Gifts

Shawn · Jan 13, 2009

I apologize because I did misunderstand you. I thought you were saying God stopped healing altogether. I don't think we actually even differ in our opinions that much. I don't know whether some people still have a gift of healing like the Apostles did or not, but I'm inclined to think not and to agree with you on that. I know what you're saying...you don't exactly see anyone going around and healing every sick person they come across at will. But some people do take that to mean that God doesn't heal at all anymore and that's just wrong. God can and does heal people when it's His will to do so. Sorry if I sounded kind of harsh and sorry I misunderstood you like that. Thanks for clarifying what you meant!

I don't know if the media would report an arm growing back or not....unless it was videotaped, probably not. And even then I think they would write it off as a hoax...lol.

oneholyfire · Jan 13, 2009

And these signs shall follow them that believe: In My name, they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues, they will lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. Mark 16:17 If we do not see evidence of these things in our lives, its not Gods doing, but our own. We have been given power and authority to do not only the things Jesus did, but even greater works !! His gospel message has not changed. Jesus is alive and well, healing, delivering, setting captives free.. His miraculous healing power is still being released throughout the world doing creative miracles. Tumors ARE shrinking, the dead ARE being raised, limbs ARE growing where there were none, diseases ARE being healed, blind eyes ARE opening and the deaf ARE hearing !!!! Mark 16:20 And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and CONFIRMING the Word through the accompanying signs. YES, its happening today and YES it is God's will. You will never find the disciples questioning whether it was God's will or not to heal. They simply prayed for healing and believed for it. Our doubt and unbelief gets in the way of seeing real miracles performed. We doubt whether God wants to do it or if its His will. Jesus said ask in faith, and do not doubt... James 1:6 If you don't get the answer you were seeking, or you don't see the results you "thought" would happen, you still believe for the next time, and trust in Gods sovereignty. And trust that HIS perfect will is being worked out.

Also, to presume that we understand the full meaning and purpose of tongues is to say that we fully understand the mind of Christ in the matter, and we don't, we know in part. Tongues serves a very powerful purpose even today. It is a language that's shielded from the enemy. Ever wonder why there is so much controversy in the church over tongues ? I believe it is because the enemy knows just how powerful it is !!! If he can convince generations of believers that it is unimportant, irrelevant, not for today... hmmm he can keep a generation(s) from conversing with God in a language that's completely hidden from him. You think that doesn't make him crazy HA. Tongues is a powerful weapon of warfare against the enemy of our souls. He may try and counterfeit it, but keep in mind he would have no purpose in doing so, UNLESS, there was a very REAL gift to counterfeit !!!

erika83 · Jan 13, 2009

Thanks Shawn and i also apologise for not being clear enough. You explained better what i really meant lol. I agree with you.
God bless

jerrywlo · Jan 13, 2009

I am confussed why do we have this?:
1Co 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.

I am also confused about statements that Jesus was God and performed miracles. Did Jesus ever made such clame? I remember Him say:
Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee (the Father, see V 1) the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Jesus prayed "as always" before resurection of Lazarus:
Joh 11:41 Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.
Joh 11:42 And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me.

If Jesus was God and had all the power why He had to pray to the Father "always"?

Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

So was Jesus God? Did He perform miracles or did the Father do the work?

Did apostles have power to heal? If so then why Paul left Trophimus sick behind?
2Ti 4:20 Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick.

Do people have power or is it God working through them?
Mat 10:20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

After the resurection Jesus confirmed by signs the word preached by apostles .
Mar 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

Shawn · Jan 13, 2009

Those are good questions Jerrywlo. They really deserve their own thread. I don't want to get this one too off-topic but I'll give answering your questions a shot. I'd really like to hear other answers as well and feedback about anything I may be wrong about.

