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

[wolfwint]

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

You quotet 2.Tim 3,16 And this is correct. But is it also correct to use the scripture according what we want?
How many groups and cults useing the scripture for their false doctrines?
F.e. i belong now to an russian german church. They seperatet from an other church which taught, that woman have to wear only dresses. And wearing trousers is a sin. Because in OT it was said to the Isrealites that woman should not wear male cloth.

You realy would say from a scripture we can make an doctrine?

We can learn from all scripture. From the hymes f.e. how they glorified God. How they prayed to God.
F.e.We can learn how the Lord dealed with the folk of Israel.
But my view is, we cant make an doctrine where is no doctrine.
What John said? At the end of his gospel. Only a a small part from that what Jesus did is written down.

As I said, acts 2, 8, 10, 19 can also interprete different then pentecostals ore charismatics do it.

So much for now.
Our Lord may bless you

 

[garee]

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."

Acts (scripture) contains the doctrine of God, the word of God's prophecy . It contains all the doctrines of God that are inspired from heaven . The law of tongues is a doctrine of God and not a doctrine of men. As a sign what does it confirm and in respect to who?

 

[notuptome]

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.

The poster said what he said. I did not change what he said but agreed with him. Perhaps it would be better if he considered what he said before he said it.

There still remains no evidence of anyone praying in tongues and Jesus never prayed in tongues. Jesus prayed to teach us how to pray and demonstrate the need for us to pray.

When the disciples asked Christ to teach them to pray Jesus did not teach them to pray in tongues nor did He tell them to wait for the Holy Spirit to teach them to pray in tongues.

Mat 6:5-18 Luke 11

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[UnderGrace]

Amen

Biblical “tongues” (in Greek - ‘glossa’, but also ‘dialektos’) as referenced particularly in Acts and Corinthians is to always be translated and understood as real language(s), not ecstatic utterances.

The poster said what he said. I did not change what he said but agreed with him. Perhaps it would be better if he considered what he said before he said it.

There still remains no evidence of anyone praying in tongues and Jesus never prayed in tongues. Jesus prayed to teach us how to pray and demonstrate the need for us to pray.

When the disciples asked Christ to teach them to pray Jesus did not teach them to pray in tongues nor did He tell them to wait for the Holy Spirit to teach them to pray in tongues.

Mat 6:5-18 Luke 11

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Absolutely]

Hi Kelby, you claim to teach the truth.
I have an earnest question about the Holy Spirit and the combination with the gift of speaking of tongues.
Why this is taught since the pentecostal movement started in the beginning of the 20th century?
But I cant find this teaching in any epistels to the church.
What i can find, is that special events, out of pentecost, in which special groups (samarians acts 8, gentiles acts 10 and disciples of John acts 19) received the Holy Spirit with laying their hands on them and speaking in tongues as it was reportet in acts 2 to the jews.
But only this reports says nothing about that this will be in future an expierience for all believers.
And when I add 1.Cor.12 30 to this. Where clear the statement is that not all believers will get the gift of speaking in tongues, as not all believers get the gift of healing.
How then it can come to such a teaching that the receiving of the Holy Spirit is combined with the gift of speaking in tongues?

And since not all believers manifest fruit or ministry and CHOOSE to be passive believers,then we can also play ministry and fruit backwards as well?
No fruit = all salvation ceased,even though some are fruitful?
Your logic is bazarre.

 

[Absolutely]

Hi Kelby, thank you for your clear response.
I will react to your answeres to the same number.
To 1. If this is an elementary teaching of the bible, then it is not understandable that we cant find this teaching during the churchhistory. Even, when the so called church fathers didn't taught this. Some mentioned it, but did not practise it self. After 400 ad till 1900 you find the practise of speaking in tongues mostly among cults( RCC, MORMONS, NEW APOSTOLIC CATHOLIC CHURCH, JW. )

To2 teachings to the church we find almost in the epistels, but not in a reportbook likes acts which goal is to report the history of first christianity and not to teach doctrines. If you dont consider this, you can come to wrong conclusions.
What we as church should know is almost written in the epistels.
So far a lack of this teaching shows me that this was not a issue, orherwise it would be mentioned and taught.

