Some truth about speaking in tongues, the Holy Ghost, spiritual gifts and 1 Corinthians 14

  • 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.

SpoonJuly

Senior Member
Feb 16, 2018
1,329
946
113
#41
no your still here because we are long-suffering LOL
So we can agree on something.:)
One must be longsuffering to remain on a forum with so much name calling and false teaching being promoted.
 

CS1

Moderator
May 23, 2012
4,157
932
113
#42
You have the audacity to call others hateful and ignorant. You attack me because I point out that Jesus never taught the apostles to speak in tongues or to pray in tongues. You take a misunderstanding of 1 Cor 12-14 and make doctrine that conflicts with the rest of scripture and act like you have the truth. You continue to build you unsound doctrine on Mark 16 the long ending. Sorry two errors do not make sound doctrine.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
Tongues are not a prayer language. No evidence in the bible to say that anyone ever prayed in tongues. Jesus never prayed in tongues. Your indications that you are not an expert on the subject is well founded. Your desire not to have any contradictory information posted finds its roots in that your position cannot be supported from the bible.

You did not point out any such thing. You attacked this person in your post ____________. so sorry I called you on it.
 

CS1

Moderator
May 23, 2012
4,157
932
113
#44
it is really simple. the context of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit is found in 1cor chapter 12 thru 14. Nothing in those chapters say they have ceased. Those who oppose the gifts for today use only one verse in chapter 13:10. Yet they want to throw out the chapter verses where the context of the gifts of the Holy Spirit continues. 1cor chapter 12-14 are unit chapters they are contextually linked together.

If the idea of the gifts have ceased then Paul under the leading of the Holy Spirit wrote incorrectly what we see in chapter 14.

Those who claim to be biblical learned should know this. But they choose to look elsewhere. So they pulled humanistic, secular humanism and even atheistic arguments to dispose of biblical truth. Mark 16 , 1cor chapter 12 -14 the book of Acts. All is not enough. nothing in the Greek Translation changes the context of "Gifts of the Holy Spirit".
They know this so they have to interject false narratives like this is pagan, demonic, or create terms from non-Christian or Christian liberal theology like modern tongues and cessationist.

We do agree that there are abuses, misuses of all the gifts the Lord has entrusted us with. Yes, there are those who are in error. Never said there was not. But those who scoff and mock do so to those who seek and believe what they cannot prove biblically that the gifts are not for today.
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
8,475
3,651
113
#45
Not hardly. Just many men will not understand Paul's teachings in light of the word of God. The use of hyperbole is not an admonition to act in a specific manner. Any interpretation that contradicts other scripture needs to be realigned to harmonize with all of scripture.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

you are living proof of that I'd say Roger :LOL:
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
8,475
3,651
113
#46
to 4 joel 2, 28-29 which Peter quotet, can only be a parttimefullfillment.
If you take the context of those verses.
Then you find out it has to do with the folk of Israel. And, before Joel2, 28-29 will take place, Israel will have peace and will be free from any ocupation.
This not happem till now.
But you take this prophecie for christians and not for the folk of Israel.
This is a very questionable view!

to 5 from where you get this?
gift of speaking in tongues is gift of speakig in tongues. Everthing else is speculation.Paul nowhere taught different types of the " gift of speaking in tongues".

So the most of your teachings base on speculation and questionable interpretation of the word of God.

it's too bad we don't have an emoticon to express how wrong and misinterpreted your understanding is. in fact, the more you try, and I've seen many of your posts on this subject of course, the worse it seems to be getting

I found this one though

 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
8,475
3,651
113
#47
Don't you folks just love it when a mod resorts to name calling.
there was no name calling spoonie...simply a truthful description of what he does...that is not name calling

I have dealt with Rogie a long long time...he believes if you speak in tongues you do so by the power of a demon

he may not come out and say that now, but sure has in the past

long long history of his anti tongue rants in this forum and why does he have to come on a thread created for informative and polite discussion and start his usual misguided and hateful pokes at people?

