For those who speak in tongues...

I am sure that you can read the passage better than that. He is not speaking about a songbook.

Peter is making a comparison.

Acts 2:15-16 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;

What you see are not drunken men. That is not the event that you are seeing. What you see is an event that was prophesied by Joel. It is an event, not a song book, not a person, but an event--a historical event, that is taking place right now before your eyes right here on the Day of Pentecost.
These are not people drunk with wine; they are not songbooks drunk with wine. These are people filled with the Holy Spirit, as prophesied by the prophet Joel. It is a fulfillment of prophesy. You can read about it in Joel 2:28. This is what it is. It is an event happening right now, Peter says--an event, a historical one, never again to be repeated, except in its complete fulfillment at that great and notable day of the Lord.
DHK

 

Well bless your heart! I too was making a comparison! By speaking so condecendingly to me, I wonder if YOU can read.

Tam

 

Hi Tam, I guess DHK and I part a little on this one. I don't think that Joel's prophecy has come true at all yet. I believe it is for a later time altogether. I really believe that Peter was saying that what they saw, at Pentecost, was a glimpse of what was to come. Peter was comparing one out-pouring of the Holy Spirit with one that was to come, that was mentioned by Joel. If you think about that it changes everything because many people feel like they have to make what Joel said apply, from Peter's words until today. If you realize it is just Peter making a comparison of two seperate events then you don't have to wonder why the prophecy doesn't fit into what we really see in the "church" today. Maybe DHK and I are just a tad different on this.

In Christ,
Brian

 

I agree with most of what you say Brian, with the greater fulfillment yet to come in the future:

Acts 2:20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

However I also believe (by the very wording of Peter) that there was a partial fulfillment--however small it may have been--on the Day of Pentecost, when they were all fiilled with the Holy Spirit, and that manifestation was evident to all--in contrast to drunkenness.
DHK

 

But still where in Acts or Joel does it say that the gifts will cease? Paul said that he was in the last days.
Heb 1:2 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;

Or does 2Peter witness that the last days are yet to come?

2Pe 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:
2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

Just as Wednesday is known as the middle of the week and Thursday is at the end, but yet not the end.
Did the last days start after Jesus ascended and the Spirit first began to be poured out? Then looking at what Peter says about this is what Joel. But where is a cut off of the Spirit being poured out? The last day maybe?

 

Then by all means read those chapters!!
But don't try to force them into the context of Acts chapter 2. Peter didn't say: "This is that which is going to happen in Acts chapter 8, 10 and 19, did he?
He said: "This is that which is spoken of by the prophet Joel" The emphasis is on the "IS." It was a present event that Peter was pointing at. The unsaved mocking Jews were accusing those speaking in tongues of being drunk. Peter, in his rebuke of them, said, NO! This (this very event) is a fulfillment of Joel's prophecy--Joel 2:28. It doesn't apply anywhere else in the New Testament, except in its complete fulfillment when Christ comes again, not anywhere in the Book of Acts! Don't try to force your own preconceived ideas into a passage where they don't belong.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]Peter did not down play what happen in these chapters . He even said in one of them that what happened to these is the same thing that happend to us on the Day of PEntecost.

Why do you always say that I am forcing a preconcieved idea. You are always hostile about this subject and I think you have some deep wounds about something. There is help available if you will look for it.

 

Brian,

But its a judgement none the less. Scripture speaks of tongues as having more than one reason for being...

1) As you have mentioned, a warning to 1st century Jews concerning their unbelief.

2) As you have pointed out, a warning to 1st century Jews concerning the coming judgment in 70AD

3) A personal prayer language for the edification of the believer, as I have given the scripture support for.

4) To give a message of encouragment to a gathered body of believers when interpreted, as I have also given the scriptural support for.

And Jesus said that those signs, along with others, would follow those "who believe". Not those "who believe in the 1st century". Those "who believe". Period.

And does God not care about the coming judgement because of their unbelief that will occur at the Great White Throne judgment?

I'm not. I'm quoting from Gods scriptures concerning all of the reasons for tongues. I'm giving scripture for every one of them.

I'm not making tongues more than what they are, you guys are making tongues less than what they are.

By just simply reading them...

I dont have to read anything good into those scriptures...Paul already does it.

Paul is only saying that to give an interpretation is more profitable for a gathered assembly, and that is true. But clearly...CLEARLY...he is not discounting the other uses, including as a personal prayer language. He affirms tham as being something GOOD...

