The Original Pentecostal Movement
- Thread starter zone
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
When you have just cause for suspicions to test the tongues... yes. 1 John 4:1,5-6 gives room for such testings if they speak as the world speaks in supernatural tongues and hears as the world hears in supernatural tongues, which is babbling nonsense.
If someone says the person is speaking in tongues and names the language that he is speaking in tongues, and yet you have no one in that congregation that speaks it, it is best to get the actual person that can speak that language to confirm it, especially when everybody in that congregation is speaking the same language and yet there is no foreignor among them.
Some believers are even saying that they speak in tongues & God gives them the interpretations of those tongues as well, but scripture says the Spirit manifests the gifts severally as He wills. I believe that means no single person will be speaking in tongues and have the gift to interpret that same tongue because that would be too convenient and Paul signified the person speaking the tongue is one that does not know the tongue he is speaking.
Women are speaking in tongues and yet the Lord's commandments is for women to be silent in the churches. Is God a hypocrite? No. Then that is not Him manifesting tongues in women... all the while seemingly... interpretation is coming with it in that assembly.
There are grounds to test the tongues by man, especially when people like Joyce Meyers admits to interpreting a tongue by getting the feeling or impression of what the message is when God's gift of tongues is of other men's lips for God to speak unto the people. 1 Corinthians 14:20-21
If someone says the person is speaking in tongues and names the language that he is speaking in tongues, and yet you have no one in that congregation that speaks it, it is best to get the actual person that can speak that language to confirm it, especially when everybody in that congregation is speaking the same language and yet there is no foreignor among them.
Some believers are even saying that they speak in tongues & God gives them the interpretations of those tongues as well, but scripture says the Spirit manifests the gifts severally as He wills. I believe that means no single person will be speaking in tongues and have the gift to interpret that same tongue because that would be too convenient and Paul signified the person speaking the tongue is one that does not know the tongue he is speaking.
Women are speaking in tongues and yet the Lord's commandments is for women to be silent in the churches. Is God a hypocrite? No. Then that is not Him manifesting tongues in women... all the while seemingly... interpretation is coming with it in that assembly.
There are grounds to test the tongues by man, especially when people like Joyce Meyers admits to interpreting a tongue by getting the feeling or impression of what the message is when God's gift of tongues is of other men's lips for God to speak unto the people. 1 Corinthians 14:20-21
You are absolutely right about this. The ones who embrace the real gifts SHOULD be the ones calling out the falsehoods. Some do, I do on occasion, like when I said that I don't agree with the circus atmosphere that surrounds so many. This is not performance art and should not be made a spectacle of. Jesus never rolled around on the floor, Paul never flung wigs in the assembly. God doesn't like hoopla ... never intended it to be part of the plan. Even in the working of the gifts were are to be humble. That's human failings, that's deception by satan, designed to discredit the whole process (and that is obviously working). And that's why Paul told people who were out of line to put a leash on it. And you're absolutely right in that we 'continualists' should be doing the very same.
T
So I guess the fact that the church at Corinth included newly converted false prophetess prostitutes of the Temple of Artemis has nothing at all to with Paul stating women should be silent in the church. These women ran the services at the temple of Artemis and Apollo and were the only ones speaking and leading the pagan services and rituals.
If you study the rules for women at Corinth, that Paul imposed, you would find it very much in common with Judaic Synagogue rules. Paul did this because the newly converted Corinthian women were turning the church into pagan practices.
You will never, ever find Paul imposing this at any other church or in any other scripture. Likewise Paul never prohibited any other women from teaching and preaching the Gospel any where else. We forget about Lydia and her ministry in her house that she was the preacher of, Philips duaghters who were Prophetesses and trained by Agabus and then there is Priscilla teaching Apollos. Yet male dominated denominations love twisting this passage to suit their own insecurities.
Have any of you brothers ever stopped to think the reason why there are so many women preaching and teaching now is because men stopped being the Spiritual leaders in their homes and church and stopped going to church and let the wife take over as the Spiritual leader. Stop looking through the lens of your own denomination and
There is direct links between the advent of TV, Golf becoming more economical and a host of other things that prove men stopped going to church in the late 70's and the trend morphed into a serious issue in every major protestant denomination and even impacted the Lutherans and Catholics.
It was most damaging to the Organized and Independent Baptist denominations. Many IFB and Conference Baptist churches closed their doors through the 80's and 90's why? because of the silly doctrine that states women cannot preach and the fact not enough men were going seminary and not enough men teachers. It is the one dirty secret the Baptists like to keep covered up.
You guys twist words like Pastor and Bishop to keep your women in check. The funny thing is you all translate Bishop as shepherd or Pastor and it means overseer or administrator and the word Pastor only is used once in the whole NT and that is in Eph 4.11 and only 7 other times in the OT and all in the book of Jeremiah.
