Charismatic Errors Listed

[awaken]

Read Peter's sermon with "the wonderful works of God" in view.

Also, consider what would have been worthy of praise in the hearts of the disciples freshly born again and now certain in their hearts that Jesus was the Christ, the Savior. Consider whether their praise would have been directed along those lines.




This cannot be dogmaticly stated from what the scripture tells us. The fact that their devotion would have centered around the Person of Christ is not only possible, but highly probable.

As far as their "witnessing," stand on a corner in your town and praise God. What would you be doing? Now ask yourself, what would you be praising God for? Would it not be Christ-centered? Would He not be mentioned in your praise?

If I was to stand on a corner (which I do not believe the Bible says do) and speak in tongues ( a language I do not know or have learned). What profit would it do UNLESS one passing by understood me in there own language?

And again, Peter speaks the wonderful works of God. He preached the Gospel just as we see the Gospel in the Old Testament.

And now...have to get going. Look, I don't expect anyone to suddenly change their view. How hard this is, which is why I found it interesting that one here actually speaks against certain doctrines once embraced.

But, as I said, very glad to talk with you about it.

God bless.

Well, I was strongly against the manifestation of the Holy Spirit until 7 years ago. I was raised Baptist all my life and was taught against them...but never knew exactly why or what they were. Most pastors avoid those chapters!

I have no problem with Peter speaking to the crowd..but he was explaining what was happening and Preaching. Tongues and prophecy is not preaching.

 

[DHK]

Tongues and prophecy is not preaching.

Do a study of any of the OT prophets, or take John the Baptist who is called the last of the OT prophets. Very little of his preaching was prophetic in nature. He was a voice calling in the wilderness. Most of his work was preaching. It was a message of repentance. It was proclaiming the truth. That is what the prophet's work was--forth-telling, not fore-telling, the truth of the Word of God. He had both obligations, but the former was greater than the latter.

Tongues means languages. They were actual known languages, not known to the one who spoke them but known to the ones who heard them. They always needed an interpreter. The message was the same as the prophet. It was for the edification of the congregation, which is forth-telling the word of God. It had the same type of message as a prophet. It was a sign to the Jews, and a sign to the unbelieving Jew in particular. It was one of the signs of the apostles. It was used as a vehicle of revelation, just as prophecy was. They both served the same purpose. Since revelation is now complete and the apostles have passed away the sign is no longer needed and has been done away with. Thus you don't see anyone today practicing this gift--Biblically.

 

[Darrell C]

That is like an unbeliever (spanish) coming into our church while one is speaking in tongues(spanish). The language that the speaker is speaking, the speaker himself does not understand..BUT...the unbeliever that already knows Spanish understands him. How is this a miracle of hearing? The unbeliever already knows Spanish!

Hello Awaken, hope the service was good. We had a pretty good one this morning. Genesis 32: Jacob wrestling with God. This is one passage that for some reason you don't hear too many sermons on.

Concerning the above, actually experienced that once: the Pastor asked a visiting missionary to open the service with prayer in spanish, and then repeat it in english, but apparently he did not hear the latter request. He prayed in spanish, then sat down, lol. This is a good example of how it is necessary to understand what is being communicated in order for participation. We cannot unite in prayer if we do not know what is being said.

The language that the speaker is speaking, the speaker himself does not understand..

Well, I would have to disagree here: Only in 1 Corinthians 14 do we see a speaking where the speaker is unaware of what is being said. This is why I see chs. 12-14 as a rebuke for employing falsely a counterfeit "tongues." And this...for show.

Back to the point:



1 Corinthians 14

King James Version (KJV)

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?


Paul makes the point, "What good is it if I speak in tongues either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?"

This would, I would think, make it clear that when tongues were employed, it was for purpose involving the word of God, whether (at this time) it was divinely revealed to the speaker (such as was the case for the Apostles and Disciples, i.e., Paul's imprisonment foretold) or if it involved previously revealed truth (such as we see Peter employ and then exopund).

This verse seems to clearly place Paul's teaching as a rebuke. Beginning in ch.12, he makes the case that not all members are the same. Chapter 13 carries on the same tenor which is, "What good is it if it is not sincere?" Chapter 14 concludes the theme with definite statement of rebuke coupled with questions which demand a negative answer.

The KJV translators I believe, inserting the word unknown, show their ability by distinguishing between when the true gift is being mentioned or the counterfeit is in view. The Corinthians would have been familiar with ecstatic speech, the Oracle of Delphi being a prominent example. Taking into consideration the underlying reason for the teaching in these three chapters, we can see that this is certainly not straightforward instruction without correction. Something was going on in the Church there that Paul did not approve of, nor did he promote it.

Of course, that is my position, lol.

You do not see that they were "saying to one another" vs. 7. They were speaking to one another.

Yes, but there is nothing there that says they communicated between the different languages mentioned, meaning, we have to assume that Parthians spoke to Medes, for example, rather than see this as Parthians and Medes spoke among themselves.

You can praise God..TO God..and others hear and God will get the glory!
Examples...
"Many, O LORD my God, are the wonders you have done. The things you planned for us no one can recount to you; were I to speak and tell of them, they would be too many to declare." (Psalms 40:5)

"Say to God, "How awesome are your deeds! So great is your power that your enemies cringe before you."" (Psalms 66:3)

These are praises to God...speaking to God!

Correct. And I will ask this again: would we not think it highly probable that in their praise, they praised God concerning Messiah?

Even as when Peter preaches, he targets Messianic scripture. Then expounds.

If I came in and heard this in a Spanish speaking church in English! I think God would get the glory! Number one I would be amazed that these Spanish speaking people knew English..Number two By what they were saying would bring glory to God!

And this is something that should be considered: at this point in time, with English being a prominent language throughout the world, there would really be no surprise that anyone speaks English.

But, back then, it would be surprising to find locals speaking a language if one was from a far country.

And this is one reason the gift of tongues is not a necessary gift today. Because our world has grown smaller. More advanced. Languages are taught in schools.

I have heard stories of missionaries speaking to an audience and those that did not speak their language understanding. I do not know if this is "urban (so to speak...lol) legend" or if it is true. But that is what I would expect to be the case when the genuine gift is employed. I think it likely that as we see in scripture exceptions to general rules (such as a woman in a place of leadership, for example) and that from time to time the Lord may use these gifts sporadically in the field, even as healings are not the norm but we from time to time see miraculous healings. But what we don't see is a consistent employment as we do in the early Church. Even before the New Testament was compiled, we see Paul leaving Trophimus in Miletum sick. Why did he not heal him?

But it was a sign on the day of Pentecost!

Agreed.

One thing that is interesting is you mentioning the people being drawn by the noise, as opposed to how I have viewed this, which is, they were drawn by what was being said by the disciples themselves. I did look at some commentators and ou are correct, this is also held by even some that I conside to be among the better teachers, such as John MacArthur.

But (and you knew that was coming, right? lol), looking at the greek we see phone translated as "sound" 8 times and voice...131 times, though I am sure that a few of these speak of the sound of an instrument.

