Speaking in Tongues Volume 4...

Mike, you haven't answered my post on "mysteries" from page 1 (or was it page 2). Anyway, I will write on Mark 16 after I hear from you and we finish the "mysteries" debate. Thanks!

In Christ,
Brian

 

Bible-boy,

Your interpretation is a possible and viable view though I do not personally believe this is correct. I said before, 'Yes, the miracle was that the disciples spoke 'in tongues' but each person understood in his or her own native language.

One tongue was spoken--and yet all understood. Miracle! Miracle! Miracle!'

Either way it was a great miracle and may have been given the disciples and apostles in the 'tongue' of the language of Heaven as noted in I Corinthians 13:1 as 'the tongues of angels' as they communicate with God. The Lord, I believe, spoke to them with the communication of Heaven. If it was the language of the people of the visiting nations, they would not have thought that they were drunk with wine. There speech was that of glossalia--the language of I Corinthians 12 & 14 an unheard of tongue/language and yet they heard in their national language.

 

At every Pentecostal or Charismatic fellowship I have been a part of since 1982 the biblical gifts of tongues has been in evidence.

Including yesterday at my current fellowship.

Last night, in addition to tongues we had the prophetic gift in evidence as well.

What a great great blessing these gifts are to the body of Christ. The sweet ~Winds~ of the Spirit are so very refreshing.

God bless,

Mike </font>[/QUOTE]I have found the opposite too be true since 1977. If this church is near tell me where? I would like to visit. I am near Detroit. I am 47 and have yet to see any charasmatic church follow the biblical guidelines for tongues in person or on tv. But hey I am open if you find one. Just not goiong to go out of my way cause I know better.

 

Mike, you haven't answered my post on "mysteries" from page 1 (or was it page 2). Anyway, I will write on Mark 16 after I hear from you and we finish the "mysteries" debate. Thanks!

In Christ,
Brian

***************************************

Brian,

In the instance you are speaking of in the bible, it's a mystery because no one listening to the person knows what he is saying.

But God, who knows all things and understands all things does understand it.

It is not a mystery to God, only to the people listening. That is why the person is "seemingly" speaking mysteries.

Selah,

Tam

 

Originally posted by D28guy:
DHK,

TamborineLady quotes you and then responded...

[/QUOTE]We have answered you, over and over and over again.[/QUOTE]And then you said...

You were the one that said that Scripture must fit like a hand in a glove. But you are doing the opposite here. The Great Commission is not only mentioned here, in Mark 16:15, but also in Mat.28:19,20; Luke 24:46,47; John 15:16; Acts 1:8. Every other place it is mentioned we are commanded to go into all the world without any mention of signs and wonders. The Scripture does not contradict itself. Why the discrpepancy? Take the totality of Scripture and you find that Christ, in this passage was specifically speaking to his Apostles, with his attention focused on his Apostles especiially in verses 16-20. Yes it talks about them that believe. Believe what? Specifically the message that the Apostle’s were about to give out in that age. The signs and wonders were the signs and wonders of that age. You claim by faith promise of speaking in tongues, and do so at any time your heart desires. But you fail to claim by faith the promise of taking up deadly serpents or drinking any poisonous substance any time your heart desries. Why the discrepancy? You are being hypocritical. You claim one of the promises by faith and yet avoid the others. If all the gifts were for today you would be able to exercise all of them with no problem. But they aren’t for today. They were for the Apostolic Age and ceased at the end of that age. That is why you don’t go around picking up serpents and drinking deadly poisons.
What does verse 20 say:

Mark 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.
--And they (the Apostles) went forth, and preached every where. The Lord confirming the Word (and them) with signs following. It was not for everyone. It was for the Apostles. The Lord confirmed the Apostles and the Apostle’s message. You can believe the gospel of Mark or not. But Mark says it plainly in verse 20. It is also verified in Heb.2:3,4 and 2Cor.12:12, which you have avoided and have no way of explaining. You have yet to explain these verses. You, like a J.W., just jump to another passage. It is typical of a cult. Your asnwer: “But what about…” Deal with the Scripture at hand. What about Heb.2:3,4? What about 2Cor.12:12. The signs of an apostle are…? You know the answer before turning to these verses don’t you?