He is affirming it all, but saying the one is more profitable than the other in a gathered assembly...

I have never denied that aspect. But I wish you guys could get to where you dont deny the other, since Paul affirms at as being good, and Jesus said it will follow as long as there are "those who believe", as we do.

God bless,

Mike

 

Brian,

I said...

And in adition to that, I'd like to add...

There are millions of born again, Spirit filled christians who love Jesus Christ with all their heart and are glorifying them with their lives and they speak in a prayer language they have never learned, and others give an interpretation when in an assembly.

If these people are not doing it because of a gift of the Spirit from God, then what is the source...Satan?

Are these born again people who are living for Jesus Christ and glorifying them with their lives doing this in the power of Satan...or God?

I am asking a sincere question, brother.

If the gift of tongues, the legitimate one from Almighty God, is no longer being given for the last 1900 years...as DHK and I believe you as well are saying...then are these people actually under the infuence by Satan?

Because they have never learned this language. It has to be one or the other. God or Satan.

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

Peter did not play up what happened in Acts chapter two on the day of Pentecost.'
He referred to the similarity between the two events. He never said that "Pentecost" was repeating itself. "Pentecost" was a one time event. In none of the other two passages were there any rushing wind or accompanying tongues of fire. This was a one time event, a fulfillment of prophecy, just like Peter said it was. He never made that claim in any of the other two chapters. "This is" means exactly what it says: "This is" What is so hard to understand about those two words. It refers to the present action that he was pointing at in opposition to "Not that" but "This is"

If the best argument or defence that you have is to pretend that you are a psychologist or a psychiatrist, then I would rather you not even post. Stick to the word of God, and stop the personal attacks. You were forcing a preconceived idea into a historical passage where the grammar clearly won't allow for it. Personal attacks are not tolerated. Next time they will be edited.
DHK

 

Mike, I do believe the real Gift of Tongues faded away right after 70AD. What I see happening in churches today where Tongues are taught is really seperated into two categories. The first is churches with really bad doctrine, including that you have to speak in tongues to be saved, or to prove you are saved. People have to speak in Tongues in those churches whether they want to or not. Because if they don't they feel they are not going to heaven. everyone around them is doing it so they pick it up as well. The other is clearly good Christian people who are making an honest mistake. The intentions are noble, with a few exceptions. They want to be closer to God and are taught and experience Tongues as a way to achieve that. A closer walk is a good thing and so the motive is pure. However, they are mistaken and what they are practicing is not pleasing to God in the sense that they think it is. The private prayer language idea is pretty new from what I have seen. Maybe others have more history on it. Here is the thing, Paul said, "do all speak in Tongues?" The implied answer was no. So now we know 100% sure that Tongues are not for everyone. But wait say some, that is just the church gift that is only for some the private prayer language is for all. You see the PPL was started because the scripture was clear that not all speak in Tongues. The word in the Bible for Tongues, in Greek, always means real languages. It does not matter what verse in what NT chapter if Tongues is used it means actual languages. The PPL is a bad theology that was generated to meet what was starting to happen in churches already. It was not driven by scripture truth it was created to meet a practice. There is not two seperate gifts in the Bible, there just is not.

Of Satan, naw I don't think so, just mostly good people under poor teaching (at least with that subject). Also, loving Jesus is an emotional thing. I love to praise with hands help up or clapping and it is emotional. Tongues perhaps is just emotions taken to the next level.

When Paul said he would pray or sing with understanding, he was saying that speaking gibberish, a non language was wrong. He was directly saying that the speaker needs to have understanding as well as the hearers because only then can full "Body" edification happen. That is why the next verse speaks of the need for the hearer to understand, so he can say the AMEN. It sounds like you agree with me on what Paul said in regards to the 5 word verse.

Mike, do you understand that Paul is bashing (for lack of a better word) the Corinthians in 1 Cor. He gives them a lashing on the mis-use of tongues. You are reading the verses as Paul is praising them when he is doing the opposite. Paul was saying self-edification is wrong! and yet you read the verse that says "the one who speaks in Tongues edifies himself" and you see a positive even though Paul says it is better to prophecy, why? because it edifies everyone and the Tongues speakers were seeking to edify themselves. Read 1 Cor. 12 when you get some time and see how paul teaches them not to seek after the "showy" or "best" gifts.