Another thing that came to mind was that if it was the noise (a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind) that drew them, how then could they have heard the disciples...lol.

But some of the translations do indeed point to the sound itself, so this was interesting to me. I still hold to the position that it was that which was being spoken by the disciples, as it would seem to me that the "sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind" would have, like the "cloven tongues like as of fire" would have been for just a short time. I guess it is possible that initially a crowd could have been drawn due to the sound, then that escalated by the speaking of the disciples.

Just throwing that in there.

But there were those that did not hear God! THey mocked!

As God said they would before.

Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Response part 2

What Joel was discribing was the pouring out of the Holy Spirit!

Agreed. But don't forget that the pouring out of the Spirit was evidenced by the things mentioned which were accomplished through the work of the Spirit of God. Even as God worked in the lives of men before, Judas again being a good example, who was counted among those that preached, healed, and cast out demons. Not of their own power, but by the power of God working through them.

THat it was available to All that believe! I am not saying there were not some that prophesied...it just was not tongues!

Again, I would just ask that you give this some consideration. It makes perfect sense that this gift would have been of immense value to those that crossed borders and preached the Gospel.

Tongues and prophecy is different!

Only if we limit the gift of languages to praise. Prophecy and prophesying carry the connotation of a "speaking forth of the word of God." Before the New Testament was compiled, as new revelation was given by God, we see prophesying that was at all times (concerning the true Prophets, that is) divinely generated. Now we still have men speaking forth the word of God that which has already been revealed, but we can assume that at least some of these men are divinely inspired in their speaking.

As Paul makes the point that if he speaks in tongues yet does not involve the word of God concerning the aspects mentioned earlier, then nothing is accomplished. There is always a reason for God empowering someone with a gift, it is never...without reason.

Then he goes on to say:


1 Corinthians 14
King James Version (KJV)


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?


Just as in chapter 13, we have a "If it does not involve..." statement, here, the focus upon that which is spoken. "Every sound must be for a reason, and the sound must be distinct so that it is recognized."

He goes to the lenght of saying, "...even inanimate objects that are used to produce distinguished sounds must make those distinct sounds so they are recognized." This is reminiscent of what he has just said in ch.13:



1 Corinthians 13

King James Version (KJV)

1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.


"Though I speak clearly and eloquently, if it is bereft of love...it is no better than noise." Likewise, the flip-side is equally important to the equation, "It is a necessity that if I speak, I speak in words that can be understood, for what good is it to speak if it cannot be understood?"

And he says exactly that in the next verse:


9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

Not...speaking to God, but, speaking to...nothing. It is of no use. It accomplishes nothing. Speech is for the purpose of communication, no matter who is speaking, or who is listening.


10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.


We can include in the "none of them," the gift of languages. And especially the gift of languages. For this is a sovereignly given gift from God Himself, and we would not expect the Lord to give a gift that does not accomplish that which is was given for. This would be akin to giving the gift of healing and the blind man's vision remaining blurry. Or a lame man left to walk on crutches. This would not be healing, right? It would just be an improvement.

Thank you for your kind way of approaching this debate! Very refreshing!
I will get back to the above when I get back from church.

Look, one of my favorite things to do is discuss God's word, and I have learned that if I do not show others that also love to speak about God's word the same respect I would show a stranger on the street that I was trying to convince that God can change lives...then I am become as a tinkling cymbal, lol.

This does not mean we have to waver in that which we are convicted of concerning our views, but, as we learn it is not a matter of "I'm right your wrong," but, "God is right and I pray He teaches me properly," then we can better be open to His leading and guidance, I believe. Sometimes it will not fail but that when we stand firm upon an issue those of opposing views may take it as aggressive, thier feelings might be hurt, or we may come across as arrogant...that is just going to happen. But, it has been a goal of mine to learn how to communicate to others in a way which leads to a profitable encounter for both of us. Because we disagree on a topic does not mean I have to hate you (and then try to show the love of Christ for another stranger, lol), nor does it mean that I should question the salvation of everyone that disagrees with me, lol, nor that I think that doctrinal perfection is a pre-requisite for another to be my brother or sister in Christ.

We all have a lot to learn, no? lol

Someone on here said the other day, "The more I learn, the more I learn how little I know," and this is true. Most of us have barely scratched the surface of what there is to know, and how we are to apply even that we do know in an attempt to live pleasing before God.

Shall we say "Lord I am glad I am not as that man?" Or, "I am the chief of sinners, Lord forgive me my sin?"

The latter has more application in my life than the former, and one thing we should remember is that every word will we give an account of, and that for us, if we expect the Lord to show mercy to us, then we must be found faithful to show mercy to others.

Okay, have to go, but I will leave you with a favorite verse of mine:



Malachi 3:16

King James Version (KJV)

16 Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another: and the Lord hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the Lord, and that thought upon his name.


If I don't get back today, I will try to get back sometime this week, but I have a pretty horrible week ahead (lol), so we will see.

God bless.

 

[awaken]

Do a study of any of the OT prophets, or take John the Baptist who is called the last of the OT prophets. Very little of his preaching was prophetic in nature. He was a voice calling in the wilderness. Most of his work was preaching. It was a message of repentance. It was proclaiming the truth. That is what the prophet's work was--forth-telling, not fore-telling, the truth of the Word of God. He had both obligations, but the former was greater than the latter.

Tongues means languages. They were actual known languages, not known to the one who spoke them but known to the ones who heard them. They always needed an interpreter. The message was the same as the prophet. It was for the edification of the congregation, which is forth-telling the word of God. It had the same type of message as a prophet. It was a sign to the Jews, and a sign to the unbelieving Jew in particular. It was one of the signs of the apostles. It was used as a vehicle of revelation, just as prophecy was. They both served the same purpose. Since revelation is now complete and the apostles have passed away the sign is no longer needed and has been done away with. Thus you don't see anyone today practicing this gift--Biblically.

The gift of prophecy edifies, exhorts and comforts. It is the ministry of the Holy Spirit to convict sin, of righteousness, and of judgment to come.

Prophecy is divinely inspired and anointed utterance; a supernatural proclamation in a known language. It is the manifestation of the Spirit of God-not of intellect (1 Cor. 12:7), and it may be possessed and operated by all who have the infilling of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 14:31).

You are confusing the gift of prophecy and the office of the prophet..they are not the same.

There is a ministry of the prophet, but not everyone is a prophet. To stand in the office of prophet, one must have a consistent manifestation of at least two or the revelation gifts (word of wisdom, word of knowledge, or discerning of spirits) plus prophecy.

NOTE: The words preach and prophesy come from two entirely different Greek words. To "preach" means to proclaim, announce, cry, or tell. Jesus said, "Go ye into all the world, and PREACH the gospel.." Mark 16:15...He did not say to prophesy the Gospel!!
The word prophecy means to "bubble up, to flow forth, or to cause to drop like rain." Teaching and preaching are preplanned, but prophecy is not.

The Bible tells us that we are to "Despise not prophesyings. Prove all things." 1 Thess. 5:20-21. When a prophecy is given, we are to test it and hold on toe what is good in it.

