-
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!
Tongues
- Thread starter Singer
- Start date
Brian, the definition of prophecy I gave you was the literal translation of the word in Greek. The definitions you posted contain what I said within them, i.e "to speak forth" etc... Strongs was giving the implied definitions of the word but not the literal translation of the word. "to speak before" is right when taken in context of 1 cor. 14 and what is being said. I already said, read as a whole the idea is proclaiming the gospel not predicting the future. It is not a Christians job to make future predictions but it is a Christians job to proclaim the gospel, even more so who have the gift from God to do it. If you say prophecy is future telling and that ALL the gifts remain then do some have future event telling capabilities now? When I say that doesn't it sound like a fortune teller or medium or something, which we know are biblically condemmed.
As for your question on tongues, tongues were a sign to unbelieving Isreal, A sign that occured to let them know they would suffer destruction again, the sign was a warning of God's judgement. Being able to proclaim the gospel to one of another language was a fringe benefit but not the purpose.
Please address my comment about "gifts" being ours to use when WE want, if no one agrees it should be easy to shoot down.
You wrote:Just a few examples of some things we do that edify ourselves.
Reading the bible
Praying
Fasting
Worshiping
Praising
Seeking God
Do you suggest we end these things? I would go as far as saying your answer would be no.
These are not spiritual gifts but are the way we grow and walk in Christ. To use a spiritual gift to self-edify is different and wrong because the Bible says so, even if it feels good to do it. Spiritual Gifts are to edify the "body" that is what scripture says and we must abide whether we are having fun or not.
Take care, thanks for the good attitude in this discussion,
In Christ,
Brian
As for your question on tongues, tongues were a sign to unbelieving Isreal, A sign that occured to let them know they would suffer destruction again, the sign was a warning of God's judgement. Being able to proclaim the gospel to one of another language was a fringe benefit but not the purpose.
Please address my comment about "gifts" being ours to use when WE want, if no one agrees it should be easy to shoot down.
You wrote:Just a few examples of some things we do that edify ourselves.
Reading the bible
Praying
Fasting
Worshiping
Praising
Seeking God
Do you suggest we end these things? I would go as far as saying your answer would be no.
These are not spiritual gifts but are the way we grow and walk in Christ. To use a spiritual gift to self-edify is different and wrong because the Bible says so, even if it feels good to do it. Spiritual Gifts are to edify the "body" that is what scripture says and we must abide whether we are having fun or not.
Take care, thanks for the good attitude in this discussion,
In Christ,
Brian
Let love be your highest goal, but also desire the special abilities the Spirit gives, especially the gift of prophecy. For if your gift is the ability to speak in tongues, you will be talking to God but not to people, since they won't be able to understand you. You will be speaking by the power of the spirit, but it will all be mysterious. But one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them. A person who speaks in tongues is strenghtened personally in the Lord, but one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church." I Corinthians 14:1-4.
Paul made it very clear that the person who speaks in tongues here speaks to God and it is mysterious. He also said they strengthen themselves in the Lord so this means that they are edifying themselves.
In the Book of Acts we read where Agabus the prophet prophesied about a terrible storm called Euclydon. Later he prophesied about Paul being bound in Jerusalem. Why do those who teach against tongues try to make prophecy something besides what it is. Agabus both times was not preaching the gospel. He was prophesying future events just like Philips 7 daughters who were all prophetesses.
Tongues are not just an emotional high. Yet Paul did say it edifies us and strengthens us.
Why are tongues a sign to unbelievers? The supernatural whether it is the true gift of tongues or prophecy will cause unbelievers to turn to God. Not the confusing babble you find in a lot of churches.
God only used local languages on the day of Pentecost. Show me anywhere else in the Bible where it says the tongues Paul was speaking about was the same tongues that the 120 spoke in on the Day of Pentecost? You cannot.