Question: Paul is clear to us that Tongues will end at a different time then Prophecy and Knowledge (as Gifts). Why is this?

In Christ,
Brian

 

Taken out of context did Jesus say they would follow "those who believe." The passage says drinking poisons would follow those who believe too. Do you make that a daily ritual? HCL perhaps? It obviously has a first century context, when most, if not all of those things in Mark 16 were fulfilled.

There is no such thing as a prayer language in tongues in the Bible. It cannot be demonstrated with an honest exegesis from Scripture. Paul rebukes those who try and do so. All of the spiritual gifts, and I mean ALL of them, were given for the benefit of the entire church; for the edification of the entire church. There is no such thing as a selfish spiritual gift, which a prayer language would be. God would not give out such a thing. You know how to pray; then pray! There is no need to pray in another language--pray to God. He knows what you are saying no matter what language you use. Prayer is for your own good. If you pray in a language you can't understand, it does you no good; and for that matter, it does God no good either, because you don't know what you prayed. It is totally unscriptural. Speaking in tongues (if Scriptural at all) was always, always given to the entire church. The entire epistle was addressing problems related to the church at Corinth. He wasn't addressing private prayer. He was addressing speaking in tongues in the church.

Secondly, how do you know it is in a language they never learned? In other words can you provide evidence that it is in a language period, and not in just some gibberish. That is what most if not all of it is. It is not a language at all. And the person interpreting doesn't know what he is saying either. Ask him. Ask him what language he is interpreting from. Ask and see if anyone can verify that that was the language he was speaking. Get some evidence.
--They may love Jesus, but they are misled, misguided. They are relying on an experience rather than the Word of God.

Not necessarily. Most allow their subconscious to override their conscious mind. That allows them to speak in incoherent syllables that they think is a language. It is a pshycological experience most of the time. People who are looking for it and wanting it, will no doubt get it. You can allow your mind to be passive enough to be over-ruled by your emotions and subconscious.

As mentioned above, not most of the time. But some of the time it is by the influence of Satan. This is what I believe Paul was referring to in 1Cor.12:1-3.
There are two kinds of Spirits: the Holy Spirit and a demonic spirit. Look at this verse carefully:

1 Corinthians 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

I can get anyone to read that verse, even a Muslim--then he would be saying that "Jesus is Lord." It obviously doesn't mean that only those who are filled with the Spirit can say that "Jesus is Lord," because that isn't true.

The issue was tongues, a badly used spiritual gift. Some of them mis-used the gift, as they did when they were pagans. They didn't know what they were saying, but others did. They were saying that "Jesus is accursed" by the power of a demon. That has happened in this day and age by some Charismatics also. They did not know what they were saying but someone else did. They were indeed speaking in another language, and cursing God at the same time. Only by a demonic spirit will that happen. Only by the Holy Spirit (in another tongue) will one say that "Jesus is Lord." Speaking in another tongue leaves one open to this possibility.

Not necessarily. But beware.

It can also be self-induced, or a partial hypnosis, which happens to those who go to Benny Hinn crusades. There was a good documentary done by CBC which showed how that happened. It all hadd to do with the effect of the music, lights, environment, Benny's clothes, voice, and even eyes. He is able to get his audience in a hypnotic state.
DHK

 

1.Show me a greek word for gibbereish.
2.Very few people believe that you have to speak in tongues to be saved. I personally have only met 7 people in my lifetime that believed this and when I questioned them they backed down.
3. Who \are you to judge who is pleasing to
God. Does a person have to agree with your interpretation to be pleasing to God?
4. Is anyone telling you that you have to speak in tongues to be their brother in christ?
5. If a person is praying in tongues in their private prarey closet is it your place to determine if they are right. if you don't want to speak in tongues that is between you and God but it is also between them and God if they do.
Are they praying to you or ,are praying to God?
If they pray to you then you decide . If they are praying to God do they need your permission to pray in tongues.

I can disagree with you and you can disagree with me. I am no more your judge thatn you are my judge.
On the isssue of people that say you have to speak in tongues to be saved,
That would be like saying that Baptist people smoke pot. I have known some Baptist pot smokers but that is an exception just like a few Christians that believe you have to speak in tongues to be saved but that is not mainstream.
The term Second Blessing is a more common belief.
Some do not believe in any kind of second blessing but if a person has ever rededicated their life they have had a second blessing.

