Start Praying in Tongues

[Steadfast Fred]

When will he reveal himself to us? At his coming! We are to come behind in NO gift until he returns!

That verse does not say we are to come behind in no gift until He returns.

What it does say, is...

1 Corinthians 1:7-8 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Notice the break between "gift" and "waiting"? It nowhere says the gift will continue until His return.

Again, you are adding to fit your theology.

 

[Steadfast Fred]

HERE IS A VERSE NONE OF YOU WHO BELIEVE TONGUES ARE FOR TODAY CAN GET PAST.....this verse alone proves you all are wrong!

1 Cor 14:22...So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.

Exactly!! They were given for a sign for unbelieving Jews in fulfillment of the prophecy found in Isaiah 28:11.

And it is quite clear that Paul was not condoning the babbling that is going on in churches today

 

[Matt22:37-39]

Yep, I think that verse says it all....nothing else needs to be said

I love how God can keep it real SIMPLE sometimes.

You'd think "plain and simple" would get that?

 

[awaken]

Yep, I think that verse says it all....nothing else needs to be said

I love how God can keep it real SIMPLE sometimes.

You'd think "plain and simple" would get that?

So if tongues were given for unbelievers, why would they cease? Are you saying we do not have unbelievers today?

 

[Steadfast Fred]

So if tongues were given for unbelievers, why would they cease? Are you saying we do not have unbelievers today?

It wasn't all unbelievers, it was specific unbelievers... Unbelieving Israel. Are there unbelieving Jews in your congregation?

 

[Matt22:37-39]

So if tongues were given for unbelievers, why would they cease? Are you saying we do not have unbelievers today?

Because we have the full revelation of God in the BIBLE, we need nothing else to point others to Christ. The speaker spoke in tongues and everyone heard the message in their own dialect.

The gift of tongues was a KNOWN language (except for the "unknown" one which was pagan) that AUTHENTICATED the speaker that he indeed was speaking from God.

That was pointed out in many of my post already

 

[righteousdude2]

And I'll Say This, in BOLD....`

I wonder how many times I will have to say the following here; I'll put it in bold so maybe it will be seen: I am not a cessationist.

But I am absolutely certain that the Charismatic interpretation, doctrine, and practice of the HS baptism and tongues is a sham, unbiblical, and not of God. As for experiencing it, oh, yes, I have in many worship services. It is manufactured, man-made, a dog-and-pony show, and does great harm to people, sometimes lifelong harm.

But I am absolutely certain that the folks who oppose Charismatic interpretations, doctrine, and practice of the HS baptism and tongues are decieved and as unbiblical as you think we who use these gifts are. Thus I would probably have to say that your opposition of the understanding of these gifts are not of God. As for experiencing it, oh, yes, I have in many worship services, and while som were manufactured, man-made, and like a dog-and-pony show, I have seen it in a structured setting with a pastor and his deacons who are senstative to the HS, and make sure only the Holy Spirit moves, and when it is done as the Bible teaches, it is fruitful, edifying, and beautiful because it fills the sanctuary with His presence in a way that you'd have to be there to experience. And just as you calim the use of gifts, wrongly administered cause great harm to people, sometimes lifelong harm; so does the denial of said gifts, because those in denial loe out on another level of worhsip not known without the faith to allow this gift to move.

I can only imagine how startled the group in the upper room were when the Holy Spirit first visited them. But, thankfully they didn't take time to convene a committee and research the validity of it, because they had nothing to compare it to in the OT. Thankfully they moved in faith, accepted the gift, and it must have been awesome, because what they went out and did was awesome too.

 

[righteousdude2]

And you call tongues .....

Tongues “Will Cease”

In 1 Corinthians 13:8 Paul made an interesting, almost startling, statement: “Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.” In the expression “love never fails,” the Greek word translated “fails” means “to decay” or “to be abolished.” Paul was not saying that love is invincible or that it cannot be rejected. He was saying that love is eternal—that it will be applicable forever and will never be passé. Tongues, however, “will cease.” The Greek verb used in 1 Corinthians 13:8 means “to cease permanently,” and implies that when tongues ceased, they would never start up again.

