Speaking in Tongues Volume 4...

Ed asked:
-----------------------------------------------------
" One was a statement, to the effect that, 'Paul was more spiritual than some (or the) others. - whatever that means, in this thread. Outta' curiosity, where does Paul (or Luke or Peter, writing about him) ever make any claim to be 'more spiritual' than anyone?
-----------------------------------------------------
I'm just taking a guess at this but some may have came to a conclusion when Paul said.....
1Cor. 14:18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:

Ed also asked:
-----------------------------------------------------
Second, when speaking of I Cor.14:4, I noticed that text says that that "...he who speaks... edifies himself...". Someone wrote to the effect of self-edifying is important. Where is that found in Scripture? I checked my concordance, but am not able to figure out from whence this arises. I see where the active sense is used that we are to edify the church and other individuals. I see where the passive sense is used and we are edified. Aside from stretching I Cor.14:4 like a rubber band around the aforementioned barrel, I see nothing that implies edify self, and in fact I would suggest that Scripture seems to warn against exactly that.""
-----------------------------------------------------
I agree with atestring~

Jude 1:20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,

 

In all of his epistles Paul wrote as the elder or more spiritual statesmen. He was writing because his hearers needed the spiritual help he was giving. To Timothy, he had nurtured in the faith, and was writing to him on how to keep order in the churches. To Philemon he was writing as a friend to a friend, and yet asking forgiveness on behalf of Onesimus, one that he "had begotten in the Lord."
When it comes to Corinth, Paul started that church. He had led these people to the Lord, discipled them, and then left them in the hands of another pastor, as was his habit so that he could continue on his missionary work of establishing other churches. But the Corinthian believers were the most carnal believers, the most carnal church of all the churches mentioned in the New Testament. Certainly Paul was more spiritual than they were. If he wasn't how could he write:

1 Corinthians 3:1-3 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
--Paul says in verse one very directly that he could not speak unto them as spiritual people. They were not spiritual. They were carnal. He was spiritual; they were not. That should settle the answer to your question right there.

In the context of spiritual gifts, there is no spiritual gift that is given to edify oneself, for all spiritual gifts are given to the benefit of the entire church, to the edification of the entire church.

1 Thessalonians 5:11 Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.

The word "edify" comes from a word used in construction--to build. In as much as it takes many hands to build a temple, it takes many hands to build a church. Barnes defines it this way: "Applied to the church, it means, to do anything by teaching, counsel, advice, etc., which will tend to promote its great object; to aid Christians, to enable them to surmount difficulties, to remove theft ignorance, etc."

Though usually used in a group sense we can also apply it in an individual sense, for we are edified when we spend time in the Word and in prayer. We are built up in the Word.

Acts 20:32 And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified.
--The Word...which is able to build you up (edify).
DHK

 

You are not siding with God, but with bad hermeneutics. There is nothing in this entire book that indicates that verse 20 has anything to do with spiritual gifts? Why do Charismatics quote Jude 20 as if it is even remotely related to speaking in tongues? It isn't. You are really stretching God's Word and taking Scripture way out of context.
I pray in the Holy Spirit every day. But the gifts of the Spirit have ceased, and I don't speak in tongues!!
DHK

 

Don,

'Do I encourage people to seek a blessing for themselves?'

.

 

I meant to say, 'Seeking both the Holy Spirit and doing good to the brethren is commendable.

Paul says, 'desire spiritual gifts.' [14:1b].

 

Psalms 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
Do you believe in Psalm 14!b just quoted, or do you ignore the rest of Scripture (the rest of the verse)?

 

I like all seven verses of Psalm 14. They are true and wonderful truths coming from the Lord. DHK, is there something in the chapter that you might not want me to believe?

You have to also welcome I Corinthians 14:1b as being truth that He wants us to receive. Yes, God says that we should '. . . desire spiritual gifts.' Do you agree with the Apostle Paul or do you teach your church members that this must mean something different than what you are reading in black and white?

Evading certain Scripture is not honest theology; I am sure you can agree with this.