I think some of you that adhere to women should shut up in church are just afraid that a woman might proclaim and demonstrate the Gospel better than some of those guys that only preach against something and not for anything and spend more time preaching fear mongering about US politics than advancing the kingdom.
Yeah I will bash them, the Baptists are the best at this and love their women dressed in calico and gingham neck to ankle bone dresses, barefoot and preggo, walking behind you at all times and seen and not heard....Just like good ole boy chauvinists and felon drunks like CI Scofield told ya all to.
Come to full age already boys
If you study the rules for women at Corinth, that Paul imposed, you would find it very much in common with Judaic Synagogue rules. Paul did this because the newly converted Corinthian women were turning the church into pagan practices.
You will never, ever find Paul imposing this at any other church or in any other scripture. Likewise Paul never prohibited any other women from teaching and preaching the Gospel any where else. We forget about Lydia and her ministry in her house that she was the preacher of, Philips duaghters who were Prophetesses and trained by Agabus and then there is Priscilla teaching Apollos. Yet male dominated denominations love twisting this passage to suit their own insecurities.
Have any of you brothers ever stopped to think the reason why there are so many women preaching and teaching now is because men stopped being the Spiritual leaders in their homes and church and stopped going to church and let the wife take over as the Spiritual leader. Stop looking through the lens of your own denomination and
There is direct links between the advent of TV, Golf becoming more economical and a host of other things that prove men stopped going to church in the late 70's and the trend morphed into a serious issue in every major protestant denomination and even impacted the Lutherans and Catholics.
It was most damaging to the Organized and Independent Baptist denominations. Many IFB and Conference Baptist churches closed their doors through the 80's and 90's why? because of the silly doctrine that states women cannot preach and the fact not enough men were going seminary and not enough men teachers. It is the one dirty secret the Baptists like to keep covered up.
You guys twist words like Pastor and Bishop to keep your women in check. The funny thing is you all translate Bishop as shepherd or Pastor and it means overseer or administrator and the word Pastor only is used once in the whole NT and that is in Eph 4.11 and only 7 other times in the OT and all in the book of Jeremiah.
I think some of you that adhere to women should shut up in church are just afraid that a woman might proclaim and demonstrate the Gospel better than some of those guys that only preach against something and not for anything and spend more time preaching fear mongering about US politics than advancing the kingdom.
Yeah I will bash them, the Baptists are the best at this and love their women dressed in calico and gingham neck to ankle bone dresses, barefoot and preggo, walking behind you at all times and seen and not heard....Just like good ole boy chauvinists and felon drunks like CI Scofield told ya all to.
Come to full age already boys
Last edited:
No. That is not the reason why Paul was citing the Lord's commandment on the matter. Read elsewhere with His wisdom for discernment.
1 Timothy 2:[SUP]11[/SUP]Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. [SUP]12 [/SUP]But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. [SUP]13 [/SUP]For Adam was first formed, then Eve. [SUP]14 [/SUP]And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
That's the reason. Compare that with your reference again, because as informational as your extrabiblical citing is, it does not apply if you read that as a commandment from the Lord.
1 Corinthians 14:[SUP]34 [/SUP]Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. [SUP]35 [/SUP]And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. [SUP]36 [/SUP]What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? [SUP]37 [/SUP]If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
We see a prophesy of a church goes bad at Thyatira in Revelation. It seems to rest squarely on having a woman teach.
Revelation 2:20Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
I would say that if you look at Christ being the head of the church as the husband is to be the head of the wife, then you can see the amount of responsibility that a man has as a spiritual leader in the church as well as in the home in being submissive to Christ.
Ephesians 5:[SUP]21 [/SUP]Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. [SUP]22 [/SUP]Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. [SUP]23 [/SUP]For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. [SUP]24 [/SUP]Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. [SUP]25 [/SUP]Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; [SUP]26 [/SUP]That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, [SUP]27 [/SUP]That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. [SUP]28 [/SUP]So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. [SUP]29 [/SUP]For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: [SUP]30 [/SUP]For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. [SUP]31 [/SUP]For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. [SUP]32 [/SUP]This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. [SUP]33 [/SUP]Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
1 Timothy 2:[SUP]11[/SUP]Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. [SUP]12 [/SUP]But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. [SUP]13 [/SUP]For Adam was first formed, then Eve. [SUP]14 [/SUP]And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
That's the reason. Compare that with your reference again, because as informational as your extrabiblical citing is, it does not apply if you read that as a commandment from the Lord.
1 Corinthians 14:[SUP]34 [/SUP]Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. [SUP]35 [/SUP]And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. [SUP]36 [/SUP]What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? [SUP]37 [/SUP]If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
We see a prophesy of a church goes bad at Thyatira in Revelation. It seems to rest squarely on having a woman teach.
Revelation 2:20Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
I would say that if you look at Christ being the head of the church as the husband is to be the head of the wife, then you can see the amount of responsibility that a man has as a spiritual leader in the church as well as in the home in being submissive to Christ.