To3 thats correct. Its the only biblical acount. But it has to agree with the whole scripture. And here we have the fact that we can understand acts in at least 2 views. The pentecostal/charismatic way, ore the understanding that acts 8,10 and 19 are only mentioned to show the jews that Jesus is there for all and not alone for the jews.
For your point you have no scriptual proof out of acts, for "my" view i can find out of acts 1. Cor 12,30. and a laxk for an important issue out of acts. Which is depend how you exegete the scripture. We would expect further this teaching in the epistels, because acts was written far after the founding of churches.
You mentioned personel expieriences. Those we have to messure with the scripture.
For example, i know an in germany famous charismatic leader who is defending the RRC doctrine and is also teaching in evangelical conferences(of vourse witjout saying something about RCC doctrine) From my understanding this is not possible.

The other points will follow.

""So far a lack of this teaching shows me that this was not a issue, orherwise it would be mentioned and taught"".

Uh,the one that spoke in tongues more than all of them wrote half the nt.

.....and you dismiss it as fluff

 

[Absolutely]

Amen

Biblical “tongues” (in Greek - ‘glossa’, but also ‘dialektos’) as referenced particularly in Acts and Corinthians is to always be translated and understood as real language(s), not ecstatic utterances.

Nobody speaks old english. It is all but extinct.
Try reading it. It is " gibberish".
Your point is not even possible because you assume God can not understand a language from heaven because you can not wrap your mind around that concept.
Paul never said " don't speak in tongues when all alone"
You are fabricating a notion that a=b.
He said when in a metting let one interpret.
Paul said " my spirit prays,but my mind is unfruitful"

Lets say,in a meeting God gives a message in aztec. Since 99% of the world does not speak it,how in the world do you mentally reconcile it is nor gibberish. You don't. You call it gibberish.

 

[Absolutely]

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

Total balony.
The bible AUTHENTICATES the operation of tongues as given to believers. Nowhere has it ceased or even implied it has ceased.
The cessationist MUST make that stuff up.

 

[Absolutely]

The poster said what he said. I did not change what he said but agreed with him. Perhaps it would be better if he considered what he said before he said it.

There still remains no evidence of anyone praying in tongues and Jesus never prayed in tongues. Jesus prayed to teach us how to pray and demonstrate the need for us to pray.

When the disciples asked Christ to teach them to pray Jesus did not teach them to pray in tongues nor did He tell them to wait for the Holy Spirit to teach them to pray in tongues.

Mat 6:5-18 Luke 11

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Nope. He COMMANDED them to wait in Jerusalem for the Holy Ghost.
Hang around after the resurrection.
You will find the prophetic word fulfilled.

Psssst....it is called pentecost.

The epistles were written by Holy Ghost baptised men to Holy Ghost baptised believers.

 

[garee]

Nobody speaks old english. It is all but extinct.
Try reading it. It is " gibberish".
Your point is not even possible because you assume God can not understand a language from heaven because you can not wrap your mind around that concept.
Paul never said " don't speak in tongues when all alone"
You are fabricating a notion that a=b.
He said when in a metting let one interpret.
Paul said " my spirit prays,but my mind is unfruitful"

Lets say,in a meeting God gives a message in aztec. Since 99% of the world does not speak it,how in the world do you mentally reconcile it is nor gibberish. You don't. You call it gibberish.

In the end of the matter it always reverts back to the foundation of the law of tongues .Then we can begin to build on it.

As a sign what does it confirm and who is it in respect to ?

 

[Absolutely]

Lets just say a cesationist has a dream from heaven.
Specific details about leaving a situation in business where he is unequally yoked .
Where do they go with that?
I mean since God is just bound by the natural??????

Do they also call that visitation as gibberish and fluff????

See,that is the problem when we begin to cut out the power of God. Where does it end?

 

[Absolutely]

In the end of the matter it always reverts back to the foundation of the law of tongues .Then we can begin to build on it.

As a sign what does it confirm and who is it in respect to ?

Your logic makes no sense in what Paul declares.

A simple test fit works for the power of God authenticated by the word.
What is behind the hope that gifts have ceased?
Ceasationism is TOTALLY made up

Not biblical.
We have the high ground in that the Bible AUTHENTICATES the gift of tongues.
You just ASSUME that "it is ONLY for a sign"
The bible refutes your claim.
Simple as that.
We definately have the high ground because we look to the word to verify what is manifest and freely,freely given.
All the opposition is " technical" with a bit of desperation.
A tireless and futile preoccupation with resisting a biblical and spiritual outpouring in our troubled day.

You never hear your camp bring out my verses...NEVER.

