Speaking in tongues

  • 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.

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,165
1,795
113
The part is the OT. The OT is the shadow of the things now made open in Christ. The OT expectation of the coming Messiah is completed. Yes the three gifts have ended. What you claim today is not biblical or Spiritual but earthly.
Again, this is eisegesis, not something that fits into the actual passage we are discussing. You take a concept that does not fit and invent a new doctrine (or repeat a doctrine someone else invented by doing that.) I Corinthians 1:7 says, 'So that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' Paul gives us a time frame during which his teachings on spiritual gifts in this book would apply.

Revelation predicts men that would prophesy and do miracles that would come after its final 'amen.' How do you think the two witnesses will be able to prophesy?

It is what the bible clearly states. The gospel is propagated by preaching not by wonders or miracles or tongues as claimed by the charismatic or Pentecostal assemblies.
Above you argue three gifts had ended. If you think only tongues, prophecy, and knowledge have ended, then why would you have a problem with other gifts, signs, or wonders, having a 'supporting role', at times, in propagating the Bible, just like we see in the Bible. Do you disagree that the Lord used signs and wonders in the spread of the gospel in the pages of scripture? We see it all throughout the gospels and Acts, and Paul even mentions signs, wonders, and miracles in the epistles.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
please don't i'm just fine thank you ,
Scripture compels me to have compassion on the less fortunate.

Love even those who are difficult to love.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,165
1,795
113
Yes - when it comes to something spoken, all Biblical references to "tongues" refer to real, rational language(s).
I do not see how that conflicts with historical Pentecostal beliefs on the subject. The issue is that you disagree as to whether the speaker could understand speaking in tongues. Paul contrasted speaking in tongues with speaking with his mind, as I have pointed out earlier.

Althought I might disagree with the idea that all users of regular languages without pnuemotikos being in use are always rational. :)
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,112
4,374
113
Scripture compels me to have compassion on the less fortunate.

Love even those who are difficult to love.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
you would not know compassion, in fact your attacks on those who speak in tongues here is well seen.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
Again, this is eisegesis, not something that fits into the actual passage we are discussing. You take a concept that does not fit and invent a new doctrine (or repeat a doctrine someone else invented by doing that.) I Corinthians 1:7 says, 'So that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' Paul gives us a time frame during which his teachings on spiritual gifts in this book would apply.
Only because it corrects your faulty exegesis.
Revelation predicts men that would prophesy and do miracles that would come after its final 'amen.' How do you think the two witnesses will be able to prophesy?
Wholly different matter. The church is gone from the earth at this point in time. You are not following Gods timeline.
Above you argue three gifts had ended. If you think only tongues, prophecy, and knowledge have ended, then why would you have a problem with other gifts, signs, or wonders, having a 'supporting role', at times, in propagating the Bible, just like we see in the Bible. Do you disagree that the Lord used signs and wonders in the spread of the gospel in the pages of scripture? We see it all throughout the gospels and Acts, and Paul even mentions signs, wonders, and miracles in the epistles.
Scripture states that God has chosen the foolishness of preaching to save men from their sins. The Holy Spirit's ministry is to work through the hearing of the word of God to bring conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment in the hearts of men. John 16:8-11 We could go on but if you will not trust the preaching of the word of God to convert men from their sins, if you think it takes more wonders and signs then you are on your own.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,165
1,795
113
I understand that Christ is coming at the end of the age. But the age is not the context as to what we have in part. The context is the word of God prophecy from where we get knowledge of God not seen, it has ceased . Revelation is still the last chapter in the book of prophecy ,God's word. The warning is to not add or substract now that we have the perfect or complete.
If you equate prophecy with teaching the word of God, then wouldn't adding doctrine be adding prophecy? And if all new prophecy is violating that passage at the end of the book of Revelation, wouldn't you be guilty of the plagues in the book for adding your new cessationist doctrine? I do not say I agree with you on your re-definition of prophecy or your idea of what it means to add to the book of Revelation, but you seem to be inconsistent on this point. I hope you aren't judged by your own standards.

We have to look at the themes in the whole epistle. Paul is leading up to a discussion of the end of the age in chapter 15, before he launches into miscellanious matters and final greetings in chapter 16. (Chapter and verse numbers were added later, of course.)

Paul sets the context of his discussion on spiritual gifts in I Corinthians 1:7 when he writes 'So that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' Later in the epistle, he will discuss spiritual gifts in light of things that occur at or after the Lord's coming. We see this in chapter 13 where he discusses the coming of 'that which is perfect'.

Before the perfect comes, Paul's speech, knowledge, and understanding were like a child's. After the perfect comes, he will be like an adult in his speech, knowledge, and understanding. He says now we see through a glass darkly. Now we know in part, but they we shall know as we are known.

