tongue speakers please answer

[Walguy]

Actually, DHK, I think we can safely conclude that by MEE's utter refusal to answer the simple question with a 'yes' or 'no,' the question has, in fact, been answered.
Also, the word 'usually' in that last quote from MEE speaks volumes.
Just to clarify, I do believe people who speak in 'tongues' can be and often are saved. I also believe that some are not, which is the real danger of this false 'gift.' Someone can go to a Pentecostal or Charismatic or whatever church where 'tongues' speaking happens, watch and hear and learn how to do it (studies have shown that people who start speaking in 'tongues' virtually always use the same speech patterns as those they 'learned' it from), have the ecstatic babbling experience, and think that therefore they must be saved, when in fact Christ hasn't yet come anywhere near their heart. It can and does happen.
I might also add that the kind of arrogance and pride that MEE and other 'tongues' speakers have displayed in this thread is EXACTLY why God would never give a Spiritual gift that benefits the individual, why all true mainfestations of the Holy Spirit are given to serve others. Why in the world would God tell that the Great Commandments are to love Him and love our neighbor, and then give us a Spiritual gift that turns our attention inward to our own emotions? Since you're having trouble answering simple questions, I'll handle that one myself: HE WOULDN'T.

 

[Revolt]

Originally posted by Walguy:
Someone can go to a Pentecostal or Charismatic or whatever church where 'tongues' speaking happens, watch and hear and learn how to do it (studies have shown that people who start speaking in 'tongues' virtually always use the same speech patterns as those they 'learned' it from

I would like to see these studies. This is the first time I have ever heard of anyone learning to speak in tounges.

 

[Don]

So Revolt: YOu've admitted that you can't find any other verse in the bible that mentions anything about a tongue of angels.

Have you asked yourself "why not?" Or are you sticking your head in the sand because you're afraid of the answer?

 

[Revolt]

Well Don I wouldnt call it sticking my head in the sand

I told you that no matter what verses I gave you it would be twisted in typical IFB circular reasoning. And you went ahead and proved me correct. You know I find it quite amusing that IFBers are alwayse out there shouting about how charasmatics change scripture but when they come across something they dont want to belive in they go as far as to change what words mean. Isnt that what you did with that pray in the spirit verse I gave you don?

 

[Don]

Would you care to back up that statement by showing which verses and how I "twisted" them?

If you're talking about how I explained the word "and," I don't see your point at all.

If anything, what I saw was you "overlooking" or "omitting" the word and, and changing it into an "or" instead.

[ June 17, 2002, 08:35 AM: Message edited by: Don ]

 

[Don]

Also, Revolt, if I've been overly sarcastic or hostile towards you, I apologize, and ask you to forgive me.

Your derogatory statement about independent fundamental Baptists reminded me (again) why I started a hiatus in the first place...and here I am again....

 

[Revolt]

Originally posted by Don:
Also, Revolt, if I've been overly sarcastic or hostile towards you, I apologize, and ask you to forgive me.

Your derogatory statement about independent fundamental Baptists reminded me (again) why I started a hiatus in the first place...and here I am again....

Dont wory about the sarcasm it dosnt offend me. And i am sorry about the deroatory statements tworad IFBers. I was wrong to let my bad experience with them get into this debate.

And i am sorry if I came off as sarcastic its my nature. I guess ive hung out with to many canadians in my life

 

[Multimom]

So Revolt: You've admitted that you can't find any other verse in the bible that mentions anything about a tongue of angels.

While this may be true, we do understand that there is only one reference to "tongue of angels" in the scripture. However to state, with absolute certainty, that there is no language of angels is vicariously close to calling Paul a liar. Why would he mention it if it didn't exist?

Now to use the "this is the only reference" theory is also not exactly kosher since there are a myriad of things that are mentioned in the scripture only once. Do we then infer that since they were mentioned only once that these must not be ligitimate either?

Be very cautious in your approach to hermeneutics(sp?).

And as for a 4 year study, there are many more who have studied it for many more years and with an open mind and they have not reached and definitive conclusions as to its origin or reality.

 

[Don]

However to state, with absolute certainty, that there is no language of angels is vicariously close to calling Paul a liar. Why would he mention it if it didn't exist?

Asked before, and answered.

Drop down to the next few verses: Did Paul have all knowledge? Did Paul give all his goods to the poor? Did Paul give his body to be burned?

If yes to all three, please provide the scriptural references.

If no to any of them, then the validity of a "tongue of angels" is in question.

The only answer is that Paul was trying to make a point about the importance of charity (love}, not state that a tongue of angels existed.

Remember, the first letter to Corinth was a rebuke for wrong practices. Keeping that in mind as the reason for writing the words in the first place, please feel free to re-read 1 Corinthians 12, 13, and 14.

 

[Don]

We can still keep this civil, Revolt!

So how about it: Are you saying that my statements about including the word "and" are invalid? If so, why?

 

[Briguy]

Revolt, Multimom, MEE and others that believe tongues are a gift for today. 1 Cor. says:
"14:21: In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
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."

These verses clearly say that tongues are a sign. Then to make sure the reader understands who the sign is to and the purpose Paul quotes Isaiah. If you read the chapter in Isaiah that Paul quotes from you will see the sign was to the Jews. Tongues were a sign of their unbelief and their pending scattering, which indeed happened in 70AD. The sign pointed to that scattering and the loss of the Jewish homeland. This is clear in the scripture. My question then is, once the thing that the sign pointed to happened, Why would the sign still be needed?