I'm not sure what you're confused about here. Maybe you can clarify? That seems pretty straightforward to me. Tongues were a sign to unbelievers. Like on the day of Pentecost the unbelievers heard the tongues spoken in their own languages and were saved because of it. I can think of one exception to this as well. When Peter heard Gentiles speaking in tongues it was a sign to Peter that they had also received the Holy Spirit. Peter wasn't an unbeliever so maybe you can call this a general rule with some exceptions? Prophesying is not for the unbelievers, it's God's Words spoken to the Church. It's as simple as that.

Now about why Jesus prayed, it takes an understanding of the Trinity and the Incarnation to understand the whys. Both are hard things to understand and even harder to explain to others. The Trinity I get, but I'll be honest here, the Incarnation of Christ is still a mystery that's hard to fully grasp for me. It's one of those things that you have to just accept by Faith.

I think of the Trinity as similar to how humans are made of three parts as well. The mind, body, and spirit. Your mind is YOU and your body is YOU and your spirit is YOU. They are each you but work together in a way to make one complete you. They have a specific relationship with each other in how they work. Your body can do nothing without your mind telling it to. Just like Jesus could do nothing without the Father. God being a Trinity is similar to this. To keep with the analogy the Father would be most like the Mind from which all other things flow. The Spirit is of course the Holy Spirit. The "body" in the analogy would be The Son and all physical manifestations of God. When people saw Jesus, they saw God in the same way that someone sees you when they see your body. But they do not see your mind or spirit that are also just as much of you as your body. Still, if they've seen you and how you ACT and SPEAK then they have seen your mind and spirit. This is what Jesus meant when He said to Philip that in seeing Him you have seen the Father. Now, while these three parts of God make one whole, the body, mind, and spirit analogy is not a perfect one because God is not made like we are. His three parts can also be seen as three distinct Persons. There is a definite relationship among the Three and how they interact to work together even though they are ONE in the same way your mind and body function as one but you are not two people. Your brain sends signals to the body and your body sends feedback to the brain. God the Father sends His thoughts and Words to the Son and the Son communed back with The Father through prayer.

I know....the Trinity is a deep and confusing subject. The Incarnation even more so. It's hard for me to grasp the concept of Jesus as both God and Man at the same time. It seems He put off His Godly powers in a way when He was clothed in flesh. He had to to be fully human in order to be a sacrifice for humans. He had to truly BE just like us to be our sacrifice and then our High Priest. Yet He didn't cease being God either. He did however operate differently I think. His human nature didn't have the Glory and Godly powers, but He always communed with The Father and was always in touch with the mind of God. He also had the Holy Spirit "without measure" so while in one sense He put off his Glorious form, in another He never stopped being able to know the mind of God and speak those words and to perform miracles at will through the Holy Spirit. He had to pray to the Father while He was a man because His thoughts and power came from that source as opposed to directly from Himself while He was here among us as a human.

I hope that made some sense...like I said it's so hard to explain thoughts on this really.

Verses that declare Jesus is God:
John 1:1
Col 1:15
Hebr. 1:3
John 10:30
Hebr. 1:8

jerrywlo · Jan 14, 2009

Thanks Shawn. You mention Trinity and reincarnation of Jesus. Could you, please, direct me where it is "writtend so"? I understand that no-one has been authorised to add or remove from the Word of God, not even ane dot. You have done just that without fear of consequences.

You say " Just like Jesus could do nothing without the Father". Did you hear about a powerless God before? The world teaching is that they are co-equal. Scripture seems to indicate that it was the Father who made Jesus to manifest His image (power and glory):

Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God...Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

The Father did His works by Jesus filing him with His Spirit:
Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
Joh 3:34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.

Yet after the resurection Jesus said:
Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Again you say:
"He had to to be fully human in order to be a sacrifice for humans. He had to truly BE just like us to be our sacrifice and then our High Priest. Yet He didn't cease being God either".

Another way imortal God died!!!!

