Why the Emphasis on Tongues?

[donnA]

The bible tells us the gifts are for the edification of all,
1 cor. 12: 7But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all .
They are not for personal use.

In case you need some help, go to Acts 2,8,10,& 19 and there you will find, when the NT Church was in its infancy, that they all spoke in tongues when they received the "baptism of the Holy Ghost."

The bible doesn't say everyone who got saved spoke in tongues. Take for instance the 3000 saved in Acts 2.

Acts 2: 41Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them

Brian, "speaking in tongues" as was given in Acts 2, is the "evidence" of being filled with the Spirit of God. It is not the *SPIRIT* but the evidence to let a person know that they have been filled with His Spirit. The Bible does make that clear. Some have either never been taught, they don't see it, or they don't want to see it for what it really

I don't think that is one bit clear, as it does not say it. Nowhere does the bible say, in Acts or elsewhere, that tongues is evidence that the Holy Spirit indwells someone. When a person is save they know the Holy Spirit is filling them when He makes then new, changes their lives, their hearts. These things can not be done without Him. God does not save people, then tell them they are to be like Jesus,a nd not give them the power to do it. That power is the Holy Spirit in us.
The evidence seems to be for those looking on, like we have to prove something to them. Since i already know the Holy Spirit is in me, then who else would I prove it to by speaking in tongues? People who want to see a sign, who can not believe without signs.

Ro 8: 9But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. 10And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.

Scripture here says if you do not have the Holy Spirit in you you are not a Christian. Notice it does not say you must prove it to anyone by speaking in tongues. But it guarantees us if we are Christians we have the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Don, truthfully, before this goes any further, do you believe that speaking in tongues, as the Spirit of God gives the utterance, exists today?

How come if it is God doing it(today), He is breaking His own rules for using tongues? 1Cor 12,14

 

[Don]

MEE, it doesn't matter whether I believe tongues are for today or not. That's simply a strategy designed to deflect us all from the fact that I've brought up a sincere, honest contradiction in the article YOU posted a link to.

As Brian pointed out, there are several questions that have been avoided (thanks, Bri). Please answer them, and then answer the contradiction, and then we'll continue.

You may not believe this, but I'm fully open. I just want my questions answered.

-------------------------------------------------

TAMBOURINE LADY,

I once received a check that I thought was from my mother. Turns out I was mistaken, and I needed to return the money.

Understand?

-------------------------------------------------

MUSIC4HIM,

What kind of tongues is Paul talking about? Why would anyone speak in a language that no one understands and then have someone to interpret?

I once listened to someone speak Spanish. However, I don't know Spanish, so I needed an interpreter--but there wasn't one around.

Was the individual speaking Spanish filled with the Holy Ghost? Possibly...but it evidently wasn't meant for me....

 

[music4Him]

Quote by Don
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MUSIC4HIM,


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What kind of tongues is Paul talking about? Why would anyone speak in a language that no one understands and then have someone to interpret?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I once listened to someone speak Spanish. However, I don't know Spanish, so I needed an interpreter--but there wasn't one around.

Was the individual speaking Spanish filled with the Holy Ghost? Possibly...but it evidently wasn't meant for me....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok let me put it this way.....You are in a church of nothing but english speaking people. You have never spoke spanish before.....don't even understand it......then all of a sudden you start talking it without even knowing what you are speaking.... then someone understands that language you spoke and interprets it. Then what language did you speak? Thats a unknown tongue to you, but you spoke it without understanding. Then someone recives a interpretation and speaks it,
then according to Paul it should edify the church.

1Cor.14:2
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.


Music4Him

 

[Singer]

1Cor: 14:4

He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue
edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

 

[Don]

Music4Him, THAT is the proper application of tongues. A language not normally spoken, just like in Acts 2.

And if there's no one there who can interpret, then my words are like a tinkling cymbal, or a trumpet giving an uncertain sound, and I should keep quiet.

Hey, Singer: 1 Corinthians 14:5 ...for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues....

Would we agree that the emphasis in 1 Corinthians 14 is on edifying the church and others, and not being selfish?

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by Don:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Don, both the "baptism of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2) and the reference of "the gift of tongues," (1 Cor. 14) if was heard by anyone, would make a believer out of a person because it is supernatural and from God.

If you witnessed, by seeing and hearing, a person receiving the "baptism of the Holy Ghost," like on the Day of Pentecost, wouldn't it make a believer out of you?

Not necessarily, and you know it.

**Keep up the smart mouth and you will be talking to someone else. At first, I thought you were interested, but now I can see what you are up to. Same thing you did to ONENESS. Remember?

</font>[/QUOTE]So when you first spoke in tongues (were first in-dwelt with the Spirit), it was an earthly language. Which language was it?

**Don, a person receiving the Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues doesn't know the language or it wouldn't be of God.

