Featured 1 Cor. 12-14

And that is not what was happening was it?
In fact that doesn't happen in most churches that speak in tongues. They don't speak in order. They don't have interpreters. Everything is chaotic. They do exact opposite to what Paul taught. Paul even taught that women should keep silence in the church (in reference to tongues). I bet they don't obey that guideline either, do they?
When you speak/pray in tongues you have no idea what you are saying.
You stand on unbiblical and dangerous ground--the ground of the devil himself. It is not of God. You cannot even keep the guidelines Paul set forth.

Study the book of Ephesians. When a Gentile became a Christian he was no longer a Gentile. When a Jew became a Christian he was no longer a Jew. We are one in Christ. Thus there is no "Gentile church" or "Jewish church," there is only the "church of God," as Paul calls it (1Cor.10:32).

1 Corinthians 10:32 Give no occasions of stumbling, either to Jews, or to Greeks, or to the church of God.

Through prayer, Bible study, church attendance, Christian fellowship, etc., but never through tongues. Why are you reading into Scripture something that is not there?

Jude says nothing about tongues. He says as much about baptism and the healing of the sick as he does about tongues--nothing.

Your analogy is wrong. If in every single play in the game, the quarter-back called for a quarter-back sneak; in other words he always kept the ball to himself, that would be selfish. His duty is to involve all the players--to pass it to his various receivers, to hand it off to his full back and other ball carriers--in short to involve everyone on the team. He cannot be a selfish player hogging the ball to himself on every play. The team consists of just more than one player.

ALL of the spiritual gifts were given to the entire local church. Not one of them was for "selfish" use. They were to edify the entire body. There is no such thing as a gift of helps just to help yourself, or a gift of administration just to administer yourself, or a gift of healing just to heal yourself, etc. All those gifts were for the ministry of all the church not just for one person. So was the gift of tongues. It was for the ministry of ALL the church.

But the apostles did more than them. Do you deny the Scriptures then??
What do the Scriptures mean when in two different places it says that they were the signs of an apostle. Are you in denial?
Yes there are other reasons. But none of them apply to you.

Mark 16:18 they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall in no wise hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Either you are ignorant of Scriptures or hypocritical, which is it?
Why not pick up some deadly thing (like Draino, or even HCL ) and prove your faith--that it will in no wise harm you.
You are the one saying that this Scripture is applicable to us today.
Don't be hypocritical and go back on your words.

1. They didn't come to Jesus in Acts 5:16. It is an event that talks about Peter's ministry.
2. They came to Peter because they knew Peter had the gift of healing.
3. No one today has that gift. For example, people are deluded into thinking people like Benny Hinn has that gift, and Hinn draws large crowds. But Hinn is a fraud, and doesn't have that gift.
4. If someone actually had the gift of healing large crowds would come to him.
5. If he were a Godly individual he would go to where the sick people are; where the sick people can't come to him.
6. If you were a thinking individual you would realize that there were no hospitals in Jesus and Peter's day.

Peter and John, by the power of the Lord healed that person, and then Peter made it clear that he did not heal that person, but the Lord did it.

Nevertheless he healed all who came to him without excuse.

There were no hospitals, Duh!

It has nothing to do with people responding in faith. That is a false belief. People were healed whether they responded in faith or not. If the "so-called faith healers" of today were healing people, they would have to admit that if they failed, it would be their faith that failed, and not the sick person's.

In James it says: "And the prayer of faith shall save the sick."
The prayer of faith is whose prayer?? It is the prayer of the pastor, not the sick person!

Perhaps the apostles themselves were given the gift of interpretation themselves. There were some that had both the gift of tongues and the gift of interpretation. You can read about that in 1Cor.14.

 

You are very obviously not a pastor. You simply don't understand the heart of a pastor. Your were very offensive in your "Satan did it, not the Charismatics" post. And now you are flippant at deep hurts. I've been treating you with respect, but frankly I've lost all respect for you at that. You're like all the other Charismatics--split the non-tongues speaking church and that's okay with you. Steal all the sheep you can from pastors that don't agree with your tongues!

 

Man, you can find anything on the Internet! :laugh:

 

Well let's see. Let me draw some conclusions:
1. You have no Biblical rebuttal, therefore you don't believe the Bible on this passage of Scripture.
2. You quote your experience as greater authority than the Word.
3. You make Scripture contradict Scripture.
4. You turn a rebuke into a command.
5. You show an attitude that you don't want to take the Scripture at face value and don't want to understand it. It is pretty much "Don't talk to me about God and salvation, I have my own religion" attitude."