at any rate, why make that comment? are you his lawyer? :rolleyes:
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
8,475
3,651
113
#48
You have the audacity to call others hateful and ignorant. You attack me because I point out that Jesus never taught the apostles to speak in tongues or to pray in tongues. You take a misunderstanding of 1 Cor 12-14 and make doctrine that conflicts with the rest of scripture and act like you have the truth. You continue to build you unsound doctrine on Mark 16 the long ending. Sorry two errors do not make sound doctrine.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

this is another of your false understandings of scripture Roger

the Holy Spirit did not descend until AFTER...AFTER DUDE AFTER...Jesus ascended

honestly, can you not be truthful at least where scripture is point blank forward about events and no interpretation needed?

and by the way, I'm not sticking up for CS1 as much as I am really ashamed for both of you that you think so little of a moderator that you openly attack them

thing is, the problem with CS1 is that he gives you back your own medicine

poor little boys. should we send you a box of Kleenex and onions to help you cry?

ANY other forum would have banned you and your friend eons back

I know that, because I have been on quite a few in years gone by

in most forums you are not even allowed to contradict a mod
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
2,316
442
83
#49
it's too bad we don't have an emoticon to express how wrong and misinterpreted your understanding is. in fact, the more you try, and I've seen many of your posts on this subject of course, the worse it seems to be getting

I found this one though

You are to nice to me😊
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
2,316
442
83
#50
this is another of your false understandings of scripture Roger

the Holy Spirit did not descend until AFTER...AFTER DUDE AFTER...Jesus ascended

honestly, can you not be truthful at least where scripture is point blank forward about events and no interpretation needed?

and by the way, I'm not sticking up for CS1 as much as I am really ashamed for both of you that you think so little of a moderator that you openly attack them

thing is, the problem with CS1 is that he gives you back your own medicine

poor little boys. should we send you a box of Kleenex and onions to help you cry?

ANY other forum would have banned you and your friend eons back

I know that, because I have been on quite a few in years gone by

in most forums you are not even allowed to contradict a mod
Banning for an different biblical view? Thats then not far from an cult.
This thread claimes to have some truth about the Holy Spirit.
The only records you have for your truth that baptism with the Holy Spirit is always combined with speaking in tongues is acts 2,8,10,19.
Acts 8,10 and 19 can easily be interpretet different rhen you do, if you simply read the text as it is written.
You have to construct texts together which are written down to an different time (John,acts, 1.Cor.) for to get your doctrine. Which was in churchhistory not practised before Agnes ozman in 1900.
Even it was not taught in the letters to the church.
But you sell it as truth.
No gift to day seems more important today as the gift of speaking/praying in tongues. Paul called this gift the lowest gift. But showed an greater one. 1.Cor 13.
I wonder that we dont find so much about this gift love, but to an gift which supports in first way the person self and not others.
The other thing is that you treat children of God which are do not speaking in tongues as not real christians, as christians which deny the power of God. Ore something else.
This is what I cant find in my bible.

Thats why I cant believe that this doctrine is true.

Personel expieriences had also the montanists from the 2nd century, ore the JW ore Irvin and the New apostolic church. But this is for me no proof.
Our expieriences can be right, but the source of it can be wrong.k
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
8,475
3,651
113
#51
Banning for an different biblical view? Thats then not far from an cult.
This thread claimes to have some truth about the Holy Spirit.
The only records you have for your truth that baptism with the Holy Spirit is always combined with speaking in tongues is acts 2,8,10,19.
Acts 8,10 and 19 can easily be interpretet different rhen you do, if you simply read the text as it is written.
You have to construct texts together which are written down to an different time (John,acts, 1.Cor.) for to get your doctrine. Which was in churchhistory not practised before Agnes ozman in 1900.
Even it was not taught in the letters to the church.
But you sell it as truth.
No gift to day seems more important today as the gift of speaking/praying in tongues. Paul called this gift the lowest gift. But showed an greater one. 1.Cor 13.
I wonder that we dont find so much about this gift love, but to an gift which supports in first way the person self and not others.
The other thing is that you treat children of God which are do not speaking in tongues as not real christians, as christians which deny the power of God. Ore something else.
This is what I cant find in my bible.

Thats why I cant believe that this doctrine is true.

