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.

KelbyofGod

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2017
640
211
43
The thing that bothers me about speaking in tongues is how misused they are. Speaking in tongues is a spiritual gift, not something you can learn. Like any other spiritual gift, tongues is not given to all believers. There MUST be someone there who can interpret the tongues for the congregation so it does not become nothing more than emotional babbling. I Cor. 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two--or at the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. " I have too often seen "speaking in tongues" without the interpreter, whip people up into a frenzy. This is not Godly, and should be discouraged.
NLT,
Thanks for reading and posting. Do you by chance have "speaking in tongues" as a prayer language? (rather than the kind to be spoken in the church for the purpose of being interpreted).

God loves you.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
2,159
339
83
Please note the parts that I made bold.

The second highlighted portion is why there is a problem. One of us says the record in the book of Acts is more relevant than the records of man. The other says no, the records of man are more applicable than the record in the book of Acts.

However, the topic is Holy Ghost... not belief. The bible shows a separation in the two.... meaning it is possible that a person can believe but not yet have the Holy Ghost.

Lastly, the bulk of your question(s) have been answered. However, I feel no obligation to tell you why the sources you choose to trust did not record some certain thing from 300AD-1900AD any more than I feel obligated to tell you why they didn't use electricity during nearly the same time period...even though that, too, was available.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Regarding acts, its not in the way that someone takes man records more then the records of the book of acts.
The point is, in my view, that one said acts 2,8, 10 and 19 are written as an information for the believer to accept that the Gospel is for all mankind.
And the other makes out of it a doctrine, that who receives the Holy Spirit got the gift to speak in tongues as proof for it.
And split this in a two different meanings: the one meaning is that that this also a matter of be saved.
The other said it is as empowerment
and to edify the believer.

I could follow your view, if I could find this anywhere else taught in the scripture.
But this teaching is not taught in the scripture to other believers. This is the main point. Add to this it was also not taught during the churchhistory till 1900. So in my understanding this is an man made doctrine and not an biblical teaching, even you took it out of the bible.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
6,505
2,500
113
Was it not to the apostles that Jesus said "if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you." ? (John 16:7, at the last supper) If so, it doesn't sound like he was making an exception for them.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
I would say we know the Apostles are an exception since no one else in Scripture is recorded as having received the Holy Spirit by having Jesus breathe on them. His going away refers to His crucifixion and death. Otherwise He could have breathed on them AT the last Supper.
 

Guojing

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2019
1,073
222
63
I would say we know the Apostles are an exception since no one else in Scripture is recorded as having received the Holy Spirit by having Jesus breathe on them. His going away refers to His crucifixion and death. Otherwise He could have breathed on them AT the last Supper.
Out of curiosity, if you feel the Apostles are an exception, what do you make of v23, the verse that Christians, but not Catholics, tend to skip. Did they also receive the power to forgive sins as well?
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
6,505
2,500
113
You don't know how happy it makes me that you answered this post. Not because it provokes a battle, but because I know what you have :) And I know that I can simply tell you something and you'll know how to go pray about it and actually let God answer you. (whenever he sees fit, rather than rushing it).

So, I'll share this with you, knowing that I'll still carry respect for you whether you are able to receive it now, or if instead it takes a while and you receive it later. :) And of course, I intend to 'challenge' your ability to believe. Not towards overthrowing it, but rather like you are weightlifting to see if you can handle an extra plate on each side. :) The thing is this:

The apostles didn't receive the Holy Ghost twice. It was impossible for them to receive the NT Holy Ghost until Jesus was glorified (John 7:39 (as you know)... but this does not mean when he died on the cross....it means when he ascended... because He said also "if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you." John 16:7 KJV therefore it was impossible for them to have received the Promise/Comforter/HolyGhost until he departed (at his ascension Acts 1). Shortly afterwards they received the Holy Ghost.(Acts 2).

Here's the hard part.... Have you ever considered the reason people why want so badly to declare themselves or anyone else as "saved"?? <--really think about that.

SPOILER ALERT: ............. It's because of fear, not faith.

Men love that word (and have nearly deified it and built a shrine to it, lol) because it gives the illusion that everything difficult is in the past. I call it an illusion because of the very first stipulation Jesus mentioned regarding how to be "saved". He said "he that endureth to the end shall be saved." <---doesn't sound much like the way men use it today, does it?