That is your attitude concerning the verse just referenced--vs. 26
1 Corinthians 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
Note carefully:
1. "How is it brethren?" This is the part you left out. It is an expression of shock and amazement. "How can this be??" The entire verse is a rebuke! Yet, you try to use this verse in your defense. It doesn't work that way.

2. "every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation."
Paul points the obvious out to them. It was utter confusion. He had told them that two, at the most three should speak. But they were all speaking and out of turn. It Satan that is the master of confusion, not God. God is a God of order, not confusion. And this is mass confusion, and didn't edify anyone. Thus Paul says:

3. "Let all things be done unto edifying." But that wasn't happening.
Besides all of that, the verse doesn't even apply to the women.
Only men were permitted to use revelatory gifts.

Then, like Mary Baker Eddy, and Ellen G. White, and Helena Blavatsky (Theosophy's leader), were all powerful speakers, but they all got their messages from Satan. They all started cults (Christian Science, SDA, Theosophy). And gullible people like yourself follow them.
Once again, you have put your experience as more important than the Word of God.

And your experience is more important than the Word of God. Who gave you this authority? Do you have more authority than God??

If you read my posts why don't you understand them. If Jews and Gentiles are one in Christ, then the church is not Gentile is it? It is what Paul says it is, "a church of God." Why are you calling it a "Gentile church," when it is not?

Why do you butcher Scripture and make it say what it doesn't. Paul never said he prays in the Spirit in relation to tongues. You are making him speak lies. That is shameful. Why are you calling Paul a liar??

1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

1. The statement is a hypothetical. Paul did not say he prayed in an unknown tongue, did he? He never said that. As in 1Cor.13:3
1 Corinthians 13:3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
--He never said he gave all his goods to the poor.
--He never said he gave his body to be burned, and we know he didn't. His death was by beheading by the Roman government.
These are all hypotheticals, including 14:14, "If I pray in an unknown tongue." Don't accuse Paul of something he never did!!! Don't make him out to be a liar!

IF I pray in an unknown tongue (like some of the disobedient Corinthians were doing), then their spirits were praying, but their understanding was unfruitful. It was a sharp rebuke. They may have been trying to pray in their carnal spirit, but their was no understanding whatsoever. Therefore whatever they said was totally messed up, wrong, not edifying, and of no benefit to anyone. The word "spirit" is a small "s" and refers to the spirit of self.

1 Corinthians 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
--Again you misunderstand Paul. He says nothing of tongues here.
I will pray with the spirit--my spirit, not unselfishly, but so that everyone can understand. He does not pray in another tongue. He prays with understanding, in Greek, the language of the Corinthians, and a language that he knew very well. He wrote in Greek.
I will sing in the spirit. Not in tongues, but in his spirit, his unselfish spirit so that they could all understand. BTW, in many translations the word "spirit" here is translated mind. Paul uses his mind (doesn't allow it to be bypassed) so that he can edify others. He doesn't allow his mind to become carnal, but uses it for the edification of others. There is not one word of tongues in this verse.
--You just want to read into the Scripture those things you want to believe, right?

You deny the Scripture in favor of experience. Your experience dictates the meaning of Scripture. Why do you allow this?

Verse 4 is a rebuke. "He that speaks in an unknown tongue edifies himself...but NOT THE CHURCH!!!
The gift was for the edification of the church, not for selfish purposes.
Jude 20 is not speaking of tongues. It is a non sequitor.
Look at the difference:
"praying in the Holy Ghost,"
It specifically says "Praying in the Holy Spirit." It does not say praying in the spirit or mind. It is quite different. It has nothing to do with speaking in tongues.
The gifts of the Spirit ceased long ago. The fact is that you have no evidence that they are still in existence today. You can give no Biblical proof.

I have. It is Paul that you won't believe. I quote Scripture. You ignore it, deny it, and remain in unbelief.

 

I have. You just don't believe me.
1. They were the signs of an apostle. 2Cor.12:12; Heb.2:3,4
2. They were given because the NT was not yet complete. (1Cor.13:8-13)
3. They were given as a sign to the unbelieving Jews (1Cor.14:21; Acts 2, 10, 19)
4. They were a fulfillment of prophecy. (Isa.28:11,12; 1Cor.14:21; Acts 2; Joel 2:28ff)
5. They would pass away when the NT was complete (at the end of the first century), and history attests to this, as well as Scripture (1Cor.13:10)

You said that nowhere in the Bible does it tell anyone to drink any poisonous thing. Now you are back-tracking instead of apologizing and saying you are wrong. Look at the Scripture again:

Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
--There is no allegory here.
Serpents refer to serpents--snakes.
Poison refers to poison--toxins that when ingested can kill you, just like the venom of a snake.
--The Lord here gave specific promises of protection to his apostles at the same time that he gave them the Great Commission, just before he ascended back into heaven. That doesn't mean they are applicable to us all.