Personel expieriences had also the montanists from the 2nd century, ore the JW ore Irvin and the New apostolic church. But this is for me no proof.
Our expieriences can be right, but the source of it can be wrong.k

no

banning for being argumentative with a moderator and not only argumentative but pointedly and directly insulting at the same time. that is not disagreeing. that, is actually a personal attack

common sense

believe what you want but I don't know why you constantly have to tell everyone that you don't believe

we believe you already that you don't believe :LOL:

and I don't have a clue what this is about : Our experiences can be right, but the source of it can be wrong.

that's like saying you can drink poison if it tastes good. it's still poison. don't confuse seeking an experience with seeking God
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
2,316
442
83
#52
no

banning for being argumentative with a moderator and not only argumentative but pointedly and directly insulting at the same time. that is not disagreeing. that, is actually a personal attack

common sense

believe what you want but I don't know why you constantly have to tell everyone that you don't believe

we believe you already that you don't believe :LOL:

and I don't have a clue what this is about : Our experiences can be right, but the source of it can be wrong.

that's like saying you can drink poison if it tastes good. it's still poison. don't confuse seeking an experience with seeking God
I know in your eyes i am now an unbeliever. Finaly our Lord judges and we are responsible to Him.

I mean that the bible says that satan can show himself as angel of light. And that he will decive even believers in Christ.
I understand, that he will do what looks like right and from God, but is not.
So you can make expieriences which feeling right, but the source of this is false.

It is f.e. strange when I read from some that they are driven to speak in tongues about hours. Who has then the controle if you even dont know what you are saying/praying?
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
8,475
3,651
113
#53
I know in your eyes i am now an unbeliever. Finaly our Lord judges and we are responsible to Him.

I mean that the bible says that satan can show himself as angel of light. And that he will decive even believers in Christ.
I understand, that he will do what looks like right and from God, but is not.
So you can make expieriences which feeling right, but the source of this is false.

It is f.e. strange when I read from some that they are driven to speak in tongues about hours. Who has then the controle if you even dont know what you are saying/praying?

tell you what

if you can find a post where I said you are not a believer,

I will make a public apology to the entire forum

you know very well I was referring to the fact you do not believe in tongues and not your salvation

I mean don't you think that is a little low to say that to me?

shaking my head
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
2,316
442
83
#54
tell you what

if you can find a post where I said you are not a believer,

I will make a public apology to the entire forum

you know very well I was referring to the fact you do not believe in tongues and not your salvation

I mean don't you think that is a little low to say that to me?

shaking my head
No worry , you said i am an dont believer not an unbeliever. This is different. Sorry. 😊
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
8,475
3,651
113
#55
No worry , you said i am an dont believer not an unbeliever. This is different. Sorry. 😊
not quite sure what you are saying here, but it seems you misunderstood

no problem

I know English is not your first language :)

there would be very few times I would think someone was not really a believer even if they do not agree about tongues

but in that case, I would probably not post it...but I would pray about it
 

Oncefallen

Idiot in Chief
Staff member
Jan 15, 2011
5,487
1,572
113
#56
Guys (and gals), if you can't discuss a topic civilly, stay out of the thread.

If you have issue with posts or conduct of a staff member, take it up with RoboOp rather than hashing it out publicly.
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
8,475
3,651
113
#57
You are to nice to me😊

well I was being funny and you responded the same way

but you have to admit we have had a good many discussions in which you say the same things and there is nothing new here

so...not much else to say about it
 

KelbyofGod

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2017
711
255
63
#58
Hi Kelby, thank you for your clear response.
I will react to your answers to the same number.
Hi Wolfwint, I'm finally getting the chance to get back to you. My answers will be brief, but not spiteful. Feel free to ask for more examples or greater detail.

To 1. If this is an elementary teaching of the bible, then it is not understandable that we cant find this teaching during the church history. Even, when the so called church fathers didn't taught this. Some mentioned it, but did not practice it self.
Which church history are you following? Please remember, if a church doesn't have or teach "speaking in tongues", they would also exclude documents that support 'speaking in tongues' from their church records.

After 400 ad till 1900 you find the practice of speaking in tongues mostly among cults( RCC, MORMONS, NEW APOSTOLIC CATHOLIC CHURCH, JW. )
I honestly don't track histories of churches, but this quote seems to show that 'speaking in tongues' was indeed still present, but not in the church/churches you follow.