Was Jesus reincarnated? Is he co-eternal with the Father, as the world's teaching goes, or was he created by the Father as all other things?
Joh 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

Joh 1:1 opens with the beautifull mesage that the Word (Dabar) spoken by God was fulfilled. God sent a man and gave him the Word of reconciliation:
2Co 5:18 And all things are of God, who (the Father) hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Act 10:36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord [not God] of all

Your explanation, although beautiful, doesn't seem to be based on the scriptual Truth at all.
My way of thinking seems to explain misteries and pozes nor difficulties in understanding the works of God and His Diety.

Shawn · Jan 14, 2009

Hey Jerry, I mentioned the Trinity which is just a word assigned to describe something that the vast majority of Christians believe the Bible does describe. I never said REINCARNATION at all, that's not a Christian concept. I said INCARNATION which simply is the belief that Jesus was an uncreated 2nd Person of a Triune God that when He became flesh was then both God and Man.

I did not add anything to God's Word my friend. I simply gave my opinion on how it should be interpreted and my opinion is in-line with the majority of Christians with their concept of the Deity of Christ and the Trinity. Although I may not have articulated it that well and note that I was careful to say this:

This is just discussion, not me claiming expertise and speaking in absolutes. I used an analogy to try to describe something and those are never perfect.

I don't believe I said anything at all that wasn't based on scripture. There are numerous passages that proclaim the Deity of Jesus and some that make His human nature clear as well. It's explained why He had to be both God and Man to be a sacrifice and atone for our sins. Now you may disagree about how I and most Christians interpret and understand these things, but that's not the same as us just being unbiblical altogether. We're not basing those concepts on nothing, but on scriptures. If we are wrong it is because of bad interpretation and misunderstanding. But, I don't believe we are.

I'd like to pick this conversation up again tomorrow if you want to continue in a friendly debate/discussion about it. Maybe we should make a separate thread for it though? I don't want to totally hijack this one and get it off topic. For now I'm way past my bedtime and need to be up in just 5 hours for work. So good night and God Bless!

jerrywlo · Jan 14, 2009

Sorry Shawn. I didn't mean to offend anyony. The term Trinity is not biblical. The fact that it has been used by majority of Christians serves not as proove. We need to remember that majority of Jews crucified Jesus. Bible speaks of remnant. Just consider Luk 18:8...when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth? Almoust halve of the wold's population today declare to be Christians. Is then Jesus wrong to say that he will have problem to find faith? Or perhaps we are wrong by fooling ourselves by following pagan beliefs? Trinity was always a pagan belief and was forced upon Christians in 325 AD.

I am new here and a technological "fosil" as well. Would you open a new topick for me, please? Perhaps "Trinity, true or false" and another one "The mystery of Satan".

May peace of God be with you all.

jerrywlo · Jan 14, 2009

I have quoted Joh 5:26 which states that Jesus was created. Could you please guide me to the scripture where I could find that Jesus was not created? I think this again isn't biblical.

MahogonySnail · Jan 17, 2009

re: lack of faith - actually, if we read the accounts of Christ healing people, faith , is the thing Christ points to time and time again as to the main reason for their healing or the reason for not being healed. It's possible, that a person pray for healing, yet not be healed because in the heart there is really doubt.

Are the gifts around today? Of course. As long as the Holy Spirit indwells believers (He is THE Gift), then the various gifts and functions which come by the Spirit are still active. To say that gifts have ceased, implies that the Holy Spirit has ceased or left and this grieves or quenches the Spirit, something which the bible tells us not to do. Whats the main purpose of gifts? Edifying the church. Does the church need to be edified today? Of course. We can only say the spiritual gifts are not needed, if we have the perfect church or never need edifying. And the scripture and gifts are not mutually exclusive, both are needed, one does not replace the other.

MahogonySnail · Jan 17, 2009

Re: Tongues -

There's really two purposes of tongues, public and private use. It's the same gift but depending upon the setting has different purposes. In public it's a sign for unbelievers. As long as there are unbelievers in the world today tongues is still present.

