Speaking in Tongues- What is it?

:thumbs: Darn Right!

 

I find your statement deplorable.....for the record, my statement was merely a declarative.

 

"Your a fool" (for example) is a declarative statement.
Some declarative statements are out of order and not to be said.
In fact when someone makes a declarative statement they are bound to give evidence and proof for making that statement. What gives them the authority to declare what they have authoritatively just declared. Hence, a "declarative statement."

 

& so what? Your saying Im not telling the truth....Is thats what your saying.

 

If you understand grammar correctly, and you were making a declaration, then no it was not truthful at all. I am not a woman. Therefore you lied, if that is your declaration.

 

So then if I said that you are in fact a woman than that would have been allright?

 

Where is your evidence.
Why would you promote a lie?

 

Listen.....here is how I see it. You misunderstand a comment I use because I thought you were a female, so your insulted. So you punish. I'm OK with that. Only so you know, I did not mean it as an insult. If I wanted to insult you or dress you down, you are pointedly aware of just how I would do it....direct & in your face. So do as you see fit.

 

It is unfathomable to me, and to others--as two other posters already pointed out to you--that you would make such a statement with no evidence. What did Baptist Believer post after you made your remark:

Others took it as an insult. Read the comment after that as well.
If you can't post in grace then don't post at all.
If you can't back up your posts with evidence then you better not post them either.

 

What do you care what others say, aren't you above that by now? Apparently not. But you are incapable of reason & your holding all the cards. I shouldn't be surprised by this, now I know the real measure of your character. You said once before that I did not know you but you were wrong and I am not impressed in the least.

 

These rules are at the bottom of every page.
You agreed to abide by them when you registered here.
If you have a problem with them you don't have to stay. No one is compelling you.

 

So what do you mean by "womanish"?

There's nothing wrong with being a woman, but every time I've heard the term "womanish", it was a derogatory term expressing some alleged inferiority.

I was attacking you or judging you. I was just giving you an opportunity to clarify before this got out of hand.

Obviously, a lot has happened since the last time I checked in.

 

I have presented the evidence for my position on tongues in the post below. So far no one has taken my exposition to task. Believe me when I say this exposition is just the tip of the iceberg in regard to how much more evidence I can provide to sustain my position that modern day "tongues" is nothing more than ancient "esctatic utterances" that were universal among most pagan religions and have no similiarity to Biblical tongues whatseover. Biblical tongues had a specific design and a specific character and that design has been fulfilled and they have ceased. Todays so-called "Tongues" can be found among the Mormon's apostles, Hindu's, African witchcraft, voodoo and many other current pagan religions. Some of it is demonic in origin while most is simply humanistic in origin due to a altered state of consciousness that can be learned and stimulated by common conditions.

 

One of these days I will show you how your conclusions are incorrect however right now Ive got a life to live & each moment is precious so Im not delving deep into answering this, particularly with you. I'm not looking for repeat dialogs that turn into contentious fights like Ive seen in other threads & I dont have the time or the inclination at this point to. I can almost guarantee that someone will respond with a wisecrack remark but thats a measurement of themselves & honestly its laughable. Audios Amigos.

 

I have seen, heard, and witnessed so-called speaking in tongues of this modern age. I have heard Pentecostal pastors describe the phenomena. But I have seen heard or heard of one case of the genuine gift of speaking in tongues in this age. It ceased by the end of the first century.

It is the same with the gift of healing which is far easier to demonstrate.
If anyone had the gift of healing then why don't they demonstrate it? Why don't they go up and down the corridors of the hospitals and heal those that are truly sick, or spend time in the ER's of variously hospitals and heal those that come in with broken arms and legs? They don't. They can't. They don't have the gift of healing.

Here is what they cannot do:
Acts 5:16 There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one.

All the cities round about Jerusalem brought their sick to Peter. All of them were healed no matter who was sick, and no matter what infirmity they had--broken bones, leprosy, whatever it may have been. They all were healed. There is no one on the earth today that can follow this pattern. If there is point him out. I am sure that we would have heard of this phenom by now. But no such person exists having such a gift. These gifts--the gift of healing, the gift of biblical tongues have ceased. There is no doubt about it.

 

And where do you see that in scripture?

 

The apostle Peter said on the day of Pentecost, "The promise is unto you, and to your children and to as many as are afar off" but both you & Doc wally seem to think that because its the 21st century, this kind of thing is no longer to be expected. That is a clear denial of the gospel.