On a separate note, speaking in tongues isn't a doctrine. It is something a person either receives or doesn't receive. That's why it is not limited to one church or another. Anyone who seeks God can receive it...even if the preacher doesn't expect them to receive it, and/or doesn't tell them they are supposed to receive it. (As the Acts 10 account shows.)

Teachings to the church we find almost in the epistels, but not in a report book likes acts which goal is to report the history of first christianity and not to teach doctrines.
Did the Bible say Acts is not for doctrine?? Or was it man that told you that? (Please be honest) Because the Bible says "ALL scripture... is profitable for doctrine". Acts = Scripture, so Acts = profitable for doctrine.

I'm struggling to find words to convey how distasteful it is that churches disregard the book of Acts (the word of God) so they can tell their congregations "Please don't base your ideas about the Holy Ghost on what God put in the book of Acts, but instead on what we teach."

One reason we need books like Acts, and Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, where we can SEE the fulfilling of scriptures, is so we cannot deny what it actually looks like when it arrives. Because what we THINK it should be (by trying to understand the scriptures) often bears little resemblance to what it ACTUALLY is when it arrives. To see an example of this, one only has to look at the Jewish scholars and church leaders when the Messiah actually arrived. They studied and studied the scriptures...but couldn't even recognize Him when he was standing in their midst. So it is with the Holy Ghost. Did you or I (by reading Matthew-John) expect that the Holy Ghost would come with speaking in tongues??? And if not, when we saw it in Acts 2, did we then understand and expect it to be given to Cornelius and his group in Acts 10? or again in Acts 19? If it wasn't for the word of God (book of Acts) RECORDING it for our observation, we would likely have missed it altogether.

I'll address the points from the rest of your quote in another posting, but I kinda want to see how you react to this much first. However, I may post more before you get a chance to respond.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
2,316
442
83
#59
Hi Wolfwint, I'm finally getting the chance to get back to you. My answers will be brief, but not spiteful. Feel free to ask for more examples or greater detail.


Which church history are you following? Please remember, if a church doesn't have or teach "speaking in tongues", they would also exclude documents that support 'speaking in tongues' from their church records.


I honestly don't track histories of churches, but this quote seems to show that 'speaking in tongues' was indeed still present, but not in the church/churches you follow.

On a separate note, speaking in tongues isn't a doctrine. It is something a person either receives or doesn't receive. That's why it is not limited to one church or another. Anyone who seeks God can receive it...even if the preacher doesn't expect them to receive it, and/or doesn't tell them they are supposed to receive it. (As the Acts 10 account shows.)


Did the Bible say Acts is not for doctrine?? Or was it man that told you that? (Please be honest) Because the Bible says "ALL scripture... is profitable for doctrine". Acts = Scripture, so Acts = profitable for doctrine.

I'm struggling to find words to convey how distasteful it is that churches disregard the book of Acts (the word of God) so they can tell their congregations "Please don't base your ideas about the Holy Ghost on what God put in the book of Acts, but instead on what we teach."

One reason we need books like Acts, and Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, where we can SEE the fulfilling of scriptures, is so we cannot deny what it actually looks like when it arrives. Because what we THINK it should be (by trying to understand the scriptures) often bears little resemblance to what it ACTUALLY is when it arrives. To see an example of this, one only has to look at the Jewish scholars and church leaders when the Messiah actually arrived. They studied and studied the scriptures...but couldn't even recognize Him when he was standing in their midst. So it is with the Holy Ghost. Did you or I (by reading Matthew-John) expect that the Holy Ghost would come with speaking in tongues??? And if not, when we saw it in Acts 2, did we then understand and expect it to be given to Cornelius and his group in Acts 10? or again in Acts 19? If it wasn't for the word of God (book of Acts) RECORDING it for our observation, we would likely have missed it altogether.

I'll address the points from the rest of your quote in another posting, but I kinda want to see how you react to this much first. However, I may post more before you get a chance to respond.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Well, thats good. Give me some time, then i will response to your post.
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
2,316
442
83
#60
Hi Wolfwint, I'm finally getting the chance to get back to you. My answers will be brief, but not spiteful. Feel free to ask for more examples or greater detail.


Which church history are you following? Please remember, if a church doesn't have or teach "speaking in tongues", they would also exclude documents that support 'speaking in tongues' from their church records.