1Co 14:22 So that tongues are not a sign to those who believe, but to those who do not believe. But prophesying is not to those who do not believe, but to those who believe.

Tongues is not really for preaching or evangelism in public, although it can be used for that as God wills. It's more the exception than the rule. At my old church a man prayed in tongues for a lady and to her it was heard in her native language. So it happens as God wills. And dDespite Paul having the gift of tongues, there's no indication that he used tongues to preach to people either within the church or outside of the church - he spoke in the language others could understand.

The purpose of tongues is also a private spiritual communication with God and our spirit:

1Co 14:2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. For no one hears, but in spirit he speaks mysteries.

Not very useful in church setting without interpretation, but good for personal edification. Paul did not forbid the private use of tongues:

1Co 14:5 I wish all of you to speak in languages......

1Co 14:39 So then, brothers, seek to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in languages.

Paul often prayed in tongues privately, yet in church he spoke in language others could understand:

1Co 14:18 I thank my God that I speak more languages than all of you;
1Co 14:19 yet in a church I desire to speak five words with my mind, so that I might also teach others, than ten thousand words in a tongue.

SonOfAdam · Jan 17, 2009

Can't see anything in scripture about people praying in tongues.....
The only verse that people use to support that is the one about the Spirit praying for us when we have no words to express our feelings. It's not a language in that case but rather the Spirit communicating what we feel inside and cannot express apart from groanings, to God directly.

MahogonySnail · Jan 17, 2009

You could be right SonOfAdam re: the verse about groanings, but these verses show praying in tongues :

1Co 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.

1Co 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the mind; I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the mind.

So from these verses "praying with the spirit" is what praying in tongues is.

1Co 14:28 But if there is no interpreter, let him be silent in a church; and let him speak to himself and to God.

"let him speak to himself and to God".. that's prayer, spiritual communication between us and God :

1Co 14:2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. For no one hears, but in spirit he speaks mysteries.

So there are different kinds of tongues, for different purposes and occasions, and not recognising these differences is a source of confusion/argument.
eg. in the book of Acts at pentecost, they spoke in tongues, and it did not require gift of interpretation. Also, in Acts people filled with the Spirit often spoke in tongues and this was one indicator by which the apostles knew people had received the Spirit (Acts 10:44-47). And this still happens today when people receive the gift of the Spirit they may speak in tongues...so unless receiving the Spirit has ceased, and God has withdrawn His gift of the Spirit, tongues have not ceased either.

But the tongues Paul is speaking about in the church setting in 1 Cor requires interpretation for it to be of value for the church. Yet no one was calling for an interpreter at pentecost in Acts 2.
So it makes no sense to apply Paul's words in 1 Cor. about tongues in church requiring interpretation to the situation of tongues in public in Acts 2, if they are speaking about two different things. So I think they are similar but two different things, public vs private tongues. Some things I've read about tongues, in order to try to explain it better, contrast "tongues" (often observed accompanying the infilling of the Spirit) with the "gift of tongues" (a gift given as God wills, with interpretation to be used for edifying the church). Recognising these differences could help clear up a lot of the confusion in the church today over tongues and its proper usage.

SonOfAdam · Jan 17, 2009

1Co 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit...
Not necessarily tongues in that verse. Praying with the Spirit is praying with God's guidance. Not tongues. If he meant praying in tongues, he'd have written that. The apostle is not in the habbit of improperly expressing himself

Besides which, the Apostle speaks here of himself personally. I have no problem believing that He had the gift. Scripture says it. But I do have problems believing the modern use of them is Biblical considering that my belief is that Scripture in chapter 13 (a prophecy that was fulfilled after 14) states it shall/did cease.

It was not receiving the Spirit that caused the tongues but the purpose of God in those specific cases to cause them to identify themselves as saved by the use of tongues as divine evidence and to demonstrate the authenticity to those around them. For example, the Gentiles speaking with tongues had the purpose of confirming God's grace had been extended to them also, which many apostles found difficult to digest at the time. But because of God's authenticity they accepted it.