Here is the question that this passage poses for the contemporary charismatic movement: if tongues were supposed to cease, has that already happened, or is it yet future? Charismatic believers insist that none of the gifts have ceased yet, so the cessation of tongues is yet future. Most non-charismatics insist that tongues have already ceased, passing away with the apostolic age. Who is right?

It should be noted that 1 Corinthians 13:8 itself does not say when tongues were to cease. Although 1 Corinthians 13:9-10 teaches that prophecy and knowledge will cease when the “perfect” (i.e., the eternal state) comes, the language of the passage—particularly the middle voice of the Greek verb translated “will cease”—puts tongues in a category apart from these gifts. Paul writes that while prophecy and knowledge will be “done away” (passive voice) by “the perfect,” the gift of tongues “will cease” in and of itself (middle voice) prior to the time that “the perfect” arrives. When did this cessation of tongues take place? The evidence of Scripture and history indicate that tongues ceased in the apostolic age.

Evidence from Scripture

What biblical or theological evidence is there that tongues have ceased? First, the gift of tongues was a miraculous, revelatory gift, and the age of miracles and revelation ended with the apostles. The last recorded miracles in the New Testament occurred around A.D. 58, with the healings on the island of Malta (Acts 28:7-10). From A.D. 58 to 96, when John finished the book of Revelation, no miracle is recorded. Miracle gifts like tongues and healing are mentioned only in 1 Corinthians, an early epistle. Two later epistles, Ephesians and Romans, both discuss gifts of the Spirit at length—but no mention is made of the miraculous gifts. By that time miracles were already looked on as something in the past (Heb. 2:3-4). Apostolic authority and the apostolic message needed no further confirmation. Before the first century ended, the entire New Testament had been written and was circulating through the churches.

Charismatic believers insist
that none of the gifts have ceased…
non-charismatics insist that tongues
have already ceased.…
Who is right?

The revelatory gifts had ceased to serve any purpose. And when the apostolic age ended with the death of the Apostle John, the signs that identified the apostles had already become moot (cf. 2 Cor. 12:12).

Second, tongues were intended as a sign to unbelieving Israel (1 Cor. 14:21-22; cf. Is. 28:11-12). They signified that God had begun a new work that encompassed the Gentiles. The Lord would now speak to all nations in all languages. The barriers were down. And so the gift of languages symbolized not only the curse of God on a disobedient nation, but also the blessing of God on the whole world.

Tongues were therefore a sign of transition between the Old and New Covenants. With the establishment of the church, a new day had dawned for the people of God. God would speak in all languages. But once the period of transition was past, the sign was no longer necessary.

Third, the gift of tongues was inferior to other gifts. It was given primarily as a sign (1 Cor. 14:22) and was also easily misused to edify self (1 Cor. 14:4). The church meets for the edification of the body, not self-gratification or personal experience-seeking. Therefore, tongues had limited usefulness in the church, and so it was never intended to be a permanent gift.

The Evidence from History

The evidence of history also indicates that tongues have ceased. It is significant that tongues are mentioned only in the earliest books of the New Testament. Paul wrote at least twelve epistles after 1 Corinthians and never mentioned tongues again. Peter never mentioned tongues; James never mentioned tongues; John never mentioned tongues; neither did Jude. Tongues appeared only briefly in Acts and 1 Corinthians as the new message of the gospel was being spread. But once the church was established, tongues were gone. They stopped. The later books of the New Testament do not mention tongues again, and neither did anyone in the post-apostolic age.

Chrysostom and Augustine—the greatest theologians of the eastern and western churches—considered tongues obsolete. Writing in the fourth century, Chrysostom stated categorically that tongues had ceased by his time and described the gift as an obscure practice. Augustine referred to tongues as a sign that was adapted to the apostolic age. In fact, during the first five hundred years of the church, the only people who claimed to have spoken in tongues were followers of Montanus, who was branded as a heretic.

The next time any significant tongues-speaking movement arose within Christianity was in the late seventeenth century. A group of militant Protestants in the Cevennes region of southern France began to prophecy, experience visions, and speak in tongues. The group, sometimes called the Cevennol prophets, is remembered for its political and military activities, not its spiritual legacy. Most of their prophecies went unfulfilled. They were rabidly anti-Roman Catholic, and advocated the use of armed force against the Roman Catholic church. Many of them were consequently persecuted and killed by Rome.

