preach to the Jews that because of their rejection the Gentiles were now being given an opportunity to join the Body, they were outraged. God allowed Peter to experience this first amongst Gentiles(Cornelius) so that Peter could confirm Paul's claims in Acts 15.
Once we get into Galatians and Ephesians we see the HS leading us away from signs as a means to bring others to Christ. We are to be lead of the HS and have our lives be the epistle the world reads. Being led of the Spirit. We dont have separate encounters as the Apostles did because we are looking back at the Cross under the dispensation of Grace. One sacrifice for all sin per Hebrews.
IA with Core that the scripture does not teach we are to make noises and yammer inaudible words during a service as we see on Christian TV. Alot of show about alot of nothing. Or to have the audacity to claim tongues can be taught? How in the world is that scriptural? I've heard Creflo, Eddie Long , Fred Price and others preach that you just start yammering away and then the more you do it the better u get at it. What???Nowhere in scripture is that even recorded. Those in Acts did not learn to speak in tongues. Ridiculous.............A sideshow is all it is......

[kay-gee]

Those miraculous events stopped with the death of the last apostle

all the best...

[CoreIssue]

Those miraculous events stopped with the death of the last apostle

all the best...
No. They did not.

They are very rare but tongues still do happen at great need.

[Jessie]

you know I did'nt know about italicized before I came here.


why on earth is the word unknown in there?
when its not in the origianal texts....

that makes it rather confusing and supporitive of "unknown" toungues.

[MichaelH]

The italicized word 'unknown' is in there because the sincerest scholarly minds saw that it helped the reader to understand better. For they were educated and skilled in the original (post original) texts, and knew how to read the passages. Therefore they included the word to help the understanding. (Not to mention that they perhaps knew by experience that it was true!)

[MichaelH]

Duh! No, it cannot be at all taught, and is not so acquired. It is received as the Holy Spirit of the Living God imparts it.. And if you are stumped in trying to understand tongues, your focus is on the wrong thing. If you try to control the relationship which you have with God, then you trash the gift and the giver. For it is His will which is to be done on earth, as in heaven, not ours. But seems we think we can tell Him how it is, huh, if we are a little afraid to let Him in? If we want to tell Him how it is, rather than have HIm tell us, we needn't have even started the journey.

[kay-gee]

Actually the languages were "unknown" to the speakers! That was the amzing part of it. It served its purpose in drawing the attention of Jews from all the world that were gathered in Jerusalem for Pentecost. Acts chapter 2:1-13 should clear the whole issue up. It seems to me men are always quick to concoct wild theologies rather than just letting the Bible speak for itself.

all the best...

[CoreIssue]

Yes. They spoke in languages they did not know.

Bible very clearly states a translator is also needed if tongues happens in a meeting. If no translator, shut up!

[InTheWind]

This speaking in tongues, is over rated imo, to much importance put on it. Seems like the most places ya hear about people doing it on a regular bases are the places that everything else they teach is way off also.
As said without a translator it is usless, Copeland is pretty good at it. :roflmbo:

[CoreIssue]

This speaking in tongues, is over rated imo, to much importance put on it. Seems like the most places ya hear about people doing it on a regular bases are the places that everything else they teach is way off also.
As said without a translator it is usless, Copeland is pretty good at it. :roflmbo:
Agree. There is rarely a need for it. Not a scheduled event every meeting. :not:

[MichaelH]

Indeed, though as a practical matter, as noted by Paul, without an interpreter, tongues were not much value to the immediate body. However, the Holy Spirit is an interpreter of 'tongues' (if one will read the text). Therefore the importance of tongues may go beyond the local meeting at the local body. Else God will not have had any joy in imparting the gift to those who receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit, also known as Pentecost, which is as true today, since He "Was born of a virgin, died, and rose from the dead, and.... visited His people with Pentecost, having paid the price that we may experience it.

Amen!