Regards,
Ray

 

I wonder if some Christians are against the gifts of the Spirit, because they think Christian experiences in our growth in sanctification, might be trying to contribute to a saved persons' salvation.

I know Five Point Calvinists keep repeating that salvation is by His gift alone, apart from the works of a person. I too, agree with this as found in Ephesians 2:8-9.

We are reminded in James 4:8 that our worship of the Lord involves our attitudes toward Jesus. Salvation is more than just accepting Jesus as personal Savior. There is a growing in the things of God which does not rule out our experiences with the Lord. In James 4:7-8 says that we are to submit to the Lord. Moreover, we are to 'Draw near to God and then He will draw nigh to you.'
We are to do some things in the Christian life. We have to purify our own hearts as He cleanses us from our sin. Jesus hates 'doublemindedness;' and our love and service to Him must be totally focused.

Some people will not admit to it but they dislike Rev. Finney's teaching about 'a deeper life' with God in the Holy Spirit.

Being a Christian is infinitely more than reciting a denomination creed or the Apostle's Creed every Lord's Day. Please, understand that I am not against creeds because I often used the Apostle's and Nicene Creed during our Service of Holy Communion.

For some Christians, though I am not included in this group at this time, do have the 'gift of tongues' because they have gone deeper into the Christian life. The 'gift of tongues' is sovereignly given by God [I Corinthians 12:11] to certain people and is not necessarily a sign a deeper spirituality than we who do not speak in this ecstatic language given by God.

 

You have a right to "wonder."

2 Timothy 1:12 ... I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.

You know less than you assert.
Your repeated assertion of "five-point Calvinists" is an indication of your lack of knowledge, and is also an indication of an insulting attitude. Probably less than 10% of the more than 6,000 members of this board are "5 point Calvinits," so who is your post directed to? I am not a five point Calvinist; in fact as I told you before I am not a Calvinist at all; yet you keep on this tirade of five point Calvinsits. Is it a pet-peeve of yours?
Let's look at it this way:
I know that five point Calvinists believe Salvation is a gift of God.
I know that Arminian Baptists believe that Salvation is a gift of God.
I know that CMA (Christian Missionary Alliance) believers believe that salvation is a gift of God.
I know that many Pentecostals beleive that salvation is a gift of God.
I know that many Bible Presbyterians beleive that salvation is a gift of God.
I know that many "Bible Churches" beleive that salvation is a gift of God.

I could keep on going and make the list much longer. Is there a need? Why are you hung up on five point Calvinists in most of your posts?

Can you demonstrate this through Scripture? When one trusts Jesus Christ as their Saviour Christ gives the the gift of salvation, as previously said, and as you have already testified. Why the contradiction? Salvation is a gift of God, given when one trusts Christ as Saviour, on the basis of his shed blood. It is as simple as that.

That is not salvation. That is describing the Christian walk. If you classify that as a part of salvation, then you believe as the cults do in a works salvation. Salvation, according to you, is not of grace, but by works.

Some people will not admit to it; but they don't know what Finney actually taught. In spite of Finney's so-called revival's Finney taught heresy.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/finney.htm

So, who is speaking about Creeds? Finney was ordained on the basis of the Westminster Creed, which he never read (though he lied and said he did), and then proceeded to attack the very men that ordained him.

For some Christians who practice the "modern day gift of gibberish" a cheap imitation of the Biblical gift of languages, their spiritual life is confused and less than the heights that it could reach because of the error that they are practicing. They also leave themselves open to demon-involvement. The modern day gift of gibberish is not given by God at all. If it does come from a source other than one's own self, it would be Satan.
DHK

 

DHK,

II Timothy 1:12 has little to nothing to do with personal sanctification or maturity in the things of the Lord. This verse strongly explains Christ keeping of the Christian to everlasting life. You might be 'in the right church' but are in 'the wrong pew.'

Five Point Calvinists are poles apart from all of the other groups you list. The only point in common is that salvation is by grace plus nothing. I agree with this.

James 4:8 indicates our personal involvement in a life of maturing in Christ. Submiting and drawing near to God is our part of the covenant relationship. Some Christians simply miss the impact of this verse and I am not referring to you because I do not know about your amount of commitment to Jesus.