At the other end of the spectrum, the Jansenists, a group of Roman Catholic loyalists who opposed the Reformers’ teaching on justification by faith, also claimed to be able to speak in tongues in the 1700s.

Another group that practiced a form of tongues was the Shakers, an American sect with Quaker roots that flourished in the mid-1700s. Mother Ann Lee, founder of the sect, regarded herself as the female equivalent of Jesus Christ. She claimed to be able to speak in seventy-two languages. The Shakers believed sexual intercourse was sinful, even within marriage. They spoke in tongues while dancing and singing in a trancelike state.

Then in the early nineteenth century, Scottish Presbyterian pastor Edward Irving and members of his congregation practiced speaking in tongues and prophesying. Irvingite prophets often contradicted each other, their prophecies failed to come to pass, and their meetings were characterized by wild excesses. The movement was further discredited when some of their prophets admitted to falsifying prophecies and others even attributed their “giftedness” to evil spirits. This group eventually became the Catholic Apostolic Church, which taught many false doctrines, embracing several Roman Catholic doctrines and creating twelve apostolic offices.

All of those supposed manifestations of tongues were identified with groups that were heretical, fanatical, or otherwise unorthodox. The judgment of biblically orthodox believers who were their contemporaries was that all those groups were aberrations. Surely that should also be the assessment of any Christian who is concerned with truth. Thus, we conclude that from the end of the apostolic era to the beginning of the twentieth century there were no genuine occurrences of the New Testament gift of tongues. They had ceased, as the Holy Spirit said they would (1 Cor. 13:8). The gift of tongues is not for today.

Adapted from John MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992). For a fuller treatment of the gift of tongues, consult this resource.

.....babble :smilewinkgrin: :tonofbricks:

 

[righteousdude2]

I can get past it....

HERE IS A VERSE NONE OF YOU WHO BELIEVE TONGUES ARE FOR TODAY CAN GET PAST.....this verse alone proves you all are wrong!

1 Cor 14:22...So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe.

....in fact I can read further down, and I believe Paul when he says [verse 18] that, "I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you." I agree with Paul on everything he says about tongues, I adhere to it, and I do not see where he says NOT to use it in church. Just that he prefers to NOT speak tongues in church. It is a preference, not a doctrinal policy. So, I got past the verse.

I also adhere to his point that when we pray and sing in the spirit, it should be done in the priavacy of our own closet - "So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding [verse 15 of same chapter]." Those who practice praying in the spirit in the privacy of their home, are not hurting anyone. In fact, show me where doing this in privacy is against any Scripture? Show me where doing this privately is harming anyone? :flower:

 

[Thomas Helwys]

For those who are trumpeting the classic Charismatic/Pentecostal view of HS baptism and tongues, consider this: If the basis for a doctrine is wrong, then so is the teaching and practice of that doctrine. The Charismatic/Pentecostal teaching was based on error and the occult, not on the scriptures. The scriptures do not support a private prayer language, a HS baptism apart from conversion, or tongues as the initial evidence of that supposed HS baptism. Therefore, I must conclude that the Charismatic/Pentecostal doctrine and practice is not from God.

I do believe in the continuation of all the gifts mentioned in the Bible, so I am not a cessationist, but I believe and it has been proven that the true exercise and possession of these gifts such as prophecy and tongues is very rare. The mission field has proven that Charismatic/Pentecotsal tongues are not languages but merely gibberish and vain babblings of deceived minds.

As I have said, I heard a couple of times what might have been real languages, but this was not in a Charismatic/Pentecostal setting. That's another reason for me to believe it could have been genuine.

Charismatic/Pentecostal doctrine and practice is false because it's basis is false and unscriptural. I believe individuals may still today have any of the gifts mentioned in the NT, but if they do and these are genuine, they have them not by following Charismania/Pentecostalism, but by following the scriptures.