 

[UnderGrace]

Nobody speaks old english. It is all but extinct.
Try reading it. It is " gibberish".
Your point is not even possible because you assume God can not understand a language from heaven because you can not wrap your mind around that concept.
Paul never said " don't speak in tongues when all alone"
You are fabricating a notion that a=b.
He said when in a metting let one interpret.
Paul said " my spirit prays,but my mind is unfruitful"

Lets say,in a meeting God gives a message in aztec. Since 99% of the world does not speak it,how in the world do you mentally reconcile it is nor gibberish. You don't. You call it gibberish.

Linguistically speaking according to years of analysis "ecstatic speech" has no structure (morpheme, phoneme) that would make it a language.

 

[stonesoffire]

One of the benefits of praying in the Spirit or through Holy Spirit, is that controlling of others actions through manipulated prayers is unable to do.

And don't tell me this isn't a problem. We can be praying our own will for one rather than Gods will. In the Spirit not so.

 

[FollowHisSteps]

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 are offering speculation in place of sound doctrine. Experience over biblical truth.

Tongues existed long before Pentecost. Apostate Israel used their lips to praise God but their hearts were far from Him this is evidenced in the OT.

Can you show any OT prophet praying in tongues? Can you show where Jesus prayed in tongues? Can you show where Jesus taught the disciples to pray in tongues?

Tongues at Pentecost were not for prayer but for evangelism. Tongues were used at Pentecost to proclaim the advent of Messiah in all the languages to all the souls present that day.

Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

18 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.
19 But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.
1 Cor 14:18-19

14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.
1 Corinthians 14:14-15

Paul is talking about tongues is primarily about praise of ones spirit talking to God.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

One of the benefits of praying in the Spirit or through Holy Spirit, is that controlling of others actions through manipulated prayers is unable to do.

And don't tell me this isn't a problem. We can be praying our own will for one rather than Gods will. In the Spirit not so.

Not sure what you mean sis. If one is prayng around other people and they here, An interpretor is required. So they would still hear what you are praying.

Just saying

 

[Absolutely]

Not sure what you mean sis. If one is prayng around other people and they here, An interpretor is required. So they would still hear what you are praying.

Just saying

She is not talking about that.
She is spot on,in that when the SPIRIT prays through me,my prayers are pure and not trying to "get my way" through praying to control others.

That is an advanage of praying in the spirit.
As paul who spoke in tongues more than anyone affirms " my Spirit prays,but my mind is unfruitful"

 

[eternally-gratefull]

She is not talking about that.
She is spot on,in that when the SPIRIT prays through me,my prayers are pure and not trying to "get my way" through praying to control others.

That is an advanage of praying in the spirit.
As paul who spoke in tongues more than anyone affirms " my Spirit prays,but my mind is unfruitful"

1. I am not sure paul spoke more than anyone, This is not found in Scripture.

2. Paul said his spirit prays.

Nothing in context says those are audible prayers (to the person the spirit is praying for) The spirit prays for me all the time, I do not hear what he says, But I have faith he prays for me, and I see the Fruits of his prayers

And I would like her to answer, Because she was talking about the context of others. Not herself.

 

[Absolutely]

1. I am not sure paul spoke more than anyone, This is not found in Scripture.

2. Paul said his spirit prays.

Nothing in context says those are audible prayers (to the person the spirit is praying for) The spirit prays for me all the time, I do not hear what he says, But I have faith he prays for me, and I see the Fruits of his prayers

And I would like her to answer, Because she was talking about the context of others. Not herself.

Exactly.
She was saying( in my opinion) that when we pray,our prayers can be tainted with selfish desires opposed to God's will.
Those around us. Many times in praying for others we do not know God's will.
So,praying in the Spirit avoids that.

As far as paul not praying in tongues more than anyone,he said he did.

1 cor 14
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:0

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Exactly.
She was saying( in my opinion) that when we pray,our prayers can be tainted with selfish desires opposed to God's will.
Those around us. Many times in praying for others we do not know God's will.
So,praying in the Spirit avoids that.

As far as paul not praying in tongues more than anyone,he said he did.

1 cor 14
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:0

One of the benefits of praying in the Spirit or through Holy Spirit, is that controlling of others actions through manipulated prayers is unable to do.

And don't tell me this isn't a problem. We can be praying our own will for one rather than Gods will. In the Spirit not so.

Once again, I would like her to explain, As the context of her statement is CONTROLLING OTHER’s ACTIONS.

As for 1 cor 14. It means he spoke more than the people he spoke too Not that he spoke it more than anyone else ever did.