Prophecy is not prediction!
Prophecy is not the intepretaion of tongues!

 

[DHK]

The gift of prophecy edifies, exhorts and comforts. It is the ministry of the Holy Spirit to convict sin, of righteousness, and of judgment to come.

You are reading too much Charismatic gobbledy-gook.
You are absolutely wrong. You quoted from John 16, where Jesus gives the ministry of the Holy Spirit, the Comforter when he shall come. It has nothing to do with prophecy whatsoever. Prophecy was not to edify, exhort, and comfort. You are wrong in that assessment.

Prophecy is divinely inspired and anointed utterance; a supernatural proclamation in a known language. It is the manifestation of the Spirit of God-not of intellect (1 Cor. 12:7), and it may be possessed and operated by all who have the infilling of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 14:31).

You are wrong on many counts here, especially the last one. Not anyone, in fact, not many could prophesy. Only a very few could. Paul made that clear in 1Cor.12:29,30. I quoted that for you. Do all prophesy? No they don't, was the obvious answer. Only some do. God had given that ability only to a few that were in the church during the first century. The gift has now ceased.
It was of the intellect, however a God-given intellect. It wasn't jibberish.

You are confusing the gift of prophecy and the office of the prophet..they are not the same.

The one who held the office of a prophet also had the gift of prophecy.

There is a ministry of the prophet, but not everyone is a prophet.

That is true. In fact today, no one is a prophet. Jesus clearly said that John was the last of the prophets.

To stand in the office of prophet, one must have a consistent manifestation of at least two or the revelation gifts (word of wisdom, word of knowledge, or discerning of spirits) plus prophecy.

More man-made Charismatic gobbledy-gook. You don't have scripture for this. Who gave it to you? Benny Hinn?

NOTE: The words preach and prophesy come from two entirely different Greek words. To "preach" means to proclaim, announce, cry, or tell. Jesus said, "Go ye into all the world, and PREACH the gospel.." Mark 16:15...He did not say to prophesy the Gospel!!

Isaiah 28:23 Give ye ear, and hear my voice; hearken, and hear my speech.
Jeremiah 1:4 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
Jeremiah 1:11 Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Jeremiah, what seest thou? And I said, I see a rod of an almond tree.
Jeremiah 3:12 Go and toward the north, and say, Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the LORD; and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you: for I am merciful, saith the LORD, and I will not keep anger for ever.

It is evident that prophets proclaim what the Lord says to them.

The word prophecy means to "bubble up, to flow forth, or to cause to drop like rain." Teaching and preaching are preplanned, but prophecy is not.

The Bible tells us that we are to "Despise not prophesyings. Prove all things." 1 Thess. 5:20-21. When a prophecy is given, we are to test it and hold on toe what is good in it.

And how do you test it, seeing that your understanding of the Bible is very limited? Do you agree with the "Holy Spirit's manifestation of barking dogs, hissing of snakes, hysterical laughing, etc."? This is the "manifestation of the Spirit" that took place in Toronto in the Vineyard Church. Is this how the Spirit manifests itself to you?

Prophecy is not prediction!

The gift of prophecy was given in NT to make up for the lack of NT knowledge. When the NT was complete there was no more need for that gift.

Acts 21:10 And as we tarried there many days, there came down from Judaea a certain prophet, named Agabus.
11 And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.
12 And when we heard these things, both we, and they of that place, besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.
--This is prediction of a prophet. It came true. Prophecy is part prediction.

Prophecy is not the intepretaion of tongues!

Yes it is. That is precisely why Paul told the Corinthians to seek after prophecy and not tongues. Prophecy had understanding; tongues, having the same message did not have any understanding.

 

[awaken]

Hello Awaken, hope the service was good. We had a pretty good one this morning. Genesis 32: Jacob wrestling with God. This is one passage that for some reason you don't hear too many sermons on.

Concerning the above, actually experienced that once: the Pastor asked a visiting missionary to open the service with prayer in spanish, and then repeat it in english, but apparently he did not hear the latter request. He prayed in spanish, then sat down, lol. This is a good example of how it is necessary to understand what is being communicated in order for participation. We cannot unite in prayer if we do not know what is being said.

I agree! In church everything should be to the edifying of the church. Tongues or preaching without interpretation/understanding is useless!

Well, I would have to disagree here: Only in 1 Corinthians 14 do we see a speaking where the speaker is unaware of what is being said. This is why I see chs. 12-14 as a rebuke for employing falsely a counterfeit "tongues." And this...for show.

Are you saying that Acts 2, 10 and 19 they understood the language they were speaking in. If they understand what language it is why is it that He tells us to pray for the interpretation. Why would I pray for an interpretation if I understand the language I was speaking?

Back to the point:



1 Corinthians 14

King James Version (KJV)

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?


Paul makes the point, "What good is it if I speak in tongues either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?"

This would, I would think, make it clear that when tongues were employed, it was for purpose involving the word of God, whether (at this time) it was divinely revealed to the speaker (such as was the case for the Apostles and Disciples, i.e., Paul's imprisonment foretold) or if it involved previously revealed truth (such as we see Peter employ and then exopund).

This verse seems to clearly place Paul's teaching as a rebuke. Beginning in ch.12, he makes the case that not all members are the same. Chapter 13 carries on the same tenor which is, "What good is it if it is not sincere?" Chapter 14 concludes the theme with definite statement of rebuke coupled with questions which demand a negative answer.

The KJV translators I believe, inserting the word unknown, show their ability by distinguishing between when the true gift is being mentioned or the counterfeit is in view. The Corinthians would have been familiar with ecstatic speech, the Oracle of Delphi being a prominent example. Taking into consideration the underlying reason for the teaching in these three chapters, we can see that this is certainly not straightforward instruction without correction. Something was going on in the Church there that Paul did not approve of, nor did he promote it.

Of course, that is my position, lol.

Fair enough! I use to have the same position! I do not judge anyone that does not believe the way I do! I am just sharing what God has shown me in His word.
That said....
I agree that Paul is rebuking the Corinthian church, but he is not forbidding tongues. He just explains if they are going to pray in the spirit do not do it without interpretation..so the whole church will be edified. If I was to sing a song in Spanish in an English speaking church..how would that uplift the church?

Yes, but there is nothing there that says they communicated between the different languages mentioned, meaning, we have to assume that Parthians spoke to Medes, for example, rather than see this as Parthians and Medes spoke among themselves.

ok! But i looks like they were communicating amongst themselves to me.

Correct. And I will ask this again: would we not think it highly probable that in their praise, they praised God concerning Messiah?

Even as when Peter preaches, he targets Messianic scripture. Then expounds.

Yes! I agree that they could have been speaking to God and praising Jesus. It does not say exactly what they were saying..only that they were magnifying/praising God.

And this is something that should be considered: at this point in time, with English being a prominent language throughout the world, there would really be no surprise that anyone speaks English.

But, back then, it would be surprising to find locals speaking a language if one was from a far country.