Paul also writes other things that occur in the 'now.'-- Now abideth faith, hope, and charity. Right now, we have the hope of the resurrection. In the future, at Christ's return, that hope will be fulfilled.

So chapter 13 tells us about tongues and prophecy and the coming of the perfect. Chapter 14 tells us how to use tongues (with interpretation) and prophecy in an orderly manner in the assembly to edify one another. Chapter 15 tells us of the resurrection which occurs 'at His coming.'

This viewpoint fits the internal argument in the book. There is a 'long thought' that runs throughout the epistle.

But there is nothing in the epistle that leads to this conclusion that Paul is referring to a completed canon when he writes 'that which is perfect.' The Bible is about Jesus. The Bible is not about the Bible. (Ooo dat's good. Maybe I could put that on a bumper sticker.)
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,165
1,795
113
You are an ignorant fool indeed if you think that the thoughts I express in this thread represent the sum total of my relationship with Jesus.
Why don't y'all simmer down or take it to PMs?
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
you would not know compassion, in fact your attacks on those who speak in tongues here is well seen.
I only point out the error of tongues. I am far more kind than you know.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,165
1,795
113
Only because it corrects your faulty exegesis.
If you have a weak position, it is a lot easier to throw out a barb like that than to address the actual contextual issues at hand. I just pointed on the 'long thought' about the resurrection/return of Christ in I Corinthians, and how this ties into 'that which is perfect.' There is no theme like this when it comes to the canon in I Corinthians. You are just eisegeting the idea into the passage-- anachronisticlaly reading into a very rigid interpretation of unbiblical strand of a Protestant view on the Bible back into scripture.

Wholly different matter. The church is gone from the earth at this point in time. You are not following Gods timeline.
First of all, whether the church were here or not, it would be foolish to argue that I Corinthians 13 teaches that prophecy will cease, only to have it resurrected again after the church is gone. Secondly-- and I don't want to hijack the thread-- in II Thessalonians 1, the church is here when Jesus comes back executing judgment on them that believe not. I Thessalonians 4 shows us that rapture and resurrection happens at the parousia of Christ. See parousia in verse 15. II Thessalonians 2:8 shows us that the man of sin is destroyed at the brightness of the Lord's parousia. Can you show a single verse that says that the church will not be on the earth when Jesus comes back?

No matter what your views are, it does not make sense to exclude the overcomers in the book of Revelation from the church.

Scripture states that God has chosen the foolishness of preaching to save men from their sins. The Holy Spirit's ministry is to work through the hearing of the word of God to bring conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment in the hearts of men. John 16:8-11 We could go on but if you will not trust the preaching of the word of God to convert men from their sins, if you think it takes more wonders and signs then you are on your own.
I agree with the first two sentences. But we actually have to believe the word of God that we preach, right? You do believe the Bible? Is the Bible true when it tells us that Jesus said, "Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.' right before doing a miracle? Is it true when it shows us that Thomas believed after He was the resurrected Christ, evidence fo the resurrection? Is it true when Paul says that with signs and wonders, from Jerusalem round about until Illyricum, he had fully preached the Gospel of Christ?

You are creating a false dichotomy here that runs contrary to scripture. Actually read the Gospels. Jesus did miracle after miracle. Read Acts. The apostles did miracles. The miracles went along with the preaching ministry and supported it.

Am I saying something has to witness a miracle to be saved? No. But God can use healing, miracles, answers to prayer, supernatural knowledge and things that later would be labelled acts of 'providence' to open people up to receive the word of God. Read your Bible. Why would you argue with something so obvious? I gave you plenty of Biblical examples. It seems like if something doesn't fit with your paradigm, even if it is very Biblical and there are numerous Biblical examples of it, you reject it.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,595
13,858
113
Scripture states that God has chosen the foolishness of preaching to save men from their sins. The Holy Spirit's ministry is to work through the hearing of the word of God to bring conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment in the hearts of men. John 16:8-11 We could go on but if you will not trust the preaching of the word of God to convert men from their sins, if you think it takes more wonders and signs then you are on your own.
So what's your take on 1 Corinthians 1:4-5 "My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power."
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
Where exactly do I find the evidence of the Holy Spirit in that statement?
Seriously you do not know?

Lu 10:33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
So what's your take on 1 Corinthians 1:4-5 "My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power."
1Co 1:21 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.
1Co 1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
Before the perfect comes, Paul's speech, knowledge, and understanding were like a child's. After the perfect comes, he will be like an adult in his speech, knowledge, and understanding. He says now we see through a glass darkly. Now we know in part, but they we shall know as we are known.

Paul also writes other things that occur in the 'now.'-- Now abideth faith, hope, and charity. Right now, we have the hope of the resurrection. In the future, at Christ's return, that hope will be fulfilled.

