-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
No tongues? ...and amputees?
- Thread starter 12strings
- Start date
convicted1
Guest
Oooooh, ooooooooh, ooooooooh, I know!! Donuts!?!?!?!?
In all seriousness, those gifts were for the Apostles, and when the last one died, those gifts were finished.
Someone who holds to us having the gifts today that the Apostles had, they need to find a puddle of water, and walk across it, and not through it.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not Awaken so I hope this isn't taken as speaking for that poster...
1. Tongues, glossalia, has been present throughout the history of the Church. Outside of the immediate apostolic era there are a number of charismatic groups which have practiced and used tongues as part of their worship. Though this does become harder to trace at certain points, there are other points where it is more obvious. Let us not forget, Christianity is larger than just the western European story. We have too often neglected Africa, Asia, and the Eastern European segments of the Church in our history.
2. This is a common charge from atheists I encounter. I reply that God clearly uses natural means to bring about His will. Perhaps this is because we humans interpret God's actions through natural understanding (this is a bigger conversation.) To heal an amputee God would have to create ex nihilo the limb since it no longer exists. This is not something God has done outside of the original creation because, again, God chooses to use natural means to accompllish His will. As miracles do happen they are within the realm of natural means, though certainly surprising means.
Again, just my take. I'm not Awaken.
1. Tongues, glossalia, has been present throughout the history of the Church. Outside of the immediate apostolic era there are a number of charismatic groups which have practiced and used tongues as part of their worship. Though this does become harder to trace at certain points, there are other points where it is more obvious. Let us not forget, Christianity is larger than just the western European story. We have too often neglected Africa, Asia, and the Eastern European segments of the Church in our history.
2. This is a common charge from atheists I encounter. I reply that God clearly uses natural means to bring about His will. Perhaps this is because we humans interpret God's actions through natural understanding (this is a bigger conversation.) To heal an amputee God would have to create ex nihilo the limb since it no longer exists. This is not something God has done outside of the original creation because, again, God chooses to use natural means to accompllish His will. As miracles do happen they are within the realm of natural means, though certainly surprising means.
Again, just my take. I'm not Awaken.
convicted1
Guest
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
Speaking in"tongues" is apparently spoke in pagan religions.
I know little about the history of tongues, sorry! I can not explain it! But your unbelief can also not take away from me what I experienced with God.
I do not have all the answers about how God heals, or why some are healed and some are not...I can just share what I come across in scriptures.
I'm not trying to take away from what you have experienced...I only take issue that you seem to be saying that all Christians should speak in tongues. I don't think that is supportable from scriptures.
All christians do not HAVE to speak in tongues! Not all christians have to pray, tithe, attend church or even be baptized.
We are born of God through our faith in the complete work on the cross and resurrection...through Jesus the only way!
How do I do that? I hope you are not wanting me to write it out, because I have a hard time writing in English...:laugh:
Did they report on the number of people who were saved?
Mormons speak in tongues.
Hindus speak in tongues.
Even the Haitian Voodoo priests speak in tongues.
How would you know that the tongues you speak in are Biblical unless you can tell us what you are speaking. How do you know you are intelligently praying to God and not a demon?
1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
--A rebuke. Since the understanding of praying in tongues is not fruitful, don't pray in tongues.
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.
--Another rebuke. Don't pray in the spirit or in tongues because there is no understanding. Pray with understanding--not in tongues.
16 Else if thou bless with the spirit, how shall he that filleth the place of the unlearned say the Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he knoweth not what thou sayest?
--If you pray in tongues the person hearing you pray doesn't even know when to say Amen. This is total chaos. It is a rebuke.
Hindus speak in tongues.
Even the Haitian Voodoo priests speak in tongues.
How would you know that the tongues you speak in are Biblical unless you can tell us what you are speaking. How do you know you are intelligently praying to God and not a demon?
1 Corinthians 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
--A rebuke. Since the understanding of praying in tongues is not fruitful, don't pray in tongues.
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.
--Another rebuke. Don't pray in the spirit or in tongues because there is no understanding. Pray with understanding--not in tongues.
16 Else if thou bless with the spirit, how shall he that filleth the place of the unlearned say the Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he knoweth not what thou sayest?
--If you pray in tongues the person hearing you pray doesn't even know when to say Amen. This is total chaos. It is a rebuke.
Last edited by a moderator:
By our most holy faith!