Ephesians 5:[SUP]21 [/SUP]Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. [SUP]22 [/SUP]Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. [SUP]23 [/SUP]For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. [SUP]24 [/SUP]Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. [SUP]25 [/SUP]Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; [SUP]26 [/SUP]That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, [SUP]27 [/SUP]That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. [SUP]28 [/SUP]So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. [SUP]29 [/SUP]For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: [SUP]30 [/SUP]For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. [SUP]31 [/SUP]For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. [SUP]32 [/SUP]This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. [SUP]33 [/SUP]Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
Ok. Here are some excerpts from the position paper I mentioned above by the Assemblies of God. It outlines the position of a leading Pentecostal denomination on the doctrine of many faith healers. The title of the paper is, The Believer and Positive Confession.
Positive and negative confession are expressions which in recent years have received acceptance in an extreme form in some circles. Both the definition in writing and the pattern of usage give some insight into the implications of these terms.
According to this view, as expressed in various publications, the believer who refrains from acknowledging the negative and continues to affirm the positive will assure for himself pleasant circumstances. He will be able to rule over poverty, disease, and sickness. He will be sick only if he confesses he is sick. Some make a distinction between acknowledging the symptoms of an illness and the illness itself.
This view advocates that God wants believers to wear the best clothing, drive the best cars, and have the best of everything. Believers need not suffer financial setbacks. All they need to do is to tell Satan to take his hands off their money. The believer can have whatever he says whether the need is spiritual, physical, or financial. It is taught that faith compels God's action.
When the positive confession teaching indicates that to admit weakness is to accept defeat, to admit financial need is to accept poverty, and to admit sickness is to preclude healing, it is going beyond and is contrary to the harmony of Scripture.
For instance, King Jehoshaphat admitted he had no might against an enemy alliance, but God gave him a marvelous victory (2 Chronicles 20). Paul admitted weakness and then stated that when he was weak, he was strong because God’s strength is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9,10). It was after the disciples recognized they did not have enough to feed the multitudes and admitted it that Christ marvelously provided a more than adequate supply (Luke 9:12, 13). It was after the disciples admitted they had caught no fish that Jesus directed them to a most successful endeavor (John 21:3-6).
When the positive confession doctrine indicates a person can have whatever he says, it fails to emphasize adequately that God’s will must be considered. David had the best intentions when he indicated his desire to build a temple for the Lord, but it was not God’s will (1 Chronicles 17:4). David was permitted to gather materials, but Solomon was to build the temple.
Getting what the believer wants is not as simple as repeating a positive confession. Pleasant things might be out of the will of God; and, conversely, unpleasant things might be in the will of God. It is important for the believer to say as Paul’s friends did, “The will of the Lord be done” (Acts 21:14) more important than to demand a life free from suffering.
When the positive confession view teaches that believers are to confess rather than to pray for things which God has promised, it overlooks the teaching of God’s Word concerning importunate prayer. According to some who hold this view of positive confession, God's promises are in the area of material, physical, and spiritual blessings; believers are to claim or confess these blessings and not to pray for them.
Jesus emphasized the importance of importunity in prayer. The illustration of the persistent friend who came at midnight asking for bread to set before his guests became the basis for Christ’s statement, “Ask, and it shall be given you” (Luke 11:5-10). The parable of the widow and the unjust judge became the occasion for our Lord to emphasize importunity in prayer (Luke 18:1-8). These people were commended for importunity and not for prayerless positive confession.
The positive confession teaching advocates reigning as kings in this life. It teaches that believers are to dominate and not be dominated by circumstances. Poverty and sickness are usually mentioned among the circumstances over which believers are to have dominion.
When believers choose the King of kings as their model, however, their desires will be completely different. They will be transformed by His teaching and example. They will recognize the truth of Romans 8:17 which is written concerning joint heirs with Christ: “If so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.” Paul even went so far as to glory in his infirmities instead of denying them (2 Corinthians12:5-10). Though Christ was rich, for our sakes He became poor (2 Corinthians 8:9). He could say, “The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head” (Matthew 8:20).
The positive confession emphasis has a tendency to include statements which make it appear that man is sovereign and God is the servant. Statements are made about compelling God to act, implying He has surrendered His sovereignty; that He is no longer in a position to act according to His wisdom and purpose. Reference is made to true prosperity being the ability to use God's ability and power to meet needs regardless of what the needs are. This puts man in the position of using God rather than man surrendering himself to be used of God.
In this view there is very little consideration given to communion with God in order to discover His will. There is very little appeal to search the Scriptures for the framework of the will of God. There is little emphasis on the kind of discussion with fellow believers which results in two or three agreeing what the will of God might be. Instead, the desire of the heart is viewed as a binding mandate on God. It is seen as constituting the authority of the believer.