In the same chapter Paul said he prayed in tongues and he sang in tongues. So this scripture proves that praying in tongues is scriptural. Why do anti-tongues people ignore these scriptures. Why do you ignore the fact that Paul said he wished all spoke in tongues and that he said to not forbid speaking in tongues.
As far as the perfect being the Bible. That is such an old reasoning. The Torah existed. Not the New TEstament.
Paul made it very clear that the person who speaks in tongues here speaks to God and it is mysterious. He also said they strengthen themselves in the Lord so this means that they are edifying themselves.
In the Book of Acts we read where Agabus the prophet prophesied about a terrible storm called Euclydon. Later he prophesied about Paul being bound in Jerusalem. Why do those who teach against tongues try to make prophecy something besides what it is. Agabus both times was not preaching the gospel. He was prophesying future events just like Philips 7 daughters who were all prophetesses.
Tongues are not just an emotional high. Yet Paul did say it edifies us and strengthens us.
Why are tongues a sign to unbelievers? The supernatural whether it is the true gift of tongues or prophecy will cause unbelievers to turn to God. Not the confusing babble you find in a lot of churches.
God only used local languages on the day of Pentecost. Show me anywhere else in the Bible where it says the tongues Paul was speaking about was the same tongues that the 120 spoke in on the Day of Pentecost? You cannot.
In the same chapter Paul said he prayed in tongues and he sang in tongues. So this scripture proves that praying in tongues is scriptural. Why do anti-tongues people ignore these scriptures. Why do you ignore the fact that Paul said he wished all spoke in tongues and that he said to not forbid speaking in tongues.
As far as the perfect being the Bible. That is such an old reasoning. The Torah existed. Not the New TEstament.
I would be glad to answer Don's question on "what are tongues for".
It's not popular to throw websites out, but I feel the following
one offers much more than ( and much of what ) I would refer
to anyhow.
It covers
1). Until that which is perfect is come
2). Pros and Cons to tongues
It is too long to post on here, but everyone please read it as it
covers exactly what we're talking about.
http://www.afom.net/tracts/tongues_devilishordivine.htm
There are so many logical fallacies in that tract it isn't funny. And it didn't answer my question at all; the apostle Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14 that tongues are a sign for unbelievers; true or false?
Some of the problems with the tract:
The writer uses the four instances of the Holy Ghost falling upon people out of order, while specifically claiming that Acts is a historical record, and uses that disorder to explain one of the instances. In other words, he references Acts 10 and Acts 19, and then uses them to explain Act 8. If the book of Acts is truly a historical record, as the author claims, then Acts 8 comes before the other two accounts, and must be addressed first; instead, the author states "The author of the book of Acts merely did not explicitly say that they spake with tongues because by this time (referencing his already mentioned accounts in Acts 10 and Acts 19) it was an accepted fact that tongues was the accompanying sign of the Holy Ghost."
While the author mentions extensively the incident in Acts 8, he fails to explain to the reader a crucial point: Why did the Holy Ghost not come upon the Samaritans until John and Peter came? Why was baptism by Phillip not enough?
The author states "All who receive the Holy Ghost do speak with tongues, but this does not mean that they have the GIFT of tongues"; however, the apostles were to wait for the baptism of the Holy Ghost in Acts 1:4, 8; they subsequently received the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues in Acts 2:4; and Peter even explained that it was fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel in Acts 2:17. YET, AT NO TIME in Acts 1 or 2 was it referred to as the 'gift of tongues.'
This is an interesting point because the author of this tract Singer provided also wants to make a distinction between speaking in tongues as a result of being filled by the Holy Spirit, and the gift of tongues. Yet, the apostle Paul makes NO such distinction. For example, the gift of prophecy: Paul refers to it as the gift of prophecy in 1 Corinthians 12, but then only refers to it as "prophecy" (not "the gift of") in 1 corinthians 14. He speaks of the gift of interpretation in 1 Corinthians 12, but only refers to it as simply interpretation in 1 Corinthians 14.