The word saved simply means "delivered" and/or "protected".

Do a bible search and check it out. See if those words (the definition of saved) give clarity pretty much everywhere the word "saved" is used.

And consider this.... if you "save" money, that means you "protect" and "deliver" it from things that would devour it. And if you "save" yourself until marriage, that means you "protect" and "deliver" yourself intact and undefiled all the way to the wedding.

God was "saving"....(protecting and delivering) the apostles since the day each was conceived. It doesn't make it anything more or less if we try to declare them "ultimately saved" at some point, just so we can feel good about it.

There's so much more to say on this topic but I think I'll wait to see what questions/comments you might have so far.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Uh oh! You appear to have gone off the rails in this post!

ALL born again WILL endure to the end. The enduring is descriptive of the saved, NOT prescriptive.

I'm not even slightly sure how you can say they somehow DIDN'T receive the Holy Spirit when Jesus breathed on them, when the text unequivically says they did!
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
6,505
2,500
113
Out of curiosity, if you feel the Apostles are an exception, what do you make of v23, the verse that Christians, but not Catholics, tend to skip. Did they also receive the power to forgive sins as well?
Well, I hope an I don't know is an acceptable answer! LOL

Jesus said something similar earlier in His ministry.

Maybe this has to do with this verse:
Matthew 19:28 New King James Version (NKJV)
28 So Jesus said to them, “Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
 

Guojing

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2019
1,073
222
63
Well, I hope an I don't know is an acceptable answer! LOL

Jesus said something similar earlier in His ministry.

Maybe this has to do with this verse:
Matthew 19:28 New King James Version (NKJV)
28 So Jesus said to them, “Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Wise choice, many Christians I have met didn't even realized that verse existed. I wouldn't have realized it a few years ago too, better not open Pandora's box ;)

But I do agree with you there, the 12 of them clearly have special privileges, which includes judging the 12 tribes of Israel. If Jesus is willing to promise them that, then it makes sense they are also given special power to forgive sins.
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
1,767
356
83
The thing that bothers me about speaking in tongues is how misused they are. Speaking in tongues is a spiritual gift, not something you can learn. Like any other spiritual gift, tongues is not given to all believers. There MUST be someone there who can interpret the tongues for the congregation so it does not become nothing more than emotional babbling. I Cor. 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two--or at the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. " I have too often seen "speaking in tongues" without the interpreter, whip people up into a frenzy. This is not Godly, and should be discouraged.
No sir.
Paul differentiates speaking in tongues in private prayer,from speaking in tongues in the assembly in prophetic messages.

The cessationist ignores Paul's differentiation and misquotes the narrative to present a convenient falsehood.

Paul said "my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful"
And, "I speak in tongues more than you all" ...( no mention of anything interpreted)
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
1,767
356
83
Brother it is better I leave this thread.
Nobody could show me from the scripture that this teaching is right.
And the respones i got shows me that i cant