And this is one reason the gift of tongues is not a necessary gift today. Because our world has grown smaller. More advanced. Languages are taught in schools.

This is where we will disagree. Tongues was a manifestation of the Holy Spirit. It was not a learned language.

I have heard stories of missionaries speaking to an audience and those that did not speak their language understanding. I do not know if this is "urban (so to speak...lol) legend" or if it is true. But that is what I would expect to be the case when the genuine gift is employed. I think it likely that as we see in scripture exceptions to general rules (such as a woman in a place of leadership, for example) and that from time to time the Lord may use these gifts sporadically in the field, even as healings are not the norm but we from time to time see miraculous healings. But what we don't see is a consistent employment as we do in the early Church. Even before the New Testament was compiled, we see Paul leaving Trophimus in Miletum sick. Why did he not heal him?

I believe the churches are lukewarm is one reason we do not see the manifestations.

As far as Paul and Trophimus...
Based on 2 Timothy 4:20, it is sometimes assumed that Paul had "lost" his healing abilities because he couldn't heal Trophimus. In that verse, the Greek word translated as "sick" is astheneo, and Paul used this Greek word 17 other times in the New Testament. Notice that with the exception of a single passage, Paul always used this Greek word to mean "weak." Here are the verses: Romans 4:19, 8:3, 14:1-2, 21 (literally, "is weak"), 1 Corinthians 8:9, 11-12, 11:20-21, 28-29, 12:10, 13:3-4, 9, Philippians 2:25-27.

Philippians 2:25-27 is the only other place in all of Paul's writings where astheneo is translated as "ill" instead of "weak," but having an illness can certainly leave a person feeling weak. If Trophimus was weak for some reason (but not actually sick), or if he was sick but received healing, then this passage doesn't support the idea that healing "died out" in the first century. But if Trophimus was sick, and if he never received healing, then this is no different than when people today don't receive healing (for various reasons). Either way, this passage doesn't prove that healing "died out" in the first century or that Paul had "lost" his healing abilities.

Agreed.

One thing that is interesting is you mentioning the people being drawn by the noise, as opposed to how I have viewed this, which is, they were drawn by what was being said by the disciples themselves. I did look at some commentators and ou are correct, this is also held by even some that I conside to be among the better teachers, such as John MacArthur.

But (and you knew that was coming, right? lol), looking at the greek we see phone translated as "sound" 8 times and voice...131 times, though I am sure that a few of these speak of the sound of an instrument.

Another thing that came to mind was that if it was the noise (a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind) that drew them, how then could they have heard the disciples...lol.

But some of the translations do indeed point to the sound itself, so this was interesting to me. I still hold to the position that it was that which was being spoken by the disciples, as it would seem to me that the "sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind" would have, like the "cloven tongues like as of fire" would have been for just a short time. I guess it is possible that initially a crowd could have been drawn due to the sound, then that escalated by the speaking of the disciples.

Just throwing that in there.

Either way, the disciples were speaking before the crowd gathered.

As God said they would before.

Continued...

true!

 

[awaken]

Agreed. But don't forget that the pouring out of the Spirit was evidenced by the things mentioned which were accomplished through the work of the Spirit of God. Even as God worked in the lives of men before, Judas again being a good example, who was counted among those that preached, healed, and cast out demons. Not of their own power, but by the power of God working through them.

But that was before the cross and the Day of Pentecost. Does't that make a difference?
What Peter was referring to in Joel was a progress of how it would unfold...and like you said..not all of it has been fulfilled yet!



[quote}Again, I would just ask that you give this some consideration. It makes perfect sense that this gift would have been of immense value to those that crossed borders and preached the Gospel.[/quote] I do consider all that is posted! My prayer in my journey through this (especially coming from Cessationalism background) is that God would not allow me to be led astray...that I was seeking Him/His truth!

Only if we limit the gift of languages to praise. Prophecy and prophesying carry the connotation of a "speaking forth of the word of God." Before the New Testament was compiled, as new revelation was given by God, we see prophesying that was at all times (concerning the true Prophets, that is) divinely generated. Now we still have men speaking forth the word of God that which has already been revealed, but we can assume that at least some of these men are divinely inspired in their speaking.

Refer to my post to DHK..

As Paul makes the point that if he speaks in tongues yet does not involve the word of God concerning the aspects mentioned earlier, then nothing is accomplished. There is always a reason for God empowering someone with a gift, it is never...without reason.

Then he goes on to say:


1 Corinthians 14
King James Version (KJV)


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?


Just as in chapter 13, we have a "If it does not involve..." statement, here, the focus upon that which is spoken. "Every sound must be for a reason, and the sound must be distinct so that it is recognized."

He goes to the lenght of saying, "...even inanimate objects that are used to produce distinguished sounds must make those distinct sounds so they are recognized." This is reminiscent of what he has just said in ch.13:



1 Corinthians 13

King James Version (KJV)

1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.


"Though I speak clearly and eloquently, if it is bereft of love...it is no better than noise." Likewise, the flip-side is equally important to the equation, "It is a necessity that if I speak, I speak in words that can be understood, for what good is it to speak if it cannot be understood?"

And he says exactly that in the next verse:


9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

Not...speaking to God, but, speaking to...nothing. It is of no use. It accomplishes nothing. Speech is for the purpose of communication, no matter who is speaking, or who is listening.
10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.


We can include in the "none of them," the gift of languages. And especially the gift of languages. For this is a sovereignly given gift from God Himself, and we would not expect the Lord to give a gift that does not accomplish that which is was given for. This would be akin to giving the gift of healing and the blind man's vision remaining blurry. Or a lame man left to walk on crutches. This would not be healing, right? It would just be an improvement.

ANd I agree with Him! Tongues should not be in the church unless done in order and interpreted! Otherwise..it is all useless!

Look, one of my favorite things to do is discuss God's word, and I have learned that if I do not show others that also love to speak about God's word the same respect I would show a stranger on the street that I was trying to convince that God can change lives...then I am become as a tinkling cymbal, lol.

This does not mean we have to waver in that which we are convicted of concerning our views, but, as we learn it is not a matter of "I'm right your wrong," but, "God is right and I pray He teaches me properly," then we can better be open to His leading and guidance, I believe. Sometimes it will not fail but that when we stand firm upon an issue those of opposing views may take it as aggressive, thier feelings might be hurt, or we may come across as arrogant...that is just going to happen. But, it has been a goal of mine to learn how to communicate to others in a way which leads to a profitable encounter for both of us. Because we disagree on a topic does not mean I have to hate you (and then try to show the love of Christ for another stranger, lol), nor does it mean that I should question the salvation of everyone that disagrees with me, lol, nor that I think that doctrinal perfection is a pre-requisite for another to be my brother or sister in Christ.

We all have a lot to learn, no? lol

Yes! I have LOTS to learn! .... I do enjoy His Word! And it is so much more enjoyable to discuss with those that do not retort to name calling!

Someone on here said the other day, "The more I learn, the more I learn how little I know," and this is true. Most of us have barely scratched the surface of what there is to know, and how we are to apply even that we do know in an attempt to live pleasing before God.