[ November 03, 2005, 10:34 AM: Message edited by: atestring ]

 

Brian,

I cetainly dont believe that, and I have never been a part of a fellowship that believes that. But I have heard it taught, and I believe that it is great error to teach that.

The scriptures are clear that not all are gifted in the same way, and the gift of faith or teaching or charity is no less important than any other gift.

I have heard people teach that its up to you to start it. The seeker is told to just starting articulating non-sensical gibberish, and the Spirit will take over after you start it. I believe that as well is great error.

But millions have recieved the gift while praising God from their heart in English, when to their complete suprise a perfectly formed non-learned language starts flowwing effortlessly from their mouth. And I have also heard testimonies from people who have had someone come up to them and say "Thats the native language from my country of "such and such", are you from there???"

Of course, they arent.

Its those types of tongues...whether its an earthly language or not...that I believe are legitimate.

Limited on time right now...more later.

Mike

 

Taken out of context did Jesus say they would follow "those who believe." The passage says drinking poisons would follow those who believe too. Do you make that a daily ritual? HCL perhaps? It obviously has a first century context, when most, if not all of those things in Mark 16 were fulfilled.

There is no such thing as a prayer language in tongues in the Bible. It cannot be demonstrated with an honest exegesis from Scripture. Paul rebukes those who try and do so. All of the spiritual gifts, and I mean ALL of them, were given for the benefit of the entire church; for the edification of the entire church. There is no such thing as a selfish spiritual gift, which a prayer language would be. God would not give out such a thing. You know how to pray; then pray! There is no need to pray in another language--pray to God. He knows what you are saying no matter what language you use. Prayer is for your own good. If you pray in a language you can't understand, it does you no good; and for that matter, it does God no good either, because you don't know what you prayed. It is totally unscriptural. Speaking in tongues (if Scriptural at all) was always, always given to the entire church. The entire epistle was addressing problems related to the church at Corinth. He wasn't addressing private prayer. He was addressing speaking in tongues in the church.

Secondly, how do you know it is in a language they never learned? In other words can you provide evidence that it is in a language period, and not in just some gibberish. That is what most if not all of it is. It is not a language at all. And the person interpreting doesn't know what he is saying either. Ask him. Ask him what language he is interpreting from. Ask and see if anyone can verify that that was the language he was speaking. Get some evidence.
--They may love Jesus, but they are misled, misguided. They are relying on an experience rather than the Word of God.

Not necessarily. Most allow their subconscious to override their conscious mind. That allows them to speak in incoherent syllables that they think is a language. It is a pshycological experience most of the time. People who are looking for it and wanting it, will no doubt get it. You can allow your mind to be passive enough to be over-ruled by your emotions and subconscious.

As mentioned above, not most of the time. But some of the time it is by the influence of Satan. This is what I believe Paul was referring to in 1Cor.12:1-3.
There are two kinds of Spirits: the Holy Spirit and a demonic spirit. Look at this verse carefully:

1 Corinthians 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

I can get anyone to read that verse, even a Muslim--then he would be saying that "Jesus is Lord." It obviously doesn't mean that only those who are filled with the Spirit can say that "Jesus is Lord," because that isn't true.

The issue was tongues, a badly used spiritual gift. Some of them mis-used the gift, as they did when they were pagans. They didn't know what they were saying, but others did. They were saying that "Jesus is accursed" by the power of a demon. That has happened in this day and age by some Charismatics also. They did not know what they were saying but someone else did. They were indeed speaking in another language, and cursing God at the same time. Only by a demonic spirit will that happen. Only by the Holy Spirit (in another tongue) will one say that "Jesus is Lord." Speaking in another tongue leaves one open to this possibility.

Not necessarily. But beware.

It can also be self-induced, or a partial hypnosis, which happens to those who go to Benny Hinn crusades. There was a good documentary done by CBC which showed how that happened. It all hadd to do with the effect of the music, lights, environment, Benny's clothes, voice, and even eyes. He is able to get his audience in a hypnotic state.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]If I buy a suit like Brother Benny's and play the same songs that he has at his crusades and try to talk like Brother Benny, does that mean that people get hypnotized. Does Brother Benny have light bulbs that are different thatn other light bulbs on the market?
The enviroment of A Benny Hinn Crusade is usually in a coleseum , Does this mean that if you got a light bulb from Benny Hinn and showed up at a basketball game at one of the colesuems in a white suit that people will get hypnotized?
This sounds interesting!!