Where Jesus said, that speaking in tongues is the proof that you are baptised/ filled with the Holy Spirit?
Where this is taught in any scripture to believers?
This was first taught in 1900. So what with the believers before 1900?
Ore which not follow this pentecostal/ charismatic doctrine?
Here ya go.
Eat your heart out in knowing you dont know what you are talking about.
A.D. 100 - Eusebius (Church Historian):
Writing to the preaching evangelists who were yet living, Eusebius says: "Of those that flourished in these times, Quadratus is said to have been distinguished for his prophetical gifts. There were many others, also, noted in these times who held rank in the apostolic succession... the Holy Spirit also wrought many wonders as yet through them, so that as the Gospel was heard, men in crowds voluntarily and eagerly embraced the true faith with their whole minds."
A.D. 115-202 - Irenaeus:
Irenaeus was a pupil of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John. He wrote in his book "Against Heresies", Book V, vi.: "In like manner do we also hear many brethren in the church who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light, for the general benefit, the hidden things of men and declare the mysteries of God, who also the apostles term spiritual."
A.D. 300 - The Early Martyrs:
The early martyrs enjoyed these gifts. Dean Ferrar, in his book "Darkness to Dawn" states: "Even for the minutest allusions and particulars I have contemporary authority." He refers to the persecuted Christians in Rome singing and speaking in unknown tongues.
A.D. 390 - Chrysostom of Constantinople:
Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, writes: "Whoever was baptised in apostolic days, he straightway spoke with tongues, for since on their coming over from idols, without any clear knowledge or training in the Scriptures, they at once received the Spirit, not that they saw the Spirit, for He is invisible, but God's grace bestowed some sensible proof of His energy, and one straightway spoke in the Persian language, another in the Roman, another in the Indian, another in some other tongues, and this made manifest to them that were without that it was the Spirit in the very person speaking. Wherefore the apostle calls it the manifestation of the Spirit which is given to every man to profit withal."
A.D. 400 - Augustine of Hippo:
Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, one of the four great fathers of the Latin Church and considered the greatest of them all: "We still do what the apostles did when they laid hands on the Samaritans and called down the Holy Spirit on them in the laying-on of hands. It is expected that converts should speak with new tongues."
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
1,767
356
83
If i am not wrong we had till post 111 a good conversation. And I had in my first post no 15 a serious question.
Maby i was to optimistic.
What I meanwhile find out is, that there is nobody who can answer my question. But i am treat as unbeliever because of my questions.
For me a sign that this teaching is wrong.
You are talking about truth, but regarding this particular teaching i asked for an answer this is no truth.
True as it is written in acts, but not as teaching for today.
Thank you for your kind manner to answer.
The Jew will not read the NT.
If they ever do,most of them get saved.

Your deal is similar,in that you are locked in and blinded by your own personal restrictions.
You actually hope God lost power.
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
1,767
356
83
LOL you don't want to hear an answer, you want to believe your question can't be answered yet it does not change the context of Book Acts, what Jesus said in John chapter 14, 15 and what is seen in 1cor 12 to 14 chapters.
bingo.
He sat down like a stubborn mule.
He is parked at the crossroads of convenient truth and doubterville
 

KelbyofGod

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2017
640
211
43
I would say we know the Apostles are an exception since no one else in Scripture is recorded as having received the Holy Spirit by having Jesus breathe on them. His going away refers to His crucifixion and death. Otherwise He could have breathed on them AT the last Supper.
If you would like to get technical, which I'm willing to do for clarification's sake, you could also say that even the apostles are not recorded as having received the Holy Ghost at the moment Jesus breathed on them. Look closely. It only records what Jesus did, not the apostles' participation.

He did something and gave them a commandment. It doesn't say there was an immediate response or outcome.
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
6,234
2,126
113
If you would like to get technical, which I'm willing to do for clarification's sake, you could also say that even the apostles are not recorded as having received the Holy Ghost at the moment Jesus breathed on them. Look closely. It only records what Jesus did, not the apostles' participation.

He did something and gave them a commandment. It doesn't say there was an immediate response or outcome.

I agree with what you say here

why did Jesus tell the Apostles to wait for the Holy Spirit if they already had Him?

further, Jesus also stated that He had to return to the Father so that the Holy Spirit could be sent

I believe it is clear that the Apostles received the Holy Spirit at the same time as everyone else in the upper room
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
6,234
2,126
113
NLT518 said:
The thing that bothers me about speaking in tongues is how misused they are. Speaking in tongues is a spiritual gift, not something you can learn. Like any other spiritual gift, tongues is not given to all believers. There MUST be someone there who can interpret the tongues for the congregation so it does not become nothing more than emotional babbling. I Cor. 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two--or at the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. " I have too often seen "speaking in tongues" without the interpreter, whip people up into a frenzy. This is not Godly, and should be discouraged.
you are addressing public or congregational use of the gift of tongues. I agree it should be done 'decently and in order' as Paul states.
however, I would like to ask you about this 'often' you mention with regards to people being 'whipped into a frenzy'

I have never seen people 'whipped into a frenzy' and I have been around alot of different churches that do believe in the gifts,

if the congregation is praying in tongues that does not need interpretation as Absolutely already pointed out to you

but further, in how many churches or how many times have you actually witnessed this frenzy you speak of and what does that look like?

when someone paints with a very broad brush, I would expect some specific illustration or information because anyone can say anything when generalizing that way

for example, I could state that everyone here has only negative remarks to make

that is not a true statement. only some people here have only negative remarks to make. that really narrows the field and changes the perception



No sir.
Paul differentiates speaking in tongues in private prayer,from speaking in tongues in the assembly in prophetic messages.