[/QUOTE]So are we agreed that the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" is NOT required for salvation?

**No, that is not what we agreed upon. Everyone has to have the Spirit of God.

You'll recall that in Acts 8, Philip preached and many believed and were baptized; and that later, Peter and John came and laid hands on those same people before they received the Holy Ghost (something which has never been satisfactorily explained by any who practice speaking in tongues--why Philip wasn't "good enough"). In fact, later in Acts 8, we find that believing is required before baptism is allowed.

**I truthfully don't know why the Spirit of God was not given until Peter was present. Maybe it was because he had the keys to the kingdom. Who knows? You have of a better guess?

**Of course one has to believe in order to "Repent, be baptised, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.


As far as the gift of tongues goes, let's follow that one to its logical conclusion: If there is no interpreter present, what do you do? [/QUOTE]

**Keep silent and speak unto yourself and to God. Don't hold up the service. Remember, Paul said "Forbid not to speak in tongues!" In other words, do things decently and in order.

MEE

 

[donnA]

Just a thought, but it the 'message' is from God, then why would He give a message you can't understand and not an interpreter too. Seems wasted to have a message in tongues and no interpreter.
Seems this would cause confusion.

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by Briguy:
[QB] Hi Carol, You and Don have made for interesting reading. Don, left you a main question to answer and yet you have ignored this all important question. The point was that in Acts 2 you say that was the "evidence" type of tongues, which you say is for the individual person, but the text is clear that this speaking of tongues was for the benefit of others, not self edification. Please explain that counterdiction.

**The Bible doesn't conradict itself! Acts 2 is talking about the baptism of the Holy Ghost, evidenced by speaking in tongues, which is receiving the Spirit of God and it is for everyone, if he/she believes the Word of God.

**Brian, I don't think that you see that "the gift of tongues" and the "baptism of the Holy Ghost" are two different manifestations of God. One is required, for salvation and one is not.

Also, I made a statement on the last page about the fact that if speaking in tongues is the evidence of the Holy Spirit filling someone, what do we do with the thousands and thousands of great Christian writers and preachers over the past 2000 years that never had this "evidence". All these great men of God were mistaken and suffering in Hell now, right? I believe that is what you are saying:
no evidence = no salvation.

**If you know how I believe the Bible speaks on this subject, why do you ask? Are these "great men" any better than the Jews, that rejected God's plan of salvation?

MEE

 

[DHK]

**If you know how I believe the Bible speaks on this subject, why do you ask? Are these "great men" any better than the Jews, that rejected God's plan of salvation?
MEE

The modern Pentecostal/Charismatic movement started in 1901. Your particular cult is even more recent than that, and likewise your belief system. What you infer by this statement, is that everyone--all the "great men of God" (and women and all believers of all ages) for the last 1800 years before the twentieth century were all damned to Hell, because they didn't believe as you do. It is your beliefs that are new and recent. It is impossible to document what you believe prior to the 20th century. There are many historical documents and pre-20th century historians--but none that have a belief system like yours. How do you reconcile the inference that you are making that all believers from the apostles to the 20th century all went to Hell??
DHK

 

[Don]

Not necessarily, and you know it.

**Keep up the smart mouth and you will be talking to someone else. At first, I thought you were interested, but now I can see what you are up to. Same thing you did to ONENESS. Remember?

My apologies if you were offended. I assumed you knew differently than what you posted due to the fact that I know you study scripture.

**Don, a person receiving the Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues doesn't know the language or it wouldn't be of God.

MEE, the apostles in Acts 2 were told quite clearly what languages they were speaking in. Are you saying there was no one present who could tell you what language you spoke in?

So are we agreed that the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" is NOT required for salvation?

**No, that is not what we agreed upon. Everyone has to have the Spirit of God.

So the apostles in Acts 2 weren't saved until that event?

MEE, Acts 2 is talking about the baptism of the Holy Ghost--but the definitions you provided from that article say that the baptism of the Holy Ghost is for the believer only, and of no interpretation. YET, it's quite obvious that the baptism of the Holy Ghost in Acts 2 was meant to be for a sign to the unbelievers present.

PLEASE explain the contradiction.

 

[music4Him]

Just wondering something, of those who don't speak in tongues. If you went to a mall anywhere in the US, and felt led by the Lord to witness to someone. But upon starting a conversation you find out they don't speak any language you ever heard before.........what do you do?

Say excuse me, and run for the nearest exit?
Or ask the Lord to fill your mouth with the right words/language if it be His will?

Could you belive that He would do it? Although I have never been in this situation...I belive it if it be His will He will. Cause He said in Matt.19:26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Jer. 32:17 , Matt. 17:20 , Luke 1:37.