Have at it!:tiphat:

[InTheWind]

For study purposes this is a good view.

http://havefaith.org/new_page_16c.htm

[MichaelH]

This is analytical jibberish! And calling it an ego trip??? I mean, it clearly says that one 'edifies' one's self. How is that egotistical if it is a gift imparted for one's edification, which I have to add, is also probably good for the body (if we were all edified singularly, then we would be corporately).

I have said it elsewhere: I am glad I didn't analyze it like so many have. I just received it before even the thought of analyzing it could come into my head. For those who think that they are wise, these are they who are egotistical, I am sorry to say. For they don't convince the Lord! Amen!

1Co 1:26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
1Co 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
1Co 1:28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
1Co 1:29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
1Co 1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
1Co 1:31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

[kay-gee]

Like Noahs Ark, The tabernacle, the burnt offerings etc...served a certain function at certain times and places in Gods plan, the tongues have no use today. The early church did have some miraculous gifts, but the purpose of them were to promote and validate the preaching of the gospel by the apostles. No need today as we have the completed and infallible Bible to reveal Gods will. People doing tongues today are decieved! They have done little more for Christendom, than make it look like a circus act to the world!

all the best...

[CoreIssue]

Indeed, though as a practical matter, as noted by Paul, without an interpreter, tongues were not much value to the immediate body. However, the Holy Spirit is an interpreter of 'tongues' (if one will read the text). Therefore the importance of tongues may go beyond the local meeting at the local body. Else God will not have had any joy in imparting the gift to those who receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit, also known as Pentecost, which is as true today, since He "Was born of a virgin, died, and rose from the dead, and.... visited His people with Pentecost, having paid the price that we may experience it.

Amen!

Have at it!:tiphat:
Nope. Baptism of the Holy Spirit is how one enters the Body of Christ. Plainly stated in the Bible. It is not a separate event with tongues as a sign. Every Born Again believer receives it.

Receiving the Holy Spirit is not Pentecost. Pentecost was where the first entering of the Holy Spirit occurred.

The Apostles never taught seeking it, how to get it or any such thing. They preached repent in faith by grace and you WOULD receive the Holy Spirit.

Nor, as some teach, is it a twofold event. One to save and one the empower. Every believer is stated to have a Gift of the Spirit but no one has everyone nor is there one give to every Christian.

That is a Pentecostal and Charismatic invention.

By the way, Mormons at their beginning practiced it. Many forms of mysticism and paganism have taught and practiced it for centuries. So just 'exhibiting' it does not prove its reality.

Just some info on the issue. :D

[CoreIssue]

This is analytical jibberish! And calling it an ego trip??? I mean, it clearly says that one 'edifies' one's self. How is that egotistical if it is a gift imparted for one's edification, which I have to add, is also probably good for the body (if we were all edified singularly, then we would be corporately).

I have said it elsewhere: I am glad I didn't analyze it like so many have. I just received it before even the thought of analyzing it could come into my head. For those who think that they are wise, these are they who are egotistical, I am sorry to say. For they don't convince the Lord! Amen!

1Co 1:26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
1Co 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
1Co 1:28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
1Co 1:29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
1Co 1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
1Co 1:31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

How about verses that deal directly with the issue?
12The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. 13For we were all baptized by[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2012&version=31#fen-NIV-28632c)] one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.
Everyone in the Body of Christ is Baptised in the Holy Spirit and every is empowered by the Holy Spirit.

Yet, not all speak in tongues. But all have gifts of some kind.
7Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues,[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2012&version=31#fen-NIV-28629a)] and to still another the interpretation of tongues.[b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2012&version=31#fen-NIV-28629b)] 11All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.
Your doctrine cannot stand up against the Biblical reality.

[CoreIssue]

Like Noahs Ark, The tabernacle, the burnt offerings etc...served a certain function at certain times and places in Gods plan, the tongues have no use today. The early church did have some miraculous gifts, but the purpose of them were to promote and validate the preaching of the gospel by the apostles. No need today as we have the completed and infallible Bible to reveal Gods will. People doing tongues today are decieved! They have done little more for Christendom, than make it look like a circus act to the world!

all the best...
Wrong, KG. Gifts are still given today. The verses I posted above apply to us as well.