In other words, the author of this tract, and many of you, would have us believe that the gift of prophecy is the gift of prophecy, no matter whether we use "gift of prophecy" or just "prophecy"; but in order to justify a special "prayer language," we must accept that there's a "gift of tongues" and "speaking in tongues"--when Paul, and the Bible, doesn't actually make that distinction.
Open your eyes, people. Remove the blinders. God does have something more He wants to give all of us, and it's spelled out in 1 Corinthians 12 and 1 Peter 4:11 -- For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit; for the body is not one member, but many; and if they were all one member, where were the body? If any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth, that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
This message that ALL must speak in tongues is nothing more than a way to make believers doubt their own salvation, and to put a yoke on the people that God never intended. We might as well just start circumcizing again.
Some of the problems with the tract:
The writer uses the four instances of the Holy Ghost falling upon people out of order, while specifically claiming that Acts is a historical record, and uses that disorder to explain one of the instances. In other words, he references Acts 10 and Acts 19, and then uses them to explain Act 8. If the book of Acts is truly a historical record, as the author claims, then Acts 8 comes before the other two accounts, and must be addressed first; instead, the author states "The author of the book of Acts merely did not explicitly say that they spake with tongues because by this time (referencing his already mentioned accounts in Acts 10 and Acts 19) it was an accepted fact that tongues was the accompanying sign of the Holy Ghost."
While the author mentions extensively the incident in Acts 8, he fails to explain to the reader a crucial point: Why did the Holy Ghost not come upon the Samaritans until John and Peter came? Why was baptism by Phillip not enough?
The author states "All who receive the Holy Ghost do speak with tongues, but this does not mean that they have the GIFT of tongues"; however, the apostles were to wait for the baptism of the Holy Ghost in Acts 1:4, 8; they subsequently received the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues in Acts 2:4; and Peter even explained that it was fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel in Acts 2:17. YET, AT NO TIME in Acts 1 or 2 was it referred to as the 'gift of tongues.'
This is an interesting point because the author of this tract Singer provided also wants to make a distinction between speaking in tongues as a result of being filled by the Holy Spirit, and the gift of tongues. Yet, the apostle Paul makes NO such distinction. For example, the gift of prophecy: Paul refers to it as the gift of prophecy in 1 Corinthians 12, but then only refers to it as "prophecy" (not "the gift of") in 1 corinthians 14. He speaks of the gift of interpretation in 1 Corinthians 12, but only refers to it as simply interpretation in 1 Corinthians 14.
In other words, the author of this tract, and many of you, would have us believe that the gift of prophecy is the gift of prophecy, no matter whether we use "gift of prophecy" or just "prophecy"; but in order to justify a special "prayer language," we must accept that there's a "gift of tongues" and "speaking in tongues"--when Paul, and the Bible, doesn't actually make that distinction.
Open your eyes, people. Remove the blinders. God does have something more He wants to give all of us, and it's spelled out in 1 Corinthians 12 and 1 Peter 4:11 -- For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit; for the body is not one member, but many; and if they were all one member, where were the body? If any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth, that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
This message that ALL must speak in tongues is nothing more than a way to make believers doubt their own salvation, and to put a yoke on the people that God never intended. We might as well just start circumcizing again.
Oneness, you agreed with scripture when you stated that tongues are a sign for unbelievers.
Unfortunately, it doesn't look like I can get a straight answer from any of your fellow tongues-speakers. So let me ask you part 2 of this question: If tongues are a sign for unbelievers, then why do believers speak in tongues when they're by themselves? Think about it. Either tongues are a sign for unbelievers, or they're not a sign for just unbelievers; but Paul unequivocably states they're a sign for unbelievers, doesn't he? And God inspired Paul to write those words, didn't He? So it isn't just Paul saying that tongues are a sign for unbelievers; it's God Himself, isn't it?
You then asked if it was a positive sign or a negative sign; I say let scripture speak for itself.