Paul asked:
1Cor.12:30 ~ Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?[/B]
What is the answer to the Pauls question above? Nay, but it don't make the person who belives on the Lord Jesus any less saved. Tongues are a gift as is the word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, working of miracles, prophecy, decerning of spirits,and interpretation of tongues.
These are the 9 gifts of the Spirit spoken of in 1Cor.12:7-11. I know that some of you are a good judge of chareter(sp?)= decerning of spirits... some may be great at taking care of sick people= gift of healing.....some my be able to take it a step futher and have working of miracles= increase of food, instant healing, ect. But this should be done to glorify the God, and not used after our own selfish lusts. Or to look at it another way, I seen people say look what "I" done...that would be wrong way to use the gifts.
BTW, If all those gifts are of the Spirit (listed above), are they for people to recive today? My answer is yes if I am working in any or all of the gifts above to glorify God and to the edification of the church.
What would be wrong with speaking in tongues that are given with the baptizim of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2) or from the gifts of the Spirit (1Cor.12)?

Music4Him

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by Don:

**Don, a person receiving the Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues doesn't know the language or it wouldn't be of God.

MEE, the apostles in Acts 2 were told quite clearly what languages they were speaking in.

So are we agreed that the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" is NOT required for salvation?

**No, that is not what we agreed upon. Everyone has to have the Spirit of God.

So the apostles in Acts 2 weren't saved until that event?

**Don, where does it say, in Acts 2, that the apostles knew what language they were speaking?

I see where there were different nationalities that understood what the was being spoken, but not that any that were speaking, as the Spirit of God gave them the utterance.

As far as the 120 (apostles included) that were in that upper room are concerned, they went from being under the Law to the Grace dispensation and they were saved. They just happened to be in a time when the NT Church was born and the Law was no longer in effect.

Repentance alone, preached by John the baptist, was no longer in effect, after the Spirit of God was poured out, on the Day of Pentecost. As Peter said in Acts 2:38-39) ...Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
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.

MEE

 

[qwerty]

The mis-translation of 1 Cor. 12:31 has given rise to much of the debate over the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
The Apostle Paul was NOT telling them that love was superior to the gifts.
The Apostle Paul WAS telling them the superior WAY to seek the gifts, and that love was the WAY to DO the gifts.
A quick reading of the first three verses of 1 Cor. 13 makes this clear.


Note - the Greek does not transfer over correctly.


First Epistle to the Corinthians
Copyright 1937
R.C.H. Lenski
Augsburg Publishing House

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 12:31

The first point is the type of the gift desired; we are to admire, value, and seek the higher types. A second point must be taken into consideration when Paul is speaking of the acquirement and the use of any gift. This is the motive for having and for employing the gift, namely the motive of love. In this regard the Corinthians are gravely deficient as we have already seen in other connections in earlier chapters. Just what this motive of Christian love is Paul intends to tell the Corinthians at some length. He introduces this part of his instruction by saying:
And besides I point out to you an exceedingly excellent way, namely for this zealous striving to which I urge you.
Blass and others would change the reading because the wording is somewhat unusual. Although the phrase ( kaq uperbolhn ) modifies a noun, it is quite plain. Paul tells the Corinthians to seek the superior gifts and adds ( eti ) that he will now show them a superior way for seeking them. The emphatic adjective: the “greater” gifts is thus balanced by the emphatic phrase: a way “in excess,” on that exceeds, i.e., in excellence for its purpose. The sense is, however, not that this exceeding excellent way is to be sought in place of the gifts, as a substitute for them. The idea expressed is not that “love” is more excellent than gifts. This introduces a false contrast and would call for an adversative connective, namely (de ) or (alla ) in place of Paul’s (kai ) and (eti ). Nor does Paul elaborate the thesis that love is preferable to gifts. In 1 Cor. 14:1 he urges us to seek both. Love is to be the all-dominating motive in seeking and in using spiritual gifts.

From: http://www.greekbible.com
1 Cor. 12:31
zhloute de ta carismata ta meizona. kai eti kaq uperbolhn odon umin deiknumi.

 

[Don]

Music4Him, I had exactly that encounter as I was out visiting one night. The man who answered the door didn't speak english. I gave him a tract anyway--all the time praying to God.

MEE,

It's very clear in Acts 2, when Peter hears the disputing between the people who were listening, that the apostles knew exactly what was going on. Peter himself even says that it's a fulfillment of "they will speak in other tongues".

The others present were not speaking; but they were hearing in their own language, and asking out loud where all could hear, "How is it that we're hearing these unlearned men speak in our own native language?"

And you didn't answer my question directly: Were the apostles saved before the event in Acts 2, or did they get saved in Acts 2?

 

[Alcott]

Why the Emphasis on Tongues?

No good reason; it's just a matter of taste.

 

[Don]

Hmmm....

Tongues.

Taste.

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by Don:

MEE,

It's very clear in Acts 2, when Peter hears the disputing between the people who were listening, that the apostles knew exactly what was going on. Peter himself even says that it's a fulfillment of "they will speak in other tongues".