And this still happens today when people receive the gift of the Spirit they may speak in tongues...
No offence intended, but so claim some Buddhists and Roman Catholics. That doesn't mean they are Christians at all. It just means they believe they speak in tongues. There is no proof that it is of God in those circumstances and my knowledge of 'Christian' tongue usetoday leads me to put them in the same category. Most actually go through tongue schooling in the church before they can do it "properly".
As an aside, I have seen an example of a person claiming to speak in tongues and the interpreter saying he was praising God... only to have a visiting missionary walk out of the service shaking and shocked because he did happen to speak the language and recognised the man was cursing God. All the while the interpreter said he was praising God. There are many examples of demonic use of it just like that. Google it. If Satan can posess a girl wth a demon and use her to tell the future (as in the New Testament), then I see no reason he can't misuse tongues too.

But the tongues Paul is speaking about in the church setting in 1 Cor requires interpretation for it to be of value for the church. Yet no one was calling for an interpreter at pentecost in Acts 2.
Just because they had the gift didn't mean they couldn't abuse it. The book of Corinthians is all about rebuking and correcting those with the gift who were doing exactly that. Sinning with their gift of tongues. In the case of Acts 2 the hearers already spoke the languages the Apostles were preaching in.

If you want to use the restricted due to abuse form of tongues in your Church as evidence of salvation then that is up to you. But to my understanding the gift in Corinthians was nothing more than the authentic gift as used in Acts 2 (to people who already understood and so required no interpretation) but that was being deliberately abused by those who had been blessed with it. Christians sin too and do abuse what they have been blessed with.

So I think they are similar but two different things...
They are similar. They are in fact identical. One used properly, and the other abused to the point of requiring correction and restrictions imposed by an apostle.

olivetree32 · Jan 18, 2009

may God's holy spirit touch your hearts and lives of those who don't belive and continue to lead us into all truth amen.

MahogonySnail · Jan 18, 2009

1Co 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit...
Not necessarily tongues in that verse. Praying with the Spirit is praying with God's guidance. Not tongues. If he meant praying in tongues, he'd have written that. The apostle is not in the habbit of improperly expressing himself

Please read the previous verse... where it says that if he prays in an unknown tongue his spirit prays , and note it is lower case s for spirit , i.e. the apostle's spirit "my spirit" , not capital S referring to the Holy Spirit as you claim.

1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth,

Besides which, the Apostle speaks here of himself personally. I have no problem believing that He had the gift. Scripture says it. But I do have problems believing the modern use of them is Biblical considering that my belief is that Scripture in chapter 13 (a prophecy that was fulfilled after 14) states it shall/did cease.

The spiritual gifts are "gifts of the Spirit", and unless the Spirit has ceased, none of the individual spiritual giftings can cease either. Unless the purpose of the Spirit as the comforter to the church has finished, then the spiritual gifts are still very much needed and active. Scripture does not explicitly state that tongues had ceased or when it has ceased. Chapter 13 says they will cease, but not until that which is perfect has come. That which is perfect has not come yet because the church is still in an imperfect state, and we do not have perfect knowledge. It also mentions knowing in part (verse 9). Obviously, since we don't have perfect knowledge yet and still know in part, the perfect has not come. In short, based on 1 Cor 13, to say that tongues have ceased is also to claim that we are in a state of perfection where all prophecies have been fulfilled and perfect knowledge exists.

Going by the purpose of prophecy and tongues, if these have ceased, and that which is perfet has come, then the church has no need for being "built up", no need for exhortation, and no need for comfort:
1Co 14:3 But he who prophesies speaks to men for building up, and exhortation, and comfort.
But since the church still needs building up and exhorting and comforting, common sense tells me that the gifts including prophesy and tongues have not ceased.

