Baptists and tongues

What are Baptist doing talking about speaking in an unknown tongue?

 

To be strictly fair, Brother Bob, though I believe speaking in tongues is not Biblical, none of the Baptist distinctives mitigate against it.

 

mcdirector, I finally went back and read the article here. (I'm embarrassed I waited so long. I agree completely with what it says. It is right on target, with all the Biblical bases covered!

 

Not so sure about that JoJ!! It would scare me anyway.

Acts, chapter 2
"1": And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
"2": And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
"3": And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
"4": And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
"5": And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
"6": Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
"7": And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
"8": And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

Revelation, chapter 22
"18": For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

"19": And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

 

double post

 

Concerning the question of Baptist and tongues. Let us look at a little scripture. Mark 1:8 (John the Baptist is speaking here) says," I indeed baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost". Question, is there two distinct difference baptisms spoken of here? There obviously is two different baptisms, John is baptizting with water as he says, the other person(whom I believe to be the Lord Jesus Christ) shall baptize with the Holy Ghost. John and somebody else makes two different baptizters, one with water and the other with the Holy Ghost.
The above outline to me clearly show two different people, two different baptisms, and two different kinds of baptizeing one of water and one of the Holy Ghost.
Now let's go to the book of ACTS 1:5(where the Scripture indicates that the Lord Jesus Christ is speaking) says," for John truly baptized with water, but ye should be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence".
Again two different baptisms are being spoken out here. Notice also that there is a gap between the times of one baptisms taking place and the next baptism taking place .
Next let's turn to the book of ACTS 1:8(where again the Lord Jesus Christ is speaking) it says," but ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem and all Judea and Samaria and into the outermost part of the world".
What is this power spoken of in ACTCS 1:8? Have you ever heard a preacher who thought had this power? This power obviously doesn't come up on anybody until after the Holy Ghost comes upon them. And a sure indication of this power, given by the Holy Ghost, is that the person will be a witness unto the Lord Jesus Christ. Does this power have anything to do with tongues, those of us that have experienced tongues are certain that the answer is yes!!!!! Is it possible to be baptized with the Holy Ghost and not with power? NO! I do not believe that is possible. Perhaps those who receive the gift of tongues, for what ever reason, need to have an extreme measure of strength to be witnesses unto the Lord. I could name many many reasons why I believe this, but maybe a little side story will suffice.
At a church service a lady comes to me and wants me to pray about her alcoholic husband. Okay I said as I reached to get my wife's hand(she too has a prayer language) and so now three others were holding hands and we began to pray, first me, then my wife, who suddenly goes into "tongues". After some time my wife stops and I lean over to the lady and say, I understood what my wife was saying and you can expect something to happen almost immediately!! The alcoholic husband accepted the Lord Jesus Christ later that same night!!!

 

To each his own;
I truly suggest the link given by mcdirector.
When you are preaching if it is not by the power of the Holy Ghost then I don't think you are preaching. Until the Holy Ghost takes over and revelates my mind I am just a man on my own. It is not Baptist doctrine to preach yaba daba doo tongue, sorry. To preach in another language I will accept if you have an interpter.
LINK

[ April 17, 2006, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: Brother Bob ]

 

Brother Bob: you recently made the following statement in one of your post."What are Baptist doing talking about speaking in an unknown tongue? " Now I'm sure you know the Bible much better than myself therefore we both know the Bible speaks about speaking in a unknown tongue. So my question to you would be this. Just because we are Baptist should we not talk about things that are in the Bible? This seems to be very exclusive, very exclusively "Baptist". Another question I would like to ask you is this, do you believe that a Baptist missionary board ruling against their missionaries having a private prayer language(let's call it a unknown tongue) will keep the Holy Spirit at bay? Will in fact prevent the Holy Spirit from moving on the set missionaries? My what a powerful missionary board that must be.

 

Nay, but what a Scriptural mission board that must be.

 

The word "unknown" never appears with "tongues" in the Scriptures. That was added by men in order to "clarify" things.