It is true that Jesus said, “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son” (John 14:13). But Scripture also teaches that the asking must be in harmony with the will of God. “This is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask anything according to his will, he heareth us: and if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him” (1 John 5:14, 15).
The authority of the believer exists only in the will of God, and it is the believer’s responsibility to discover and conform to the will of the sovereign God even in the things he desires. Paul's words are still applicable: “Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is” (Ephesians 5:17).
A practical test of a belief is whether it has a universal application. Does the teaching have meaning only for those living in an affluent society? Or does it also work among the refugees of the world? What application does the teaching have for believers imprisoned for their faith by atheistic governments? Are those believers substandard who suffer martyrdom or grave physical injury at the hands of cruel, ruthless dictators?
Some Positions of the Positive Confession Teaching
Positive and negative confession are expressions which in recent years have received acceptance in an extreme form in some circles. Both the definition in writing and the pattern of usage give some insight into the implications of these terms.
According to this view, as expressed in various publications, the believer who refrains from acknowledging the negative and continues to affirm the positive will assure for himself pleasant circumstances. He will be able to rule over poverty, disease, and sickness. He will be sick only if he confesses he is sick. Some make a distinction between acknowledging the symptoms of an illness and the illness itself.
This view advocates that God wants believers to wear the best clothing, drive the best cars, and have the best of everything. Believers need not suffer financial setbacks. All they need to do is to tell Satan to take his hands off their money. The believer can have whatever he says whether the need is spiritual, physical, or financial. It is taught that faith compels God's action.
Believers Should Consider the Total Teaching of Scripture.
For instance, King Jehoshaphat admitted he had no might against an enemy alliance, but God gave him a marvelous victory (2 Chronicles 20). Paul admitted weakness and then stated that when he was weak, he was strong because God’s strength is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9,10). It was after the disciples recognized they did not have enough to feed the multitudes and admitted it that Christ marvelously provided a more than adequate supply (Luke 9:12, 13). It was after the disciples admitted they had caught no fish that Jesus directed them to a most successful endeavor (John 21:3-6).
Believers Should Consider Adequately the Will of God.
Getting what the believer wants is not as simple as repeating a positive confession. Pleasant things might be out of the will of God; and, conversely, unpleasant things might be in the will of God. It is important for the believer to say as Paul’s friends did, “The will of the Lord be done” (Acts 21:14) more important than to demand a life free from suffering.
Believers Should Recognize the Importance of Importunate Prayer.
Jesus emphasized the importance of importunity in prayer. The illustration of the persistent friend who came at midnight asking for bread to set before his guests became the basis for Christ’s statement, “Ask, and it shall be given you” (Luke 11:5-10). The parable of the widow and the unjust judge became the occasion for our Lord to emphasize importunity in prayer (Luke 18:1-8). These people were commended for importunity and not for prayerless positive confession.
Believers Should Recognize They Can Expect Suffering in This Life.
When believers choose the King of kings as their model, however, their desires will be completely different. They will be transformed by His teaching and example. They will recognize the truth of Romans 8:17 which is written concerning joint heirs with Christ: “If so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.” Paul even went so far as to glory in his infirmities instead of denying them (2 Corinthians12:5-10). Though Christ was rich, for our sakes He became poor (2 Corinthians 8:9). He could say, “The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head” (Matthew 8:20).
Believers Should Recognize the Sovereignty of God.
In this view there is very little consideration given to communion with God in order to discover His will. There is very little appeal to search the Scriptures for the framework of the will of God. There is little emphasis on the kind of discussion with fellow believers which results in two or three agreeing what the will of God might be. Instead, the desire of the heart is viewed as a binding mandate on God. It is seen as constituting the authority of the believer.
It is true that Jesus said, “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son” (John 14:13). But Scripture also teaches that the asking must be in harmony with the will of God. “This is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask anything according to his will, he heareth us: and if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him” (1 John 5:14, 15).
The authority of the believer exists only in the will of God, and it is the believer’s responsibility to discover and conform to the will of the sovereign God even in the things he desires. Paul's words are still applicable: “Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is” (Ephesians 5:17).
Believers Should Apply the Practical Test.
A practical test of a belief is whether it has a universal application. Does the teaching have meaning only for those living in an affluent society? Or does it also work among the refugees of the world? What application does the teaching have for believers imprisoned for their faith by atheistic governments? Are those believers substandard who suffer martyrdom or grave physical injury at the hands of cruel, ruthless dictators?
Yeah, I don’t think the definition is that simple. Glōssa (tongue) is used to describe language (Acts 2:11; Rev. 5:9; 7:9), but language isn’t the primary use of the word. Glōssa is translated “tongue” because the word is used to describe the organ of speech. For example when the rich man asked Abraham to send Lazarus to place a little water on his glōssa (Luke 16:24), he wasn’t making a request to have his language cooled off!