Shall we say "Lord I am glad I am not as that man?" Or, "I am the chief of sinners, Lord forgive me my sin?"

The latter has more application in my life than the former, and one thing we should remember is that every word will we give an account of, and that for us, if we expect the Lord to show mercy to us, then we must be found faithful to show mercy to others.

Okay, have to go, but I will leave you with a favorite verse of mine:



Malachi 3:16

King James Version (KJV)

16 Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another: and the Lord hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the Lord, and that thought upon his name.


If I don't get back today, I will try to get back sometime this week, but I have a pretty horrible week ahead (lol), so we will see.

God bless.

Enjoyed the discussion!
I will also add..the more I learn..I have more questions than answers too!

 

[awaken]

You are reading too much Charismatic gobbledy-gook.
You are absolutely wrong. You quoted from John 16, where Jesus gives the ministry of the Holy Spirit, the Comforter when he shall come. It has nothing to do with prophecy whatsoever. Prophecy was not to edify, exhort, and comfort. You are wrong in that assessment.

1 Cor.14:3

You are wrong on many counts here, especially the last one. Not anyone, in fact, not many could prophesy. Only a very few could. Paul made that clear in 1Cor.12:29,30. I quoted that for you. Do all prophesy? No they don't, was the obvious answer. Only some do. God had given that ability only to a few that were in the church during the first century. The gift has now ceased.
It was of the intellect, however a God-given intellect. It wasn't jibberish.
The one who held the office of a prophet also had the gift of prophecy.
That is true. In fact today, no one is a prophet. Jesus clearly said that John was the last of the prophets.

1 Cor. 14:1

More man-made Charismatic gobbledy-gook. You don't have scripture for this. Who gave it to you? Benny Hinn?

Conversing with you would be more productive if you would leave off these comments!

 

[DHK]

1 Cor.14:3

Quoting a verse or reference without explanation is not helpful.

Here it is along with context in the WEB:
1 Corinthians 14:3 But he who prophesies speaks to men for their edification, exhortation, and consolation.
4 He who speaks in another language edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the assembly.

The contrast is in relation to "other languages." The gift of prophesy would edify the church or assembly because the gift of languages would not. The gift of languages was a completely useless gift if it did not have interpretation. Furthermore, it was a gift to be used only in the local church, God's assembly.

1 Cor. 14:1
Conversing with you would be more productive if you would leave off these comments!

As Aaron pointed out, your comments are far from Baptistic. They are Charismatic to the core. Why shouldn't I associate you with other such Charismatics?
What does the reference you post say:
1 Corinthians 14:1 Follow after love, and earnestly desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. (WEB)
--First, and most importantly, follow after love.
--Second, desire the spiritual gifts (not all of them). See chapter 12.
--Third, Especially desire prophesy. This is in contrast to languages. The entire chapter is a contrast between languages and prophecy. The desire to prophecy is always put in contrast to the desire to speak in another language. The latter was a carnal desire. Were they all able to prophesy. The obvious answer to that is NO. Paul had already made that clear.

1 Corinthians 12:29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all miracle workers?

No, not all are prophets, and not all can prophesy. As I calculated, maybe one in ten if that would have been able to prophesy. The gifts were distributed among all the members. Study chapter 12. Each member had a different gift. Not everyone could speak in tongues; not everyone could prophesy.

 

[awaken]

Quoting a verse or reference without explanation is not helpful.

Here it is along with context in the WEB:
1 Corinthians 14:3 But he who prophesies speaks to men for their edification, exhortation, and consolation.
4 He who speaks in another language edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the assembly.

The contrast is in relation to "other languages." The gift of prophesy would edify the church or assembly because the gift of languages would not. The gift of languages was a completely useless gift if it did not have interpretation. Furthermore, it was a gift to be used only in the local church, God's assembly.

NOWHERE does it say it has to be used in the assembly! It is used to edify...but we can give a word of encouragement etc. outside the church building! I have always said it has to have an interpretation in order for it to be edifying to the church.

As Aaron pointed out, your comments are far from Baptistic. They are Charismatic to the core. Why shouldn't I associate you with other such Charismatics?

I believe in the manifestation of the HOly Spirit? Other Baptist believe this too! If that is what it takes to be charismatic..then I am! A charismatic baptist...lol...

What does the reference you post say:
1 Corinthians 14:1 Follow after love, and earnestly desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. (WEB)
--First, and most importantly, follow after love.
--Second, desire the spiritual gifts (not all of them). See chapter 12.
--Third, Especially desire prophesy. This is in contrast to languages. The entire chapter is a contrast between languages and prophecy. The desire to prophecy is always put in contrast to the desire to speak in another language. The latter was a carnal desire. Were they all able to prophesy. The obvious answer to that is NO. Paul had already made that clear.

1 Corinthians 12:29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all miracle workers?

No, not all are prophets, and not all can prophesy. As I calculated, maybe one in ten if that would have been able to prophesy. The gifts were distributed among all the members. Study chapter 12. Each member had a different gift. Not everyone could speak in tongues; not everyone could prophesy.

I have explained this in other post!

 

[John of Japan]

When we pray in the spirit...our understanding is unfruitful. Tell me where in scriputure it says the ones speaking understood what they themselves were saying! The Jews understood in THEIR OWN LANGUAGE.

It does not matter for my point whether or not the speakers understood their own words, though I believe they did. The point that you are obfuscating is that the hearers understood what they were saying. You have avoided this point again, just like you have done so every time it is made to you.

And another question you avoided which I will ask again: Can you give me one reason why God would have them pray in a language other than their own when He understands people perfectly well in their own language?

No, that is letting scripture interpret scripture! Acts 10 said they were praising God the same as Acts 2. Praising God is PRAYER! Talking to God! Why were the disciples praising God in tongues? Because this is one of the primary purposes for tongues.

No, praising God and prayer are different. If I say to you, "God has done a wonderful work in my life," that is praising God. I might do that directly to Him, or I might do it to other people. Either way I am praising God. However, prayer must be done directly to God and must not be done to other people or it becomes idolatry. So, you cannot prove that in Acts 10 they "spoke with tongues and magnified God."

The Greek word for "magnify" there is megaluno. It is clearly used in Acts 5:13 for speaking about other humans, the apostles, and again in Luke 1:58 where God magnifies Elisabeth, and again in 2 Cor. 10:15 for humans. So it doesn't mean to praise God in prayer, it simply means to praise someone.

So in Acts 10, once again you have no proof that they were speaking to God with their tongues. There also they were speaking to humans, telling how great God is.

With this logic..why pray at all! Just let God read your thoughts...you are grasping at straws again!

Be very careful here. You seem to be disagreeing with me that God knows our thoughts. Is that your point? Do you or do you not believe that God is omniscient, that He knows everything?

Now, if you believe God is omniscient, I'll ask again. Why would God give a different language to pray to Him? What is the logic in that? Why would He want us to pray to Him in a different language? Or to put it a different way, if tongues is only talking to God, what does He gain from your tongues?