It was not receiving the Spirit that caused the tongues but the purpose of God in those specific cases to cause them to identify themselves as saved by the use of tongues as divine evidence and to demonstrate the authenticity to those around them. For example, the Gentiles speaking with tongues had the purpose of confirming God's grace had been extended to them also, which many apostles found difficult to digest at the time. But because of God's authenticity they accepted it.

Yet we have a general statement by Christ referring to believers in general speaking with new tongues, that makes no such distinctions about the purpose of God in specific cases:
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Is casting out devils only for a limited number of believers to show God's purpose? or has casting out devils ceased? No, it still happens today. So speaking in tongues is still around today too. Has healing ceased too? (Mar 16:18), no it's still around. Has proclaiming the gospel to all creation, baptism, salvation ceased too? (Mar 16:15), no it's still around.

And this still happens today when people receive the gift of the Spirit they may speak in tongues...
No offence intended, but so claim some Buddhists and Roman Catholics. That doesn't mean they are Christians at all. It just means they believe they speak in tongues. There is no proof that it is of God in those circumstances and my knowledge of 'Christian' tongue usetoday leads me to put them in the same category. Most actually go through tongue schooling in the church before they can do it "properly".

Of course tongues is not something confined to christianity, just as casting out demons/exorcism is not either. But Paul gave this test to tell the difference between believer and non-believer:

1Co 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

Remember the magicians of the Egyptian Pharoah could turn their rods into snakes, but so did Moses and Aaron. But that doesn't mean Moses and Aaron were evil magicians or not God's servants. The point is, giving examples of the same or similar practice in other religions etc does not disprove its existance in christianity today.

As an aside, I have seen an example of a person claiming to speak in tongues and the interpreter saying he was praising God... only to have a visiting missionary walk out of the service shaking and shocked because he did happen to speak the language and recognised the man was cursing God. All the while the interpreter said he was praising God. There are many examples of demonic use of it just like that. Google it. If Satan can posess a girl wth a demon and use her to tell the future (as in the New Testament), then I see no reason he can't misuse tongues too.

Just because there is demonic tongues does not disprove its existance in christianity.
If anything, these examples of false tongues, only proves that the real tongues exists. I've heard demonic tongues myself, so I know they exist. In that case the person was clearly demon possessed. But I also know many christians who fulfill 1 Co 12:3 and also speak in tongues after being filled with the Spirit. Even just one of these many christians proves that tongues has not ceased.

NazariteNation · Jan 20, 2009

SonOfAdam said:

1Co 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit...
Not necessarily tongues in that verse. Praying with the Spirit is praying with God's guidance. Not tongues. If he meant praying in tongues, he'd have written that. The apostle is not in the habbit of improperly expressing himself

Besides which, the Apostle speaks here of himself personally. I have no problem believing that He had the gift. Scripture says it. But I do have problems believing the modern use of them is Biblical considering that my belief is that Scripture in chapter 13 (a prophecy that was fulfilled after 14) states it shall/did cease.

It was not receiving the Spirit that caused the tongues but the purpose of God in those specific cases to cause them to identify themselves as saved by the use of tongues as divine evidence and to demonstrate the authenticity to those around them. For example, the Gentiles speaking with tongues had the purpose of confirming God's grace had been extended to them also, which many apostles found difficult to digest at the time. But because of God's authenticity they accepted it.

And this still happens today when people receive the gift of the Spirit they may speak in tongues...
No offence intended, but so claim some Buddhists and Roman Catholics. That doesn't mean they are Christians at all. It just means they believe they speak in tongues. There is no proof that it is of God in those circumstances and my knowledge of 'Christian' tongue usetoday leads me to put them in the same category. Most actually go through tongue schooling in the church before they can do it "properly".
As an aside, I have seen an example of a person claiming to speak in tongues and the interpreter saying he was praising God... only to have a visiting missionary walk out of the service shaking and shocked because he did happen to speak the language and recognised the man was cursing God. All the while the interpreter said he was praising God. There are many examples of demonic use of it just like that. Google it. If Satan can posess a girl wth a demon and use her to tell the future (as in the New Testament), then I see no reason he can't misuse tongues too.