The cessationist ignores Paul's differentiation and misquotes the narrative to present a convenient falsehood.

Paul said "my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful"
And, "I speak in tongues more than you all" ...( no mention of anything interpreted)
you are so right concerning how a cessationist tries to explain how tongues should be used

they do not seem able to understand there is a difference and it certainly does present a falsehood that fits right in with their understanding which is NOT the correct understanding as presented by Paul
 

KelbyofGod

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2017
640
211
43
Regarding acts, its not in the way that someone takes man records more then the records of the book of acts.
The point is, in my view, that one said acts 2,8, 10 and 19 are written as an information for the believer to accept that the Gospel is for all mankind.
And the other makes out of it a doctrine, that who receives the Holy Spirit got the gift to speak in tongues as proof for it.
And split this in a two different meanings: the one meaning is that that this also a matter of be saved.
The other said it is as empowerment
and to edify the believer.

I could follow your view, if I could find this anywhere else taught in the scripture.
But this teaching is not taught in the scripture to other believers. This is the main point. Add to this it was also not taught during the churchhistory till 1900. So in my understanding this is an man made doctrine and not an biblical teaching, even you took it out of the bible.
You'd mentioned earlier that you held this opinion as early as post #15. There have been more than a thousand posts since that time, (many for answer and/or clarification of the answers). My question is... What have you learned during all this time?

In love of Jesus,
Kelby
 

7seasrekeyed

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2017
6,234
2,126
113
although I use 'Got Questions' from time to time myself, it should be noted that they have a cessationist view of 'tongues'

so an answer provided from that site will be slanted with that view in mind
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
9,384
733
113
Regarding acts, its not in the way that someone takes man records more then the records of the book of acts.
The point is, in my view, that one said acts 2,8, 10 and 19 are written as an information for the believer to accept that the Gospel is for all mankind.
And the other makes out of it a doctrine, that who receives the Holy Spirit got the gift to speak in tongues as proof for it.
And split this in a two different meanings: the one meaning is that that this also a matter of be saved.
The other said it is as empowerment
and to edify the believer.

I could follow your view, if I could find this anywhere else taught in the scripture.
But this teaching is not taught in the scripture to other believers. This is the main point. Add to this it was also not taught during the churchhistory till 1900. So in my understanding this is an man made doctrine and not an biblical teaching, even you took it out of the bible.

I would agree with that. The proof in respect to that seen the sign. It clearly does not edify but rather just the opposite....(curse) it confirms those who do require a sign before the believe. The stumbling of the cross for those and yet for all as to what God has revealed as it is written God shows them as unbelievers.(no faith)

For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;1 Corinthians 1:22-23

They who loved their wonderments made Jesus into a "circus seal" mocking Him . The same one he mocks with stammering lip in Isaiah 28 as a sign against them to confirm something.

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

Jesus informed those who seek to confirm after a suppositious wonderment gospel as another authority other than as it is written alone

John 4:48 Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.
 

KelbyofGod

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2017
640
211
43
Uh oh! You appear to have gone off the rails in this post!

ALL born again WILL endure to the end. The enduring is descriptive of the saved, NOT prescriptive.
If you can receive this without getting angry, I would say that "the rails" are the doctrines that encourage you to read that verse backwards to how it is written.

Matthew 10:22 KJV
And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

"Endureth to the end" is the prerequisite
"Shall be saved" is the result.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
9,384
733
113
I would say we know the Apostles are an exception since no one else in Scripture is recorded as having received the Holy Spirit by having Jesus breathe on them. His going away refers to His crucifixion and death. Otherwise He could have breathed on them AT the last Supper.

I think the "breathing on" is like spit, sweat, or water it is used as a metaphor in
parables to represent the doctrine of God that come from above. .He is our breath of eternal life.

God is not a man as us to breath on is to receive the unseen work of Christ. It as it is written does work in us both to will and perform His good pleasure.