Do people actually speak in Tongues (for real) anymore?

[Joshua_Generation]

why is it that only people believes in tongues are the only experts.. seems like it goes both ways.

I do not disagree, but I think it is interesting that those that do not believe seem to be experts in something they do not believe is for today, kind of like Atheists do about God and evolutionists do with creationists.

In other words if you do not believe in tongues why are you trying so hard to convince those that do?

Be Acts 5 brother.

 

[phil112]

The word perfect = complete.......so when that which is complete is come...that which is in part shall be done away with......so how do we take that?

Y'know, Dcon, we're so close on so many things. You have a lot going on my friend.

To expound on your post........ "But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away"....who here will deny that the written word of God is perfect? Who here can deny that the written word of God transcends the need for tongues?

 

[phil112]

People, it isn't a show, it isn't about putting on a vaudeville act, it is about salvation. Tongues had it's place and it served it's purpose. The bible now continues that aim, which is simply to bring every man to salvation.

 

[Joshua_Generation]

No but the bible itself is.

so why do we need tongues? Is Gods word, which is complete. not enough? Don't you think if God thought we needed to know more, he would have continued to write his own book to the world?

So things in Bible are NOT complete, but the Bible is? How can that be that is perfect be given if noth everyhting is perfect or complete yet?

 

[MarcR]

Okay, since you quote scripture to validate babbling, tell me this: How many devils have you cast out? How many sick people have you healed? For you to believe tongues are for public display, you must also believe the rest of those scriptures applies to you. Do you also pick up rattlers? Some people do, and the bible here says, if you interpret it as you do, that you too, must do so.

i totally agree brother Phil.......wonder if those who support babbling as such have ever come to learn that Mark 16 ended at verse 8 and later some translators added verses 9-20.......

"Although the vast majority of later Greek manuscripts contain Mark 16:9-20, the Gospel of Mark ends at verse 8 in two of the oldest and most respected manuscripts, the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. As the oldest manuscripts are known to be the most accurate because there were fewer generations of copies from the original autographs (i.e., they are much closer in time to the originals), and the oldest manuscripts do not contain vv. 9-20, we can conclude that these verses were added later by scribes. The King James Version of the Bible, as well as the New King James, contains vv. 9-20 because the King James used medieval manuscripts as the basis of its translation. Since 1611, however, older and more accurate manuscripts have been discovered and they affirm that vv. 9-20 were not in the original Gospel of Mark."

Should Mark 16:9-20 be in the Bible?

Complete and utter rubbish, I recommend you go and do a bit of research on the matter and speak as one who is "informed" and not one who speaks out of "ignorance"!

Here is my understanding (for what it's worth):

1) It is NOT MY ROLE to tell the Holy Spirit what gifts He can give or operate through.

2) I had an experience (posted above) which I believe may have been Biblical tongues.

3) If 'unknown tongues' are a gift of the Spirit; they should not need to be encouraged or taught.

4) The 'older' texts which omit Mk 16:9-20 come from Alexandria where allegorical interpretation was practiced. The manuscripts of the Coptic, Byzantine, and Syriac churches; which contain these verses; are indeed more recent; but come from places where God's Word was taken literally and treated with respect. I prefer a more recent document from people who honored God's Word to an older one from people who 'messed with it'. The documents which include these verses come from geographically diverse regions; while those that omit them ALL come from Alexandria.

I do NOT practice unknown tongues or advocate their practice.

 

[dcontroversal]

Has everything in the Bible been perfect=complete yet?

The gifts were to substantiate the message and the messengers as being from God.......all I can go by is what the verse states in the bible....it clearly said that tongues shall cease......and is within the context of that which is complete doing away with that which is in part.....When someone can stand up and speak English and when non-English speaking Russian, Chinese, French, German, Spanish, Navajo, Polynesian, Aboriginal, Dutch, Hebrew, Greek, Japanese, Korean, Swahili speaking people can understand in their own language.......then and only then will we see what took place in the bible....not the rigmarole blabbering that takes place today in most Charismatic groups.......!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I do not disagree, but I think it is interesting that those that do not believe seem to be experts in something they do not believe is for today, kind of like Atheists do about God and evolutionists do with creationists.

In other words if you do not believe in tongues why are you trying so hard to convince those that do?

Be Acts 5 brother.

maybe because of what that belief does.

My aunt walked away from the church because of it. Many believe in less you speak in tongues your not saved.

More comes from the tongues side, which causes those who appose it to act that way.

 

[Joshua_Generation]

No but the bible itself is.

so why do we need tongues? Is Gods word, which is complete. not enough? Don't you think if God thought we needed to know more, he would have continued to write his own book to the world?

I never said we did, I just find people like you that are beating empty air over the issue to be a little over the top.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So things in Bible are NOT complete, but the Bible is? How can that be that is perfect be given if noth everyhting is perfect or complete yet?

Is the bible complete or not?