Scholarly Greek dictionaries (Bauer, TDNT and also see New Bible Dictionary and Baker’s dictionary of Theology) list three definitions of glōssa. Two are listed above, i. e., organ of speech and language. The third definition places the word in a category by itself and that is Glossolalia. Based on the larger context of contemporary religions in Paul’s time, many scholars/historians view the third definition of glōssa as unlearned languages, non-languages, mysterious utterances and/or heavenly languages. (As far as I can tell these scholars don’t have a dog in the hunt. They’re not Pentecostals).
It seems as though the use of the word “tongues” is neither due to a religious meaning nor from old translations, rather the use is due to careful consideration of how the language is used in its historical context.
T
1 Timothy 2.11--dern, I forgot about that one, good catch.
1 cor 14 is what I was talking about and it would do you really well to study the church at corinth, God did not call you to swallow what every Baptists preacher tells you, he calls you to study to show yourself approved.
You do understand Rev 2.20 is dealing with stopping the word of God and the truth of the word not woman teachers/preachers right? this is backed up again by Jesus in the parable of the woman and 3 measures of leaven in the loaf. Jezebel doe snot represent the average woman, unless you believe every woman to be a Jezebel. Jezebl is symbolic to stopping the proclaimed word of God...she was immoral, she was a witch, but her main assignment was prophet killer, thereby stopping the word of God.
Eph 5 has nothing to do with church organization it deal with the sanctity of marriage.
Let the flaming arrows come, but we disagree as to the Biblical interpretation on women serving in the church in the capacity of something other than teacher and singing a nice Sunday morning song.
There are women I know that are anoitned and preach the snot out of the word and are not in violation of the commands of the Lord and they even do it in modest blue jeans<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<GASP!
T
Let me offer this and only this, has it occurred to any of you which debate tongues/language that 2 things happened in Acts 2?
Acts 2.4 says the spoke in new tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. This seems to indicate they were still in the upper room and not yet out of the upper room. That is something I see people miss all the time. Acts 2.1-4 is one event and Acts 5 picks up another event.
For the below I use Blue Letter Bible, which has an online Strong's Concordance.
The original Greek word for utterance is apophtheggomai and it is the ONLY time it is used in the Bible and only used in Acts 2.4, there are 3 other times utterance is used in the whole Bible and only in the NT and that word is
The word apophtheggomai means:
Not a word of everyday speech but one "belonging to dignified and elevated discourse"
Many of you are attempting to translate the wrong word. The passage in the original Greek uses the word utterance and that is very important, because without the word utterance you lose something very important.
Acts 2.5-12 shows us supernatural manifestation of known languages because each man heard in his own language the wonderful works of God.
A statement it seems everyone misses is Acts 2.13 Peter and the other 11 are accused of being drunk. Now if every man heard the wonderful works of God in his own language why would they then suggest that many were drunk?
Let us also not forget that were another 109 people, including Mary, the Mother of Jesus, under the power of the Holy ghost, still speaking in other tongues as the Spirit continued to give them utterance.
In Acts 2.15-14 Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
If we believe that only the miracle of hearing the the wonderful works of God in his own language happened and we intellectualize that some men said they were drunk, because they could not understand them, then you are calling the Bible a lie.
If each man could understand the wonderful works of God in his own language and those same men then saw others that acted and sounded drunk, something else happened. If you attempt to justify it any other way, you imply the Bible contradicts itself and the word never contradicts itself.
I have been on the mission field and witnessed people, that had no knowledge of the language of the country we were in speak in the native language for a day or two as they were leading others to Christ and praying for people,then never do it again. When we got back to the States they never could do it again.
Ironically the only ones I witnessed doing that were the ones that beleive and pray in their own heavenly language that one you all call gibberish and cannot wrap your fleshly minds around.
2 Things happened in Acts 2.1-15 and not only one and most denominations teach only one thing happened and therfore err greatly, because they attmept to reconcile it with contradiction.
Let the arrows continue
Acts 2.4 says the spoke in new tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. This seems to indicate they were still in the upper room and not yet out of the upper room. That is something I see people miss all the time. Acts 2.1-4 is one event and Acts 5 picks up another event.
For the below I use Blue Letter Bible, which has an online Strong's Concordance.
The original Greek word for utterance is apophtheggomai and it is the ONLY time it is used in the Bible and only used in Acts 2.4, there are 3 other times utterance is used in the whole Bible and only in the NT and that word is
The word apophtheggomai means:
Not a word of everyday speech but one "belonging to dignified and elevated discourse"
Many of you are attempting to translate the wrong word. The passage in the original Greek uses the word utterance and that is very important, because without the word utterance you lose something very important.
Acts 2.5-12 shows us supernatural manifestation of known languages because each man heard in his own language the wonderful works of God.
A statement it seems everyone misses is Acts 2.13 Peter and the other 11 are accused of being drunk. Now if every man heard the wonderful works of God in his own language why would they then suggest that many were drunk?