Rev. Finney did not lie to his superiors in the ecclesiastical realm. They well knew of his various disagreements with his Calvinistic mentor. They included Finney because of his vast and great success in his ability to touch the lives of sinners, unlike his mentor who sat behind 'stained glass windows' who thought his theology was better than Finneys' views. Later Finney's mentor began to see some of his views as being right for that age.

The N.T. covenant is more than sovereignly imposed on sinners; God requires a human response to His call of grace as noted in John 3:16-18.

Finney attacked his Presbyterian Elders long before he was ordained by them into the Christian ministry.

Your insensibility to other Christians who are deeper in their maturity in Christ only serves you poorly in your word description of the other brethren. Someone who taught your 'gibberish theory' was bias and was never taught the Biblical truths as to the deeper life in the Holy Spirit.

I guess we have to leave you in your own little world of misconception as to how the Lord interacts with some of His people. You are like some who lock Jesus up in their own little theological box and expect others to revere your bias misconceptions of the Apostolic faith.

Your 'watered down' faith might serve you well, but some of us allow God's words to stand and mean what He meant in the original language of the first manuscripts.

 

1. Tell me what my "watered-down faith is, Ray?

2. Secodnly, tell me what God meant in the original languages concerning the word "glossa" (languages) "dialectos" and any other words that pertain to either "speaking in tongues" or slain in the spirit for that matter. Prove your case from the original languages. Don't just state what you cannot prove. Back up your statements. Give evidence from the Greek. I would like to hear this.
lkkDHK

 

Some of the brethren on the board rather than going into Greek word pictures, need to begin with believing what the basic KJV tells us.

When a Christian speaks in tongues he or she is speaking to the Lord God [I Corinthians 14:2 a, b].

Verse 5 causes 'tongues' and the 'interpretation of tongues' to serve for the common spiritual good of all the congregation unto the edification of the entire body of people.

Back to 'boot camp.'

 

You are backing down Ray. Don't make statements you can't back up.
Posted by Ray Berrian:

Prove your believe. Don't post what you cannot demonstrate. To put it bluntly: Put up or shut up. I am tired of going around in circles here. If you say the original manuscripts can prove your position, I want to see it. How does the word glossa mean anything else than national languages? Where does it mean the gibberish that is spoken today?
DHK

 

DHK,

You are doing a lot of guess work up there in Canada. I used Greek before and you merely 'blew it off.' How many people do you think know the Greek N.T. on this board. Many here are struggling to understand what the KJV is saying.

You do not accept the KJV, why should I or anyone else try to show you the nuances of N.T. Greek. You,in the past, have not even valued what the Greek scholars say as to these passages and perhaps others.

The term 'gibberish' is first of all disrespectful to the Lord and to other Christians who God has given this 'gift of tongues.' Moreover, you disrespect yourself by using this term carelessly.

 

Ray, you need to read this in the context it was written. The entire letter of 1 Corinthians was to correct mislead practices of a church that was obviously growing, but taking many wrong paths--one of which was the abuse of speaking in tongues. First look at the scripture:

1Co 14:1 Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy.
1Co 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.
1Co 14:3 On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation.
1Co 14:4 The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church.
1Co 14:5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up.
(ESV)

Now, assume this is an English speaking church and the speaker was speaking in tongues as a true miracle of the Holy Spirit, so it came out in Spanish. Doesn't it make sense that the speaker would only edify himself and only he and God would understand? This would then require an interpreter.

I have repeated this more than once, but Pentecostals have built an entire doctrine around speaking-in-tongues to prove Baptism of the Holy Spirit, when Paul actually plays down the importance of speaking-in-tongues in the Church of Corinth.

Why do the Pentecostals not prophesy instead? According to Paul it would be a much GREATER gift. Could the reason be that a Prophet who makes a single mistake is not a prophet of God according to the Bible, so this is harder to immulate?

I noticed an interesting news article last week which covered the issue of "being slain by the spirit" very well. It discussed Benny Henn and how when he touched someone and they fell, this was obviously the Spirit flowing through Benny into that person.

