tongues

Please give your 'evidence' that tongues is the 'evidence' of one receiving the baptism of the Holy Ghost.
DHK

 

If you don't want to speak in tongues nobody is making you. God does not force anything on anyone.
If someone does speak in tongues don't let that bother you.
THEY ARE NOT PRAYING TO YOU!!!!!!!
Why not let that between them and God.

the Bible plainly says FORBID NOT TO SPEAK IN TONGUES.
And if you don't like that then you can tear it out of your Bible. I personally accept that scripture as the part of the canon of scripture and believe that it is inspired of God.

 

All Scripture has context Atestring.
"Forbid not to speak in tongues," God said.
He also did not forbid the ass to speak to Balaam.
The application is all yours.

Forbid not to speak in tongues was written to first century Christians specifically those in the church at Corinth. If you read 1Cor.7:1, you will find that the Corinthians had written Paul a letter with questions concerning problems relative to their church. Paul was answering them. Everything has a context. Paul put the tongues in their proper context in chapter 14 when he said that they were a sign for the unbelieving Jew. I don't know how you can get around verses 21 and 22. What unbelieving Jews are present today who need to hear the miracle of speaking in tongues that they may know that the gospel message of 2000 years ago actually came from the Apostles of Christ, and thus came from God. After 2000 years of history you would think they would have gotten at least that fact straight by now--'ya think??
That was the purpose of tongues. Take it or leave it. I know you will leave it. Leave it and you leave the Bible, for that is what it says.
DHK

 

All Scripture has context Atestring.
"Forbid not to speak in tongues," God said.
He also did not forbid the ass to speak to Balaam.
The application is all yours.

Forbid not to speak in tongues was written to first century Christians specifically those in the church at Corinth. If you read 1Cor.7:1, you will find that the Corinthians had written Paul a letter with questions concerning problems relative to their church. Paul was answering them. Everything has a context. Paul put the tongues in their proper context in chapter 14 when he said that they were a sign for the unbelieving Jew. I don't know how you can get around verses 21 and 22. What unbelieving Jews are present today who need to hear the miracle of speaking in tongues that they may know that the gospel message of 2000 years ago actually came from the Apostles of Christ, and thus came from God. After 2000 years of history you would think they would have gotten at least that fact straight by now--'ya think??
That was the purpose of tongues. Take it or leave it. I know you will leave it. Leave it and you leave the Bible, for that is what it says.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]What are you implying when you are talkijng about Balaam's donkey and then say the application is all yours.
I believe that posting rules do not make room for personal remarks of this type.

 

DKH,
I will discuss issues with you. This could be healthy. That is what forums are for but you refereing to me as an "Ass" is simply uncalled for.
If everyone agreed on issues, forums would be boring and non effective. But I beg you not to take personal jabs at me or anyone else.

 

Sorry for the offence Atestring.
It was a poor attempt at some humor.
But it did have a point to it, that I was trying to make at the same time. And that is that God, at that time and place could give an animal the ability to speak in a tongue foreign to its own (a miraculous tongue--which the gift of tongues were).
And so God also gave the gift of tongues--also a miraculous gift; also given during a certain time and place in history, for a definite and specific purpose. I believe it is a good analogy. Forbid not to speak in tongues has no application to us today. We need to take the statement in its context.
DHK

 

Sorry for the offence Atestring.
It was a poor attempt at some humor.
But it did have a point to it, that I was trying to make at the same time. And that is that God, at that time and place could give an animal the ability to speak in a tongue foreign to its own (a miraculous tongue--which the gift of tongues were).
And so God also gave the gift of tongues--also a miraculous gift; also given during a certain time and place in history, for a definite and specific purpose. I believe it is a good analogy. Forbid not to speak in tongues has no application to us today. We need to take the statement in its context.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]I am not laughing but Apology accepted!

 

Please give your 'evidence' that tongues is the 'evidence' of one receiving the baptism of the Holy Ghost.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]OK, be glad to... Acts 1:4-5
4) And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, saith he, ye have heard of me.
5) For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the HOLY GHOST not many days hence.

Acts 2:1&4
1) And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

4) And they were all filled with the HOLY GHOST and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Acts 2:12&16
12) And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, WHAT MEANETH THIS?
16) But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;

Joel 2:28
And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh;

Acts 2:32-33
32) This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
33) Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and *HEAR.*

This was the Day of Pentecost, when the NT Church was born! How did they know that they had received the "Baptism of the Holy Ghost"...."they heard them speak in tongues!

The "Baptism of the Holy Ghost," evidenced by speaking in other tongues, is for everyone...not just for the Jews, as you would have everyone to believe.

Acts 2:39
For the promise (Holy Ghost) is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

As I said before, "That's Us" and He's still calling.

Keep in mind that it doesn't mention "the gift of tongues." There is a difference!

DHK, you can take this post and change it to suit what you believe, but it doesn't change what the Bible says.

