Speaking in tongues

[CS1]

The "perfect" has come, and tongues has ceased.

When Paul speaks of "perfect", he is not engaged in prophecy, but in basic reasoning. When tongues is no longer needed, then tongues will cease. When we have all we need, the makeshift solution is no longer needed. And, tongues is no longer needed. Tongues isn't needed as a sign to demonstrate the authority of the Gospel to Old Testament Jews, not since 70 AD. Tongues isn't needed to provide us with godly guidance in lieu of the New Testament, because the New Testament has been completed. Tongues isn't needed to spread the Gospel because we have Christians who naturally speak every language in the world.

Spewing gibberish and calling it an angelic tongue is a childish game. And, twisting scripture to try to legitimize that game is irresponsible (and, dishonest when televangelists do it).

well insulting and mocking the gifts of the Holy Spirit will not produce glory to God either. you have an issue with tv evangelist take it up with them. The context of 1cor 12, 13, and 14 is the Gifts of the Holy Spirit if you like it or not. Nothing said ever tells us the gifts of the Holy Spirit are done away with. NO said tongues we needed to produce godly guidance , the Gifts of the Holy Spirit are given by the Holy Spirit as 1cor 12 says for what?

1cor 12 : 1

"Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
1cor 12:4

Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
:5 "And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
:6And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

why ?

here you go :

:7 "But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

NOthing in chapter 12 says about doing away with the gifts of the Holy Spirit
in Chapter 13 only verse 8-11 can one create this idea but it is not supported with the remaining verses of chapter 13 nor is mentioned again in chapter 14 . BIG stretch. And I will note too the interjecting of

"Jewish thought taught throughout the history of Israel and recorded over and over again in the bible is that knowledge is essential. Knowledge of God to produce understanding and further wisdom of the Holy."

Was Paul writing to jewish people or to the Christian Church in roman made up of jew's and & gentiles ?
. You are wrong

 

[Noose]

it is taught in 1cor 12, 13 and 14 the Gifts of the Holy Spirit all of them are for the body of Christ. it is also tongues which is a gift of the Holy Spirit. there is no contradiction in that. tongues and intrepetation provides the knowing of what is being said for the purpose of edifcation, comfort , and building up. The word of God and the elders judge if it is of God . Also just so you know many unlearned pentacostels error in thinking it is a "new word" . IT IS NOT! it is confimation of what is already known. It maybe knew to the hearer but the word confirms it. As it does with Prophecy. One who prophesies is not a prophet who is fortelling something NEW like the future , example I told the church congergation that God was going to open up NOrth Korea to the Gospel in July of Last year. I told them I believed the Lord showed me this. If you remember NK was talking about bombing Guam.

I did not see or know about the talks or what is happning now. Why Did God I beleive show me this?

For only one reason TO pray for North Korea and South Korea which I still think South Korea will play the biggest role in getting the gospel to NK. This understanding came to me as I waas praying in tongues and interpreting .

That being said I do not call my self a prophet or nor to I ask those to agree with what I said I'm asking all to pray for what was said.

NOw does the Gift in context to what I have presented bring glory to God or Not ?

So the tongue is not for the speaker but the hearer? The speaker has understanding of what they say, so they pass that understanding to the hearer so that they are edified when they understand, right? then there's absolutely no reason to do this in another language if both the speaker and hearer can understand English.

And, there's no way one can pass understanding to another person in a language they don't understand not unless it is a total supernatural event where the speaker speaks their own language and the hearer hears in their own language (as what happened in Acts) or the speaker speaks in their own language and one is given the ability to understand so they translate to the congregation in a common language.

 

[DDDo]

well insulting and mocking the gifts of the Holy Spirit will not produce glory to God either.

Spewing gibberish and calling it an angelic language (which isn't a thing, BTW) given by God is mocking God. Pointing out that gibberish is gibberish is not mockery.

NO said tongues we needed to produce godly guidance , the Gifts of the Holy Spirit are given by the Holy Spirit as 1cor 12 says for what?

1cor 12 : 1

"Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
1cor 12:4

Why did you quote that? Are you calling me ignorant? That verse says nothing about why tongues is given. Nothing you quoted helps your position. If you can't give me a reason for a man to speak in tongues, then there's no reason for him to speak in tongues. I gave a number of reasons for a man to speak in tongues, and you waved your hand and dismissed those reasons.

 

[CS1]

Spewing gibberish and calling it an angelic language (which isn't a thing, BTW) given by God is mocking God. Pointing out that gibberish is gibberish is not mockery.