 

I am in the same boat with atesting and D28guy. You don't have to talk in tongues to be saved and I posted that on the 1st page. As a matter of fact I don't think I read a post on this thread here of anyone saying you got to talk in tongues to be saved? I know they are out there though.

 

I never said you had to, and agree that most people don't. There are many that do believe tongues is a requirement of salvation such as Oneness Pentecostal, United Pentecostal, etc.
Cult or not, they are not to be discounted.
DHK

 

If tongues was, indeed, a valuable spiritual experience, taught by scripture, why do not more solid Christian and dedicated congregations have at least one experience of tongues? I have been a minister of the gospel for more than 50 years and never once had the urge to speak in tongues, other than French, and never experienced anyone in my congregations to pursue tongues.

Is does seem strange to me.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I don't buy everthing that comes down the pike like the ellusive Vancouver greek scholar and the Chineese laundryman

 

Brian,

I never argued against that.

I dont believe any form of tongues must be for everyone.

If someone is speaking a heavenly language, they are speaking a real language.

I dont agree. It started because in the 1st century some of the tongues were known earthly languages, while some were a language unknown to earth, with interpretations given by one gifted to do that.

I have given the scriptural support for all of those types of tongues. But your denominational tradition has taught you a particular interpretation of those passages that is different than the interpretation by other groups. And thats OK. ("let your brother be fully convinced in his own mind, for who are you to judge anothers servant") However, your side is not the only side with Greek scholors and Hebrew scholors and Aramaic scholors. Our side has those who are versed in all of those things as well, and they are convinced that the views I am sharing are the correct interpretation of the scriptures regarding these issues.

Simply put, we believe the scriptures clearly teach that their are. In the Greek. In the Hebrew. With proper exegesis, etc.

You better believe it is!

There could be an element of truth to that. But its still a gift. One cant emotionally speak a completly new language fluently. If I had a great love for the Italian people as an example, I could not emotionally conjure up fluent Italian with my emotions.

No he wasnt. He merely said that in a gathered assembly one was better. Here it is again. Please notice the bolded parts...

"14:15 What is the conclusion then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the understanding.

14:16 Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how will he who occupies the place of the uninformed say "Amen" at your giving of thanks, since he does not understand what you say?

14:17 For you indeed give thanks well, but the other is not edified.

14:18 I thank my God I speak with tongues more than you all;"

I dont know how God can make it any clearer...and I dont know how you can miss it over and over again.

I do agree with you, but why are you not seeing that Paul is affirming both! I dont know how you can miss it.

He does not say...

"I will not pray with the spirit, rather I will only pray with the understanding"

He says...

"I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding."

He does not say...

I will not sing with the spirit, rather I will only pray with the understanding"

He says...

"I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the understanding"

He clearly affirms both.

Only partially. He is not bashing them for their use of the gifts of the Spirit. He is saying that they are not using them properly.

I agree. But he is not saying that tongues are wrong, or that a personal prayer language is wrong. He is simply telling them what is the most profitable in a gathered assempbly

If that is all they are doing in gathered assembly! He is not saying a personal prayer language for the edification of the believer is wrong, for he said...

"I will pray with the spirit", "I will sing in the spirit", and "I thank God I speak in tongues more than you all"

Because Paul doesnt say that to pray in the spirit is wrong, he just says the other is better in a gathered assembly. The tradition of some denominations says that to pray in the spirit is wrong, but not Paul.

When Paul says...

"I will pray with the Spirit, and I will pray with the understanding".

...how do you get a negative out of that regarding praying with the spirit?

And when Paul says...

I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding"

...how do you get a negative out of that regarding singin in the spirit?

It would be as if you said...

"I like Cleveland, and I also like Detroit".

...and then I said "Oh, so you dont like Detroit???"

In a gathered assembly the messages or prophecying should be understandable, and tongues should be interpreted.

Could you share the passage of scripture where you got that?

The scripture I am thinking of is this...

"13:8
Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away.
13:9
For we know in part and we prophesy in part.
13:10
But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.
13:11
When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
13:12
For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known."

That seems to indicate that all of those things will no longer be needed when we are no longer seeing heaven as through a mirror, dimly, but when we are literally in heaven.

Grace and peace,

Mike