Let us also not forget that were another 109 people, including Mary, the Mother of Jesus, under the power of the Holy ghost, still speaking in other tongues as the Spirit continued to give them utterance.
In Acts 2.15-14 Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
If we believe that only the miracle of hearing the the wonderful works of God in his own language happened and we intellectualize that some men said they were drunk, because they could not understand them, then you are calling the Bible a lie.
If each man could understand the wonderful works of God in his own language and those same men then saw others that acted and sounded drunk, something else happened. If you attempt to justify it any other way, you imply the Bible contradicts itself and the word never contradicts itself.
I have been on the mission field and witnessed people, that had no knowledge of the language of the country we were in speak in the native language for a day or two as they were leading others to Christ and praying for people,then never do it again. When we got back to the States they never could do it again.
Ironically the only ones I witnessed doing that were the ones that beleive and pray in their own heavenly language that one you all call gibberish and cannot wrap your fleshly minds around.
2 Things happened in Acts 2.1-15 and not only one and most denominations teach only one thing happened and therfore err greatly, because they attmept to reconcile it with contradiction.
Let the arrows continue
Acts 5:6 connects what was happening in verses 1-4.
[SUP]6[/SUP]Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
The verses did not say they went outside for these other people to hear this: it said this noice.. that same noise of tongues in that room... went abroad. So God was mainfesting tongues in that room to be heard abroad.
Because "some" did not understand what everyone were saying and so they assumed they were drunk.
DO NOT attribute this drunkness as belonging to God because the American Indians danced & chant for the Great Spirit to come & fall on them wherein they related the effects of drinking alcohol with when they were introduced to "firewater".
Do NOT attribute supernatuarl tongues that comes with no interpretation as being of God when the occults had it before God's gift came which was of other men's lips to speak unto the people.
SINCE we are not to believe every spirit but test them & prove all things and thereby abstaining from all appearance of evil, then God will not be copycatting Satan so that He can draw sinners away from their spirits and their tongues to a personal reconciled relationship with God the Father through the Son which is why all invitations given points to the Son: and NONE to the Holy Spirit.
You are assuming that Mary, the mother of Jesus and any other women were still there in that upper room. Note the beginning of that chapter as it mentioned the beginning of another day which was Pentecost.
So note how in Acts 1 when the men had their thing as seperate from the women.
Acts 1:[SUP]15 [/SUP]And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,) [SUP]16 [/SUP]Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
Not "Men & ladies".
You are just reading it wrong. You separated verses 1-4 and did not see how verse 6 connects the noise in that room as they were being heard of speaking in their language.
If a member of your congegation spoke in a language that a foriegnor understood in his native tongue but some other visitor did not understand it, he would scoff and say that he was drunk too. Not that hard to fathom.
I find that circumspect.
Consider this: how can God call sinners away from their spirits and their supernatural tongues if they are going to be experiencing the same thing in christianity? How can they say to those that knew them as sinners in the occult BELIEVE that they have repented and are born again if there is no change in their tongues nor their focus on the "spirit"? It would be a poor witness.
I find it hard to believe that God would manifest His actual gift of tongues to speak unto the people and then permit His servants to give credence to that which is not of Him.. and yes, I can honestly say that it is NOT. I find that report dubious at best, especially when you are giving a general overview lacking great details.
Did God manifest tongues in believers to speak unto the people in the mission field and then stopped when they were believing that spirit that came over them with babbling nonsense to serve as a prayer language which is why they never could do it again?
I believe the Lord has led me to give you lines of discernment so that you do not believe every spirit as being of God, because He told us to test them... and believers are just going with the flow with whatever comes over them and the strange thing is... they can invoke it again by calling on the Holy Spirit.....which is not the will of the Father to do in approaching Him by because Jesus, the Son of God, is the only way to the Father. WHY? BECAUSE there are seducing spirits in the world and the Son is Whom the real indwelling Holy Spirit is still pointing to: the Bridegroom.
But it seems the meaning of that title is lost as well as Jesus being the only Mediator between God & man that believers broaden the way in approaching God the Father as if they can do so by way of the Holy Spirit... and they cannot in according to His word and the commandment of His invitation in John 14:6 from which the purpose of prayer is known in John 14:13-14. Cited below.
John 14:[SUP]6 [/SUP]Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me....[SUP]13 [/SUP]And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. [SUP]14 [/SUP]If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
Going around the Son is asking for trouble & breaking the commandment of His invitation.