And one more note: Charismania/Pentecostalism vastly overemphasizes tongues and makes them central and supreme among the gifts, whereas Paul makes tongues among the least of the gifts. Therefore, Charismania/Pentecostalism turns Paul's teaching on its head. In all these ways, Charismania/Pentecostalism demonstrates its opposition to scriptural truth and makes its experiences superior to scripture, mangling and misinterpreting scripture to try and make it fit their erroneous and unscriptural doctrine.

So, my position is between members like DHK and the Charismatics here. But I am firmly in agreement with DHK and others who contend that Charismatic/Pentecostalism is false teaching and practice because it is absolutely non-scriptural.

 

[righteousdude2]

Thomas....

For those who are trumpeting the classic Charismatic/Pentecostal view of HS baptism and tongues, consider this: If the basis for a doctrine is wrong, then so is the teaching and practice of that doctrine. The Charismatic/Pentecostal teaching was based on error and the occult, not on the scriptures. The scriptures do not support a private prayer language, a HS baptism apart from conversion, or tongues as the initial evidence of that supposed HS baptism. Therefore, I must conclude that the Charismatic/Pentecostal doctrine and practice is not from God.

I do believe in the continuation of all the gifts mentioned in the Bible, so I am not a cessationist, but I believe and it has been proven that the true exercise and possession of these gifts such as prophecy and tongues is very rare. The mission field has proven that Charismatic/Pentecotsal tongues are not languages but merely gibberish and vain babblings of deceived minds.

As I have said, I heard a couple of times what might have been real languages, but this was not in a Charismatic/Pentecostal setting. That's another reason for me to believe it could have been genuine.

Charismatic/Pentecostal doctrine and practice is false because it's basis is false and unscriptural. I believe individuals may still today have any of the gifts mentioned in the NT, but if they do and these are genuine, they have them not by following Charismania/Pentecostalism, but by following the scriptures.

And one more note: Charismania/Pentecostalism vastly overemphasizes tongues and makes them central and supreme among the gifts, whereas Paul makes tongues among the least of the gifts. Therefore, Charismania/Pentecostalism turns Paul's teaching on its head. In all these ways, Charismania/Pentecostalism demonstrates its opposition to scriptural truth and makes its experiences superior to scripture, mangling and misinterpreting scripture to try and make it fit their erroneous and unscriptural doctrine.

So, my position is between members like DHK and the Charismatics here. But I am firmly in agreement with DHK and others who contend that Charismatic/Pentecostalism is false teaching and practice because it is absolutely non-scriptural.

.....I believe you. You are not a cessationist! :wavey:

 

[saturneptune]

.....I believe you. You are not a cessationist! :wavey:

I agree with RD. When it is said that the gifts have ceased, that does not mean God cannot use those gifts from time to time to accomplish His work. God can do anything. I think "ceased" means it is not a common event as it was during the book of Acts. I posted in another thread a timeline comparing the book of Acts to Pauls books, and it IMO does a good job showing when these gifts dropped off the radar.

The gifts today are specific and rare. Maybe it is kind of like salvation after the Rapture (this is not a debate about end times), according to some salvation from a conviction by the Holy Spirit will become more rare than now, but will not cease.

This is not the most important thing, and what makes SDAs and Pentecostals so far off the mark. Even if these gifts had not ceased, the error in their doctrine is its emphasis. From reading the Magical Mystery Tour Raiders posts, one gets the impression that tongues, worship on Saturday, and snake bites are more important than telling others about Jesus Christ and worshipping the Lord.

 

[awaken]

Because we have the full revelation of God in the BIBLE, we need nothing else to point others to Christ. The speaker spoke in tongues and everyone heard the message in their own dialect.

The gift of tongues was a KNOWN language (except for the "unknown" one which was pagan) that AUTHENTICATED the speaker that he indeed was speaking from God.

That was pointed out in many of my post already

But you fail to see in scripture the purpose of tongues!
They were not preaching in tongues!
They were praising and magnifying God!
Who were the unbelievers in Acts 10 and 19?
I believe it was a known language too! It was unknown to the speaker and it was an unlearned language.
1 Cor. 14 says tongues is speaking to God/praying in the spirit/blessing with the spirit.

You are just copying and pasting someones man-made doctrine. YOu have get into the Word for yourself and see what tongues really are!