 

1 Corinthians, chapter 14
"1": Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
"2": For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
"3": But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
"4": He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
"5": I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
"6": Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?
"7": And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?
"8": For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?


1 Corinthians, chapter 14
"11": Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
"12": Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
"13": Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
"14": For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
15": What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
"16": Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?

In all these years never ran into this problem the missionary boards had but think they were probably nipping something in the bud before it got out of hand.

 

For what it's worth, Bob, Hope is right. The word "unknown" is not in the Greek. But it is implied by the context. Why would there be a need for interpretation if it was known?

 

Then in my case it would be English. If it was implied I guess for translation sake is why it is in the KJV

If not in there then why the following Scripture if it was a known tongue, please? along with several others in same context, I agree if not there it certainly was implied?

1 Corinthians, chapter 14
23: If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

It seems the word glossa (tongues) should of been translated as languages also if we are going to start questioning the translation. Agree

[ April 17, 2006, 07:09 PM: Message edited by: Brother Bob ]

 

mima, I must agree but disagree with you here. First of all, I agree that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is for power for God's service, in particular for evangelism. R. A. Torrey did a very extensive study of the Holy Spirit, and wrote in his book The Holy Spirit, "There is not one single passage in the Bible, either in the Old Testament or the New Testament, where the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is spoken of, where it is not connected with testimony or service" (p. 118). Based on that statement, I myself read through the entire Bible, marking every mention of the Holy Spirit's power, and I agree completely with Torrey.

However, I must disagree with you about tongues. You quote Acts 5 and 8, and rightly use it to refer to the "specimen revival" (as John R. Rice called it) of Acts 2. However, in Acts 2 the languages, though miraculously given, were literal, real languages spoken by actual people groups. If you have never used your "prayer language" to actually witness to a lost person in their own, understandable foreign language, then you don't have what they had in Acts 2!

 

mima, I take exception to this. Correct me if I am wrong, but you seem to be saying that if one is filled with the Holy Spirit he will of necessity have a private prayer language. Therefore, anyone who doesn't have a private prayer language is, ergo, not filled with the Spirit.

Please tell me that this is NOT what you meant!! Otherwise, you then believe that D. L. Moody, R. A. Torrey, John R. Rice and many other great evangelists who saw countless thousands of people saved through their ministry were never filled with the Holy Spirit!!

 

You may stretch it to mean that it's unknown to the person speaking it, but it is not an unknown tongue; it is a real language. The word "unknown" has been added by the translators to try to "clarify" something, and as is so often the case, they have done the opposite.

The addition of this word has led many people to thinking that gibberish is an "unknown" tongue. Now, if you get up and start speaking Japanese, then you are speaking in a "tongue", and I assume that it is unknown to you.

Any time you see a word in italics in the KJV, the word is not in the original text.

 

Well said, Bro Bob. What comes next? I used to say "Lent", but I see Baptist's are now adopting this Catholic "man made Holy Time".

Christian faith, ituttut

 

You may stretch it to mean that it's unknown to the person speaking it, but it is not an unknown tongue; it is a real language. The word "unknown" has been added by the translators to try to "clarify" something, and as is so often the case, they have done the opposite.

The addition of this word has led many people to thinking that gibberish is an "unknown" tongue. Now, if you get up and start speaking Japanese, then you are speaking in a "tongue", and I assume that it is unknown to you.

Any time you see a word in italics in the KJV, the word is not in the original text. </font>[/QUOTE]npetreley, I agree with Hope of Glory here--except that of course Japanese would not be an unknown tongue to me.

How do you get that the word "unknown" is implied by the context here--that is unless you are not talking about "unknown" in the sense the Charismatics are but in the sense Hope of Glory and I are referring to it--and now I think I've confused myselfF!

 

It seems to me that 1 Cor 14:23 can be interpreted two ways. If they were all speaking in some unknown (angelic, whatever) language, then someone who came in would think they were crazy.

That interpretation is not necessary, though. It could also mean that they were all speaking in different languages (Greek, Aramaic, etc.) at once -- and worse -- with no interpreters, so that it's just a chaotic mess. In which case people who walked in would still think they were crazy.