While speaking in tounges....

[Salty]

You have also admitted that you don't know what language you are speaking in tongues or even if your interpretation is correct. In effect you don't know what you are saying or what language, if any language, you are speaking in.
Therefore, it is not wrong for anyone of us to conclude that you are not speaking in a language at all but in gibberish.
If you were speaking in a language, you would at least recognize it but you don't. Therefore what you do is unblblical. Even your own standards state that tongues in the Bible were actual languages, but you have no idea if you are speaking in a language or not.

Therefore the gibberish you speak in is not of God, is it? If it is not of God who is it from?[/QUOTE]

Therefore, Awaken could, by his own admission, very possibly be guilty of I proposed in the OP.

 

[awaken]

When speaking in tounges, have those churches, without fail follow all three rules as stated in I Cor 14:27-34?

Yes! Always with an interpreter!

 

[awaken]

It was you who said: "Without the Holy Spirit you can not speak in tongues!"

I wanted to show you that was not true.

No, you did not show me tongues as in the Bible can be spoken without the Holy Spirit!

 

[TCassidy]

I am no theologian but I wonder if you haven't redefined knowledge to a Divine gift in the head of a prophet--words that are not in the verse itself? I just don't see where you get that implication.

1 Corinthians 12:8 "for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit,"

You either believe God and His word or you don't.

 

[awaken]

You don't believe as the Word says. I have given you evidence, and you have in part agreed.
Look at what you have said and put it all together.
You have said and agreed that "tongues are real languages."

Yes!

You have also admitted that you don't know what language you are speaking in tongues or even if your interpretation is correct.

Why do you add to what people say? I have never said I do not know the interpretation...I said when I pray for the interpretation He gives it to me!

In effect you don't know what you are saying or what language, if any language, you are speaking in.

vs. 2 "For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth him.." vs. 13 "WHEREFORE LET HIM THAT SPEAKETH IN AN UNKNOWN TONGUE PRAY THAT HE MAY INTERPRET!" Does that sound like you understand what you are praying or what language you are speaking in? If you knew what language you were speaking...why pray for the interpretation? How many times do you have to be asked that?

Therefore, it is not wrong for anyone of us to conclude that you are not speaking in a language at all but in gibberish.

You can conclude what ever you like! But I would like you to stick to scriptures to prove any stand you make...not my personal walk with God!

If you were speaking in a language, you would at least recognize it but you don't. Therefore what you do is unblblical. Even your own standards state that tongues in the Bible were actual languages, but you have no idea if you are speaking in a language or not.

Do you know all the languages of the world? NO! Plus as I have stated for the last time...NOWHERE in the scriptures does it say I have to know the language!

Therefore the gibberish you speak in is not of God, is it? If it is not of God who is it from?

You continue to believe that, DHK!

 

[awaken]

You have also admitted that you don't know what language you are speaking in tongues or even if your interpretation is correct. In effect you don't know what you are saying or what language, if any language, you are speaking in.
Therefore, it is not wrong for anyone of us to conclude that you are not speaking in a language at all but in gibberish.
If you were speaking in a language, you would at least recognize it but you don't. Therefore what you do is unblblical. Even your own standards state that tongues in the Bible were actual languages, but you have no idea if you are speaking in a language or not.

Therefore the gibberish you speak in is not of God, is it? If it is not of God who is it from?[/QUOTE]

Therefore, Awaken could, by his own admission, very possibly be guilty of I proposed in the OP.

What exactly did I admit to to bring you to that conclusion? NO one speaks by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed!

 

[Salty]

When speaking in tounges, have those churches, without fail follow all three rules as stated in I Cor 14:27-34?

Yes! Always with an interpreter!

Are you saying yes to interpreters (only)
what about the other rules?

 

[Thomas Helwys]

No, you did not show me tongues as in the Bible can be spoken without the Holy Spirit!

Glossolalia is practice by Christian Charismatics, by Christian cults, and by non-Christians. Xenoglossy, speaking of a natural language, is the kind of tongues in the NT; it is VERY rare.

 

[awaken]

Are you saying yes to interpreters (only)
what about the other rules?

The church services that the HOly Spirit manifested in tongues... We have never had more than one during a service.

 

[awaken]

Glossolalia is practice by Christian Charismatics, by Christian cults, and by non-Christians. Xenoglossy, speaking of a natural language, is the kind of tongues in the NT; it is VERY rare.

Not tongues as in the Bible! You can not manifest what you do not have!
Again! I agree that there is fake out there..
Can you show me in scripture where an unbeliever spoke in tongues?

 

[TCassidy]

The bible is clear that tongues were a sign for unbelievers, not for believers. Therefore those "churches" that practice so-called "tongues" are admitting they are unbelievers.