 

[awaken]

But I am absolutely certain that the folks who oppose Charismatic interpretations, doctrine, and practice of the HS baptism and tongues are decieved and as unbiblical as you think we who use these gifts are. Thus I would probably have to say that your opposition of the understanding of these gifts are not of God. As for experiencing it, oh, yes, I have in many worship services, and while som were manufactured, man-made, and like a dog-and-pony show, I have seen it in a structured setting with a pastor and his deacons who are senstative to the HS, and make sure only the Holy Spirit moves, and when it is done as the Bible teaches, it is fruitful, edifying, and beautiful because it fills the sanctuary with His presence in a way that you'd have to be there to experience. And just as you calim the use of gifts, wrongly administered cause great harm to people, sometimes lifelong harm; so does the denial of said gifts, because those in denial loe out on another level of worhsip not known without the faith to allow this gift to move.

I can only imagine how startled the group in the upper room were when the Holy Spirit first visited them. But, thankfully they didn't take time to convene a committee and research the validity of it, because they had nothing to compare it to in the OT. Thankfully they moved in faith, accepted the gift, and it must have been awesome, because what they went out and did was awesome too.

:thumbs::thumbs: Very well said!

 

[Matt22:37-39]

1 Cor 1:22...For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

The SIGN GIFTS died out with the apostles how many times do you guys have to be told this?

They were NO longer needed to authenticate the speaker as each one heard the gospel in their own language....we now have the bible the only revelation from God.

No one has answered me this?...if tongues really are for today then how do you explain

1 Corinthians 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

Also there is NO history of TONGUES after ACTS and till 1901 and later 1961...unless you counts CULTS or other non Christian sects.

http://www.bible.ca/tongues-history.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossolalia

 

[Matt22:37-39]

Some Christians talk in tongues. So do some Mormons, some devil-possessed spiritists, heathen witch doctors in Africa and Asia. Ages ago many heathen religions talked in tongues. It is not of itself necessarily of God.

In his book, New Testament Teaching on Tongues, Dr. Merrill Unger calls attention to this fact, on pages 163-165:

That tongues can be and are counterfeited by demon spirits is evidenced by the fact that spiritistic mediums. Muslim dervishes, and Indian fakirs speak in tongues. It must be remembered by those who try to make tongues a badge of spirituality or a status symbol of saints who have attained the height of spiritual experience, that speaking in tongues and their interpretation are not peculiar to the Christian church but are common in ancient pagan religions and in spiritism both ancient and modern.
The very phrase "to speak with tongues" (Greek glosais lalein, Acts 2:4; 10:46; 19-6; 1st Cor. 12-14; cf. Mark 16:17) was not invented by New Testament writers, but borrowed from the ordinary speech of pagans. Plato's attitude toward the enthusiastic ecstasies of the ancient soothsayer (mantis, diviner,) recalls the Apostle Paul's attitude toward glossolalia among the Corinthian believers.
Virgil graphically describes the ancient pagan prophetess "speaking with tongues." He depicts her disheveled hair, her panting breast, her change of color, and her apparent increase in stature at the god (demon) came upon her and filled her with this supernatural afflatus. Then her voice loses its mortal ring as the god (demon) speaks through her, as in ancient and modern necromancy (spiritism).
Phenomena of this type are common among savages and pagan peoples of lower culture. Ecstatic utterances interpreted by a person in a sane state of mind have been verified, In the Sandwich Islands, for example, the god Oro gave his oracles through a priest who "ceased to act or speak as a voluntary agent, but with his limbs convulsed, his features distorted and terrific, his eyes wild and strained, would roll on the ground foaming at the moth, and reveal the will of the god in shrill cries and sounds violent and indistinct, which the attending priests duly interpreted to the people."

