A Distinction Between Tongues

[notuptome]

If the bible indicated that belief I would do so. It does not. Therefore, I remain steadfast in my commitment to be obedient to all that I possibly can.

Oh but it surely does and you grow farther away from the truth day by day.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[presidente]

This was in Acts. The Epistles show an absence of the gifts.

No, they don't. If there were miracles happening left and right, Paul could have still written his epistles just as he did.

Paul must have done a lot of miracles that aren't specifically told about in Acts. Look at Romans 15: 19

Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.

When did he go to Illyricum? Maybe he took a detour when he left Philippi. I don't know of any miracles he dd in Illyricum narrated in Acts or the epistles. What miracles in Jerusalem did Acts or the epistles specificlaly tell us about? Paul was doing miracles for which we do not have the narrative in Acts, just this passing reference.

It is false reasoning. You are just imagining a lack of miracles and assuming it.

“Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick.” (2 Timothy 4:20) (KJV 1900)

“Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.” (1 Timothy 5:23) (KJV 1900)

This must present a huge problem for your way of thinking which must have Paul doing miracles, at will, any time Paul was sick. Let me guess-- you think he could and would choose to do miracles and heal apart from other considerations like his faith, the faith of the sick person, or the will of God?

But we have evidence that Paul himself got sick early on.
Galatians 4
13 Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.
14 And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.
15 Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.

Lystra and Derbe were likely in Galatia. (Many scholars in the 1800's did not realize the border was shifted northward from the coast of southern Anatolia/Asia Minor to further up a hundred or so years after Paul's time.) Acts 16 tells he went to Galatia.

Acts 16
6 Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia,

Does this prove that miracles ceased in Acts 16? No. Because we see great healing and miracles in later chapters. So your line of reasoning does not line up with scripture.

Proof positive:

Acts 19
11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:
12 So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.

So I have proven from scripture that a verse about someone being sick in one verse at one point in time does not prove that God does not do miracles through people at a later point in time.

I have disproven your argument, but usually when I do this, you keep repeating this false line of reasoning. Surprise us all and do not stick to your guns when proven wrong.

 

[Wansvic]

This is a Pentecostal/Charismatic misinterpretation of the gift of tongues. And you continue to push this false teaching here.

There are two recorded instances where tongues were necessary in order to prove to Jewish believers that Gentiles (or Semi-Gentiles) had also receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. You have mentioned them as noted in Acts 8 and Acts 10.

But that was not meant to be the norm (as you claim). The fact that about 3,000 Jews received the gift of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecosts WITHOUT SPEAKING IN TONGUES totally undercuts your belief.

Then we have other instances in the book of Acts of people being saved without any mention of tongues. And when the doctrine of salvation (justification) by grace through faith is expounded in Scripture, there is absolutely no mention of tongues being the evidence of salvation, since the gift of the Holy Spirit also means the gift of Christ and the gift of eternal life.

Silence concerning speaking in tongues in regard to the 3,000 Jews does not mean it did not occur.

Also, Apostle Paul's interaction with the Ephesus disciples shows that individual's are to seek to obey the God given instructions initially presented by the Apostle Peter at Pentecost.

Paul provided the disciples with accurate information concerning the correct way to water baptize, and of the need to receive the Holy Ghost as evidenced by speaking in tongues he stayed to teach others this truth as well. (Acts 19:8) But many believed him not and spoke evil of that way so he departed from them. (Acts 19:9)

 

[Dave-L]

No, they don't. If there were miracles happening left and right, Paul could have still written his epistles just as he did.

Paul must have done a lot of miracles that aren't specifically told about in Acts. Look at Romans 15: 19

Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.

When did he go to Illyricum? Maybe he took a detour when he left Philippi. I don't know of any miracles he dd in Illyricum narrated in Acts or the epistles. What miracles in Jerusalem did Acts or the epistles specificlaly tell us about? Paul was doing miracles for which we do not have the narrative in Acts, just this passing reference.

It is false reasoning. You are just imagining a lack of miracles and assuming it.