Gifts are given today. Most assuredly. I have seen them in action.

But I agree, abuse in the name of Gift of Tongues does cause problems.

[MichaelH]

Kay-gee: No need today as we have the completed and infallible Bible to reveal Gods will. People doing tongues today are decieved! They have done little more for Christendom, than make it look like a circus act to the world!

:nod: Huh? In fact you are correct. We have the Bible available to us to reveal God's will, and therein will one find that 'HIS revealed will' is what the very people whom you fault, do experience in their worship. Their experience is valid according to the word, which you and others deny based on what can only be of "Private interpretation." So you can defend your interpretation before men, but it remains to be seen if you can defend it before God on judgment day.

The whole reason that Paul harps on the natural mind, and the carnal mind is that it stands in the way of the Holy Spirit's understanding. This is emphatically voiced by way of frequent appeals made by Paul, for Christians to understand and not be misguided. So, while these scripures which refer to the 'natural man not receiving the things of God', do refer to the unsaved, they also speak to the believer who is dull of hearing. Selah! If no one else will warn you, I will.

The Tabernacle consists of three levels. Holy of Holies is where the believer is to aim. Yet many who 'choose' to follow Christ only enter into the outer court, and thereafter boast about it. But we learn from the parable of the talents that he who received only one talent (which I will compare to entering the outer court) was rebuked by the Master for not increasing. Of course, increasing in Biblical terms is accomplished by 'decreasing'. And decreasing is the way to the Holy of Holies. But decreasing means there is less of us, and more of Him, 'working in us'. As a result of this, there are things which HE imparts to us, which one should not 'refuse'!


Who sed this? Receiving the Holy Spirit is not Pentecost. Pentecost was where the first entering of the Holy Spirit occurred.

:nod: Yes! And it has not changed, although I will grant that everyone does not have the same experience in the same way. I just happen to be able to relate to that blessed day, not by anything that I did, but according to which it was done unto me. So I testify that it is true, and if your mind does not confirm this, lean not to your mind. It will cost you.

YE also sed: The Apostles never taught seeking it, how to get it or any such thing. They preached repent in faith by grace and you WOULD receive the Holy Spirit.

:nod:And don't stop there thinking you have received all that HE has for you, lest you be considered on that day to be a 'wicked' servant.

Ye also sed: Nor, as some teach, is it a twofold event. One to save and one the empower. Every believer is stated to have a Gift of the Spirit but no one has everyone nor is there one give to every Christian.

:nod:???????

And ye also sed: That is a Pentecostal and Charismatic invention.

:nod:I beg you to consider, it is no invention as you are judging it to be.

So, let's go back to the opener:

Kay-gee: No need today as we have the completed and infallible Bible to reveal Gods will. People doing tongues today are decieved! They have done little more for Christendom, than make it look like a circus act to the world!

These do not what they do - but receive what they have, and are. It is not about 'doing for Christiandom', for then one must needs perform 'dead works' in the manner of Cain!

[InTheWind]

Lets play a little reversed psychology and tell you just what you have told KayGee.

Huh? In fact you are correct. We have the Bible available to us to reveal God's will, and therein will one find that 'HIS revealed will' is what the very people whom you fault, do experience in their worship. Their experience is valid according to the word, which you and others deny based on what can only be of "Private interpretation." So you can defend your interpretation before men, but it remains to be seen if you can defend it before God on judgment day.

Every time a person that claims this tongue stuff as biblical is refuted they start attacking and saying you`ll be judged for your wrong doctrine.
I`m so tired of hearing it. :(

Any more of this you`ll answer at judgement day crap and i`ll ban you in a split second.
Debate if you want but knock off i`m better than you garbage.

[CoreIssue]

Michael, deal with these verses about Baptism of the Holy Spirit and the Gift of Tongues.

