Speaking in Tongues Continued

Paul lists the gifts of the Holy Spirit twice in 1Cor.12; tongues is one of them. Either they had this gift at Pentecost or they did not. If they did not, then what they had must have been of the devil? No?? Then what is your belief? I thought you were the one that kept on saying that the gifts and calling of God were without repentance, meaning without change. God doesn't change the nature of the gift. Speaking in a foreign language remains speaking in a foreign language. The only time it changed to an ecstatic utterance is when it was used in a pagan cult, a demon possessed person, or in the modern day gibberish started at the beginning at the twentieth century--a phenomena completley foreign to Christianity up until that time. Not even the apostles had ever known about this except to recognize it as a pagan practice.

 

Good post DHK.

Another interesting point is how the Assy of God churches latched on to a gift that Paul was negative about and had to correct the Corinthian church for their abuse of.

He put so many restrictions on it, that it was essentially worthless to the church. The entire point was, if there aren't people you can talk to in another language in your church, then you are wasting your time and you certainly better have a translator since nobody can understand you.

Funny, that the Assy of God churches do NOT follow the rules of Paul in their entirety when they mumble on.

I also think it is interesting that they use tongues to prove Baptism of the Holy Spirit, when it is admitted that not all people get the gift.

Tongues, in the first century, was quite a miracle. It was wonderful that people could listen to the gospel in their own language.

 

The Baptist Faith and Message passed by the Southern Baptist Convention
i 2000 say this:

VI. The Church

A New Testament church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the two ordinances of Christ, governed by His laws, exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by His Word, and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. Each congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes. In such a congregation each member is responsible and accountable to Christ as Lord. Its scriptural officers are pastors and deacons. While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.

The New Testament speaks also of the church as the body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.

This 'church', the universal bride of Christ and universal
body of Chirst, in paragraph 2 is often called 'the catholic church'.
Southern Baptists believe they are 'catholic' (i.e. part of the universal
church of the Living Christ). By contrast, the 'Roman Catholic Church' (AKA RCC)
denotes the apostate church under the control of the Bishop of
Rome, falsely known as 'the Pope, Christ's substitute on earth'.

I hereby rebuke the adheering to the RCC History of Christianity.
Roughly here is the propaganda of the RCC:

There is one true RCC formed by the perpetual abstainer Pope Peter
In 1054 the RCC expelled the apostate church of the East (AKA:
Eastern Orthodox, ha 'orthodox'!) and in the 14th century the
apostate churches of the Protestants.

I've already given a more 'Baptist' view of Christian history:

There are four great branches (sperated by geography) of Christianity
until the formation of the RCC in 1054:
1. RCC
2. Eastern Orthodox (the Metropolitian Sees"
3. Eastern Syrian (AKA: Nestorian)
4. Coptic (Egyption)

If you choose to reject my history, and accept the history (propaganda)
of the RCC - doesn't that make you more of a RCC than a Baptist?

DHK: //The Catholic Church, per se, started with Constanntine in the early part of the fourth century when Constantine made "Christianity" a state religion, and began to paganize it. //

Roman propaganda, the RCC (not the catholics) is still evolving.
The Papal Inffalibility Doctrine of the RCC didn't appear until the
19th century (1801-1900).
In the Nicean council of 325AD there were representatives of what would
later become the RCC, Easter Orthodox, Eastern Syrian, and Coptic churches.
That was when Christianity was still 'catholic' (i.e. the universal body of
Christ) and not divided asunder as it is today.

BTW, guess which three branches of Christianity practice estatic utterances.
Here is the answer:
2. Eastern Orthodox (the Metropolitian Sees"
3. Eastern Syrian (AKA: Nestorian)
4. Coptic (Egyption)

But hey, RCC folks don't want that known in the pew, their folks might
start praying in tongues and quit praying to Mary.

 

At this site it says what follows:

http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/Norval/pease.htm

BTW, 'ecstatic utterances' is NOT speaking
to multiple people at one time each
one hearing in their own language.

If all the people understood what was
said in their own language, it is not what
Paul spake of in 1 Corinthians chapter 14
where it was commanded

1Co 14:13 (KJV1611 Edition):
Wherefore let him that speaketh
in an vnknowen tongue, pray that
he may interprete.

There is no need to 'interpret' when
one hears in ones own languages.