We can only conclude that as long as the Apostles were alive that these gifts of the Spirit continued, and that is all.
DHK

 

D28guy,

When you spoke of the 'prophetic gift' after the 'speaking in tongues.' I understand you to mean the 'interpretation of tongues.' Am I correct? Some of the brethren need to understand this, if this indeed is what happened.

Ray

 

Yes, he quotes from the Law, Isaiah 28:11,12 to be specific. He shows the Jews that this was a fulfillment of prophecy, that one day God would send them a sign—people would speak the message of God in Gentile languages, and they would not listen. They didn’t listen in Isaiah’s day, and sadly, they didn’t listen in the Apostle’s day. As a result judgment came, as prophesied.
Consider the result of Isaiah’s prophesy, and the consequent action of Israel. Israel rebelled. Therefore:
Israel went into captivity in 722 B.C.
Judah went into captivity in 586 B.C.
The Messiah came and they rejected Him, crucified him.
In one final opportunity they rejected the Apostles message which was accompanied by the sign of other langauges (tongues). This sign they knew about for it was prophesied about in Isaiah 28. Thus they knew judgement was around the corner, soon to come. They had rejected God now for too long.
The Jews hated the Gentiles. The would not socialize with them in any way—not by eating, by going into their houses, not in any way. To hear their sacred message of God being spoken to them by Gentiles in Gentile languages was absolutely abhorrent. This was a sign of judgement. They had gone too far when they had crucified their Messiah. This is what Peter addressed in his sermon in Acts 2—By wicked hands ye have taken and crucified the Holy One.
This generation of Jews suffered judgment at the hands of the Roman General, Titus, when he destroyed their city Jerusalem, and especially their Temple.

Now consider very carefully.
Paul says: “it is written to this people. Who does “this people” refer to? “This people” refers to the nation of Israel, just as “this people” refers to the nation of Israel in Isaiah 28. He was speaking of the entire nation of Israel. The prophecy and accompanying judgement was upon the entire nation of Israel. Tongues was a sign for the nation of Israel. When the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. the nation of Israel ceased to exist as a nation. The Temple was no more, and Israel was scattered throughout the world. They did not become a nation again until 1948, almost 1900 years later when the U.N. formally gave them a portion of their land back, and once again they were incorporated as a nation. For 1900 years Israel did not exist as a nation. Thus your interpretation of this verse makes no sense whatsoever. It would not be applicable to 1900 generations of people when Israel was not a nation. It is evident therefrore that the gift of tongues was a sign only to the first generation of Jews, not to the Jews of today, and all the Jews before today, but ONLY the first generation Jews. They existed as a nation only up to 70 A.D., around which time tongues began to cease.

If you look at the passage carefully you will see that verse 22 is connected with verse 21 by the word “wherefore.” The two verses go together. The “unbelieving” of verse 22 defines the “this people” of verse 21, in other words the unbelieving Jews. It was not a sign to the believing Jews but rather the unbelieving Jews. The context is the nation of Israel. That much is obvious. It does not refer to beleivers all over the world: Gentile and Jew alike. Take the verse in its context. Either way, you have to deal with verse 21. Without verse 22 you still have no answer for verse 21. That is the crux of the whole matter. Tongues is a sign to the nation of Israel. That is the meaning of verse 21. That is the verse you must contend with. Never mind verse 22 for the time being. Don’t be like the J.W. “But what about….” Deal with 1Cor.14:21. You have no answer for that verse.

Here you have done the typical Charismatic thing of defining your thelogy upon the basis of your experience. It must be false because my experience comes first. Clearly the Scriptures show that the nation of Israel rejected God, and rejected Christ. They were judged for their rejection. What has that got to do with everyone in the world? You only say that because of your twisted interpretation of verse 22. You need your interpretation of 22 to refer to all believers or (unbelievers) to fit into your theology. You have put your experience first and your theology second, trying to justify your experience by twisting the Word of God. Deal with verse 21. It is a sign to the Jews.