When the apostles started speaking in tongues in Acts 2, it isn't mentioned what they said; but it is mentioned that the listeners--the unbelievers--were amazed, and thus paid attention to what Peter said next, and 3,000 of them called upon the name of the Lord and were saved; thus, positive.
In Acts 10, we find specifically stated that the Gentiles magnified God, amazing the Jews witnessing the event; thus, positive.
Neither Acts 8 nor Acts 19 make reference to what the listeners heard when the recipients of the gift of the Holy Ghost spoke in tongues.
Unfortunately, it doesn't look like I can get a straight answer from any of your fellow tongues-speakers. So let me ask you part 2 of this question: If tongues are a sign for unbelievers, then why do believers speak in tongues when they're by themselves? Think about it. Either tongues are a sign for unbelievers, or they're not a sign for just unbelievers; but Paul unequivocably states they're a sign for unbelievers, doesn't he? And God inspired Paul to write those words, didn't He? So it isn't just Paul saying that tongues are a sign for unbelievers; it's God Himself, isn't it?
You then asked if it was a positive sign or a negative sign; I say let scripture speak for itself.
When the apostles started speaking in tongues in Acts 2, it isn't mentioned what they said; but it is mentioned that the listeners--the unbelievers--were amazed, and thus paid attention to what Peter said next, and 3,000 of them called upon the name of the Lord and were saved; thus, positive.
In Acts 10, we find specifically stated that the Gentiles magnified God, amazing the Jews witnessing the event; thus, positive.
Neither Acts 8 nor Acts 19 make reference to what the listeners heard when the recipients of the gift of the Holy Ghost spoke in tongues.
hrhema, What version of the Bible was that you quoted from? It is obviously a paraphrase of some sort with a bias overtone. When studying the Bible and quoting scripture here I think it is only fair to use direct translation Bibles, like the KJV or NASB. Non-direct, like the NIV, and others should be avoided. Also, DHK and myself have shown from 1 cor 12:7 that you can't use spiritual gifts to self-edify yet you want us to believe that in 2 chapters later Paul reverses that teaching. Not logical.
Brian (oneness) I will wait for your response to my questions before I say more.
Don, good job with your responses to the questions asked by the tongue speakers. Also, good solid challanging questions for them as well.
In Christ
Brian
Brian (oneness) I will wait for your response to my questions before I say more.
Don, good job with your responses to the questions asked by the tongue speakers. Also, good solid challanging questions for them as well.
In Christ
Brian
Don:
With your ruthless attack on the workings of the Holy Spirit, you
find yourself attacking God Himself. "Quench not the Spirit:" is
not found in the favored verses of those who would try to inhibit
the mysteries of God. (anti tongues)
You do see the distinction between "praying in the spirit" and "having
the gift of tongues". There has been enough scripture pass through
here to clarify that; I do not need to add more.
You have not responded to this scripture:
Romans 8:26
Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know
not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself
maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
....and possibly because it is one of the "praying in the spirit"
scriptures that has nothing to do with the gifts of the spirit
that is confusing you. You might also consider what it means to
"pray in the spirit and pray with the understanding also".
You have not addressed those. They do not attest to the gifts o
f the spirit and give no evidence of being used ''as a sign''.
You asked:
" Why did the Holy Ghost not come upon the Samaritans until John
and Peter came? Why was baptism by Phillip not enough?"
Quite possibly you've caught yourself in your own web.
Water baptism does NOT bring baptism of the Holy Spirit does it..?
That's why the early believers were asked if they had received the
Holy Spirit since they believed. Jesus said he would baptize with the
Holy Spirit.......Phillip could not do that nor can any water baptism.
Don't be afraid to ask for the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Again...beware of the 7 things I did that brought that about.
Ironic isn't it ?
has enhanced my faith and has been a blessing to me. It is not a yoke, it is
a freedom. It has freed many believers of all faiths into one brotherhood.
Do tongues speakers all come across to you as some who would
intentionally cause others to doubt their salvation?