I don't deny healing. I never said I did. I deny the gift of healing such as is exemplified in Acts 5:16. Read my posts carefully. Study Acts 5:16. Show me anyone on this earth today that possesses the gift that Peter did in Acts 5:16.

You don't read very well do you?
I said I believe in healing. But I don't believe in faith healers or those who claim they have the gift of healing. The gift of healing has ceased.

I have shown you plenty of Scripture, but you have not shown me one instance of Biblical tongues or one instance of the gift of healing--not one. Those who practice such today are frauds and often dabble in the occult.

 

I was in the Assemblies of God for 10 years, Elder for 7 of those yeras, trained in their school...

Would say that the bible teaches that ALL christians have received the Holy Spirit at conversion, baptized by him into the Body of Christ...

we are ALL sealed/indwelt by him, but we also can be filled by him daily basis... That part is conditional upon our response to Him...

Also each one of us have a spiritual gift from the same Spirit, but its HIS choosing which gift to which person, all valid and equal to God...

Also would say that the biggest errors in Charasmatic views are there seeing that the Spirit has a secondary aspect/act of grace, they call it the "baptism" in Him, shown by tongues...

Christians not commanded to be baptised in HS, as already done when saved, but to be Filled by Him...

IF they said that a christian can experience a deeper aspect of the same salvation, in that we can chose to abide in Christ and submit to the HS for His empowering daily, that would be much more biblically acceptable!

Also, drop their insistence in sign/wonders/miracle/tongues as evidence of that 'baptising' in the HS!

And none of that extra revelation sometimes claimed for "Modern prophets/Apostles"

 

There are two views on this.
Some believe that only the "sign gifts" (2Cor.12:12; Heb.2:3,4) have ceased, as well as revelatory gifts. Others remain such as the ones you mentioned.

The other view is this. Since all the gifts were in some way supernatural, then all the gifts have ceased. As you ask, what is the word or gift of "wisdom"? It is wisdom that was supernaturally given to an individual at that time, during the first century, that would help the first century churches function better. The gifts were given specifically for first century churches that did not have the completed Word of God. When the canon was complete and the Apostles were no longer alive, the gifts (all of them) ceased. They were all supernatural in some way. Thus they all ceased.

How is the gift of helps or the gift of administration supernatural? That is a question I cannot answer and perhaps gives the first scenario a better case.

 

The way you define that particular gift, as revelatory, it has ceased. The revelation of God is closed. The canon of Scripture is closed. God is not giving revelation to anyone anymore. You are standing on the brink of heresy here. All revelation ceased at the end of the first century with the book of Revelation (ca. 98 A.D.).

 

1 Corinthians 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

Words of knowledge is a type of revelation. It has ceased. It is done away with. There is no more revelation being given today.

Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
--In the OT God spoke through his prophets in different ways: dreams, visions, audibly, etc.
But now he has ALREADY spoken unto us by his Son. Everything God wants us to know about Christ is written in the 66 books of the Bible. That is how God has spoken to us--through the written Word of God.

2 Peter 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
--God spoke in the OT through the prophets, and in the NT through the apostles. Peter makes that clear. Then he commands us to be mindful of their words--the prophets and the apostles (and their associates).

2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
--Peter refers to Paul's epistles as Scripture. He says some of them are hard to understand, and the unlearned and unstable wrest as they do also the other scriptures to their own destruction. We find this practice among the Charismatics probably more than any other group.

Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
--If you, by words of wisdom, words of knowledge, a prophesy here and a prophesy there, etc., add to this book, God will add to you the plagues which are written in this book. It is fitting that this book is placed at the end of the Bible, making these verses applicable not just to Revelation, but to all the Bible.

2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
--The prophecy (the Word of God) did not come by the will of man--not just any man. But holy men of God spoke (or wrote) as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit moved or directed holy men of God, such as the prophets and Apostles to write the inspired words of God. After that the canon of Scripture was closed.

Tell me Awaken. Are you one of those "holy men of old"?

Are the things you and your contemporaries say "inspired of God"?

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
--Scripture is inspired of God (literally 'God-breathed'). Are the words that you and your contemporaries speak inspired of God. Do they come from the very breathe of God? Are they equal with what "the holy men of old" said?