I realize that. And I believe your interpretation is wrong. But because there is so much to discuss about this passage it is better left to a thread of its own, thererfore I did not go into any detail here.

I can provide Scriptural evidence and you cannot. That is the difference.

That is not what it says; that is only what you would like it to say.

I am the one that has given you Scripture that to this day has gone unanswered. Why?

They ceased by the end of the first century.
As someone else issued the challenge: Show me one church in this entire world where Biblical tongues is practiced. You can’t. It doesn’t exist.
I live in a city of a million. In it are dozens of Charismatic churches. If I were to randomly choose six of the more prominent ones where they speak in tongues I could guarantee you that:
1. All I would hear would be babbling, incoherent gibberisn, and no language at all.
2. If it would be Biblical it would be an actual foreign language
3. If it would be Biblical it would not only be a foreign language, but it would be translated so that all would be edified.
4. The translator would know what language he was translating. I would be able to ask him and he would be able to tell me.
5. The foreign language being spoken in would be of benefit to some in the congregation who do not understand English. So I would be able to go to those people and verify that it was their language being spoken.. For tongues (languages) was for all the church to be edified.
6. This assumes that every other rule has been negated already—a sign to the Jews, no women speaking in tongues, at the most 3 could speak in tongues, only one person at a time, all had to have an interpreter, the Bible still not completed, etc.
DHK

 

DHK,

You said, 'We can only conclude that as long as the Apostles were alive that these gifts of the Spirit continued, and that is all.'

.

 

. </font>[/QUOTE]To my knowledge Billy Graham, as ecumenical as he may be, does not speak in tongues, does not claim to have any of the gifts of the spirit--prophecy, interpretation of tongues, miracles, healing, etc. He is not a Charismatic, though he tolerates them being ecumenical, just as he tolerates Catholics.

The gifts of the Spirit ceased by the end of the first century with the end of the Apostolic age. The did not continue after the Apostolic Age, and they did not exist before the Apostolic Age. Was God depriving His people of the gifts of the Spirit before the Apostolic Age? Was he being unfair to them also--according to your logic.
DHK

 

DHK,

You said, 'The gifts of the Spirit ceased by the end of the first century with the end of the Apostolic age. They did not continue after the Apostolic Age.'

 

Hi Mike, I am very sorry I missed your answer on page two. My apologies for saying that you hadn't answered me.

In 1 cor. 12:7, which is obviously before 1 Cor. 14 Paul gives an intruction on the Spiritual Gifts. He very directly says that the Gifts are given as a benefit for the whole "body". Earlier in 1 Cor. he also said that we are not to seek to please ourselves but our goal is to love others as more important as ourselves. In one of the other threads I used the Corintian verses and others to bring this point to light. Anyway, self-edification by use of Gifts is not taught in the Bible but Paul clearly said that the Gifts edify the "body". I would argue that self-edifing in anyway is not Biblical. Now, I agree that prayer, bible reading, singing God's praises, do make us feel closer to god and can lift our spirits and give us joy. But that feeling we get should never take over the more important thing, which is to love others and give them more value then we give ourselves. If we seek to edify ourselves we open ourselves up to "pride". How many Tongue speakers have felt that based on their tongue speaking they are closer to God then someone that doesn't speak in tongues? Many, and that is pride. I say that because I have been told that my wife and I have not been Baptized in the Holy Spirit and we are missing out on a blessing. If one person has been baptized by God's Holy Spirit it is easy to see that they would feel they are closer to god then one who hasn't. No, Paul would not have spoken about edifing ourselves in a positive light, especially based on the fact that he was speaking about Spiritual gifts.

On mysteries, hmmm we have established that initerpreted tongues do not edify the "body" and are just a noisy cymbal. But now the mysteries are not spoken to God but to men. But we just said that speaking uninterpreted tonguess to men, without interpretation, is a bad thing. So, speaking mysteries to men is a positive even though it isn't a good thing to do. Now, when a person prayers quietly in tongues that is a mystery to men? He is not speaking to God, even though no person can hear him. When spoken out loud, tongues are to men even though men have no idea what is being said. Mysteries seem to come out negative either way here.