This must present a huge problem for your way of thinking which must have Paul doing miracles, at will, any time Paul was sick. Let me guess-- you think he could and would choose to do miracles and heal apart from other considerations like his faith, the faith of the sick person, or the will of God?

But we have evidence that Paul himself got sick early on.
Galatians 4
13 Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.
14 And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.
15 Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.

Lystra and Derbe were likely in Galatia. (Many scholars in the 1800's did not realize the border was shifted northward from the coast of southern Anatolia/Asia Minor to further up a hundred or so years after Paul's time.) Acts 16 tells he went to Galatia.

Acts 16
6 Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia,

Does this prove that miracles ceased in Acts 16? No. Because we see great healing and miracles in later chapters. So your line of reasoning does not line up with scripture.

Proof positive:

Acts 19
11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:
12 So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.

So I have proven from scripture that a verse about someone being sick in one verse at one point in time does not prove that God does not do miracles through people at a later point in time.

I have disproven your argument, but usually when I do this, you keep repeating this false line of reasoning. Surprise us all and do not stick to your guns when proven wrong.

He left his helpers behind sick. He put Timothy on medicine for his stomach. Don't rewrite scripture.

 

[Kavik]

Silence concerning speaking in tongues in regard to the 3,000 Jews does not mean it did not occur.

Surely something that momentous (if one argues that it had to have occurred ), even if only a fraction of these individuals started to 'speak in tongues', would have warranted at the very least one sentence in the Pentecost narrative.

It seems the more obvious observation here would be that one of the 'aftereffects' of being baptized in the Holy Spirit does not seem to include modern tongues-speech. How could it; Biblical "tongues" are nothing more than real, rational language(s).

 

[Wansvic]

Surely something that momentous (if one argues that it had to have occurred ), even if only a fraction of these individuals started to 'speak in tongues', would have warranted at the very least one sentence in the Pentecost narrative.

It seems the more obvious observation here would be that one of the 'aftereffects' of being baptized in the Holy Spirit does not seem to include modern tongues-speech. How could it; Biblical "tongues" are nothing more than real, rational language(s).

First, the baptism mentioned may have been water baptism. Peter did say everyone was to be baptized in Jesus' name and they would receive the promised gift. The crowd believed what he said and complied. Regardless of what baptism is referenced, there are experiences throughout scripture that only focus on some concepts, and remain silent on others as I mentioned previously.

Only God knows why He inspired the writers to include some aspects and not others. It does make me consider that He expects everyone to step out in faith and do as commanded without the need to analyze every aspect.

A scripture that comes to mind is: "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter and the glory of kings to search it out." Proverbs 25:2

 

[garee]

Surely something that momentous (if one argues that it had to have occurred ), even if only a fraction of these individuals started to 'speak in tongues', would have warranted at the very least one sentence in the Pentecost narrative.

It seems the more obvious observation here would be that one of the 'aftereffects' of being baptized in the Holy Spirit does not seem to include modern tongues-speech. How could it; Biblical "tongues" are nothing more than real, rational language(s).

Yes tongues are prophecy no different than parables. God's word. Again I would emphasize if a person does not first go to the foundation of a doctrine. They can as a oral tradition of men turn the understanding in any direction they chose.

The law of tongues (God mocking unbelief that mocks the authority of prophecy )is given in Isiah 28 and is revisited in 1 Corinthians 14 :22 -23 . Once the law is properly understood then the rest of the doctrine falls into place.

Tongues (God's word) is clearly not a sign for those who believe without adding new inovations . Men have turned it upside down for the purpose of self edification, creating little wonderments. . marveling at what they performed or getting filled withself..

Note. . . (orange) in parenthesis. . unbelievers that reject the word of God in exchange for a oral tradition of man .They are given the sign of faling backward slain in the spirtit to show they are mocking God.

Note. . .(green) in parethessis . .. believers that do hear prophecy and not the oral tradition that make the word of God to no effect

Note. . .( red) in parenthesis ….. The power of salvation.