But the tongues Paul is speaking about in the church setting in 1 Cor requires interpretation for it to be of value for the church. Yet no one was calling for an interpreter at pentecost in Acts 2.
Just because they had the gift didn't mean they couldn't abuse it. The book of Corinthians is all about rebuking and correcting those with the gift who were doing exactly that. Sinning with their gift of tongues. In the case of Acts 2 the hearers already spoke the languages the Apostles were preaching in.

If you want to use the restricted due to abuse form of tongues in your Church as evidence of salvation then that is up to you. But to my understanding the gift in Corinthians was nothing more than the authentic gift as used in Acts 2 (to people who already understood and so required no interpretation) but that was being deliberately abused by those who had been blessed with it. Christians sin too and do abuse what they have been blessed with.

So I think they are similar but two different things...
They are similar. They are in fact identical. One used properly, and the other abused to the point of requiring correction and restrictions imposed by an apostle.

The Word says it better than I can...

And He said to them,

don't you hate it when the forum won't accept scripture that has been pasted *lol*

NazariteNation · Jan 20, 2009

NazariteNation said:

Sorry about that. Often times I will use bible gateway to pull up scripture so that I do not have to type it all out for myself however, for some reason or another, there are times when it will not take. Let's try it again.

Anyways, the Word says it best:

And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will willow those who believe: In my name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover. (Mark 16:15-18)

"I give thanks to my God always for you because of the grace of God that was given you in Christ Jesus, that in every way you were enriched in him in all speech and all knowledge even as the testimony about Christ was confirmed among you so that you are not lacking in any spiritual gift, as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Cor.1:4-8)

"So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But all things should be done decently and in order." (1 Cor.14:39)

"Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil." (1 Thess. 5:19-22)

"Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. FOR NOW we know in part and we prophesy in part, BUT WHEN the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. FOR NOW we see in a mirror dimly, BUT THEN face to face. NOW I know in part; THEN I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known." (1 Corinthians 13:8-12)

It should be noted that "Perfection" does not come until Christ returns to set up His Mellenial Kingdom. The ideology of the church somehow having being "perfected" actually began with the Catholics (part of the reasoning behind the Crusades & Inquisition) and still held on to by various cults such as the Mormons and Jehova's Witnesses. Think about it, if they church in it's current form is perfect, then why do we have so much division?

NazariteNation · Jan 20, 2009

MahogonySnail said:

Absolutely. There must be an original before there can be a counterfeit. Think about it. God is the Creator, scripture tells us that there is no other God besides Him. Satan can do nothing more than confuse, pervert, lie, & manipulate.

Growing up as a Continuationist (aka "spirit filled"), I have seen plenty of things that that were questionable. I have also seen plenty of things that were nothing short of miraculous. That is why it is very important to ask for the gift of Discernment, which primarily is the ability through the Holy Spirit to identify the authentic from the counterfeit.

pinky · Jan 23, 2009

Dear friends, speaking in tongues, yes, I do this, when I received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is when it started, for me, its a personal prayer between myself and the Lord....yes, I agree that in church if someone speaks in tongues aloud for the whole church, there must be an interpator there, so that everyone can be edified,1 Corinthians 14:1, " Go after a life of love as if your life depended on it, because it does, Give yourselves to the gifts God has given you. most of all try to proclaim His truth.If you praise Him in the private language of tongues, God understands you but no one else does, for you are sharing intimacies just between you and Him, ...."it goes on threw out that chapter, I do not believe that gift went away after the dicsiples died, that was a gift given to the believers, why would God take a gift back? its no different than the rest of the gifts, take care friends

Gifts

Shawn

Guest

oneholyfire

Guest

Senior Member

Banned

Shawn

Guest

Banned

Shawn

Guest

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

NazariteNation

Guest

NazariteNation

Guest

NazariteNation

Guest

pinky

Guest