With your ruthless attack on the workings of the Holy Spirit, you
find yourself attacking God Himself. "Quench not the Spirit:" is
not found in the favored verses of those who would try to inhibit
the mysteries of God. (anti tongues)
You do see the distinction between "praying in the spirit" and "having
the gift of tongues". There has been enough scripture pass through
here to clarify that; I do not need to add more.
You have not responded to this scripture:
Romans 8:26
Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know
not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself
maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
....and possibly because it is one of the "praying in the spirit"
scriptures that has nothing to do with the gifts of the spirit
that is confusing you. You might also consider what it means to
"pray in the spirit and pray with the understanding also".
You have not addressed those. They do not attest to the gifts o
f the spirit and give no evidence of being used ''as a sign''.
You asked:
" Why did the Holy Ghost not come upon the Samaritans until John
and Peter came? Why was baptism by Phillip not enough?"
Quite possibly you've caught yourself in your own web.
Water baptism does NOT bring baptism of the Holy Spirit does it..?
That's why the early believers were asked if they had received the
Holy Spirit since they believed. Jesus said he would baptize with the
Holy Spirit.......Phillip could not do that nor can any water baptism.
Don't be afraid to ask for the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Again...beware of the 7 things I did that brought that about.
Ironic isn't it ?
I've never claimed such a thing, and besides I've said how that experience
has enhanced my faith and has been a blessing to me. It is not a yoke, it is
a freedom. It has freed many believers of all faiths into one brotherhood.
Do tongues speakers all come across to you as some who would
intentionally cause others to doubt their salvation?
Don, if the scripture speak for itself you would not have a problem giving me that answer world you ?LOL Don’t please don’t take my questions as offensive I know it’s hard some time to see the silliness behind words. But I do want you to answer that question if you don’t mind.
Don I can show you what I am trying to get at if you give me the answer to the previous question.
Please Check Box
[] Negative [] Positive
Thanks Don.
First of all in your latest post you told me to answer your question....What question? LOL, I know I'm slow just give me time.
Are you saying that Proclaiming the Gospel is Prophesy?
I'm not saying that prophesy is just future telling. I believe their are false prophets out there and yes they are biblically condemmed.
But I'm not talking about false prophesy. I'm speaking of prophesy that is given from God.
I we use your difinition of prophesy than dosen't eveyone have that gift. We all can speak before things.
God bless
[ February 20, 2003, 02:25 PM: Message edited by: ONENESS ]
I Corinthians 12 Paul was dealing with an issue called Tongues and Interpretations. I have explained this more than once. This is not the tongues a person speaks in when initially filled with the Holy Ghost. This is a separate supernatural gift where the Lord reveals things unto the church to edify the local body of Christ. This is why Paul said you have one who gives the message in tongues, and one who interprets it in the native language and then the third who judges the message to make sure it is of God and not a fleshly manifestation. This is why BriGuy, DHK, and Don cannot understand this whole issue of tongues because they refuse to see that there are more gifts of tongues then one.
Why do you ignore the fact that Paul said he prayed in tongues and sang in tongues. This would edify no one but Paul. No one could understand what he was saying. This is why Paul said this was praying only to God for he only could understand and these things are mysterious. I don't need to use a translation that you so choose just because it proves my point against yours because I believed this during the time when I used nothing but the KJV or amplified version. THis translation I use only verifies what I believed the KJV states.
There are more than one gift of tongues. Those that a person speaks in when he or she is initially filled with the Holy GHost, those when a person prays in the spirit or sings in the spirit and then Tongues to be interpreted which
is a supernatural way God speaks to his people.
This is similar to the gift of prophecy.
All tongues are for unbelievers. It tells them when they have been filled. It shows them the power of God through a supernatural manifestation. Yet the tongues a person speaks in prayer edifies themselves and the tongues and interpretation edifies the body of Christ.
Does a person have to be filled with the Holy Ghost to be saved. No. It is a gift. When a person comes to Christ that person has the spirit come upon them. It does not reside in them but upon them.