Isaiah 28:11-13 King James Version (KJV) For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

1 Corinthians 14:21-22 King James Version (KJV) In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. 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.

The prophecy or tongue (same thing) spoken of is without the oral traditions of men . And it clearly represent the one where men fall backward mocking the same prophecy that speaks of those slain in the spirit. Signs and wonder seekers

 

[garee]

First, the baptism mentioned may have been water baptism. Peter did say everyone was to be baptized in Jesus' name and they would receive the promised gift. The crowd believed what he said and complied. Regardless of what baptism is referenced, there are experiences throughout scripture that only focus on some concepts, and remain silent on others as I mentioned previously.

Only God knows why He inspired the writers to include some aspects and not others. It does make me consider that He expects everyone to step out in faith and do as commanded without the need to analyze every aspect.

A scripture that comes to mind is: "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter and the glory of kings to search it out." Proverbs 25:2

Those who seek after self edification in both cases tongues and baptism they must as all costs ignore the foundation of the teachings.

If we are to rightly divide in order to seek His approval The foundation must be visited first. Both have there foundation in the Old testament. Neither is for self edification. Look what I did. That kind of ideology turned Jesus into a circus seal.

There is a eternity of difference between walking by faith ( not of ourselves)the unseen eternal and walking by sight as that seen the temporal.

John 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

 

[presidente]

He left his helpers behind sick. He put Timothy on medicine for his stomach. Don't rewrite scripture.

I have not rewritten anything. I showed from scripture that Paul gad an infirmity but went on to do great miracles.

A proved from scripture that an illness at one point of time does not prove cessation of the gifts thereafter.

 

[Wansvic]

Gifts would be only for believers not for evangelism of the lost.

Notice what the bible says in 1 Corinthians:

"In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

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." 1 Cor 14:21-22

 

[presidente]

Notice what the bible says in 1 Corinthians:

"In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

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." 1 Cor 14:21-22

This is a passage about unbelievers not believing when they hear speaking in tongues. The verse quoted from Isaiah in the passage says 'and yet for all that, they will not hear Me.'

But Hebrews 2 does speak of God confirming them that heard Christ with signs, wonders, and gifts of the Holy Ghost. An evangelist is also a gift according to Ephesians 4.

I Corinthians 12 focuses on spiritual gifts edifying the church.

 

[presidente]

Those who seek after self edification in both cases tongues and baptism they must as all costs ignore the foundation of the teachings.

Speaking in tongues, which edifies oneself, is good, because Paul wrote, "I would that ye all spake with tongues..." but prophesying, which edifies the church, is better. Paul wrote, "but rather that ye prophesied."

There is a eternity of difference between walking by faith ( not of ourselves)the unseen eternal and walking by sight as that seen the temporal.

John 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

There are plenty of examples in the gospels and Acts of people who saw signs, miracles, etc. and then believed. Jesus said before one healing, 'Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.' It is better to see without believing. Christ told Thomas about the resurrection that because he saw, He believed, but blessed are they that do not see, but yet believe.

In the book of John, there were people who believed after the resurrection of Lazarus. In Acts, many people believed after the resurrection of Tabitha. Samaritans believed after they saw the signs and wonders that Philip did. The proconsul Sergius Paulus believed after he saw Elymas struck blind.

Were Thomas and all the early Christians who believed after seeing a miracle condemned to live a life of walking by sight instead of walking by faith? No, Paul's words were not aimed at them as some kind of attack on them.

Nor should we conclude that miracle workers, who did miracles exercising their faith, were being criticized by Paul's words. Paul did miracles. That does not mean he walked by sight. Jesus Himself is a great miracle Worker.
Believing what the Bible teaches about miracles and spiritual gifts does not make one walk by sight instead of faith. The apostles prayed for God to stretch forth His hand and to do signs and wonders for the sake of His Servant Jesus. They were not to blame for this prayer. That was a good and righteous prayer.

Some philosophies and ideas skew interpretation of the word of God. Miracles and spiritual gifts are not bad.