Two different things:
1. The miracle of the Day of Pentacost,
a miracle of HEARING
2. the non-miracle of speaking with
ecstatic utterances (AKA: unknown tongues)

 

quote
This is what Ray said:

Due tell us what quasi-theologian told you this erring view first. We all want to blacken his name for such a virus placed in the Word of God--the Bible.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tam says,

First of all Ray did not say God was a quasit-theologian, you put words in his mouth! He was not attacking the Bible or God!! He was asking where the theology that you preach came from.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DHK then said:

Here's Ray's original quote in response to Hope of Glory:

quote:

Hope of Glory,

You said, 'But, the signs of the spirit aren't outward signs. The sign-gifts were given for a specific reason and that specific reason went away about 69 AD.'

Rays answer was:

 

http://hem.bredband.net/arenamontanus/Mage/Egypt/Chorus.html

Uh, Muslims don't like ecstatic utterances.

 

DHK,

Muslims have a holy book--the Koran a prophet--Mohammad and you say 'tongues.' What does that have to do with anything.

Christians have the Holy Bible, our O.T. prophets and 'the gift of tongues.' Our religion/faith is right; we are blessed.

 

Paul in 1 Cor never says that tongues has ceased. What he does it to attempt to control it and when it is controlled it will cease partly because there is no need for it. Tongues does not edify the body. It only edifies self. So in the body there is no need for tongues.

To say tongues has ceased is absolutely wrong. It is to add an interpretation that Paul never taught. It has even been documented that non-believers have spoken in tongues.

Any reputable lexicon or theological dictionary on the word glossolalia teaches that tongues includes ecstatic utterances. If one studies the history of Corinth he will find it is ecstatic utterances.

 

DHK: //The Biblical gift of tongues is always
confined to speaking a real genuine foreign language, unknown to the speaker, but known
to the hearer.//

Your wrong definition of 'tongues' colors all your derived logic and
leads to continuial error.

The Miracle of Hearing on the Day of Pentcost is NOT
the same as the 1 Cor chapter 14 'unknown tongues'.

Paul even goes so far as to DEFINE 'unknown tongues' in 1 Corinthians 14:2
(KJV1611 Edition):

For he that speaketh in an vnknowen tongue,
speaketh not vnto men, but vnto God:
for no man vnderstandeth him:
howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Which part of NO MAN UNDERSTANDS HIM are you having problems with?
it is not some other language, for people of that language would
understand him. No man understands him because it is an UNKNOWN
tongue.

BTW, unknown tongues is NOT a miracle.
It is so easy to do that I taught it once to a 5-year-old.
He thought he was pretending to read the words
he really couldn't read.

 

1Co 14:18-19 (KJV1611 Edition):
I thanke my God, I speake with tongues more then you all.
19 Yet in the Church I had rather speake fiue words
with my vnderstanding, that by my voyce I might teach others also,
then ten thousand words in an vnknowen tongue.

I guess like Paul, I speak with tongues more than you all.
But I'm the head bouncer in my local church. I'd bounce any one
who starts outloud talking in unknown tongue. (By rules of
our church, nobody there can interpert an unknown tongue).
Fortunately in 32 years nobody spoke in an unkown tongue.
(Some folk started going to the AoG church across town).

Yes, I'd rather teach in English, which all but one of
my Sunday School Class members speak (but he can hear
English just fine).

DHK: // ... an ecstatic tongue is impossible to interpret ... //

Oh, I recon it can, if God gives a person the gift of the Spirit
of interpreting tongues.

1 Corinthians 12:5-11 (KJV1611 Edition):

5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
6 And there are diuersities of operations, but it is the same God, which worketh all in all.
7 But the manifestation of the spirit, is giuen to euery man to profit withall.
8 For to one is giuen by the spirit, ... to another diuers kindes of tongues,
to another the interpretation of tongues.
11 But all these worketh that one and the selfe same spirit, diuiding to euery man seuerally as he will.

Sorry, interpretation of unknown tongues (glossia, escatic utterances, etc.)
is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

The ability to interpret one language into another language
you know is a common human ability. To bad we tend to neglect
that ability in the USofA

 

DHK: //You cannot demonstrate through Scripture that there was
any miracle of hearing. But the Bible definitely says they spoke
with other languages. Why not believe the Bible instead
of your own imagination?//

Of course, using the same scriputre you used:

Acts 2:4-6 And they were all filled with the holy Ghost,
and began to speake with other tongues,
as the spirit gaue them vtterance.
5 And there were dwelling at Hierusalem Iewes,
deuout men, out of euery nation vnder heauen.
6 Now when this was noised abroad,
the multitude came together, and were confounded,
because that euery man heard them speake in his own language.

What kind of human language is heard by all who hear it in their
own langugae? Must have been an OTHER TONGUE.
The miracle of pentacost is NOT talking, the maracle was THE HEARING.