I honestly don't track histories of churches, but this quote seems to show that 'speaking in tongues' was indeed still present, but not in the church/churches you follow.

On a separate note, speaking in tongues isn't a doctrine. It is something a person either receives or doesn't receive. That's why it is not limited to one church or another. Anyone who seeks God can receive it...even if the preacher doesn't expect them to receive it, and/or doesn't tell them they are supposed to receive it. (As the Acts 10 account shows.)


Did the Bible say Acts is not for doctrine?? Or was it man that told you that? (Please be honest) Because the Bible says "ALL scripture... is profitable for doctrine". Acts = Scripture, so Acts = profitable for doctrine.

I'm struggling to find words to convey how distasteful it is that churches disregard the book of Acts (the word of God) so they can tell their congregations "Please don't base your ideas about the Holy Ghost on what God put in the book of Acts, but instead on what we teach."

One reason we need books like Acts, and Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, where we can SEE the fulfilling of scriptures, is so we cannot deny what it actually looks like when it arrives. Because what we THINK it should be (by trying to understand the scriptures) often bears little resemblance to what it ACTUALLY is when it arrives. To see an example of this, one only has to look at the Jewish scholars and church leaders when the Messiah actually arrived. They studied and studied the scriptures...but couldn't even recognize Him when he was standing in their midst. So it is with the Holy Ghost. Did you or I (by reading Matthew-John) expect that the Holy Ghost would come with speaking in tongues??? And if not, when we saw it in Acts 2, did we then understand and expect it to be given to Cornelius and his group in Acts 10? or again in Acts 19? If it wasn't for the word of God (book of Acts) RECORDING it for our observation, we would likely have missed it altogether.

I'll address the points from the rest of your quote in another posting, but I kinda want to see how you react to this much first. However, I may post more before you get a chance to respond.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Dear Kelby, when i speak from church history, then i speak from the whole churchhistory and not from an specific denomination. According some defination churchhistory is all what happend about christianity after the biblical evidence.
So the RCC f.e. dominate in the westchurch the history till the reformation time.
It is in my eyes remarkable, that non single founder of the reformation taught and practice in tongues. Although this happend in certain extreme groups like in germany (münster). But these groups even the use prophecie and speaking in tongues dont become known as serious biblical groups, but as heretic groups with much sinful deeds. So i dont believe that the Holy Spirit stand behind such groups.
I dont see Irving and the New Apostolic church, the Mormons, JW ore the RCC as regular christian churches.I dont know any denomination which taught and practised speaking in tongues. From their foundation on.
No Baptist, no Mennonite, no Calvinist, no Protestant, no reformed
(today of course you will find it in every denomination)

You say it is not an teaching.
Well, then i must clearify what i understand under the gift of talking in tongues.4
According 1.Cor. 12- 14, speaking in tongues is an gift like all other spirituell gifts and is not the highest gift.

- (btw in the epistel to the romans, which content nearly everything what a christian should know. The gift of speaking in tongues is not even mentioned. Thats not understandable if this gift is playing the role in the christian life according it is teached today)-

If you mean that i agree with you that this is no teaching.

But,
what we find since 1900 is with the first person which became the gift of speaking in tongues (Agnes Ozman)
became it an doctrine. The baptising with the Holy Spirit is combined with the gift of speaking in tongues.
This was not taught and practized before, orherwise Agnes Ozman would not called the first person and the beginning of the movement would not start with this event.

Also i have to clarify that I see an diffetent between church ( gatheting from believers) and mission situation.
I was 20 years involved in mission ministry in india, and from the witnesses often healing and miracles played in role that people turned to Christ, when Missionaries ore the church prayed. So in mission conditions the Lord uses the word and more supernatural deeds ( sometimes also in translating from a tongue) to call the people, what he normally not must do among believers (church).

Today we discuss about speaking in tongues among believers. And this arose with the pentecostal doctrine of baptized with the Holy Spirit and as proof for this the gift of speaking in tongues. Later then came other doctrines from charismatic side.

Also strange for me and not to read in the NT lettets to the church ore the Coworkers, that the baptising with the Holy Spirit goes along with wind, noise, shoumove out of controle, lcontrol out of controle, winding on the ground, acting and noising like animals, laying without ability to move.