Is it Biblical to pass the Holy Spirit back and forth like a volley ball? Is it Biblical for the MAN, Benny Henn to even immitate being able to GIVE someone the Holy Spirit?

The bottom line that I see with this thread is that it is going a bit off-course because you, Ray, are trying to make it look as if those who do not see "speaking in tongues" as you do---well, in your book they are just not up to speed on the spirit's gifts. When the real problem is the understanding of what really took place in the book of Acts on Pentecost and in the Church of Corinth where Paul spent most of his letter correcting doctrines that were becoming a problem due to the outside influences of heathen worship.

Read these books 'in context' and don't try to add modern Pentecostal meaning to the Scriptures and they will become very clear to you.

 

There are many on this board that understand Greek, and many Greek scholars in fact. Go spend some time in the Versions forum and become acquainted with some of them. If you can't participate, you can read. Most people, almost all, understand the KJV. But that isn't the point is it? The point is that you made a statement that you cannot back up. You claim that the Greek can support your position, whereas it cannot. And now you look very foolish trying to worm your way out of your claim, when I call your bluff. If the Greek supports your claim, then demonstrate. Otherwise it is against BB rules to post false information, isn't it?

Contrary. I accept the KJV and its underlying text, the received text. They are the primary sources of my study. Why should you show me the nuances of NT Greek. Because otherwise you are posting false claims on this board. You are in effect posting lies. If you can't back up what you say then it is a lie. You are saying white is black and black is white. If glossa does not mean national languages in the Bible than demonstrate it through the Greek as you claim. Don't make false claims, like so many frauds do.

The term "gibberish" is an accurate description for the fraudulent practice of "tongues" so-called, an imitation of the real gift of languages that ceased in the first century. Putting together a string of nonsense syllables is not a language. It is nonsense both to man and to God. It is abhorrent in the sight of God. It is not of God. And if it is not of God, then whence is its source? I'll leave you to answer that question.
DHK

 

Phillip,

You said, 'Ray, you need to read this in the context it was written. The entire letter of 1 Corinthians was to correct mislead practices of a church that was obviously growing, but taking many wrong paths--one of which was the abuse of speaking in tongues. First look at the scripture'

.

Phillip said, 'Now, assume this is an English speaking church and the speaker was speaking in tongues as a true miracle of the Holy Spirit, so it came out in Spanish. Doesn't it make sense that the speaker would only edify himself and only he and God would understand? This would then require an interpreter.'

.

'I have repeated this more than once, but Pentecostals have built an entire doctrine around speaking-in-tongues to prove Baptism of the Holy Spirit, when Paul actually plays down the importance of speaking-in-tongues in the Church of Corinth.'

.

'I noticed an interesting news article last week which covered the issue of "being slain by the spirit" very well. It discussed Benny Henn and how when he touched someone and they fell, this was obviously the Spirit flowing through Benny into that person.'

.

'Is it Biblical to pass the Holy Spirit back and forth like a volley ball? Is it Biblical for the MAN, Benny Henn to even immitate being able to GIVE someone the Holy Spirit?'

.

'The bottom line that I see with this thread is that it is going a bit off-course because you, Ray, are trying to make it look as if those who do not see "speaking in tongues" as you do---well, in your book they are just not up to speed on the spirit's gifts.'

.

'When the real problem is the understanding of what really took place in the book of Acts on Pentecost and in the Church of Corinth where Paul spent most of his letter correcting doctrines that were becoming a problem due to the outside influences of heathen worship.'

.

'Read these books 'in context' and don't try to add modern Pentecostal meaning to the Scriptures and they will become very clear to you.'

.

Dr. Berrian

 

DHK,

I will not waste more of my time on you because you do not have a teachable spirit. Read my post to Phillip above and you will see that tongues is from the Lord.

Your wilful bias is against the Lord and I am 100% sure of the Biblical interpretation.

The N.T. says after you have warned a false teacher after two or three times, let them remain in their sinful unbelief. I'll bet you can understand this part of the English language, but as to I Cor. 12 & 14 you are in a deceptive maze.