 

[garee]

Speaking in tongues, which edifies oneself, is good, because Paul wrote, "I would that ye all spake with tongues..." but prophesying, which edifies the church, is better. Paul wrote, "but rather that ye prophesied."

Hi thanks for the reply

The gospel does not teach self edificatio . Like I did something, look. I made a noise, hear. . . as the "witness of men". We walk by faith the unseen work of God. We build each other up or edify in the gospel . It has nothing to do with what the eyes see. But what the spirit of the gospel, the spirit of faith performs

How would prophesying or declaring the word of God edify the one God gives word to? And not God who moved the person to speak the word of God.? Tongues are prophecy .

Like for instance .Do we edify Balaam's Donkey for stopping the madness of the false prophet?

There are plenty of examples in the gospels and Acts of people who saw signs, miracles, etc. and then believed. Jesus said before one healing, 'Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.' It is better to see without believing. Christ told Thomas about the resurrection that because he saw, He believed, but blessed are they that do not see, but yet believe.

What do you think he meant by saying Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.' It is better to see without believing. Was he opposed to walking by sight?

In the book of John, there were people who believed after the resurrection of Lazarus. In Acts, many people believed after the resurrection of Tabitha. Samaritans believed after they saw the signs and wonders that Philip did. The proconsul Sergius Paulus believed after he saw Elymas struck blind.

People who believed what at the resurrection of Lazarus. Mary said she knew he would rise again? What was the sign that he would rise the first time seeing some say signs lead what a person believes?

Were Thomas and all the early Christians who believed after seeing a miracle condemned to live a life of walking by sight instead of walking by faith? No, Paul's words were not aimed at them as some kind of attack on them.

The last sign as a wonder (source of unseen faith) was the sign of Jonas. The Son of man fulfilled it. Paul's word given by the Holy Spirit is to walk by faith after the unseen eternal not by sight the temporal. No sign was given. Even though today many are proposed

Like the sign of the beast people seeking to avoid placing a number on their flesh .Or some are looking for a man as the antichrist .even though there are many here .

Matthew 12:39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall "no sign" be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:

Nor should we conclude that miracle workers, who did miracles exercising their faith, were being criticized by Paul's words. Paul did miracles. That does not mean he walked by sight. Jesus Himself is a great miracle Worker.

First and foremost God is not served by human hands in any way shape or form .The idea of accrediting the miracles to the apostles as things seen fulfills the requirements of paganism. Making gods in the likeness of men. The abomination of desolation .They in effect cried out Blasphemy . Not job well down miracle makers .

The Son of man, Jesus constantly resisted men attributing the unseen work of the father working in him to his outward flesh.

Said with a loud voice, Stand upright on thy feet. And he leaped and walked. And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men. And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker. Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people. Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out, Acts14 :10-14

Believing what the Bible teaches about miracles and spiritual gifts does not make one walk by sight instead of faith. The apostles prayed for God to stretch forth His hand and to do signs and wonders for the sake of His Servant Jesus. They were not to blame for this prayer. That was a good and righteous prayer.

Spiritual gift are gifts unseen .They have not ceased but continual to work in the believer to both will and perform the good pleasure of our Good God as One master not seen .

No such thing as a "sign gift." Signs are for those who rebel .Prophecy /tongues for those who do believe God.

Believing what the Bible teaches about miracles and spiritual gifts does teach us to walk by faith just as parable do . Signs not seen as metaphors are associated with believing, the metaphors follow after .

Mark 16:17And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Mark 16:20And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

Some philosophies and ideas skew interpretation of the word of God. Miracles and spiritual gifts are not bad.

God works miracles every day . Miracles are not bad .Its when mankind attributes them to human hands that it becomes a abomination of desolation. Things seen the temporal in the place of faith the unseen eternal place of God's glory

 

[Dino246]

The gospel does not teach self edificatio . Like I did something, look. I made a noise, hear. . . as the "witness of men". We walk by faith the unseen work of God. We build each other up or edify in the gospel .