In Christ,
Brian

 

I don't know who is debating who here. I haven't paid much attention to this discussion because the Bible tells us that "tongues" have ceased. However I would ask the question, if it hasn't already been asked, How many times do we have the Lord Jesus speaking in tongues?

 

Do the math.

Dr. Philip E. Hughes, D.Litt., believes that I Corinthians was written in spring of 57 A.D. Now if your theory is right that the 'gifts of the Spirit' ended at 70 A.D. with the Fall of Jerusalem and the dispersion of the Jews and their being basicly cut off from God's grace, then the 'gifts' only lasted 13 years. This would make it hardly worth writing in the N.T. that tongues will cease in 13 years. Plus, if the Destruction of the Temple were the cut off date, the Lord might have expressed this concept through the Apostle Paul. Notice He did not do this.

The wicked trashing of the 'gifts of the Spirit' limits the Holy Spirit's ministry and work in the Christian church. Speaking evil of God is a very dangerous undertaking for any soul.

We are warned in Scripture not to blaspheme the Holy Spirit of God [*Mark 3:28-29; Acts 26:11; I Timothy 1:20; James 2:7; Revelation 13:6].

Speaking against another Christian church and people who love and worship the Lord is hardly loving them as I Corinthians 13 demands of us.

 

Shiloh, playing debater's advocate here: I would say your question is invalid, because it was Jesus who said in Mark 16 that signs would follow the believers, indicating that He would bestow those abilities upon them.

I would instead suggest you focus on every jot and every tittle. For example, in 1 Corinthians 13, we read "Though I speak in the tongue of angels." While it would be easy to focus on the fact that this verse mentions the tongue of angels, and therefore the tongue of angels is validated by scripture, we often see each other write and hear each other say that we have to ensure we keep the message in context.

In context, that word "though" kind of gums things up. It's equivalent to "if," and therefore changes the validity of a tongue of angels. For example, in the next few verses, we see Paul say "though..I move mountains" and "though...I allow my body to be burned."

I believe everyone agrees that Paul never moved a mountain, and Paul never gave his body to be burned. Yet, when it comes to speaking in the tongue of angels, the exact opposite occurs. It's immediately argued that Paul spoke about it in 1 Corinthians 13, therefore he did it.

So how come we never see anyone argue that since Paul spoke about moving a mountain, he did it?

Since the context of 1 Corinthians 13 is about love (the greatest of these is charity), it's not valid to take a questionable statement (though I speak in the tongue of angels) and make it a message it wasn't intended to be.

But that's just me. Y'all debate this situation however you want.

 

Ray, only Tongues was a sign to the jews of their pending destruction and scattering and so after 70Ad the gift faded away just as Paul said it would. As shown many times Paul said Tongues would end at a different time then Prophecy and knowledge. The other Miraculous gifts (maybe all the gifts were miraculous and so they all passed away a little later) but for sure Healings and Miracles, as spiritual gifts, passed away as soon as the written word was able to be an authority unto itself. As the apostles and others died and more N.T type writings were available those "POWER showing gifts went away as well.

13 to 18 years was plenty of time to warrant proper intruction on Tongues. Plus Paul did not know when the temple would fall and the Jews would be scattered. We would not want people confused about the proper use of tongues for 13 or so more years, right?

In Christ,
Brian

 

D28guy,

You made a very good point as to truth when you said, 'And the message included that these signs that He described,would...follow...those...who...believe, not that they would follow you apostles. Then, in adition to that, we find that lo and behold, those very things have been in evidence for 2000 years now.'

I thought you meant 'the interpretation of tongues' so thank you for the clarity. If these people were to sit in church and experience this observed and done in Divine order, it sure would clear up their unbelief in God being able to minister the 'gifts of the Spirit' in our times.

The interpretation makes you sit in awe of what the Lord is saying to His believing, trusting people of God. I am always amazed at the power and strenth that the 'interpretation' affords to those in Divine Presence.

If this happened when I was officiating at a worship service I would make sure that we followed the correct procedure that they do in your church.
If there was not an interpretation I would tell the person, publicly, not to do that again.

When you hear the interpretation you will never forget the uplift in the Spirit that comes to your heart and life.