Believe that the Lord can still grant the gift to a missionary to hear/understand/speak a foreign tongue to him, but will be exceptioanal cases!
NOT normitive for today!
Right. Not norm because of our unbelief?
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Believe that the Lord can still grant the gift to a missionary to hear/understand/speak a foreign tongue to him, but will be exceptioanal cases!
NOT normitive for today!
Helen Keller never learned to speak in tongues...:tongue3:
Right. Not norm because of our unbelief?
I've heard anecdotes, but never a documented case of a modern missionary miraculously receiving a foreign tongue.Believe that the Lord can still grant the gift to a missionary to hear/understand/speak a foreign tongue to him, but will be exceptioanal cases!
NOT normitive for today!
I've heard anecdotes, but never a documented case of a modern missionary miraculously receiving a foreign tongue.
Some of the original Pentecostals in 1906, including Charles Parham, thought that their missionaries would simply go to different countries and speak their languages miraculously (Azusa Street and Beyond, ed. by L. Grant McClung, Jr., pp. 13-14). Of course that didn't happen, and even today Pentecostals and Charismatics have to go to language school, just like us Baptists!
... a fact! And for those who think otherwise, they need to rethink what tongues in worship is all about! Thanks for clearing up a myth, at least as far as I know from my research, too!
Local church autonomy allows the local church to do pretty much what it pleases, but an SBC church that would allow the practice of tongues should be confronted by believers who know better. That is what I meant by "correction."I agree with you that the signs and wonders and revealtory gifts were intended for the Apostolic Age itself, as God worked thru His Apsotles to confirm the message of jesus as Saviour/Messiah to both the Jews/Gentiles, but would local church autonomy though require a SBC could be "gfull Gospel" if they so choose?
A new study by LifeWay Research on the use of private prayer language indicates that half of Southern Baptist pastors believe the Holy Spirit gives some people a special language to pray to God.
The personal beliefs of half of SBC pastors doesn't make their opinion correct. More likely, it means that half of the SBC pastors surveyed are wrong. I also doubt the percentage is that high. While half of those surveyed responded affirmatively, it is highly doubtful half of SBC pastors actually believe that to be true.
Right. Not norm because of our unbelief?
None of those gifts have ever been the "norm".
Frankly, I'm amazed this thread has lasted this long. I can't believe the number of Baptists who seem to think the practice of tongues today is valid and biblical. It is neither.Local church autonomy allows the local church to do pretty much what it pleases, but an SBC church that would allow the practice of tongues should be confronted by believers who know better. That is what I meant by "correction."
And yeah, RD2, I say this with love and affection, but you need correction. This concept of a "full gospel" is a Pentecostal misnomer. The gospel is the gospel, either you preach it or you don't. Your example of the "black church, white church" in Texas is not a matter of the gospel not being fully preached, it is a matter of the white church choosing sinful prejudice over brotherly love. That relates to the gospel, but it is not the gospel, per se.
I've heard anecdotes, but never a documented case of a modern missionary miraculously receiving a foreign tongue.
Some of the original Pentecostals in 1906, including Charles Parham, thought that their missionaries would simply go to different countries and speak their languages miraculously (Azusa Street and Beyond, ed. by L. Grant McClung, Jr., pp. 13-14). Of course that didn't happen, and even today Pentecostals and Charismatics have to go to language school, just like us Baptists!
:type: I have been talking with Baptist brothers and pastors from around the states [on another forum], and I was totally blown away with the increased number of Southern Baptist churches that, while they do not promote or say tongues is an evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, are now permitting those with the gift of tongues to sit in their fellowship, and to use the gift for pray purposes.
Maybe I am no longer the "Lone Wolf" in this belief that this gift continued to be poured out to those who request it, but, NOT making it a "Deal breaker."
So, in the following poll, where anonymity is a "good thing," please be honest and take the poll, so I can see if this is not just associated with this other group of Baptists, but Baptists in general. And when I say Baptist in general, it is because I think this board is the most definitive one, when it comes to the heartbeat and pulse of the Baptist churches in America and around the world! :flower:
1. Tongues was never gibberish. It was always a real language so basically EVERYBODY who practices it today is not remotely in line with biblical tongues.
2. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think that that miracle should continue in every age. NONE. We don't expect men to part seas and rivers today because we know that those were miracles for a specific age for a specific people. That is the way it is with all biblical miracles. Why in the world we don't apply that very clear truth to "tongues" is beyond me.
I have several other points, but that's enough for now.
1. Tongues was never gibberish. It was always a real language so basically EVERYBODY who practices it today is not remotely in line with biblical tongues.
2. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think that that miracle should continue in every age. NONE. We don't expect men to part seas and rivers today because we know that those were miracles for a specific age for a specific people. That is the way it is with all biblical miracles. Why in the world we don't apply that very clear truth to "tongues" is beyond me.
I have several other points, but that's enough for now.
I don't see tongues and a situation like that as being analogous. And anyway, I know of no documented cases like that.believe that the lord can and does do special things like this when needed, but the normal course of events is to go to language school!
I would tend to see that like stories read about where missionaries go into new land, and met by tribal chief, saying that in a dream God told him to look out fro men bring word of God to them...
No, rather due to us having the Bible canon, and no more modern Apostles required!
No additional revelations from prophets either!
I don't see tongues and a situation like that as being analogous. And anyway, I know of no documented cases like that.
What usually happens is not a dream, but something handed down in the tribal culture that points to Christ, as in Peace Child, where the tribes understood Christ's sacrifice through their own custom. See Eternity in Their Hearts by Don Richardson for many such examples. These cases are not miraculous like tongues in Acts 2 were, but are examples of God's providence.
I do not believe that the canon being closed is a valid argument. No where in scripture does it make that case. What is important is the nature of the gifts. Any argument that begins there will be clear and unambiguous.