I will already state you have taken an assumed position not stated anywhere in the Bible. These are literal and firmly stated verses from I Corinthians 12:
7Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues,[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=i%20cor%2012&version=31#fen-NIV-28629a)] and to still another the interpretation of tongues.[b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=i%20cor%2012&version=31#fen-NIV-28629b)] 11All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines. Exclusionary language. All get a gift but not all the same gift. Tongues is a gift, thus not all get tongues.
12The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. 13For we were all baptized by[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=i%20cor%2012&version=31#fen-NIV-28632c)] one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. All born again believers receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and equally take part in him.

All one Baptism but not all the same Gift.

Absolutely no where is there ever taught or mentioned receiving the sign of tongues to demonstrate a second movement of the Holy Spirit in ones life. You cannot found a doctrine upon a couple of instances at the beginning of the Church when not even there did all receiving the Holy Spirit along with tongues in transition from the OT to NT as sign to the Jews. Nor are experiences sufficient. That is the bread and butter of Mysticism.

The Apostles taught about the Baptism and taught about Gifts. But signs of being Baptized? Never.

We all have gifts. I have gifts, but tongues are not one of them.

Early Mormons practiced tongues in the identical way Pentecostals do. Pagans and Mystics have for centuries and do today. In fact the bulk of those attending those first so-called second rain of the Holy Spirit were largely in to Mysticism.

Are Mormons and Mystics Baptized in the Holy Spirit? No.

Deal with the 1 Cor 12 verses. They are very plainly stated.

[MichaelH]

So sed thou! Personal experience is not equal to the Bible. Many experiences do not come from God at all.

You know, there can be no doubt if one reflects on it, that people doubted Moses' 'experience' when on the mountain he encountered the burning bush. Else no one would have been slain in the wilderness, for they will have been convinced. And God (Christ Jesus) is an experience, even 'as' one believes. Note that we have nothing but by revelation, and revelation - is an experience! So, with all respect to what people say about faith, knowing Jesus is an 'experience', or an experience waiting.

??? You launched into a personal attack of judgment for disagreeing with you. The old touch not my anointed and such attacks by Pentecostals, WoF and similar that supposedly shield one from challenge with righteous condemnation.

Righteous condemnation?


Joh 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
"I came not to judge," says our Lord Jesus Christ. If HE came not to judge, then he does not condemn: Neither righteously!


Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
So we see that a person is condemned if he believes not! But Jesus does not condemn him. Not yet~! Therefore there is no 'righteous' condemnation. Neither do I judge, but I admonish, and a person will take it however one will.



Discuss it. Do not accuse or threaten with God's condemnation. That is what ITW is saying. No one did any such thing to you.
Now, please, go to the forum and answer 1 Cor 12. But no more 'God condemns you' type postings for disagreeing with you. Examine yourself via scripture, as in verses posted that deny your statements.
The verses you posted are real, but trying to use them as proof of you claims do not fly. You have to first prove your claims and then they apply to defend you.



Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
You know, no one can 'prove' God. Yet we try anyway. Of course, if we could prove God, there would be no use for faith. And faith is pretty important to HIM. It is about faith, after all. But if we cannot prove God, neither can we prove what we believe using scripture. For everyone supports his or her belief with scripture according as he or she is convinced in his or her own mind. But we are measured by our belief! ! ! Therefore we will stand or fall according to what we believe. And if someone says that scripture does not support what I believe, well.... Is he right just because he is convinced in his mind of something else? That is the reason for the judgment. I would convince as many as able.



Our errors and sins are forgiven as if they never happened, so how can they be pointed out to any saint? You are carrying error into eternity, where it is not. It went into the grave with Christ, never to rise again.

If you sin, you are in your sin and the Cross is of none effect. What the Cross did does not condone sin as though it is now irrelevant. If you sin, you 'crucify' the Son afresh. (Heb 6:6) There is a gross misunderstanding about what the Cross does. The Cross 'delivers' from sin. It does not 'condone' sin as though it is meaningless, just because.

Please deal with 1 Cor 12 first.

What do you want to know about 1 Cor 12?