When you reach your destination, say in a Marathon, the little arrows pointing the right direction to go end, right? how silly would it be for there to be arrows pointing you back to your home, when you know how to get there. It is the same with tongues, they pointed to an event and that event occured. How strange for God to keep them around when their use was over 1,930 years ago.

Please respond with scripture that refutes my points here. If you can't, how do you explain the sound argument that I made?

In Truth and Love,
Brian

[ June 17, 2002, 12:13 PM: Message edited by: The Briguy ]

 

[Revolt]

Originally posted by Don:
We can still keep this civil, Revolt!

So how about it: Are you saying that my statements about including the word "and" are invalid? If so, why?

Don I have sent you a private message, I would like to debate with you only.

 

[Don]

Heard and understood ("HUA" for you military types!).

Reply sent. Make take a while to digest....

 

[hrhema]

In the Oneness movement when it comes to Speaking in tongues it is taught that this is the sign of the infilling of the Holy Ghost. Yet, in a Oneness church that has a learned pastor (learned in true pentecostalism) the people are not sitting in the service chattering in tongues like a bunch of monkeys.

Now when they pray the may pray in tongues or pray in the spirit but this is not to edify the church or anyone else. This is between them and the Lord.

It is taught and believed that there is a gift of the Spirit called Tongues and Interpretation which is a supernatural utterance. This is what Paul was speaking about where it said let one speak in tongues and another interpret and another judge whether the message was of God.
This is a form of edification for the church or the body of Christ. It also can be a message to an unbeliever about something in their lives which only could be revealed by the supernatural.

In once church I attended a woman stood up and began speaking in tongues. After she finished then the pastor interpreted the message. After the service one of the women stood up and said that the message was given in Japanese. She was japanese and spoke it fluently. She declared that the interpretation was exactly correct. Then another time the japanese woman stood and gave a message in tongues which the pastor interpreted and another woman stood and told that the message was in French. She spoke fleunt French and the message was interpreted precisely. In another meeting I attended a message was given out then another person interpreted. Before the end of the service a man asked if he could say something and he told the audience that his father was a Rabbi of the Jewish faith and that he himself was fluent in Hebrew and that the message was given in fluent Hebrew and interpreted precisely.

THese incidents were supernatural and of God.
The majority of these incidents the language spoke is a known language. Known in the world but not known to the speaker.

What hurts the supernatural and always has is the excesses of those who want to show off. The LALALALA. The shik-a-mo-shio garbage that some people have learned to repeat is nonsense and not of God. In most Oneness churches these excesses are not tolerated. Most pastor control their churches and do not allow things to be done unless it is in order.

Meee and Oneness both know that what I am saying is true. Why they won't tell this is beyond me.
Yet, I think it is wrong for people to say this experience is of the devil when it is found in the Bible and doing so I believe is dangerous.
This is why so many people want to be cessanists.
The excesses are very embarrassing and right down revolting. The mooing like cows. The laughing all the time. The barking like dogs. This is totally off the wall. Even people sitting around chattering like monkeys and calling it Tongues and of God is off the wall. I am not saying that there has not been instances where the supernatural gift was not given and the person as a sign to unbelievers could not speak in english but this is not the normative.

When you have so many abuses of supernatural gifts you question everything. That is human nature but it does not do away with the fact that we serve the same God that the apostles did.

 

[Revolt]

how do you know that the other tounges you hear are not a language? Have you heard every languge fro eglish down to the undiscovered tribe in africa?

 

[Briguy]

hrhema wrote:
"In once church I attended a woman stood up and began speaking in tongues. After she finished then the pastor interpreted the message. After the service one of the women stood up and said that the message was given in Japanese. She was japanese and spoke it fluently. She declared that the interpretation was exactly correct."

Hr, the problem here is twofold. First, who spoke Japanese that needed to hear the gospel that day? Certainly the Japanese woman spoke English so it wasn't for her. Tongues in the early church were only used to communicate God's message to those of a different language. If the whole audience is English speaking then there would be no reason for a tongue.

The second problem is from my post above. Tongues were a sign to Jews that they would be scattered. The sign is not needed and is now gone.

If what you say you saw happened, please understand it was not the gift of tongues that was once given out by the Holy Spirit. I don't mean to doubt you but it seems that many people have a story but many of the stories are just not true.
Keep searching!

In Christ,
Brian

[ June 17, 2002, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: The Briguy ]

 

[DHK]

To add to Briguy's answer:
The third problem with that situation is that it was women that were speaking tongues:

1Cor.14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

This also was not permitted.
DHK

 

[Walguy]

Excellent point on the languages, Briguy! At times like this I'm proud to be your brother! (And at all the other times too, of course! )

 

[Briguy]

Thanks big bro, see you soon.

DHK, Good point!

Walguy and DHK, Looks like we have proved our point as the folks on the other side of this debate have grown strangely dim. Well, on to other battles if this one is over

In Christ,
Brian

 

[Revolt]

Originally posted by The Briguy:
Thanks big bro, see you soon.

DHK, Good point!

Walguy and DHK, Looks like we have proved our point as the folks on the other side of this debate have grown strangely dim. Well, on to other battles if this one is over

In Christ,
Brian

Wow you guys are great you managed to chase everyone away. Guess what winning a internet argument is alot like winning the special olypics. Even if you win youre still retarted.

(ok dont get made I dont hate hanycapped people i have even done volunteer work to help handycapped people I am just making a point)