So, intelligent and concerned people will want to find out what is of God and what is of evil spirits.
The matter is so important, let me call to the witness stand again the assistant professor in Grace Theological Seminary, Dr. Charles R. Smith. He says on pages 20-22 of his book, Tongues in Biblical Perspective:

IN NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS.--Tongues occupied a significant place in ancient Greek religion. The seeress at Delphi, not far from Corinth, spoke in tongues. According to Plutarch (A.D. 44-117), interpreters were kept in attendance to explain her incoherent utterances. Many scholars have stated that tongues were experienced in the mystery religions (Osirius, Mithra, Eleusinian, Dionsyian, and Orphic cults). Some have concluded that the unintelligible lists of "words" in the "magical papyri" and in certain Gnostic "prayers" are records of ecstatic utterances. About A.D. 180 Celsus reported ecstatic utterances among the Gnostics. Lucian of Samosata (A.D. 120-198) described tongues speaking as it was practiced by the devotees of the Syrian goddess, Juno.

Today shamans (witch doctors, priests, or medicine men) in Haiti, Greenland, Micronesia, and countries of Africa, Australia, Asia, and North and South America speak in tongues. Several groups use drugs to aid in inducing the ecstatic state and utterances. Voodoo practitioners speak in tongues. Buddhist and Shinto priest have been heard speaking in tongues. Moslems have spoken in tongues, and an ancient tradition even reports that Mohammed himself spoke in tongues. According to his own account, after his ecstatic experiences he found it difficult to return to "logical and intelligible speech" (Kelsey, p. 143).

IN MENTAL ILLNESS.--The fact hat nonreligious tongues speaking often occurs in association with certain mental illnesses is well documented. Psychiatrists have reported it in association with schizophrenia, neurosis, and psychosis. Probably all psychiatrists and psychologists are aware of the possibility of psychic damage resulting from tongues speaking (Kelsey, p.227). It was reported that following the extended tongues meeting held by Aimee Semple McPherson, founder of the Church of the Foursquare Gospel, mental institutions in the area of her meeting were overburdened. The Episcopalian church financed a study commission which concluded that tongues are "not per se a religious phenomenon" and may appear among those "who are suffering from mental disorders as schizophrenia and hysteria" (Jennings, p.11)

IN SPIRITISM.--Tongues speaking occurs among anti-Christian spiritistic mediums. Contrary to popular belief among tongues speakers, a few years ago the European Pentecostal Conference admitted that "tongues might occur apart from the Spirit's action" (Brown, p.151)

IN THE DEMON POSSESSED.--Even Pentecostal authors grant that there are cases where demonic influence is apparently responsible for tongues utterances. Some feel that this is why "the gift of discernment of spirits" is necessary.

Again on page 38 Dr. Smith says:

In extra biblical literature this word was used to describe the "inspired" utterances of diviners. Moulton and Milligan cite three occurrences of the word in Vettius Valens where it designates irrational or unintelligible speech. It is stated that the speakers' minds had "fallen away," they were overcome with "madness," and they spoke in "ecstasy" (p. 72). Apoptheggomai was almost a technical term for describing the speech of the oracle-givers, diviners, prophets, exorcists, ecstatics, and other "inspired" persons (Kittel, I, 447; Arndt and Gingrich, p. 101). The basic idea is "an unusual utterance by virtue of inspiration." Though the word obviously cannot be limited to unintelligible speech, it is certainly appropriate for such. Its usage in Greek literature, in fact, definitely suggests a connection with ecstatic, often unintelligible, utterances.

If a Mormon talks in tongues with his false religion, is that speaking with tongues the Bible gift of tongues? I think not. If an unconverted Catholic who prays to Mary, confesses to a priest, hopes to get out of purgatory if enough people pay for masses and if he hasn't sinned badly, talks in tongues, is that the Bible gift of tongues? I think not.
Evidently Satan can have people talk in tongues also, and we need to carefully consider that when we talk about the gift of tongues.

 

[awaken]

Some Christians talk in tongues. So do some Mormons, some devil-possessed spiritists, heathen witch doctors in Africa and Asia. Ages ago many heathen religions talked in tongues. It is not of itself necessarily of God.