 

Since when is speaking in tongues equal to the gospel. It is not. It is a sign for the unsaved Jew who rejected that sign (prophetically) and thus received judgment from God. Read 1Cor.14:21,22.
The gospel has always been commanded for one to be preached plainly in simple words that can be understood by all, never in other languages that cannot be understood. Paul said that he would rather speak in five words that could be understood than in 10,000 words of another language or in tongues. You deny the the very purpose of the gospel and thus, a misunderstanding of the Word of God.

The promise that you refer to in context is a promise made to the Jew. What tribe are you from?

 

I have as well. I’m been in crowded rooms both large and small with tongue-speaking. I have heard it in a number of places in the open air and with individuals praying in a “private prayer language” when they didn’t necessarily know I could hear them.

I’m assumed you actually meant to write that you haven’t heard of one single case of genuine gift of speaking in tongues in your experience since you believe it ended at the end of the first century.

My experience is likely very similar to yours, EXCEPT I am convinced I have witness at least one case of genuine tongues speaking with interpretation by a long-time close friend (who was also unconvinced of tongues until he realized he had the interpretation) and shared it with me. Furthermore, the interpretation was confirmed by an incident which occurred less than three minutes later on July 4, 1987 on Stewart Beach at Galveston Island, Texas.

You are assuming that the gift of healing is at the beck and call of the person with the gift instead of the person being the channel through which God does the healing according to His divine will.

But you are making this the norm instead of taking into account that even Jesus sometimes did not heal everyone. (Look at the beginning of John 8. Jesus walked past a number of people laying about the Pool of Siloam and only healed one.)

And then there’s the issue of the lack of faith (Matthew 13:58) which is a characteristic of our age (and many ages past) where people assume that divine healing, or other gifts, are not available to them.

For what it’s worth, my understanding of the sign gifts is that they are available to any believer as the need arises, according to the will of God. I have prayed (with another person) that someone who was very close to death in the emergency room of the hospital would recover. (This was in at the hospital in Torrington, Wyoming in March 1987.) The doctors quietly told the family that the woman would probably die from complete heart failure within the next 30 minutes and to gather the family quickly. The woman was unconscious, but her daughter begged us to pray for her, so we did. A few moments we left to minister to the gathering family in the waiting room. Within a few minutes, the woman was conscious and had fully recovered. They kept her for a few hours to check her out, but she was released that afternoon.

I did not heal her nor did the other person (the pastor of the church I was visiting, who was secretly involved in extensive immorality and not much later, indecency with a minor), but God restored the woman.

I see no evidence from scripture for your position and my experience demonstrates something else.

I must respectfully disagree.

 

Nowhere is their evidence that the gift of tongues is to be used as a private prayer language. In fact this was rebuked by Paul.

The word "tongues" means "languages." What foreign language did he speak in? In what language was it interpreted in? "Glossalalia or gibberish is not Biblical tongues. It was one foreign language to another language. "How hear we every man in our own language?" Was he miraculously given the ability to speak a foreign language and the interpreter miraculously given the ability to interpret this foreign language. That is what happened in the NT. And it was a gift. If it was a gift that means it could be done on a regular basis.

According to the will of God, yes it could. For example Paul healed many. But he couldn't heal: himself, Timothy, Trophimus. Why? It wasn't God's will for those particular individuals to be healed. It isn't God's will for all to be healed. But Paul did have the gift of healing and healed many that came to him. We see that as we study his missionary journeys.

Jesus often healed all who came to him. Read the gospel accounts. Some he did not heal. He is sovereign. He will heal whom he will heal. And he will do that for His glory and His purposes. It is not his will that all be healed. But he has the power and ability to heal anyone at anytime. He is and was, and always has been omnipotent.

That is the most terrible indictment and unbiblical excuse ever given. It is an excuse for not healing. It is not Biblical. It is cruel. And people who give it ought to be ashamed of themselves and step out of the ministry and declare themselves as frauds immediately.
Look at James 5 and read it carefully. This passage still applies for today.
Read the passage: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick.
Whose prayer? Whose faith? Certainly not the sick person's!!! It is the prayer of the pastor's that have gathered there to pray over the sick. All these charlatan's that claim to be faith-healers and say that the sick don't have enough faith have proven themselves to be frauds because they don't have enough faith to heal the sick ones right before them. That is how it works.

Read 1Cor.12-14. God only gives gifts to whom he will. Not everyone can speak in tongues. 1Cor.12:28ff specifically says that.

What does an anecdotal incident like that prove. God has the ability to heal. That has nothing to do with the gift of tongues neither the gift of healing. Neither was demonstrated there.

And I never said that God doesn't heal. I said the gift of healing is not in evidence today. Go down the corridors of a hospital and heal all that are there. Why doesn't someone who has the GIFT of healing do that?

You can, but you have no evidence.