The others present were not speaking; but they were hearing in their own language, and asking out loud where all could hear, "How is it that we're hearing these unlearned men speak in our own native language?"

And you didn't answer my question directly: Were the apostles saved before the event in Acts 2, or did they get saved in Acts 2?

I haven't a clue what you are talking about in your first two paragraphs..above.

Yes, I did answer you about the apostles being saved. You must have missed it.

MEE

 

[Don]

Sorry; I didn't post the direct references.

MEE:
**Don, where does it say, in Acts 2, that the apostles knew what language they were speaking?

I see where there were different nationalities that understood what the was being spoken, but not that any that were speaking, as the Spirit of God gave them the utterance.

Don:
It's very clear in Acts 2, when Peter hears the disputing between the people who were listening, that the apostles knew exactly what was going on. Peter himself even says that it's a fulfillment of "they will speak in other tongues".

The others present were not speaking; but they were hearing in their own language, and asking out loud where all could hear, "How is it that we're hearing these unlearned men speak in our own native language?"

--------------------------------------------------

MEE:
As far as the 120 (apostles included) that were in that upper room are concerned, they went from being under the Law to the Grace dispensation and they were saved. They just happened to be in a time when the NT Church was born and the Law was no longer in effect.

Repentance alone, preached by John the baptist, was no longer in effect, after the Spirit of God was poured out, on the Day of Pentecost. As Peter said in Acts 2:38-39) ...Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
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.

Don:
And you didn't answer my question directly: Were the apostles saved before the event in Acts 2, or did they get saved in Acts 2?

Thanks!

 

[Briguy]

Hey all, it seems every new personthat comes in to this conversation brings another twist of tongues. I don't even know where to start.

First, Carol(MEE). I have showed clearly that Acts 2:38,39 are not for us, unless of course you are Jewish. Acts 2:38-39 is a direct response from Peter to a direct question by a group of jews, and the "we" that is spoken of in "what shall we do" is the people of Isreal, who just put the Messiah to death and believed that they had become a footstool (enemy) of God. I could go on but the point is that you need to refute what I am saying or stopping using this scripture to support you srgument. To use it without addressing what I am saying is just not appropriate.

There seems to be basic lack of understanding how tongues in a worship service worked and what an interpreter is for, even though Don, I believe addressed it some a while back. The tongue speaker spoke a message to someone who came into the "service" who did not speak the common language (remember we are talking about an area with many languages and dialects in close proximity of eachother). The new person would be edified by the message, as we are when our pastors speak. The interpreter interprets that message so the whole gathering can be edified, thus all are edified, which is the requirement of a spiritual gift. Hope that sheds some light on this. And don't forget that these "tongues" were a sign to unbelieving Isreal that a judgement was coming. In 70ad judgement came and tongues faded away as they were predicted to do in 1 cor. 13.

Carol, you said something strange. You said
"""**If you know how I believe the Bible speaks on this subject, why do you ask? Are these "great men" any better than the Jews, that rejected God's plan of salvation?"""

So you are saying that to not speak in tongues is to reject God's plan of salvation???

Isn't Jesus God's plan of salvation and the one to accept or reject??????

In Christian Love,
Brian

 

[music4Him]

Quote from Briguy:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have showed clearly that Acts 2:38,39 are not for us, unless of course you are Jewish.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I sorry and not to be hard headed, but not to me. I just backed up a little in Acts 2, from verse 14-41 Peter is exsplaining Pentecost (I'm supposing to those people mentioned in verses 8-13 to me looks like more nationalities than Jews mentioned there? Verse 22 says ye "men of Israel" , but could that be because they are all somewhere in Israel? Verse 36 says; Therefore let the house of Israel know assuredly.... but he is also speaking of David just a couple of verses up. But just a question...in Acts 2:17-21 where Peter is quoting from Joel, who is the "all flesh" and the "servents", and "handmaidens" mentioned that he is going to pour out His Spirit on? Isn't that the ones who call on the name of the Lord?


Quote by Briguy:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And don't forget that these "tongues" were a sign to unbelieving Isreal that a judgement was coming. In 70ad judgement came and tongues faded away as they were predicted to do in 1 cor. 13
---------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean all this time I thought 1Cor.13 where instructions on how to exercise the gifts with love? I'm sorry if I misunerstood what you said here, but you make it sounds like all those gifts spoken of in 1Cor. ch.12 should be void for today? Then what do we do with all these people that have been healed? What do we do with all these smart people that have wisdom and knowledge? Do we tell them oops can't do that cause its not for you, that stopped in 70 A.D.? I guess I'm one that belives that the 9 gifts of the Spirit are for still for today as long as we use them in love.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Acts 10:34-35~
Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: 35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Hebrews 13:8~
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Music4Him