You need to take your own advice in the above...Peter did not say they prophesied that day (they could have, but it is not shown in scriptures as it is in chapter 19). Even if they did tongues and prophecy is different..it does not prove that tongues was addressing the people!

One more note....Peter was describing the pouring out of the Holy Spirit that day. It was going to be available to all flesh! The Gentiles did not receive that day! YOU ARE THE ONE READING INTO WHAT IS NOT THERE.

No where does it say tongues is prophesying! They are different manifestations!

In order to prove your point you need to rebut my Greek exegesis, and you haven't done that. I'll give it again so you can try to refute it. I wrote:

"Exactly. Tongues and prophecy are different. In other words, the tongues were the means by which they prophesied. God gave them tongues to enable them to prophesy to people who did not understand their language. They spoke miraculously with other languages the wonderful works of God. This is very clearly prophesying.

It's like saying, "He raised the gun and shot the deer." The gun was the tool used to shoot the deer. So, "They spoke with tongues and prophesied." The tongues were the means by which they prophesied.

The Greek for "other tongues" in Acts 2:4 is, eteraiV glwssaiV. This is in the dative case, and is what is called in Greek grammar the 'dative of means,' or in the big advanced grammar by Daniel Wallace, the "dative of manner." Wallace says, "The dative substantive denotes the manner in which the action of the verb is accomplished" (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 161). So Acts 2:4 could be translated, "They spoke by means of tongues." The Greek grammar clearly shows that I am right here.

Acts 19:6 is very similar. Tongues is in the dative case, and is a dative of means, showing how they prophesied. It could be translated, 'They spoke and prophesied by means of tongues.'"

Then Peter did not need to preach! It was Peter that proclaimed the Gospel!

Well of course Peter needed to preach. God uses both sermons and personal witness to win souls. I have seen this done very well at a Japanese church in Sapporo, where the pastor preaches and then the believers sit down with every visitor to witness to them. This is just what happened in Acts 2: Peter preached the Gospel, then the disciples witnessed with other languages.

Keep digging maybe you will find the same thing I did! It was trying to disprove this that I actually came across the truth! They spoke by means of the utterance that the Holy Spirit gave them..yes! they used their own voice and mouth!

Keep digging? Very well. Show me how to get deeper than I have with the Greek text. Teach me how you get deep into Scriptures, something you've been claiming since you joined the Baptist Board. I'm serious here. What method of Bible study do you use that is deeper than mine?

I let scripture interpret scriptures! prophecy and tongues are a different manifestation!

Great. Then refute my analysis of the Greek. Show me how deep you go into the Word.

 

[awaken]

It does not matter for my point whether or not the speakers understood their own words, though I believe they did. The point that you are obfuscating is that the hearers understood what they were saying. You have avoided this point again, just like you have done so every time it is made to you.

I have answered this questions several times. Go back and read my post! If not on this thread on others!

And another question you avoided which I will ask again: Can you give me one reason why God would have them pray in a language other than their own when He understands people perfectly well in their own language?

I am not talking to myself, I am talking to God! I do not know God's perfect will about most matters...but the Holy Spirit does! Why wouldn't I want him to give me the prayers? When people pray with there understanding that is all they can do..pray what they understand to pray for! THe HOly Spirit knows the mind of Christ.

No, praising God and prayer are different. If I say to you, "God has done a wonderful work in my life," that is praising God. I might do that directly to Him, or I might do it to other people. Either way I am praising God. However, prayer must be done directly to God and must not be done to other people or it becomes idolatry. So, you cannot prove that in Acts 10 they "spoke with tongues and magnified God."

I do not have to prove it to you! Scriptures speak for themself! Read vs. 46 in chapter 10.

The Greek word for "magnify" there is megaluno. It is clearly used in Acts 5:13 for speaking about other humans, the apostles, and again in Luke 1:58 where God magnifies Elisabeth, and again in 2 Cor. 10:15 for humans. So it doesn't mean to praise God in prayer, it simply means to praise someone.

Who do you think they were praising in chapter 10, Peter? No! they were doing the same thing they were in Acts 2!

Megaluno: 3170 megaluvnw Megaluno (meg-al-oo'-no);
Word Origin: Greek, Verb
from (3173)

to make great, magnify
metaph. to make conspicuous
to deem or declare great
to esteem highly, to extol, laud, celebrate
to get glory and praise

What you keep ignoring is 1 Cor. 14 where it says that tongues IS SPEAKING TO GOD! PRAYING IN THE SPIRIT IS TONGUES.

So in Acts 10, once again you have no proof that they were speaking to God with their tongues. There also they were speaking to humans, telling how great God is.

Your theory contradicts 1 cor. 14:2.

Be very careful here. You seem to be disagreeing with me that God knows our thoughts. Is that your point? Do you or do you not believe that God is omniscient, that He knows everything?

Stop with the games! I never said God can not read our thoughts!

THis is what you said:Furthermore, yours is a completely illogical interpretation. Give me one reason why God would have them pray in a language other than their own when He understands people perfectly well in their own language. The only possible reason for tongues to be given in Acts 2 is for the disciples to speak to other people. God doesn't need our languages in the slightest! He can read our thoughts before we think them.

I just came back and said if he can read our thoughts why pray at all? He can read our thoughts but whether we pray in the spirit or pray with our understanding ...he can read our thoughts either way.

Now, if you believe God is omniscient, I'll ask again. Why would God give a different language to pray to Him? What is the logic in that? Why would He want us to pray to Him in a different language? Or to put it a different way, if tongues is only talking to God, what does He gain from your tongues?

see above..

In order to prove your point you need to rebut my Greek exegesis, and you haven't done that. I'll give it again so you can try to refute it. I wrote:

"Exactly. Tongues and prophecy are different. In other words, the tongues were the means by which they prophesied. God gave them tongues to enable them to prophesy to people who did not understand their language. They spoke miraculously with other languages the wonderful works of God. This is very clearly prophesying.

It's like saying, "He raised the gun and shot the deer." The gun was the tool used to shoot the deer. So, "They spoke with tongues and prophesied." The tongues were the means by which they prophesied.

The Greek for "other tongues" in Acts 2:4 is, eteraiV glwssaiV. This is in the dative case, and is what is called in Greek grammar the 'dative of means,' or in the big advanced grammar by Daniel Wallace, the "dative of manner." Wallace says, "The dative substantive denotes the manner in which the action of the verb is accomplished" (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 161). So Acts 2:4 could be translated, "They spoke by means of tongues." The Greek grammar clearly shows that I am right here.

Acts 19:6 is very similar. Tongues is in the dative case, and is a dative of means, showing how they prophesied. It could be translated, 'They spoke and prophesied by means of tongues.'"

They were magnifying and praising God in tongues ( utterance by the Holy Spirit). Prophecy is for the believer...why would they prophecy to the unbeliever?

Well of course Peter needed to preach. God uses both sermons and personal witness to win souls. I have seen this done very well at a Japanese church in Sapporo, where the pastor preaches and then the believers sit down with every visitor to witness to them. This is just what happened in Acts 2: Peter preached the Gospel, then the disciples witnessed with other languages.