In his book, New Testament Teaching on Tongues, Dr. Merrill Unger calls attention to this fact, on pages 163-165:

That tongues can be and are counterfeited by demon spirits is evidenced by the fact that spiritistic mediums. Muslim dervishes, and Indian fakirs speak in tongues. It must be remembered by those who try to make tongues a badge of spirituality or a status symbol of saints who have attained the height of spiritual experience, that speaking in tongues and their interpretation are not peculiar to the Christian church but are common in ancient pagan religions and in spiritism both ancient and modern.
The very phrase "to speak with tongues" (Greek glosais lalein, Acts 2:4; 10:46; 19-6; 1st Cor. 12-14; cf. Mark 16:17) was not invented by New Testament writers, but borrowed from the ordinary speech of pagans. Plato's attitude toward the enthusiastic ecstasies of the ancient soothsayer (mantis, diviner,) recalls the Apostle Paul's attitude toward glossolalia among the Corinthian believers.
Virgil graphically describes the ancient pagan prophetess "speaking with tongues." He depicts her disheveled hair, her panting breast, her change of color, and her apparent increase in stature at the god (demon) came upon her and filled her with this supernatural afflatus. Then her voice loses its mortal ring as the god (demon) speaks through her, as in ancient and modern necromancy (spiritism).
Phenomena of this type are common among savages and pagan peoples of lower culture. Ecstatic utterances interpreted by a person in a sane state of mind have been verified, In the Sandwich Islands, for example, the god Oro gave his oracles through a priest who "ceased to act or speak as a voluntary agent, but with his limbs convulsed, his features distorted and terrific, his eyes wild and strained, would roll on the ground foaming at the moth, and reveal the will of the god in shrill cries and sounds violent and indistinct, which the attending priests duly interpreted to the people."

So, intelligent and concerned people will want to find out what is of God and what is of evil spirits.
The matter is so important, let me call to the witness stand again the assistant professor in Grace Theological Seminary, Dr. Charles R. Smith. He says on pages 20-22 of his book, Tongues in Biblical Perspective:

IN NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS.--Tongues occupied a significant place in ancient Greek religion. The seeress at Delphi, not far from Corinth, spoke in tongues. According to Plutarch (A.D. 44-117), interpreters were kept in attendance to explain her incoherent utterances. Many scholars have stated that tongues were experienced in the mystery religions (Osirius, Mithra, Eleusinian, Dionsyian, and Orphic cults). Some have concluded that the unintelligible lists of "words" in the "magical papyri" and in certain Gnostic "prayers" are records of ecstatic utterances. About A.D. 180 Celsus reported ecstatic utterances among the Gnostics. Lucian of Samosata (A.D. 120-198) described tongues speaking as it was practiced by the devotees of the Syrian goddess, Juno.

Today shamans (witch doctors, priests, or medicine men) in Haiti, Greenland, Micronesia, and countries of Africa, Australia, Asia, and North and South America speak in tongues. Several groups use drugs to aid in inducing the ecstatic state and utterances. Voodoo practitioners speak in tongues. Buddhist and Shinto priest have been heard speaking in tongues. Moslems have spoken in tongues, and an ancient tradition even reports that Mohammed himself spoke in tongues. According to his own account, after his ecstatic experiences he found it difficult to return to "logical and intelligible speech" (Kelsey, p. 143).

IN MENTAL ILLNESS.--The fact hat nonreligious tongues speaking often occurs in association with certain mental illnesses is well documented. Psychiatrists have reported it in association with schizophrenia, neurosis, and psychosis. Probably all psychiatrists and psychologists are aware of the possibility of psychic damage resulting from tongues speaking (Kelsey, p.227). It was reported that following the extended tongues meeting held by Aimee Semple McPherson, founder of the Church of the Foursquare Gospel, mental institutions in the area of her meeting were overburdened. The Episcopalian church financed a study commission which concluded that tongues are "not per se a religious phenomenon" and may appear among those "who are suffering from mental disorders as schizophrenia and hysteria" (Jennings, p.11)

IN SPIRITISM.--Tongues speaking occurs among anti-Christian spiritistic mediums. Contrary to popular belief among tongues speakers, a few years ago the European Pentecostal Conference admitted that "tongues might occur apart from the Spirit's action" (Brown, p.151)

IN THE DEMON POSSESSED.--Even Pentecostal authors grant that there are cases where demonic influence is apparently responsible for tongues utterances. Some feel that this is why "the gift of discernment of spirits" is necessary.