So chapter 13 tells us about tongues and prophecy and the coming of the perfect. Chapter 14 tells us how to use tongues (with interpretation) and prophecy in an orderly manner in the assembly to edify one another. Chapter 15 tells us of the resurrection which occurs 'at His coming.'

This viewpoint fits the internal argument in the book. There is a 'long thought' that runs throughout the epistle.

But there is nothing in the epistle that leads to this conclusion that Paul is referring to a completed canon when he writes 'that which is perfect.' The Bible is about Jesus. The Bible is not about the Bible. (Ooo dat's good. Maybe I could put that on a bumper sticker.)
Nice try but NO.
The 'perfect which is to come' is nothing more than LOVE which Christ brings with Him in our hearts. Loving one another is 'being perfected in Love' and this is what is referred to as knowing God as we are known. John reiterated this simple fact here:

1 John 4:
7 Beloved, let us love one another, because love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

9This is how God’s love was revealed among us: God sent His one and only Son into the world, so that we might live through Him. 10And love consists in this: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.

11Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God remains in us, and His love is perfected in us. 13By this we know that we remain in Him, and He in us: He has given us of His Spirit. 14And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent His Son to be the Savior of the world.

15If anyone confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. 16And we have come to know and believe the love that God has for us. God is love; whoever abides in love abides in God, and God in him. 17In this way, love has been perfected among us, so that we may have confidence on the day of judgment; for in this world we are just like Him.

And when was this perfect love to come?

Heb 10:36 You need to persevere, so that after you have done God’s will, you will receive what He has promised. 37For, “In just a little while, He who is coming will come and will not delay.

There's no amount of twisting and turning that would make the above mean 21st century and counting, it was just 1st century when these things were accomplished. If anyone speaks meaningless words today, it is straight from their head, let them not associate God in their own worldly things. Miracles and signs continued but it is not from God. Hence:

Matt 7:
21Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’

23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’

It is actually the opposite; those who will make it to heaven will be wondering how they made it. This is what the Lord says:
"..i was found by those who did not seek me"
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,595
13,858
113
1Co 1:21 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.
1Co 1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
That's a dodge, not a response.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
If you have a weak position, it is a lot easier to throw out a barb like that than to address the actual contextual issues at hand. I just pointed on the 'long thought' about the resurrection/return of Christ in I Corinthians, and how this ties into 'that which is perfect.' There is no theme like this when it comes to the canon in I Corinthians. You are just eisegeting the idea into the passage-- anachronisticlaly reading into a very rigid interpretation of unbiblical strand of a Protestant view on the Bible back into scripture.



First of all, whether the church were here or not, it would be foolish to argue that I Corinthians 13 teaches that prophecy will cease, only to have it resurrected again after the church is gone. Secondly-- and I don't want to hijack the thread-- in II Thessalonians 1, the church is here when Jesus comes back executing judgment on them that believe not. I Thessalonians 4 shows us that rapture and resurrection happens at the parousia of Christ. See parousia in verse 15. II Thessalonians 2:8 shows us that the man of sin is destroyed at the brightness of the Lord's parousia. Can you show a single verse that says that the church will not be on the earth when Jesus comes back?

No matter what your views are, it does not make sense to exclude the overcomers in the book of Revelation from the church.



I agree with the first two sentences. But we actually have to believe the word of God that we preach, right? You do believe the Bible? Is the Bible true when it tells us that Jesus said, "Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.' right before doing a miracle? Is it true when it shows us that Thomas believed after He was the resurrected Christ, evidence fo the resurrection? Is it true when Paul says that with signs and wonders, from Jerusalem round about until Illyricum, he had fully preached the Gospel of Christ?

You are creating a false dichotomy here that runs contrary to scripture. Actually read the Gospels. Jesus did miracle after miracle. Read Acts. The apostles did miracles. The miracles went along with the preaching ministry and supported it.

Am I saying something has to witness a miracle to be saved? No. But God can use healing, miracles, answers to prayer, supernatural knowledge and things that later would be labelled acts of 'providence' to open people up to receive the word of God. Read your Bible. Why would you argue with something so obvious? I gave you plenty of Biblical examples. It seems like if something doesn't fit with your paradigm, even if it is very Biblical and there are numerous Biblical examples of it, you reject it.
It would take many threads to correct the errors of your doctrine. Jesus Himself said that many of the disciples followed Him only for the miracles and when Jesus told them He would die for their sins they abandoned Him.

John 6:22 through the end of the chapter.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
That's a dodge, not a response.
No it's just a response that doesn't fit what you had in mind. It is wholly consistent with what Paul is teaching.

For the cause of Christ
Roger