If you are studying by yourself, or praying by yourself, or reading Scripture by yourself, are you edifying yourself? Yes. Is that "self-edification" in the negative sense? No. You are assuming incorrectly that the sense is negative in 1 Cor. 14:4, but you have no evidence for that outside of your pre-existing belief.

 

[Wansvic]

This is a passage about unbelievers not believing when they hear speaking in tongues. The verse quoted from Isaiah in the passage says 'and yet for all that, they will not hear Me.'

But Hebrews 2 does speak of God confirming them that heard Christ with signs, wonders, and gifts of the Holy Ghost. An evangelist is also a gift according to Ephesians 4.

I Corinthians 12 focuses on spiritual gifts edifying the church.

Notice the content of the scripture states specifically that the Spiritual gift of tongues is for a sign to them that believe not.

"Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: ..."

The word "wherefore" in this verse 21 means "for that reason..."

There is no question that the person operating in the Spiritual gift of tongues is already a believer. The words coming forth would bring confirmation that God is speaking by either 1) the person speaking is speaking in the listeners language without personal knowledge of the language; 2) a person being given an answer only God could know via the corresponding interpretation of the tongues spoken.

 

[Wansvic]

This is a passage about unbelievers not believing when they hear speaking in tongues. The verse quoted from Isaiah in the passage says 'and yet for all that, they will not hear Me.'

But Hebrews 2 does speak of God confirming them that heard Christ with signs, wonders, and gifts of the Holy Ghost. An evangelist is also a gift according to Ephesians 4.

I Corinthians 12 focuses on spiritual gifts edifying the church.

Notice the content of the scripture states specifically that the Spiritual gift of tongues is for a sign to them that believe not.

"Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: ..."

The word "wherefore" in this verse 21 means "for that reason..."

There is no question that the person operating in the Spiritual gift of tongues is already a believer. The words coming forth would bring confirmation that God is speaking by either 1) the person speaking is speaking in the listeners language without personal knowledge of the language; 2) a person being given an answer only God could know via the corresponding interpretation of the tongues spoken.

And as you said, some will still refuse to believe.

 

[presidente]

Hi thanks for the reply

The gospel does not teach self edificatio . Like I did something, look. I made a noise, hear. . . as the "witness of men".

I showed you in scripture where Paul said that speaking in tongues edified oneself, and he wished that you all spoke with tongues. Prophesying edifies the church, and he'd prefer that you prophesy.

You should accept what Paul says. You should also look up 'edify' in the English dictionary and the Greek word, which can also mean 'build.'

It is good to build yourself up by reading the Bible and praying by yourself. Speaking in tongues is also self-edifying. That's good. But our activities in the assembly (the church) should be directed toward edifying the church.

I don't know what you mean by "Like I did something, look. I made a noise, hear. . . as the "witness of men"". That's not what Paul is saying when he says to 'edify.' Prophesying isn't there for the whole church to know it is making a noise to have the witness of men. When Paul says to let all things be done unto edifying, he isn't just talking about making a noise.

We are like a building that is being built up (edified.) Construction workers build the house. They don't just make noises and say 'Look at me'. That's not edifying/building up.

We walk by faith the unseen work of God. We build each other up or edify in the gospel .

So now you are redefining the term 'edify'? Now it means build up, but it just means make a noise in whatever verse you want it to mean that? It looks like you are just defining the word to mean one thing in one verse and something else in another.

How would prophesying or declaring the word of God edify the one God gives word to?

Of course someone who prophesies, teaches, preaches, exhorts, etc. can be edified by his own words. The word of God is very powerful. And it is possible to get a deeper understanding of a scripture while teaching it, to be encouraged and strengthened in ones faith while teaching it. Prophesying also can build up the speaker.

And not God who moved the person to speak the word of God.?

Tongues are prophecy .

In I Corinthians 14, Paul uses the terms to designate different kinds of manifestations in this chapter.

Like for instance .Do we edify Balaam's Donkey for stopping the madness of the false prophet?