1 Corinthians 14:22 "Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers."

 

[awaken]

The bible is clear that tongues were a sign for unbelievers, not for believers. Therefore those "churches" that practice so-called "tongues" are admitting they are unbelievers.

1 Corinthians 14:22 "Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers."

Do you realize what you are saying? THey were a sign to unbelievers! It does not say tongues were for unbelievers! Show me one unbeliever in scriptures that spoke in tongues.

 

[Salty]

Do you realize what you are saying? THey were a sign to unbelievers! It does not say tongues were for unbelievers! Show me one unbeliever in scriptures that spoke in tongues.

Do you realize what you said??

 

[Revmitchell]

Do you realize what you are saying? THey were a sign to unbelievers! It does not say tongues were for unbelievers! Show me one unbeliever in scriptures that spoke in tongues.

Well then keep faking your tongues and speaking that gibberish. Don't forget you will have to look God in the eye one day.

 

[awaken]

Do you realize what you said??

Yes! Tongues is FOR a SIGN to the unbeliever! Tongues is not just for unbelievers.

TCassidy, implied that those that spoke in tongues are unbelievers. I ask her to show me an unbeliever speaking in tongues in scriptures!

 

[awaken]

Well then keep faking your tongues and speaking that gibberish. Don't forget you will have to look God in the eye one day.

Yes, WE ALL will look God in the eye one day! It will be a sad day for those that could have walked in more of what the Bible says...but because of their unbelief...they did not!

I did not say anyone was not saved...just that God had gifts for them and they said "THanks, but no thanks" to God!

I would hate to have paid such a dear price for a gift that many will will not open or refuse all together! Unbelief is a sad thing!

 

[DHK]

Yes! Tongues is FOR a SIGN to the unbeliever! Tongues is not just for unbelievers.

TCassidy, implied that those that spoke in tongues are unbelievers. I ask her to show me an unbeliever speaking in tongues in scriptures!

At least look at the profile and realize that "she" is a "he."
TCassidy: Retired Pastor/Seminary Professor

But to look at the Scriptures more closely:

1 Corinthians 14:21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

Tongues are a sign:
First to the Jews (this people) vs. 21,
Secondly, to them that believe not, vs, 22.

Thus, taking into consideration the wider context, if you don't have any unbelieving Jews in your church then tongues are out of order. It was a sign to them. They didn't listen. Judgment came in 70 A.D. Tongues ceased after that. We don't find them in history after the first century.
We find the paganistic practice of speaking gibberish being accommodated by some sects of Christianity in 1905, and so the modern Charismatic movement began. Up to that time it was relegated to paganism.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Not tongues as in the Bible! You can not manifest what you do not have!
Again! I agree that there is fake out there..
Can you show me in scripture where an unbeliever spoke in tongues?

Since you can't seem to understand what I'm saying, I'll hush now.

 

[awaken]

At least look at the profile and realize that "she" is a "he."
TCassidy: Retired Pastor/Seminary Professor

But to look at the Scriptures more closely:

1 Corinthians 14:21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

Tongues are a sign:
First to the Jews (this people) vs. 21,
Secondly, to them that believe not, vs, 22.

Thus, taking into consideration the wider context, if you don't have any unbelieving Jews in your church then tongues are out of order. It was a sign to them. They didn't listen. Judgment came in 70 A.D. Tongues ceased after that. We don't find them in history after the first century.
We find the paganistic practice of speaking gibberish being accommodated by some sects of Christianity in 1905, and so the modern Charismatic movement began. Up to that time it was relegated to paganism.

First you say that tongues ceased with the last apostle..
Then it was with the complete written Word (Bible)...
Now it was after the Judgment in 70 A.D..
None of the above is found in scripture!

You keep tongues tied to one thing and ignore the rest!
I agree with the purposes you posted...but I do not ignore the other purposes.
Historical and anecdotal testimonies, as interesting as they may be, are still secondary. The Bible must be the source of primary importance in establishing the present-day validity of speaking in tongues.

"these signs will accompany those who believe"
“Anyone who speaks in a tongue ... speak ... to God.”
That is, speaking in tongues is a God-given way for believers to “speak to God.” As such, it is a valuable asset in our prayer life, along with speaking to God in our own native language (which is English for me).

The one speaking in tongues is edified, built up. Some have wrongly read this as Paul minimizing the importance of tongues. But Paul is making two positive comments here: (1) speaking in tongues edifies the individual, and (2) prophecy spoken in the church edifies the church. It is a good thing for both individuals and the church to be edified.

 

[awaken]

Since you can't seem to understand what I'm saying, I'll hush now.

Well, we must have both misunderstood each others post..so we can drop it if you like!