Why did you quote that? Are you calling me ignorant? That verse says nothing about why tongues is given. Nothing you quoted helps your position. If you can't give me a reason for a man to speak in tongues, then there's no reason for him to speak in tongues. I gave a number of reasons for a man to speak in tongues, and you waved your hand and dismissed those reasons.

No one is spewing gibberish here.

We are talking about 1cor 12, 13, and 14 in context to the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, which tongues is one of them. I see no Biblical context to your opinion. You think it is gibberish yet the word gibberish is not in the Bible. It is a word you use to explain what you do not know. I would love to see where the context Biblically of tongues is not for today ? But you have none. The chapters in 1cor , are there which sp0eak about the Gifts of the Holy Spirit. I do not need to speak ill or name call or insult Just Bible .

 

[CS1]

Spewing gibberish and calling it an angelic language (which isn't a thing, BTW) given by God is mocking God. Pointing out that gibberish is gibberish is not mockery.



Why did you quote that? Are you calling me ignorant? That verse says nothing about why tongues is given. Nothing you quoted helps your position. If you can't give me a reason for a man to speak in tongues, then there's no reason for him to speak in tongues. I gave a number of reasons for a man to speak in tongues, and you waved your hand and dismissed those reasons.

if I wanted to call you ignorant I would just you are or post 1cor 14:38
the context of 1cor 12:1 is Paul is saying Concerning spirtual gifts I will educate you. that's all I see you are looking for confrontation why? because you have no Biblical refute ?

 

[DJ2]

The equation of modern modern day tongues to 1st century tongues is not a scripture vs. scripture debate. Those who claim the validity of modern day tongues are tasked with proving their claim. Much like Jesus did when those around Him questioned His claims:

Mark 3:16
John 14:11
Luke 7:18-23
John 20:24-29

The inability to follow the example of Jesus is damning testimony against these groups. Presenting a scriptual theory in place of phyiscal evidence exposes the weakness of their claims.

The prima facie of the New Testament manifestations were obvious, not so with the pentecostal/charismatic movement. Their inability to see the nakeness of their emperor is shocking.

 

[DDDo]

No one is spewing gibberish here.

Pentecostals are not speaking in tongues.

You think it is gibberish yet the word gibberish is not in the Bible.

What Pentecostals do isn't in the Bible.

 

[DJ2]

No one is spewing gibberish here.

We are talking about 1cor 12, 13, and 14 in context to the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, which tongues is one of them. I see no Biblical context to your opinion. You think it is gibberish yet the word gibberish is not in the Bible. It is a word you use to explain what you do not know. I would love to see where the context Biblically of tongues is not for today ? But you have none. The chapters in 1cor , are there which sp0eak about the Gifts of the Holy Spirit. I do not need to speak ill or name call or insult Just Bible .

Tongues may very well be possible today but their existence would not be up for debate. Their origin would possibly be debated but certainly not their existence.

If 1st century tongues were happening today the evidence would have been shown a long time ago.

 

[CS1]

Pentecostals are not speaking in tongues.



What Pentecostals do isn't in the Bible.

that is your opinon I speak in tongues as the holy Spirit ables me to do so.

 

[CS1]

Tongues may very well be possible today but their existence would not be up for debate. Their origin would possibly be debated but certainly not their existence.

If 1st century tongues were happening today the evidence would have been shown a long time ago.

I know where you stand on this and we will just have to agree to dis agree I have seen it and I know it is real. I have been around the world literially and seen God do mighty things and I agree with the book of Acts and 1cor 12, 13, and 14 . And I have seen it.

 

[shrume]

How did they not know what they were saying?

They were speaking in tongues, and when a person speaks in tongues, he does not know what he is saying (1 Cor 14:2, 14).

they were preaching the gospel.

No, they were speaking in tongues.

They even knew it was a prophesy fulfilled and they even declared the specific prophesy.

I think you're confusing when they were speaking in tongues with Peter's sermon.

What they did is very different from what you are doing.

It was the same.

The babble today doesn't edify anyone;

Speaking in tongues today edifies the person speaking, and when tongues are interpreted, the church is edified.

even the speaker can not claim to be edified because edification can only measured by what is known, not what is unknown.

I'll believe the Bible over what you say:

1 Cor 14:
4) He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

 

[shrume]

This demonstrates the questionable merits of your argument.

Yet ANOTHER baseless accusation.

Jewish thought taught throughout the history of Israel and recorded over and over again in the bible is that knowledge is essential. Knowledge of God to produce understanding and further wisdom of the Holy.

Speaking in tongues has nothing to do with gaining knowledge.

It appears that you are espousing a counterfeit theology. I hope I am in error but there is sufficient evidence to question if not draw a conclusion.