You got that backwards...they spoke with tongues THEN Peter preached. He even explained why they were speaking in tongue....because of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit! Evidence that the Spirit had been poured out...think about that!

Keep digging? Very well. Show me how to get deeper than I have with the Greek text. Teach me how you get deep into Scriptures, something you've been claiming since you joined the Baptist Board. I'm serious here. What method of Bible study do you use that is deeper than mine?

Great. Then refute my analysis of the Greek. Show me how deep you go into the Word.

Because what you are saying contradicts what Corinthians is saying about tongues. Tongues is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit...just like prophecy, word of knowledge, discernment etc. It does not say tongues is the means that these are manifested. Tongues is a seperate manifestation.

 

[DHK]

NOWHERE does it say it has to be used in the assembly!

He was writing to an assembly; not an individual.
"These truths are self-evident."

It is used to edify...but we can give a word of encouragement etc. outside the church building! I have always said it has to have an interpretation in order for it to be edifying to the church.

The Bible doesn't speak of a church building. The church (local churches) met in cemeteries (Catacombs), fields, homes, and just wherever they could. Buildings used exclusively for churches did not come until about 300 years later. The church is the assembly of people. The church is where the people assemble together. They are an organized assembly.

Acts 12:5 Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him.
Acts 12:12 And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying.

They were praying for Peter, not in tongues, but praying fervently for his deliverance and the Lord answered their prayers. Note the "church" the assembly at the house of Mary, the mother of John Mark.

I believe in the manifestation of the HOly Spirit? Other Baptist believe this too! If that is what it takes to be charismatic..then I am! A charismatic baptist...lol...

So you say. You can't even define what you believe in. It is just some mystical existential phrase that you have pulled out of one verse of the Bible. But you have yet to define what this "Manifestation" is.

 

[John of Japan]

Forgive me, I'm not trying to be condescending, but I really don't think you are understanding some of the points I'm making. Maybe you read them and then posted late at night or something. So I'll try again.

I am not talking to myself, I am talking to God! I do not know God's perfect will about most matters...but the Holy Spirit does! Why wouldn't I want him to give me the prayers? When people pray with there understanding that is all they can do..pray what they understand to pray for! THe HOly Spirit knows the mind of Christ.

I know you are not talking to yourself, that you believe you are talking to God. That is not my point. My point is, why would God want you to speak to him in some language you do not know? What does that do for God? We are told to do all to the glory of God in 1 Cor. 10:31. How does it glorify God if you talk to him in some other language you do not know?

I do not have to prove it to you! Scriptures speak for themself! Read vs. 46 in chapter 10.

Hmm. Okay. Let me try again. It is obvious that in Acts 10:46 they were praising God. But I'm asking, how do you know they were speaking to God Himself when they praised Him in 10:46? It doesn't say so. We can speak to others and praise God, can't we? Praise in English just means to speak well of someone. I praise my wife when I say to other people, "She's a great cook and housekeeper." If you are married, don't you ever praise your mate to other people? I can praise my wife to her directly or to other people.

So again, the question. In 10:46 it does not say they magnifying God to Him directly. So how do you know they were magnifying God directly to God? Why could they not be magnifying God to other people?

And for goodness sake, don't send me back to Acts 2. That would be circular reasoning. You can't prove something in Acts 2 from 10 and then the same thing from 10 to 2.

Who do you think they were praising in chapter 10, Peter? No! they were doing the same thing they were in Acts 2!

Megaluno: 3170 megaluvnw Megaluno (meg-al-oo'-no);
Word Origin: Greek, Verb
from (3173)

to make great, magnify
metaph. to make conspicuous
to deem or declare great
to esteem highly, to extol, laud, celebrate
to get glory and praise

Again, yes they were praising God in ch. 10. But how do you know they were praising God to God? I often praise God to other people, don't you?

Do angels pray? Yet they were praising God in Luke 2:13. In Judges 16:24 the Philistines praised their idol god by saying, "Our god hath delivered into our hand our enemy" (meaning Samson), but they were not praying to their false god at the time.

What you keep ignoring is 1 Cor. 14 where it says that tongues IS SPEAKING TO GOD! PRAYING IN THE SPIRIT IS TONGUES.

No, I don't ignore it. I believe that the tongues in 1 Cor. and the tongues in Acts were different. We went through all of that on other threads. and I don't really want to rehash it with you. You think you proved they were the same, I don't think you did. Let's agree to disagree.

Your theory contradicts 1 cor. 14:2.

To compare Scripture with Scripture is good, but before you do that you have to properly exegete the passage. Sorry, I don't believe you have properly exegeted either Acts 2 or 1 Cor. 12-14 anywhere on the BB. That's just the way it is. Learn to live with it. You are simply not going to convince me. (This is where you tell me again that I'm resisting the Holy Spirit and not acting in faith, and that you have determined your view by much deep Bible study, therefore you know I'm wrong. :sleep

They were magnifying and praising God in tongues ( utterance by the Holy Spirit). Prophecy is for the believer...why would they prophecy to the unbeliever?

Prophecy can be either to believers or unbelievers. Surely you know this! Just read the OT prophets. Many times they prophesied to unbelieving Israel.

You got that backwards...they spoke with tongues THEN Peter preached. He even explained why they were speaking in tongue....because of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit! Evidence that the Spirit had been poured out...think about that!

The order doesn't matter for my point. They witnessed for Christ and then Peter preached, or the Japanese preacher preached and then the believers witnessed. It's the same thing. I'm sure you don't believe we should forbid witnessing to newcomers before the service. raying:

 

[saturneptune]

Here is documented evidence that healing miracles still take place today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuQ4SJWECBY

 

[John of Japan]

Because what you are saying contradicts what Corinthians is saying about tongues. Tongues is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit...just like prophecy, word of knowledge, discernment etc. It does not say tongues is the means that these are manifested. Tongues is a seperate manifestation.

I think I need to answer this, though I did not before. I specifically exegeted the Greek NT. I told you exactly what it says in two passages. So by this answer, you are putting your opinon of Scripture above what the Bible itself says: "prophesied with/by means of tongues." I'll take the Bible over your opinion any day.

Once again, here is the direct Word of God which you are rejecting.

Tongues and prophecy are different. In other words, the tongues were the means by which they prophesied. God gave them tongues to enable them to prophesy to people who did not understand their language. They spoke miraculously with other languages the wonderful works of God. This is very clearly prophesying.

It's like saying, "He raised the gun and shot the deer." The gun was the tool used to shoot the deer. So, "They spoke with tongues and prophesied." The tongues were the means by which they prophesied.

The Greek for "other tongues" in Acts 2:4 is, eteraiV glwssaiV. This is in the dative case, and is what is called in Greek grammar the 'dative of means,' or in the big advanced grammar by Daniel Wallace, the "dative of manner." Wallace says, "The dative substantive denotes the manner in which the action of the verb is accomplished" (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 161). So Acts 2:4 could be translated, "They spoke by means of tongues." The Greek grammar clearly shows that I am right here.