MEE

 

MEE,
I read your post, and the verses. They are all connected to the Day of Pentecost and the prophecy that was fulfilled on that day in Joel 2:28.
Therefore, since that was the Day of Pentecost was a one time event in history; a Jewish festival where many of the Jews got saved; a time in history where prophecy was fulfilled; one must ask:

1. Are you a Jew? If so, which tribe?
2. Do you/haveyou spoke in tongues on the Day of Pentecost?
3. Are your offspring Jews?
4. Are your ancestors Jews?

Since I know the answer to these questions, MEE, I conclude that your evidence is faulty, and in reality you have none. Tongues is not for today.
DHK

 

Reading is one thing; understanding is another.

MEE

 

Reading is one thing; understanding is another.

MEE </font>[/QUOTE]I understand. Do you?

1 Corinthians 14:21-22 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.
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.

Tongues were a sign to the unbelieving Jew. That is easy enough to understand from these verses. It is also easy enough to understand that just as the burning bush that Moses saw will never come back again, so will the Day of Pentecost never come back again. Both are historical events, never again to be repeated. What happened on those days will never happen again. Tongues have ceased.
DHK

 

So I'm curious: MEE, what exactly is the difference between the baptism of the Holy Spirit as evidenced in Acts 2, and the gift of tongues?

Scripture, please.

 

DKH:
In Acts 10 was Cornelius a Jew?
Were the Ephesians in Acts 19 Jews?

 

After over 300 post and that is a bunch. Must be some interest in this subject. I thought I would answer the original question.
My opinion is D.

 

I asked MEE for evidence for her claim of being baptized in the Spirit. Her answer or evidence was confined solely to Acts 2. Therefore these verses (at this present time) have no bearing on the rebuttal questions that I asked MEE.
DHK

 

I asked MEE for evidence for her claim of being baptized in the Spirit. Her answer or evidence was confined solely to Acts 2. Therefore these verses (at this present time) have no bearing on the rebuttal questions that I asked MEE.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]DKh
I am asking you if Cornelius (Acts 10) and the Ephesians ( Acts 19) were Jews.
If speaking in Tongues ( in your opinion from previous post) is limited to Unbelieving Jews, I think that this is a fair question. i would love to hear your answer to my question.

 

In the incident in Acts 10, Cornelius and those with him were Greeks. When Peter left from Joppa he took some of the Jewish brethren with him:

Acts 10:23 Then called he them in, and lodged them. And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him.

It was the Jews that at this time were not convinced that the gospel should go to the Gentiles. Speaking in tongues was a sign to them, to show them that the message of salvation was not simply for the Jew, but for the Gentile also. In this sense it was a sign for the Jew as well.

Acts 10:45-47 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

The Jews heard them speak in tongues, were convinced of their salvation, and therefore urged them to be baptized as well. The gospel had now reached out to the Gentiles. Tongues was a sign to the Jews.

In Acts 19, the men that Paul had encountered were Jews. They had been baptized by John the Baptist, but had not been taught about the Holy Spirit. John's baptism was before the cross, a baptism unto repentance. These believers were therefore still unbaptized. If you look just before in the verses ending chapter 18 you find Apollos mightily covincing the Jews. Apollos had much zeal, but little education in the things of the Lord, yet in spite of it, many Jews believed. Once someone believes, they ought to be baptized. The speaking in tongues was a sign for the Jews that the message was of God, especially the unbelieving Jews, lest he not repent.
In all three cases: Acts 2, 10, 19, there were Jews present when tongues were spoken.
DHK

 

Yes, the Jews were present, but the Gentiles spoke in tongues, AS THE JEWS DID, when they rerceived the HOLY GHOST, in the beginning.

This was a confirmation TO THE JEWS that God had given the Holy ghost to the Gentiles also,...how did they (Jews/Gentiles) know that they had received the Spirit of God?...Hint: THEY *ALL* SPOKE IN TONGUES!

DHK, this was not to be a one time happening! It was the begining of the NT Church. I've quoted it time after time, Acts 2:39) For the promise is unto you, and to your children and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

He's still calling and will continue to call until His return, for His bride.

MEE

 

No the promise is not unto YOU.
The promise is unto the children of the one's that crucified the Saviour, the Jews. If you are not a Jew, the promise is not unto you. You are not rightly dividing the word of truth. You are taking a promise of the Word of God, directly given to the Jews and trying to apply it to yourself. God never commanded you to take off your shoes and approach the burning bush either.
DHK

 

No the promise is not unto YOU.
The promise is unto the children of the one's that crucified the Saviour, the Jews. If you are not a Jew, the promise is not unto you. You are not rightly dividing the word of truth. You are taking a promise of the Word of God, directly given to the Jews and trying to apply it to yourself.
DHK

**You mean that the "Spirit" of God is not for the Gentiles?


MEE