-
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!
Why the Emphasis on Tongues?
- Thread starter MennoMan
- Start date
SpiritualMadMan
New Member
I find it interesting how far we stretch a point to make one.
I also noticed that my rebuttal to the argument that tongues were *only* a sign for the Jewish Unbeliever went completely avoided.
The day of Pentecost and the Believers in Ephesus, I suppose, can be used to bolster either side of the story.
And, neither side is really listening to the other?
Or, casually, maybe deliberately, not seeing things presented.
When DHK and Briguy speak against *all* modern day Speaking in Tongues with the level of emphasis I have seen... They make me, and others out to be unregenerate deceivers.
When Mee and others from the *must* speak in tongues camp speak with the ardor they do... They make DHK and Briguy, and those in their camp out to be unsaved and deceived as well.
Is it any wonder our emotions get the better of our exegesis and debating skills?
By now Neither DHK, Briguy, or myself will convince Mee that you can be Born-Again without Speaking in Tongues...
Also, by now, I know that I will never get *any* quarter from DHK. That I will never convince him that Speaking in Tongues *can* happen today.
It's sad that I can't enjoy discussing such topics among well-read and studied people.
I must admit though a bit of 'glee' at a few of the 'barbs' I've launched... Even if they weren't even recognized...
I also noticed that my rebuttal to the argument that tongues were *only* a sign for the Jewish Unbeliever went completely avoided.
The day of Pentecost and the Believers in Ephesus, I suppose, can be used to bolster either side of the story.
And, neither side is really listening to the other?
Or, casually, maybe deliberately, not seeing things presented.
When DHK and Briguy speak against *all* modern day Speaking in Tongues with the level of emphasis I have seen... They make me, and others out to be unregenerate deceivers.
When Mee and others from the *must* speak in tongues camp speak with the ardor they do... They make DHK and Briguy, and those in their camp out to be unsaved and deceived as well.
Is it any wonder our emotions get the better of our exegesis and debating skills?
By now Neither DHK, Briguy, or myself will convince Mee that you can be Born-Again without Speaking in Tongues...
Also, by now, I know that I will never get *any* quarter from DHK. That I will never convince him that Speaking in Tongues *can* happen today.
It's sad that I can't enjoy discussing such topics among well-read and studied people.
I must admit though a bit of 'glee' at a few of the 'barbs' I've launched... Even if they weren't even recognized...
M4H, the verb used for knowledge and prophecy is a whole different word and it means that those two will end when something happens that makes them end. Paul says that that something is the coming of the "prefect" (a different topic). So the argument I used still works because of Paul's words.
SMM, One could say that it didn't matter who saw the "sign" to the Jews, it was still for them. If a warning sign for a big hole is in front of the hole it will be there for whoever sees it until the hole is filled in. Same thing here. The "sign" of judgement was placed in the "church" it didn't matter who saw it, it still pointed to what it pointed to regardless. Now as you know the early church was was comprised of many many Jews and there were Jews that didn't believe all around as well, so there would have been plenty of opportunity for Jews to see the sign. The sign is the sign it does not matter who saw it, in a practical sense. Hope that cleared it up.
In Christ,
Brian
SMM, One could say that it didn't matter who saw the "sign" to the Jews, it was still for them. If a warning sign for a big hole is in front of the hole it will be there for whoever sees it until the hole is filled in. Same thing here. The "sign" of judgement was placed in the "church" it didn't matter who saw it, it still pointed to what it pointed to regardless. Now as you know the early church was was comprised of many many Jews and there were Jews that didn't believe all around as well, so there would have been plenty of opportunity for Jews to see the sign. The sign is the sign it does not matter who saw it, in a practical sense. Hope that cleared it up.
In Christ,
Brian
DHK do you belive that in 1 Cor. Chapter 12 that the 9 spiritual gifts that Paul speaks of is not for us?
Just tring to understand what the problem is?