You are in error. You simply do not know what speaking in tongues is, and what it is for.

 

[shrume]

The "perfect" has come, and tongues has ceased.

The "perfect" has not yet come, and tongues have not yet ceased.

When Paul speaks of "perfect", he is not engaged in prophecy, but in basic reasoning. When tongues is no longer needed, then tongues will cease.

That is correct.

When we have all we need, the makeshift solution is no longer needed.

Tongues is not, and never has been, a "makeshift solution". It is one of the nine manifestations of the gift of the Holy Spirit.

And, tongues is no longer needed.

While it's true that no Christian NEEDS to speak in tongues, God wants us to do it (1 Cor 14:5), and there are several benefits to doing it.

Tongues isn't needed as a sign to demonstrate the authority of the Gospel to Old Testament Jews, not since 70 AD.

70 AD has nothing to do with it.

Tongues isn't needed to provide us with godly guidance in lieu of the New Testament, because the New Testament has been completed.

Tongues was never meant for godly guidance.

Tongues isn't needed to spread the Gospel because we have Christians who naturally speak every language in the world.

Tongues was never meant for spreading the gospel.

Spewing gibberish and calling it an angelic tongue is a childish game.

Yes, that would be rather childish. Speaking in tongues is not childish. God wants every Christian to do it.

And, twisting scripture to try to legitimize that game is irresponsible (and, dishonest when televangelists do it).

You cannot show one scripture that I have "twisted".

 

[notuptome]

do we get knowledge from the Bible or is it gibven to us from reverance (fear of the lord) of God? I aso will remind you those same Jewish did not even know thier Messiah and the Old testamant Provided much ON HIM. the Prophet Isaiah for one. The relationship with God through the Holy Spirit brings understanding. this is the normitive in the Old and New testamants .

The Holy Spirit has been and will always be the one as Jesus said in John chapters 14 & 6 the one who leads and Guides as will the word of God. I have no counterfeit theology you have built an understanding on just one verse in 1cor 13:10.

The bible says that faith cometh by hearing and hearing the word of God. Yes knowledge comes from reading Gods word the bible. Yes the Holy Spirit reveals the truth contained in the word that is the understanding that proceeds from the knowledge from there we move on to wisdom which is reverential trust in God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

Yet ANOTHER baseless accusation.


Speaking in tongues has nothing to do with gaining knowledge.


You are in error. You simply do not know what speaking in tongues is, and what it is for.

You are a credit to all who claim to speak in tongues.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[shrume]

You are a credit to all who claim to speak in tongues.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

All you seem to have left are insults.

On the other hand, insults and belittlement have been a significant part of your argument from the first.

 

[CS1]

The bible says that faith cometh by hearing and hearing the word of God. Yes knowledge comes from reading Gods word the bible. Yes the Holy Spirit reveals the truth contained in the word that is the understanding that proceeds from the knowledge from there we move on to wisdom which is reverential trust in God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

the Bible also says he has given to every man the measure of faith. The word "measure"

= word. The word of God produces faith amen. You assume one thinks they don't need the word of God? You have assumed incorrectly, and nor does the denomination I have been with or in currently in teach that.

 

[notuptome]

the Bible also says he has given to every man the measure of faith. The word "measure"

= word. The word of God produces faith amen. You assume one thinks they don't need the word of God? You have assumed incorrectly, and nor does the denomination I have been with or in currently in teach that.

I was responding to the concept that speaking without knowing what you are saying is in any way shape of from a fruitful undertaking. The answer is absolutely not. The purpose of language is communication. God gave us His word that we are able to know Him. The Holy Spirit reveals God to us through the word of God. We see our need of redemption, sanctification and glorification in Christ through the word of God.

God spoke to Israel to reveal His promise of a Redeemer. Israel must have faith in Gods promise to redeem them through Messiah to have righteousness imputed to them. The NT points back to Christ and faith in Christ as our Redeemer is how God imputes righteousness to us.

God has not spoken to us in unknown tongues but in His Son. God has left us to testify of the saving grace of God in Christ to the whole world. We cannot testify of salvation in Christ if we speak in unknown tongues.

Somehow things have gotten turned around that we have folks declaring that no knowledge is a good thing.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

All you seem to have left are insults.

On the other hand, insults and belittlement have been a significant part of your argument from the first.

I'm being kind to you. The rules will not permit me to express my distain for your position from a doctrinal standpoint.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[shrume]

I'm being kind to you. The rules will not permit me to express my distain for your position from a doctrinal standpoint.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

You're showing your true colors, Roger.