Your question does not make much sense considering what the word 'edify' means. Do you mean do we say something edifying to the donkey because she spoke, like say 'Way to go, Donkey!' or read her the psalms?

What do you think he meant by saying Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.' It is better to see without believing. Was he opposed to walking by sight?

You are the one who associates no miracles with walking by sight. Paul wrote about being absent from the body and present with the Lord in that passage, not about miracles.

The apostles did miracles, prayed for God to do signs and wonders and exercised faith as they did miracles. When Peter doubted, he sank into the water he was walking on.

The last sign as a wonder (source of unseen faith) was the sign of Jonas.

You make a lot of assumptions. Do you have any scripture that shows that 'wonder' means a source of faith? I can't think of any context that backs that up, or any reason based on the actual meaning of the word.

When God grants that signs and wonders occur and that helps people believe, we should be thankful for God's mercy and grace in doing this, and not be opposed to it.

Matthew 12:39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall "no sign" be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:

You should also note that Jesus said that an evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, but he did not say that anyone who seeks a sign is evil or adulterous. The apostles asked Jesus for a sign and prayed to God to do signs and wonders. Different kinds of signs, probably, but signs none the less. The people in Matthew were probably wanting a sign to test the Prophet like unto Moses, wanting Jesus to predict something so that, if it does nto come to pass, they would have an excuse to reject Him....and maybe could believe Him if it came to pass.

That an evil and adulterous generation liked to eat bread. But this doesn't mean that everyone who eats bread is evil or adulterous.

First and foremost God is not served by human hands in any way shape or form .

That's not true, especially with all of your additions there to what Paul said. A specific Greek word is used in the passage you are referring to. and Paul clarifies-- as if He needed anything. God doesn't need people to supply him with food or anything like that. But we are to serve Him with our bodies, our speech, etc.

The idea of accrediting the miracles to the apostles as things seen fulfills the requirements of paganism. Making gods in the likeness of men. The abomination of desolation .They in effect cried out Blasphemy . Not job well down miracle makers .

That first sentence is word salad. You like to quote the passage where the pagans think Paul and Barnabas are their false gods and almost sacrifice to them. I haven't seen any Christians do that.

Acts tells us that Paul healed the people on Malta. Having read Acts, we can know that this was the power of God working through Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ. Believing that the apostles did miracles is not the same as worshipping them as false gods.

You seem to have some fuzzy idea that believing that God does miracles through people now is somehow idolatry, and want to quote that passage to 'prove' it, even though the Bible shows God doing miracles through people without it being an idolatrous thing throughout Acts. I Corinthians shows that the Spirit gifts members of the body of Christ with the working of miracles as He wills. They do not even have to be apostles. Given your unclear vague word usage, I am not sure what your objection is exactly, and I am not even sure that you know what your objection is.

The Son of man, Jesus constantly resisted men attributing the unseen work of the father working in him to his outward flesh.

I don't know of any Christian who attributes miracles now to the apostles' flesh or the flesh of other believers. I don't see anyone arguing along those lines in that forum. I wonder why you go off on diatribes about such things.

Spiritual gift are gifts unseen .They have not ceased but continual to work in the believer to both will and perform the good pleasure of our Good God as One master not seen .

You might think that sounds spiritual, that spiritual gifts are unseen, but does that line up with what Paul taught? Paul calls them 'manifestations of the Spirit.' Can you see someone prophesy? Yes. Can you see healing or miracles? Yes. Many of the things that Paul listed as charismata are visible. Look in Romans 12 at those charismata. You can see someone prophesy, teach, or exhort. You might be able to see leading, serving, or giving in some cases.

Your psuedospiritual statements do not line up with what we know about many of the spiritual gifts in the BIble.

No such thing as a "sign gift." Signs are for those who rebel .Prophecy /tongues for those who do believe God.

Your statements are not particularly helpful here. Who is arguing for a 'sign gift'? I don't care for that term because of the way some people use it, but something could conceivably be both a gift and a sign. There is a word translated either miracle or sign. Genuine miracles occur through grace that comes through the Spirit. So your first statement is unbiblical.