1Co 12:31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.
Covet earnestly the best gifts. It can be kept that simple. After all, why was Paul speaking only to his generation. Why was Christ speaking only to His generation? I mean, why do people really think that about part of what either of them said, and not about the rest of what they said? Does one suppose that is what is meant by 'rightly dividing'? Either each of them spoke all they said for the benefit of future generations (hence the 'written record') or, if they spoke it only to their generation, then we are not saved. There is utterly a fault in seeing that as a dispensation which ended with the last Apostle, rather than continuing until the second coming.

[CoreIssue]

You are playing a game. Answer the post where I posted verses from 1 Cor 12. It is the post before your last one.

Jumping to other verses as if they prove your case because you say they prove your case is pure nonsense.

Deal with the verses. You are dodging.

I know the game you are playing here. You have no answer so you try to talk around it, sound wise and/or make us sound non spiritual.

Answer the verses.

[MichaelH]

I have no need to dodge.


11All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.

He gives them to each one..... Observe that He has given to 'each one' as He has determined, therefore you are seeing the evidence of this very verse played out in those who have so stated that they have received. Nuf said. Like I said before, I am not one of those who insist that one must have the evidence of tongues. (I am not dodging either. It is in my earlier post.) But I see three separate, "From glory to glory," revelations for the believer.

I might add, that I do not put God in a box. Not everyone who is His, has the same progression from step to step as I have laid out. But he does have the same confession, in that he believes in his heart that Jesus raised from the dead, and is therefore able to confess with His mouth that Jesus is Lord. Of course the same believes that He was born of a virgin, was crucified by evil men (who is anyone who rejects Him) and was raised, and seen of others before HE went to the Father.

But to believe in Him implies submission, more than simple 'belief'. For I have made this point: When Obama first came on the scene I was surprised to hear the way people who were against him were speaking. It didn't take long to realize that they knew what they were talking about, and it wasn't just predjudiced. But I had gone to his web site and read, in his words, that he believes that Jesus died for his sins! Well, that is enough to convince some people, but I realize that that means diddly squat. For it is not appropiated if he does not surrender to HIS will. Therefore he "Honors HIM with his mouth, but his heart is far from Jesus." So his 'belief' does not translate into anything redemptive. So in spite of his confession, he really does not believe, except superficially.

I cannot deny tongues are a gift of the spirit. Au contrair, I have the testamony that they are.

[CoreIssue]

Then you need to post more clearly what you mean.

Look at where tongues were used in the Bible as evidence. The ONLY place they were used. It was to OT Jewish saints at transition to the Church to establish proof of what the Apostle said.

But it was not gibberish. It was the tongues of other men that those speaking did not know.

For every use of tongues at Jerusalem at Pentecost it was the native tongue of someone present.

Same when he laid hands on those Jewish saints at the FIRST time they every heard of Christ. That they spoke in a tongue they did not know but someone else there did was a proof to the Jewish community there.

Others didn't need a sign so none was give.

That got the Church going and there is absolutely never a mention again in the Bible of tongues as a sign that the Holy Spirit had come to the Church.

Yes, tongues are given today at need. I know of instances where they were given, but NEVER as evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. But as tools of preaching and witnessing to those who otherwise could hear the message. But it is rare. Very rare.

That is the distinction. Never given JUST to say someone had JUST received the Holy Spirit. ALWAYS now given to as a tool of the Holy Spirit via one who already was Baptized in the Holy Spirit when they repented.

Pentecostals, WoF and others get it very wrong. They see it as sign of a following movement of the Holy Spirit in someone's life.

But that is false. Everyone receives the Holy Spirit when they repent. They grow in the Holy Spirit as they study and change. That is called santification.

No one goes from level 1 to level 2 and so one in leaps. It is a process that flows over time.

Just trying to make what I am saying clear beyond any doubt.

Now, please, clarify what you are saying. It sure sounded like the doctrine some have a more than one 'movement' of the Holy Spirit in the lives of saints.

Not good to start off with misunderstandings. :tiphat:

[Jessie]

then why does it say that NOT all speak in tongues?