Where did he say not to speak in tongues! The rebuke was if your going to do it do it with an interpretation in the church because without interpretation no one else can understand you. You seem to leave out "Forbid not to speak in tongues"
You are adding to the scriptures or not telling the whole story...
13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
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.
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest ?
17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
Praying and singing in the spirit is not comdemned because in verse 17 He said that thou givest thanks well. BUT in a church we all need to be edified!
NOTICE...Paul spoke in tongues more than anyone, but not in the church. So where did he speak? Could be in private! to edify himself as Jude says!
A rebuke to do it right in the church and not to do it without an interpretation. He said that they gave thanks well, but it did not edify the church. Again.."Forbid not to speak in tongues"
Sure, just write it out like it sounds. A sentence or two is fine. Thanks.
ANd what purpose will this serve?
Well you would not hear it over this forum either! You would be reading it! Sorry!
Chapter 12 was very specific. It listed the "gifts of the Spirit" given to the local church. There is no spiritual gift ever given for private use. No gift was given to heal oneself. No gift was given to help oneself. No gift was given to administer oneself. No gift was given to teach oneself. It is absurd to think that any gift was given for the "edification of oneself." The gifts were given for the edification of the church, not for private use. They were never given for selfish edification of oneself. Thus your whole argument falls apart on this one point. They are to be used for the church, in the church, on behalf of the church, etc. Never for selfish use!!
Secondly, they were always to have an interpreter.
If you are to speak in tongues, then one must interpret.
Otherwise don't speak in tongues. Even if you pray don't speak in tongues without an interpreter. That is one of the guidelines. That also indicates it was also for public and not private use.
Edification never came through tongues, because people could not understand the tongues being spoken. Therefore don't speak in tongues. The emphasis in each one of those verses is understanding! You don't know the source of your tongues if you don't know what you are saying. It could be demonic. How would you know? You are only making an assumption.
Where does Jude mention tongues?
Paul spoke in tongues in other churches. He did so because NT revelation was not yet complete. God gave him the gift for that purpose, and because there were other Jews present. He was also an apostle. The tongues verified his message. All three purposes were fulfilled. It wasn't a private selfish gift, as you suppose. Why are you reading into the Scripture more than what is there?
Paul went on three missionary journeys and in that time established about 100 different churches. He had ample opportunity to use the gift of tongues which God gave him.
Do you speak, then, with an interpreter? If not, don't do it.
The meaning of the verse, considering all of the other Scripture, is this:
Forbid not to speak in tongues in the first century. You cannot ignore context. Like I said previously if you don't have first century unsaved Jews in your church you have no need of tongues (1Cor.14:21,22).
let me ask you this? Who does it benefit when you pray? Who does it benefit when you study your Bible at home? etc. It benefits you! You are built up etc... praying in the spirit build oneself up! When we grow in the spirit...it helps the whole body! ...
who is making assumptions? Praying in the spirit edifys the person 1 Cor. tell you that and Jude 20 tells you! Study out praying in the spirit!
and who is making assumptions?? What chapter and verse is this in!
I will pray in the spirit by myself..without an interpretation or with it! God told me to pray for the interpretation, so I will listen to him instead of you!
Praying in tongues was always public. If I lead in prayer all would pray with me. If I prayed in the language I learned on the mission field, no one would benefit.
Your last statement is the most revealing. I study that I may preach to others. It benefits others most. Hopefully my study on tongues will benefit you more than me. My study is that others may be benefited. What I do I do for others. If I did it in another tongue I would not benefit myself or others.
You are making assumptions. Can you demonstrate that the phrase "praying in the spirit" actually means "Praying in another tongue?" I pray in the spirit also. The Holy Spirit indwells me. He fills me with His Spirit. Who is not to say that I don't pray in the Spirit. That has nothing to do with speaking in tongues.
Jude 1:20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
--a non sequitor.
This has nothing to do with speaking in tongues. No where is speaking in tongues mentioned. Do you really think that everywhere "Holy Spirit" is mentioned it refers to tongues. That is absurd!
Paul SPOKE in other tongues, not prayed. Tongues was a gift given to the church. It was to be used for the edification for the church. He would not go against his own teaching. That is obvious.
A misinterpretation. To pray in the spirit is not to pray in tongues. You can't get that from Scripture. Listen to God from the Word of God. That is how he speaks to us today.