'Signs are for those who rebel' but signs are also for people of faith, too. Jesus told the apostles about the sign of His coming. The apostles prayed for God to stretch forth His hand to do signs and wonders, and then went out and healed.

Prophecy and tongues are for those who believe. These gifts edify those who believe. But prophesying might also open someone's heart to recognize that God is in or among the saints. And tongues is a sign to them that believe not.

God works miracles every day . Miracles are not bad .Its when mankind attributes them to human hands that it becomes a abomination of desolation. Things seen the temporal in the place of faith the unseen eternal place of God's glory

God delegates. He has delegated many things to angels. He has delegated to man. The Bible has numerous examples of God working miracles through men, even through hands.

Acts 19:11 Now God worked unusual miracles by the hands of Paul,
(NKJV)

I Corinthians 12 also lists the working of miracles among spiritual gifts given to the saints as the Spirit wills.

 

[presidente]

Notice the content of the scripture states specifically that the Spiritual gift of tongues is for a sign to them that believe not.

"Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: ..."

The word "wherefore" in this verse 21 means "for that reason..."

There is no question that the person operating in the Spiritual gift of tongues is already a believer. The words coming forth would bring confirmation that God is speaking by either 1) the person speaking is speaking in the listeners language without personal knowledge of the language; 2) a person being given an answer only God could know via the corresponding interpretation of the tongues spoken.

I am not sure what your commentary means in relation to mine (agree? disagree?)

But I would like to point out that Paul does not say that tongues are only for unbelievers. Tongues are for believers. But tongues are a sign to unbelievers.

Tongues are for believers because 'divers tongues' is among the gifts I Corinthians 12 teaches are given to the body to 'profit withal'. Tongues and interpretation edify the church.

If....if....if an unbeliever comes into the church and heard all speak with tongues, won't he say that 'ye are mad?'

And this is part of Paul's argument regarding proper order and interpreting tongues. If the unbeliever doesn't come in and tongues and interpretation edify the church, that is still a good thing.

 

[garee]

If you are studying by yourself, or praying by yourself, or reading Scripture by yourself, are you edifying yourself? Yes. Is that "self-edification" in the negative sense? No. You are assuming incorrectly that the sense is negative in 1 Cor. 14:4, but you have no evidence for that outside of your pre-existing belief.

I have the law a circular reasoning . It say it is true because it is God's word. The one source of Christian faith.

The prayers recorded in the Bible are prophecy . Who do they edify? The one who inspired them or the mouth he moved to reveal them?

No such thing as self edification as a wonderment, anymore than the idea of "sign gifts" (gifts seen) rather than spiritual gifts not seen.

And the evidence is in the law found in 1 Corinthians 14:21-22. It is clear. The sign of Tongues .The Spirit of Christ mocking (stammering lips) unconverted mankind. Many thought it had something to do with the flesh of nations. Caused a great tribulation .Mankind trying to find a face to attach to their belief system .One like never before or ever again.

It is not a sign to those who do believe prophecy as God's tongue to the nations .Those signs as metaphors follow after.

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. 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.1 Corinthians 14:21-22

Once you have the understanding of the law, then the rest of the doctrine falls into place. No falling backward needed. Prophecy /tongues for those who believe (have faith) Signs are for those who rebel and go approve prophecy (no faith) walking by sight.

 

[Dino246]

I have the law a circular reasoning .

What you have is a lack of understanding regarding the term, "circular reasoning".

No such thing as self edification as a wonderment, anymore than the idea of "sign gifts" (gifts seen) rather than spiritual gifts not seen.

You also are lacking understanding with regard to both edification and spiritual gifts.

Once you have the understanding of the law, then the rest of the doctrine falls into place. No falling backward needed. Prophecy /tongues for those who believe (have faith) Signs are for those who rebel and go approve prophecy (no faith) walking by sight.

Once you stop mindlessly repeating your pseudo-biblical statements, and start believing what the Bible actually says, you will see that your position is not biblically sound.