Acts 19:6 is very similar. Tongues is in the dative case, and is a dative of means, showing how they prophesied. It could be translated, 'They spoke and prophesied by means of tongues.'"

 

[John of Japan]

Here is documented evidence that healing miracles still take place today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuQ4SJWECBY

Very funny!

The first time I saw Ernest Angley "healling" I thought it was bizzarre--hitting people on the forehead and knocking them down? Weird! Then there was Oral and his 900 foot Jesus. Even weirder!

 

[awaken]

Forgive me, I'm not trying to be condescending, but I really don't think you are understanding some of the points I'm making. Maybe you read them and then posted late at night or something. So I'll try again.

I know you are not talking to yourself, that you believe you are talking to God. That is not my point. My point is, why would God want you to speak to him in some language you do not know? What does that do for God? We are told to do all to the glory of God in 1 Cor. 10:31. How does it glorify God if you talk to him in some other language you do not know?

This hard to explain to someone that does not believe it is prayer, but..
It is impossible to please God without faith.

1 Cor. 14:14 says that when I pray in tongues my spirit prays, but my understanding ( we understand with our mind) is unfruitful (does not benefit our minds).

Keep in mind that the Holy Spirit isn't the one praying. He is helping you pray by giving you utterance in our spirit. You ask how does it glorify God? I think it is the faith in what the Word says! As I am praying I have faith that the Holy Spirit is praying through me the perfect will of God. This is not blind faith, because His Word tells us that it is by our most HOly Faith that we pray in the spirit. ...and when he gives you the interpretation...it is awesome! (1 Cor. 14:13 tells us to pray for our own tongue interpretation)
I usually then pray what He has shown me in English (my own understanding). Remember 1 Cor. 14:15 says to pray with both!
I could explain even more...but again if you do not believe it is prayer then you will not receive anything else I post concerning this.
God gets the glory because of our faith.
note: It is the foolishness of this world that confounds the wise. What do you think if you saw someone spit in mud and put it on someones eyes to heal them. Our ways are not His ways!

Hmm. Okay. Let me try again. It is obvious that in Acts 10:46 they were praising God. But I'm asking, how do you know they were speaking to God Himself when they praised Him in 10:46? It doesn't say so. We can speak to others and praise God, can't we? Praise in English just means to speak well of someone. I praise my wife when I say to other people, "She's a great cook and housekeeper." If you are married, don't you ever praise your mate to other people? I can praise my wife to her directly or to other people.

This is what I ask the Lord as I was studing this too!
You could talk about your wife all day and yes! if it was good things said about her, I would say you would be praising her TTHER PEOPLE.
#1 "Who were the people speaking to before the crowd gathered in Acts 2?"
#2 When we compare scripture with scripture 1 Cor. 14:2 tells us who we are speaking to in tongues...God. That is prayer. Why would God say tongues was speaking to God in Cor. and contradict Himself in the other scriptures? Tongues do not benefit others UNLESS there is an interpretation.
#3 Tongues is a language unlearned. THe Holy Spirit gives the utterance, right? That is why it is called "manifestation of the Holy Spirit"..because it is from the HOly Spirit, not man..it is supernatural! What we pray we do not understand ourself. If we understood then there would be no need to pray for interpretation.

So again, the question. In 10:46 it does not say they magnifying God to Him directly. So how do you know they were magnifying God directly to God? Why could they not be magnifying God to other people?

See above post. Why would God say in Cor. it was talking to God? Nowhere in scripture does it say that tongues is talking to other people. In 1 Cor. 14: 16-17 it says that we give thanks well! We are speaking again too God! Show me one verse where it says tongues is speaking too the people?

And for goodness sake, don't send me back to Acts 2. That would be circular reasoning. You can't prove something in Acts 2 from 10 and then the same thing from 10 to 2.
Again, yes they were praising God in ch. 10. But how do you know they were praising God to God? I often praise God to other people, don't you?

Because 1 Cor. tells us it is speaking to God!! Again show me where they say tongues is talking to other people. THe interpretations are for the benefit of the church to understand what they are saying in tongues. It also explains in verse 15 that it is praying.

Do angels pray? Yet they were praising God in Luke 2:13. In Judges 16:24 the Philistines praised their idol god by saying, "Our god hath delivered into our hand our enemy" (meaning Samson), but they were not praying to their false god at the time.
No, I don't ignore it. I believe that the tongues in 1 Cor. and the tongues in Acts were different. We went through all of that on other threads. and I don't really want to rehash it with you. You think you proved they were the same, I don't think you did. Let's agree to disagree.

That is where the confusion will come in and you will get unanswered question concerning 1 Cor.12-14. If tongues are the same throughout scriptures then the scriptures do not contradict themselves! Tongues are a manifestation of the HOly Spirit, it is "praying in the spirit."

To compare Scripture with Scripture is good, but before you do that you have to properly exegete the passage. Sorry, I don't believe you have properly exegeted either Acts 2 or 1 Cor. 12-14 anywhere on the BB. That's just the way it is. Learn to live with it. You are simply not going to convince me. (This is where you tell me again that I'm resisting the Holy Spirit and not acting in faith, and that you have determined your view by much deep Bible study, therefore you know I'm wrong. :sleep

The way I understand tongues do not contradict in scriptures..yours do! The only way you can make a little sense of it is by making them different! They are not! They are speaking to God/praying in the spirit...and when this is done in church without interpretation the church is not edified! Cor. is correcting the use of "praying in the spirit" in a church setting. Praying where others do not understand is not edifying to the church... even though it is to you.

Prophecy can be either to believers or unbelievers. Surely you know this! Just read the OT prophets. Many times they prophesied to unbelieving Israel.

The manifestation is given to the church to edify the church. 1 Cor. 14:22 says that "prophesying serveth not for them that believeth not." You are confusing the office of a prophet with the manifestation of tongues given to the church. Not all are called to be a prophet..but all are to desire to prophesy..that is for the church!

The order doesn't matter for my point. They witnessed for Christ and then Peter preached, or the Japanese preacher preached and then the believers witnessed. It's the same thing. I'm sure you don't believe we should forbid witnessing to newcomers before the service. raying:

Did I say that I forbid witnessing to newcomers before service? NO!
Tongues were a manifetation of the Holy Spirit being poured out on the Day of Pentecost! Peter said that in His sermon addressing the people (SAID TO THEM). What they saw was the promise spoken by Joel.."I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh" (this is still going on today because there are still people coming to know the Lord). Jesus also told his disciple to wait for it in Acts 1:8. Once it was poured out..it is now availble to all of us if we believe!

 

[awaken]

Very funny!

The first time I saw Ernest Angley "healling" I thought it was bizzarre--hitting people on the forehead and knocking them down? Weird! Then there was Oral and his 900 foot Jesus. Even weirder!

Wonder what people said about Jesus methods of healing...spitting in mud and applying it to the eyes. I am not sayig all those healings are real..but we need to be careful!