Things in the bible prophesies not being completed yet is not the question, or has no bearing.

the bearing is if God needs us to know something else. Why did he not continue to write the bible. ESPECIALLY since we are to use the bible to test words of men? If men say things which can not be confirmed in scripture. then we have no way to test them.

 

[Joshua_Generation]

maybe because of what that belief does.

My aunt walked away from the church because of it. Many believe in less you speak in tongues your not saved.

More comes from the tongues side, which causes those who appose it to act that way.

Well I am sorry for that, tongues has zero to do with salvation and shame on those that state that.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I never said we did, I just find people like you that are beating empty air over the issue to be a little over the top.

lol I just came in,, You just proved why people act the way they do. you say something, and we are the enemy, and you expect us to just sit here and act all stupid? I did nothing to cause you to attack me like you just did.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Well I am sorry for that, tongues has zero to do with salvation and shame on those that state that.

thank you for at least saying that..

 

[Joshua_Generation]

Is the bible complete or not?

Things in the bible prophesies not being completed yet is not the question, or has no bearing.

the bearing is if God needs us to know something else. Why did he not continue to write the bible. ESPECIALLY since we are to use the bible to test words of men? If men say things which can not be confirmed in scripture. then we have no way to test them.

Stop trying to earn another green hash mark bro. We disagree that the perfect in 1 Cor 13 is the Bible, I believe the perfect in 1 Cor 13 is Jesus Christ. That said, I do believe the Bible is my complete=perfect authority in all matters pertaining to life and godliness.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Here is my understanding (for what it's worth):

1) It is NOT MY ROLE to tell the Holy Spirit what gifts He can give or operate through.

2) I had an experience (posted above) which I believe may have been Biblical tongues.

3) If 'unknown tongues' are a gift of the Spirit; they should not need to be encouraged or taught.

4) The 'older' texts which omit Mk 16:9-20 come from Alexandria where allegorical interpretation was practiced. The manuscripts of the Coptic, Byzantine, and Syriac churches; which contain these verses; are indeed more recent; but come from places where God's Word was taken literally and treated with respect. I prefer a more recent document from people who honored God's Word to an older one from people who 'messed with it'. The documents which include these verses come from geographically diverse regions; while those that omit them ALL come from Alexandria.

I do NOT practice unknown tongues or advocate their practice.

amen, I am like you. If God needs to use the gift of tongues to speak to someone, He will do it, whether I believe it or not.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Stop trying to earn another green hash mark bro. We disagree that the perfect in 1 Cor 13 is the Bible, I believe the perfect in 1 Cor 13 is Jesus Christ. That said, I do believe the Bible is my complete=perfect authority in all matters pertaining to life and godliness.

Well jesus already came. so that does not make sense.

And jesus was perfect when he came, so that still does not make sense.

I am just stating why I question the use of tongues, no need to get nasty

 

[Joshua_Generation]

thank you for at least saying that..

why wouldn't I? I have been to a lot churhces that spew without tongues you are not saved nonsense and works based salvation and other self righteous foolishness.

I do beleive in the baptism of the Holy Spirit upon a believer and it gives us power to witness, just as Acts 1.8 states.

 

[peacefulbeliever]

Or it could be that "those who don't understand speaking in tongues" has heard nothing but babbling from people that have no clue what being saved is and only want attention. They don't know what scripture is when addressing tongues and don't know that if an interpreter isn't present they should be silent. Why? Because they are babbling. I have seen this garbage for years and I have yet to see it done in a scriptural manner. What does that say about it? It isn't from God.

Well, it would sound like babbling unless you yourself knew the language being spoken. Me, myself, I KNOW no other language but English but the difference is I know that God gives the language to the person speaking. I, personally, do not know of anyone who speaks in tongues who are doing it for attention - so I can't speak to that.

Scripture says that the one speaking should interpret [1 Co. 14:5]. I agree -- if they pray to interpret but still feel they cannot then they should keep silent and speak to themselves in an assembly. [1 Co. 14:28]

I have seen it done decently and in order but I have also seen it abused and not done in a scriptural manner. It really dismays me because the abuse is what has ruined the things of the Spirit. WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT IT? Men are men, humans are humans and make mistakes in all areas of their understanding of scripture - not in just 1 Co. 12-14. However, if someone is speaking in tongues - MOST of the time it is of God even when men handle it inappropriately.

 

[Joshua_Generation]

Well jesus already came. so that does not make sense.

And jesus was perfect when he came, so that still does not make sense.

I am just stating why I question the use of tongues, no need to get nasty

Is Jesus coming back again?

 

[Willie-T]

People, it isn't a show, it isn't about putting on a vaudeville act, it is about salvation. Tongues had it's place and it served it's purpose. The bible now continues that aim, which is simply to bring every man to salvation.

Did "tongues" have anything to do with Cornelius and all his household believing?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Is Jesus coming back again?

So Jesus will not be perfect till he comes back again? I am confused.