Again on page 38 Dr. Smith says:

In extra biblical literature this word was used to describe the "inspired" utterances of diviners. Moulton and Milligan cite three occurrences of the word in Vettius Valens where it designates irrational or unintelligible speech. It is stated that the speakers' minds had "fallen away," they were overcome with "madness," and they spoke in "ecstasy" (p. 72). Apoptheggomai was almost a technical term for describing the speech of the oracle-givers, diviners, prophets, exorcists, ecstatics, and other "inspired" persons (Kittel, I, 447; Arndt and Gingrich, p. 101). The basic idea is "an unusual utterance by virtue of inspiration." Though the word obviously cannot be limited to unintelligible speech, it is certainly appropriate for such. Its usage in Greek literature, in fact, definitely suggests a connection with ecstatic, often unintelligible, utterances.

If a Mormon talks in tongues with his false religion, is that speaking with tongues the Bible gift of tongues? I think not. If an unconverted Catholic who prays to Mary, confesses to a priest, hopes to get out of purgatory if enough people pay for masses and if he hasn't sinned badly, talks in tongues, is that the Bible gift of tongues? I think not.
Evidently Satan can have people talk in tongues also, and we need to carefully consider that when we talk about the gift of tongues.

Really???? Are you going to post this on every thread???

 

[Matt22:37-39]

.
2 Thess 2:9...The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through SIGNS and wonders that serve the lie,

 

[awaken]

.
2 Thess 2:9...The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through SIGNS and wonders that serve the lie,

So you are going to throw away or misguide others because of what the lawless one is going to be doing?

That statement alone make me want to pray more for the gift of discernment in my life!

The Holy Spirit is here to guide us in all truth! Do you think he will misguide us when the lawless one displays all the false signs?

 

[Yeshua1]

For those who are trumpeting the classic Charismatic/Pentecostal view of HS baptism and tongues, consider this: If the basis for a doctrine is wrong, then so is the teaching and practice of that doctrine. The Charismatic/Pentecostal teaching was based on error and the occult, not on the scriptures. The scriptures do not support a private prayer language, a HS baptism apart from conversion, or tongues as the initial evidence of that supposed HS baptism. Therefore, I must conclude that the Charismatic/Pentecostal doctrine and practice is not from God.

I do believe in the continuation of all the gifts mentioned in the Bible, so I am not a cessationist, but I believe and it has been proven that the true exercise and possession of these gifts such as prophecy and tongues is very rare. The mission field has proven that Charismatic/Pentecotsal tongues are not languages but merely gibberish and vain babblings of deceived minds.

As I have said, I heard a couple of times what might have been real languages, but this was not in a Charismatic/Pentecostal setting. That's another reason for me to believe it could have been genuine.

Charismatic/Pentecostal doctrine and practice is false because it's basis is false and unscriptural. I believe individuals may still today have any of the gifts mentioned in the NT, but if they do and these are genuine, they have them not by following Charismania/Pentecostalism, but by following the scriptures.

And one more note: Charismania/Pentecostalism vastly overemphasizes tongues and makes them central and supreme among the gifts, whereas Paul makes tongues among the least of the gifts. Therefore, Charismania/Pentecostalism turns Paul's teaching on its head. In all these ways, Charismania/Pentecostalism demonstrates its opposition to scriptural truth and makes its experiences superior to scripture, mangling and misinterpreting scripture to try and make it fit their erroneous and unscriptural doctrine.

So, my position is between members like DHK and the Charismatics here. But I am firmly in agreement with DHK and others who contend that Charismatic/Pentecostalism is false teaching and practice because it is absolutely non-scriptural.

To me, there is also a clear distinction to be made between classical pentacostalists like AoG, and modern Charasmatics!

Pentsacostalists stillhave wrong/ba doctrines in regarding to the person and workings of the Holy spirit, but they claim to have their theolgy from the Bible itself, and are NOT into claiming extra biblcal revelations, faith healers, miracle workers etc...

Charasmatics tend to be the ones into extar revealtions, 5 fold ministries, faith healers etc..

both wrong, but charasmatic really wrong, as they claim the "HS" revelations for most of their teachings, NOT the Bible itself!