John 10:1Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber....[SUP]5 [/SUP]And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers....[SUP]7 [/SUP]Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep. [SUP]8 [/SUP]All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. [SUP]9[/SUP]I am the door:Those that have climbed up another way wind up with following a voice of strangers.. tongues that comes with no interpretation. That is what happens when they ask the Spirit directly and seek to receive Him again to get this tongues. They are thieves and robbers because they cut inbetween the bride & the Bridegroom in stealing away their personal time together by babbling nonsense thus not making known prayer requests to the Lord at that throne of grace so that the Father may be glorified in the Son for the Son answering their prayers. The Lord cannot answer prayers if they never knew what they had prayed for by allowing this spirit to cut inbetween them and the Lord.
Matthew 6:[SUP]7 [/SUP]But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. [SUP]8 [/SUP]Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
For that underlined to be true, then the Spirit need not say anything by using God's gift of tongues as a prayer language for Him to be praying to God. God would lead by example in giving assurances in His word.
I have heard the excuse from others that God is using this heavenly language so that the devil doesn't know what is being prayed for & interfere. The Book of Job testifies that Satan cannot do anything without God's permission & Jesus is Lord.
Pray about this, brother. The prophesy of 1 Timothy 4:1-2 is happening now. Ask Jesus for confirmation on the scripture given so that you may shun vain & profane babblings as it is a snare of the devil taken captive those that are led astray.
[SUP]6[/SUP]Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
The verses did not say they went outside for these other people to hear this: it said this noice.. that same noise of tongues in that room... went abroad. So God was mainfesting tongues in that room to be heard abroad.
Because "some" did not understand what everyone were saying and so they assumed they were drunk.
DO NOT attribute this drunkness as belonging to God because the American Indians danced & chant for the Great Spirit to come & fall on them wherein they related the effects of drinking alcohol with when they were introduced to "firewater".
Do NOT attribute supernatuarl tongues that comes with no interpretation as being of God when the occults had it before God's gift came which was of other men's lips to speak unto the people.
SINCE we are not to believe every spirit but test them & prove all things and thereby abstaining from all appearance of evil, then God will not be copycatting Satan so that He can draw sinners away from their spirits and their tongues to a personal reconciled relationship with God the Father through the Son which is why all invitations given points to the Son: and NONE to the Holy Spirit.
You are assuming that Mary, the mother of Jesus and any other women were still there in that upper room. Note the beginning of that chapter as it mentioned the beginning of another day which was Pentecost.
So note how in Acts 1 when the men had their thing as seperate from the women.
Acts 1:[SUP]15 [/SUP]And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,) [SUP]16 [/SUP]Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
Not "Men & ladies".
You are just reading it wrong. You separated verses 1-4 and did not see how verse 6 connects the noise in that room as they were being heard of speaking in their language.
If a member of your congegation spoke in a language that a foriegnor understood in his native tongue but some other visitor did not understand it, he would scoff and say that he was drunk too. Not that hard to fathom.
I find that circumspect.
Consider this: how can God call sinners away from their spirits and their supernatural tongues if they are going to be experiencing the same thing in christianity? How can they say to those that knew them as sinners in the occult BELIEVE that they have repented and are born again if there is no change in their tongues nor their focus on the "spirit"? It would be a poor witness.
I find it hard to believe that God would manifest His actual gift of tongues to speak unto the people and then permit His servants to give credence to that which is not of Him.. and yes, I can honestly say that it is NOT. I find that report dubious at best, especially when you are giving a general overview lacking great details.
Did God manifest tongues in believers to speak unto the people in the mission field and then stopped when they were believing that spirit that came over them with babbling nonsense to serve as a prayer language which is why they never could do it again?
I believe the Lord has led me to give you lines of discernment so that you do not believe every spirit as being of God, because He told us to test them... and believers are just going with the flow with whatever comes over them and the strange thing is... they can invoke it again by calling on the Holy Spirit.....which is not the will of the Father to do in approaching Him by because Jesus, the Son of God, is the only way to the Father. WHY? BECAUSE there are seducing spirits in the world and the Son is Whom the real indwelling Holy Spirit is still pointing to: the Bridegroom.
But it seems the meaning of that title is lost as well as Jesus being the only Mediator between God & man that believers broaden the way in approaching God the Father as if they can do so by way of the Holy Spirit... and they cannot in according to His word and the commandment of His invitation in John 14:6 from which the purpose of prayer is known in John 14:13-14. Cited below.
John 14:[SUP]6 [/SUP]Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me....[SUP]13 [/SUP]And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. [SUP]14 [/SUP]If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
Going around the Son is asking for trouble & breaking the commandment of His invitation.
John 10:1Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber....[SUP]5 [/SUP]And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers....[SUP]7 [/SUP]Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep. [SUP]8 [/SUP]All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. [SUP]9[/SUP]I am the door:Those that have climbed up another way wind up with following a voice of strangers.. tongues that comes with no interpretation. That is what happens when they ask the Spirit directly and seek to receive Him again to get this tongues. They are thieves and robbers because they cut inbetween the bride & the Bridegroom in stealing away their personal time together by babbling nonsense thus not making known prayer requests to the Lord at that throne of grace so that the Father may be glorified in the Son for the Son answering their prayers. The Lord cannot answer prayers if they never knew what they had prayed for by allowing this spirit to cut inbetween them and the Lord.