Music4Him
That's a good question, and even Briguy and I differ on the answer. If I can accurately portray his position (he may correct me); Briguy arbitrarily divides the gifts into sign gifts and service gifts. The sign gifts have ceased and the service gifts continue. Service gifts are those such as helps, administration, etc. continue.
I believe that every gift: sign or service, was supernatural in nature. Helps, for example, was more than just bringing a bouquet of flowers to a sick patient. It was a supernatural gift in a sense that we cannot fully explain today (since we were not there to see it in operation). How would it be classified as a "spiritual" gift otherwise? We all have natural gifts and talents which we are encouraged to use, and some are more talented in some areas more than others. But these were different; they were supernatural in nature. Therefore I believe that all the spiritual gifts have ceased. If a gift such as healing were still around today, a healer would be able to go through the corridors of any hospital and heal every patient that is there. No faith healer in the world would take up that challenge. There are no genuine faith healers in this world. That gift has ceased, along with the rest.
God still heals, but not in the same way He did in the first century.
DHK
Just tring to understand what the problem is?
Music4Him
That's a good question, and even Briguy and I differ on the answer. If I can accurately portray his position (he may correct me); Briguy arbitrarily divides the gifts into sign gifts and service gifts. The sign gifts have ceased and the service gifts continue. Service gifts are those such as helps, administration, etc. continue.
I believe that every gift: sign or service, was supernatural in nature. Helps, for example, was more than just bringing a bouquet of flowers to a sick patient. It was a supernatural gift in a sense that we cannot fully explain today (since we were not there to see it in operation). How would it be classified as a "spiritual" gift otherwise? We all have natural gifts and talents which we are encouraged to use, and some are more talented in some areas more than others. But these were different; they were supernatural in nature. Therefore I believe that all the spiritual gifts have ceased. If a gift such as healing were still around today, a healer would be able to go through the corridors of any hospital and heal every patient that is there. No faith healer in the world would take up that challenge. There are no genuine faith healers in this world. That gift has ceased, along with the rest.
God still heals, but not in the same way He did in the first century.
DHK
You have come to the point of accusing me of lying and calling God a liar (blasphemy), only to provide evidence of your own unbelief. What a terrible thing to do.
I already said that Apollos was a believer.
I pointed to Scripture and quoted Scripture that said Apollos was a believer.
In your unbelief you neither believed me, nor the Word of God. That is as good as calling God a liar, only to conclude: I just don't buy into the Cessationist Heresy. You have the right to believe and not believe what you want. But do you have to call God a liar to do it?
DHK
Yes I would and I do.
20% of SBC members have charismatic leanings according to a report in Charisma Magazine. </font>[/QUOTE]You wouldn't happen to know if any of those 20% charismatic SBC, that do the 7th day sabbath (Sauterday) also?
That would be awsome!
Music4Him </font>[/QUOTE]I have never heard a SBC survey on the issue of 7th day sabbath.
The interesting thing about The SBC is that incdividual churcheds are autonomous and they do have the right to believe in the 7th day sabbath.
SpiritualMadMan, you're not going unnoticed.
As for fellowshipping with those who speak in tongues--I couldn't do so if their belief was that doing so was somehow required for salvation (as in, evidence of salvation).
MEE, if you're not going to defend, and point out the errors in our arguments, then how can you say you have the correct belief?
As for fellowshipping with those who speak in tongues--I couldn't do so if their belief was that doing so was somehow required for salvation (as in, evidence of salvation).
MEE, if you're not going to defend, and point out the errors in our arguments, then how can you say you have the correct belief?
Ever heard of "pearls and swine?"Originally posted by Don:
SpiritualMadMan, you're not going unnoticed.
As for fellowshipping with those who speak in tongues--I couldn't do so if their belief was that doing so was somehow required for salvation (as in, evidence of salvation).
MEE, if you're not going to defend, and point out the errors in our arguments, then how can you say you have the correct belief?
MEE