To the issue of prophecy. I have the gift of prophecy at times. It is not a daily gift. It is not a weekly or monthly gift. It is a gift given to me when God so chooses. The first prophecy was for a family. The spirit of God came upon me and I prophesied to them that if they took a trip to Louisiana they planned on taking that there would be a tragedy. They personally thought I was too young to be used of God so they went. On the way to Louisiana they met two teen age boys in Mustangs that were drag racing. Since
this was a rural two lane road there was no place to go so they hit head on. Marion and Mike Huffman were killed. THree other family members were injured. This was the gift of prophecy or foretelling being used.
Why do you ignore the fact that Paul said he prayed in tongues and sang in tongues. This would edify no one but Paul. No one could understand what he was saying. This is why Paul said this was praying only to God for he only could understand and these things are mysterious. I don't need to use a translation that you so choose just because it proves my point against yours because I believed this during the time when I used nothing but the KJV or amplified version. THis translation I use only verifies what I believed the KJV states.
There are more than one gift of tongues. Those that a person speaks in when he or she is initially filled with the Holy GHost, those when a person prays in the spirit or sings in the spirit and then Tongues to be interpreted which
is a supernatural way God speaks to his people.
This is similar to the gift of prophecy.
All tongues are for unbelievers. It tells them when they have been filled. It shows them the power of God through a supernatural manifestation. Yet the tongues a person speaks in prayer edifies themselves and the tongues and interpretation edifies the body of Christ.
Does a person have to be filled with the Holy Ghost to be saved. No. It is a gift. When a person comes to Christ that person has the spirit come upon them. It does not reside in them but upon them.
To the issue of prophecy. I have the gift of prophecy at times. It is not a daily gift. It is not a weekly or monthly gift. It is a gift given to me when God so chooses. The first prophecy was for a family. The spirit of God came upon me and I prophesied to them that if they took a trip to Louisiana they planned on taking that there would be a tragedy. They personally thought I was too young to be used of God so they went. On the way to Louisiana they met two teen age boys in Mustangs that were drag racing. Since
this was a rural two lane road there was no place to go so they hit head on. Marion and Mike Huffman were killed. THree other family members were injured. This was the gift of prophecy or foretelling being used.
With regard to the original poster's comments about the way he was treated by a moderator, I too was treated poorly in my initial contact with them. It cause me to wonder about the fruit of the spirit of "kindness" that was missing from the rude retorts and tacky comments I received via e-mail.
Yes I made a big stink with I was "informed" (and I use the term loosely, it was more a slap in the face) not because I was told I couldn't post in the baptist only forums, but because of the way I was told.
I guess they tend to ignore the scripture "a soft answer turneth away wrath."
I have also had Baptist Members private message me regarding similar treatment toward them by moderators.
So its not isolated, but it is rude.
Yes I made a big stink with I was "informed" (and I use the term loosely, it was more a slap in the face) not because I was told I couldn't post in the baptist only forums, but because of the way I was told.
I guess they tend to ignore the scripture "a soft answer turneth away wrath."
I have also had Baptist Members private message me regarding similar treatment toward them by moderators.
So its not isolated, but it is rude.
Multimom:
Gotta agree with you. I did breach the rules, but then again I
wonder if it was such a sin to walk into someone's bible study.
My upbringing in what is thought to be a cult by some people
would also not condone my interrupting their services with my
input. We've all been asked not to participate in Communion
at a Catholic wedding. Our Sabbath keeping friends wouldn't
show up at our churches on Sunday to rest and worship.
Rest in peace that God is not a respector of persons...or a
disrespector on account of our denominational choices, so you're
a winner anyhow
God Bless and thanks for the input.
Singer
Gotta agree with you. I did breach the rules, but then again I
wonder if it was such a sin to walk into someone's bible study.