Matthew 6:[SUP]7 [/SUP]But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. [SUP]8 [/SUP]Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
For that underlined to be true, then the Spirit need not say anything by using God's gift of tongues as a prayer language for Him to be praying to God. God would lead by example in giving assurances in His word.
I have heard the excuse from others that God is using this heavenly language so that the devil doesn't know what is being prayed for & interfere. The Book of Job testifies that Satan cannot do anything without God's permission & Jesus is Lord.
Pray about this, brother. The prophesy of 1 Timothy 4:1-2 is happening now. Ask Jesus for confirmation on the scripture given so that you may shun vain & profane babblings as it is a snare of the devil taken captive those that are led astray.
T
Ever hear of drawing on comparison? Paul was attempting to instruct Timothy that pagan women in Ephesus like Corinth, had positions of worship in the pagan temples and that they could snare the men of the church, and lead them astray like Eve did with Adam. Paul was using a comparison of Adam and Eve as an example to Timothy.
There is nothing wrong with study of the times brother, God did not call you to parrot doctrine. The Word is the final authority. However, studying the customs of the times and the places, will help you understand scripture in a broader sense.
Paul used many writing styles that included paragraphing, simile, metaphor, comparisons, etc. You cannot simply read the Bible in a linear fashion. Book, Chapter and verse is for our benefit, but the Bible is not really organized in that manner. Genesis is not the oldest book in the Bible, Job is.
There are many instances where chapters actually flow together and continue one such well known example is Matthew chapters 5-7, if you read that in a linear fashion as 3 separate chapters, you wont get the real revelation behind the full sermon on the mount, which was really all 3 chapters.
The same is true for John 9 & 10. If you read through both you will easily see that the I am the door and the I am the shepherd discourse is really directed at the pharisees and not his disciples or those crowds around him. John10.10 is often interpreted that the thief is the devil that comes to steal, kill and destroy. I see that, but I also see Jesus saying religion is the thief that steals, kills and destroys, because he was talking to the pharisees the whole time, but you have to start in John 9 to get the full revelation of John 10....
There is nothing wrong with study of the times brother, God did not call you to parrot doctrine. The Word is the final authority. However, studying the customs of the times and the places, will help you understand scripture in a broader sense.
Paul used many writing styles that included paragraphing, simile, metaphor, comparisons, etc. You cannot simply read the Bible in a linear fashion. Book, Chapter and verse is for our benefit, but the Bible is not really organized in that manner. Genesis is not the oldest book in the Bible, Job is.
There are many instances where chapters actually flow together and continue one such well known example is Matthew chapters 5-7, if you read that in a linear fashion as 3 separate chapters, you wont get the real revelation behind the full sermon on the mount, which was really all 3 chapters.
The same is true for John 9 & 10. If you read through both you will easily see that the I am the door and the I am the shepherd discourse is really directed at the pharisees and not his disciples or those crowds around him. John10.10 is often interpreted that the thief is the devil that comes to steal, kill and destroy. I see that, but I also see Jesus saying religion is the thief that steals, kills and destroys, because he was talking to the pharisees the whole time, but you have to start in John 9 to get the full revelation of John 10....
T
I did nothing you accuse me of brother and whether you know it opr not, you acctually did exactlyw hat i said most do, you claim contradiction to explain the drunk statement. I never attributed being drunk with the move of the Holy ghost, you did.
I do have one simple comment about all your comments and it is below:
Last edited:
K
Well when it comes to the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues. Peter stood up and said and it shall come to pass, in the last days.saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh.
The bold parts mean that a dead church can't stop it, the government can't stop it, the white house can't stop it and the devil can't stop it.
Eyewitness accounts of Azusa street saw flames on the building and call the fire department, but when they got there the found the fire of the Holy Ghost recorded by the LA fire department. People walking by, when they came to were speaking in tongues.
We need to get just as hungry for God as Seymour did and the people that came to his meetings. For 3 1/2 years, 3 services a day, 7 days a week. People were saved, filled with the Holy Ghost, healed, delivered, set free and its going to happen again on a larger scale and some long faced dead church can't stop it.
The bold parts mean that a dead church can't stop it, the government can't stop it, the white house can't stop it and the devil can't stop it.
Eyewitness accounts of Azusa street saw flames on the building and call the fire department, but when they got there the found the fire of the Holy Ghost recorded by the LA fire department. People walking by, when they came to were speaking in tongues.
We need to get just as hungry for God as Seymour did and the people that came to his meetings. For 3 1/2 years, 3 services a day, 7 days a week. People were saved, filled with the Holy Ghost, healed, delivered, set free and its going to happen again on a larger scale and some long faced dead church can't stop it.