My upbringing in what is thought to be a cult by some people
would also not condone my interrupting their services with my
input. We've all been asked not to participate in Communion
at a Catholic wedding. Our Sabbath keeping friends wouldn't
show up at our churches on Sunday to rest and worship.
Rest in peace that God is not a respector of persons...or a
disrespector on account of our denominational choices, so you're
a winner anyhow
Singer
From Oneness:
From Singer:
The only other possible reason for your statement is that you're saying that because I'm saying that the gift of tongues, as it's being used today, is wrong, and thus, I'm attacking the Holy Ghost. Again, attack my use of scripture if you want to prove that point. Attacking me only means you can't actually show that I'm wrong, and therefore I must be right.
Something tells me you can't answer that question.
How you answer that will answer your own question.
Go back and read again. I answered.
From Singer:
I gave a review of some--not all, but only some--of the points in the article you provided. Now, in order for you to say what you just said, you must be saying that that article was inspired by God Himself. To my knowledge, only the Bible can make that claim.
The only other possible reason for your statement is that you're saying that because I'm saying that the gift of tongues, as it's being used today, is wrong, and thus, I'm attacking the Holy Ghost. Again, attack my use of scripture if you want to prove that point. Attacking me only means you can't actually show that I'm wrong, and therefore I must be right.
Apparently, you do, because I don't agree. I stated why, using scripture. Refute it, or admit that you can't.
Is this supposed to support speaking in tongues? Look at the last few words: cannot be uttered. At the most, this only supports groaning.
I would suggest you do the same. Especially seeing as the conjunction "and" combines the two thoughts, making them of one accord; i.e., don't pray in the spirit if you're not going to pray with understanding.
Nah, don't think so. Because you still haven't answered, WHY wasn't Phillip enough? Why did the Holy Spirit not come upon them until the apostles laid hands on them?
Something tells me you can't answer that question.
I've never spoken in tongues, Singer; am I saved? Or have I just not received the gift of the Holy Ghost yet?
How you answer that will answer your own question.
In regards to how one was treated here, why not tactfully handle that with the person that offended you? There are Biblical ways to handle it and posting about it here seems to not show the spirit of turning the other cheek.
I have had many people offend me here, but I don't carry that grudge, I give it to God and move on, it's not doing them or yourself any good to keep bringing it up.
If you aren't happy with how this board is run, then maybe it isn't the board for you. There are many places to post at on the net, why stay where you feel there is so much ill will against you?
~Lorelei
I have had many people offend me here, but I don't carry that grudge, I give it to God and move on, it's not doing them or yourself any good to keep bringing it up.
If you aren't happy with how this board is run, then maybe it isn't the board for you. There are many places to post at on the net, why stay where you feel there is so much ill will against you?
~Lorelei
Don:
Longs posts don't get read much. If they did, you'd be a Sabbath keeper
now with all the bible proof that you can't rightfully disobey God's Will which
is that you are to obey ALL the laws including the Fourth one.
" To my knowledge, only the Bible can make that claim."
** Easy to say, but you don't believe the scriptures we give you either.
" Attacking me only means you can't actually show that I'm wrong, and therefore I must be right."
** Children justify their means in the same way.
"Nah, don't think so. Because you still haven't answered, WHY wasn't Phillip enough? Why did the Holy Spirit not come upon them until the apostles laid hands on them?"
** Because water baptism won't bring the Holy Spirit..like I said twice before.
Longs posts don't get read much. If they did, you'd be a Sabbath keeper
now with all the bible proof that you can't rightfully disobey God's Will which
is that you are to obey ALL the laws including the Fourth one.
" To my knowledge, only the Bible can make that claim."
** Easy to say, but you don't believe the scriptures we give you either.
" Attacking me only means you can't actually show that I'm wrong, and therefore I must be right."
** Children justify their means in the same way.
"Nah, don't think so. Because you still haven't answered, WHY wasn't Phillip enough? Why did the Holy Spirit not come upon them until the apostles laid hands on them?"
** Because water baptism won't bring the Holy Spirit..like I said twice before.