The Purpose of 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.
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
Well,. one thing, I did never "Attacked" someone personally. If you claim that I did, then please show me.
What I do not believe is that the pentecostal / charismatic teaching about the baptism with the Holy Spirit and as proof for that the gift of speaking in tongues is from God.
And special not in the way it came to germany in 1907. In my eyes this teaching is the greatest spliting among believers. It makes All non tongue speakers to 2nd class believers and rejeckter of Christ, because of not searching this gift. Maby you dont realize this
Thats why I asked specific questions. I got answers, but no one did answer the questions I had.

I never again will join here an thread about speaking in tongues.
Our Lord may bless you.


As I indicated in the post before this, You are definitely saved and a man of God!

Seondly, no one has the right to make such a claim that if you do not Speak in Tongues you are not saved, just like no one can prove in the Bible where Tongues has stopped. And since there are no examples that Tongues has stopped in the Bible, then it doesn't matter that in 1900's people began Speaking in Tongues, because the Bible proves Tongues had not ended.

Tell me, since there is no Scripture claiming Tongues had ended, why do you think the 1900 Pentecostals are wrong?
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
Seondly, no one has the right to make such a claim that if you do not Speak in Tongues you are not saved, just like no one can prove in the Bible where Tongues has stopped. And since there are no examples that Tongues has stopped in the Bible, then it doesn't matter that in 1900's people began Speaking in Tongues, because the Bible proves Tongues had not ended.

Tell me, since there is no Scripture claiming Tongues had ended, why do you think the 1900 Pentecostals are wrong?
1 Cor 13:8 is not there just to fill space on the page.

There is much said about tongues but none of what is said is biblical. Yes the 1900's Pentecostals were wrong. Nothing they did was biblical and that has not changed to this day.

The bible is the only thing that can be seen as the perfect which signifies the end of tongues, prophecy and knowledge.

Gods word does not change. The truth does not change. Men's hearts are changeable and no one can know them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 
Apr 17, 2019
71
47
18
1 cor 14:2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit.

This doesn't sound like a human foreign language but scripture does have that as a possibility. I have heard evangelists to see both in foreign lands.

In doing a simple word search in Strong's Concordance in 1 Corinthians 14:2, one finds that the Greek word translated “tongue,” glōssa, is the same word as that used at Acts 2:4, 11, where it obviously has reference to known languages. The Greek word translated “listens” can denote hearing something without understanding what is stated. This can be better understood in the light of verses 13, 16 and 17 of 1 Corinthians, chapter 14, where we read: “Therefore let the one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may translate. Otherwise, if you offer praise with a gift of the spirit, how will the man occupying the seat of the ordinary person [or, unbeliever; see verses 22-25.] say ‘Amen’ to your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying? True, you give thanks in a fine way, but the other man is not being built up.”

This could be put in another way, the one speaking in a tongue speaks to God rather than to men if the men who are listening do not understand what he is saying. Paul had in mind not unintelligible speech but foreign languages that potentially could be understood by others. But if, in fact, none of those present could understand the language and if there were no interpreters present, then the one who spoke the tongue should pray that he might translate it and thus build up others, especially the unbelievers. If there was no one to translate, then, as the scripture says, it would be better for him to keep silent.—1 Cor. 14:28.

Speaking in tongues must be in a literal language and I have yet to see any verifiable proof from linguists that a person with no knowledge of a language can suddenly be carried away to speak in another language. I wish this ability to speak in another language were true, as a professor of Spanish linguistics at the community college level, I would love to find a quick way for my students to learn another language!
 

Kavik

Senior Member
Mar 25, 2017
795
159
43
Actually if one man (the speaker) understands what is being said, it doesn't fulfil what Paul said:

A) NO man undertands. (the speaker is a "man")
B) MY understanding is unfruitful. (I don't understand any more than the others, because this isn't spoken to man)
I have to respectfully disagree. For proponents of modern tongues-speech, the only possible way in which these passages can be taken is if the speaker also does not understand what /she is saying; else wise, it negates evidencing the modern phenomenon in the Bible.

These two passages have been discussed further up in this thread (at least I think so), but let me repeat here.

1 Cor. 14:2 -

Let's paraphrase this into a more modern English, get rid of the added "unknown", use a more accurate translation of the Greek, and a more modern rendering of the archaic word 'tongue'.

“He that speaks in a language isn’t speaking to others (or, “speaks not to people"), but only to God; no one hears with understanding; however, though he’s ‘praying in the Spirit’, he’s speaking mysteries.”

The whole passage refers to real, rational language. How? Let me use an analogy - If I attend a worship service in ‘East Haystack’, Alabama two things are likely to be evident: one; there’s only going to be so many people at that service (i.e. there will be a finite given amount of people there) and two; the chances that anyone in East Haystack speaks anything but English is pretty slim to nil (no offense to 'East Haystack').

If I start praying aloud in say Lithuanian, there’s no one at that service that’s going to understand a word I’m saying. Even though I’m speaking a real language, no one there will understand my “tongue”. That does not mean or imply that no one else understands Lithuanian; just no one at that particular service. In this sense, therefore; for all intents and purposes, I'm not speaking to people, I am speaking only to God, since he understands all languages. To everyone at the service, even though I’m praying in the Spirit (as defined below), I’m still speaking “mysteries” - just another way of saying that even though I’m praying as I ought, no one understands me; I’m still speaking in ‘mysteries’ – no one has a clue what I’m saying as no one speaks my language.

“Praying in the Spirit” does not refer to the words one is saying. Rather, it refers to how one is praying. In the three places it is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely zero reference to 'languages' in connection with this phrase. “Praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with modern “tongues”, i.e. when one “prays in the Spirit”, one is typically engaged in some form of tongues-speech.

There is nothing in this passage that remotely suggests modern tongues-speech nor is there anything that even remotely suggests that the speaker does not understand what he himself is saying; it is the listeners who do not understand, not the speaker and the listeners – no matter how hard proponents of modern tongues-speech want the speaker to also not understand.....it just isn't there.

1 Cor. 14:14 -

This one could easily take a few pages to explain properly, but I'll try and sum it up as briefly as possible.....

This passage hinges on the Greek word “akarpos” – it's a word that can be used in both an active sense, and in a passive sense.

In this particular passage, most people use it in the passive sense, i.e. my understanding is unfruitful to me, or my understanding produces no fruit in/for me. In short, what I'm saying doesn't benefit me as I have no idea what I'm saying even though I am praying “in the spirit” (as defined above).

Given that in his letter to the church in Corinth, Paul calls for clarity and understanding at a public worship such that everyone there can benefit, I (as well as others) would argue for the active sense of ‘akarpos’: that is, my understanding is unfruitful for others, or my understanding produces no fruit for/in others.

In other words, the fact I understand what I’m saying does not benefit anyone else as they don’t speak my language. This echos back to 1 Cor 14:2 where no one understands what I'm saying (so I'm speaking only to God), thus no one is benefiting from what I'm saying (I'm the only one benefiting/being edified).

Now, before you think using this passage with an active meaning is something far-fetched, or a new concept, or a recent ‘theory’, or I'm just pulling this out of thin air, I would ask you to consider Luther’s Bible of 1534 - written almost 500 years ago, and some 30 years before King James VI and I was even born.

This same passage is rendered (in English) “.......but my understanding brings no one fruit”.

Even almost 500 years ago, the idea of this passage, and 'akarpos' in particular, being used with an active meaning was nothing new. Indeed, an active understanding/reading fits better with Paul’s intent of clarity so all may benefit. Further, it's clear here the speaker is praying in a particular (known) language; his native language that, just as in v. 2, no one else there speaks.

There’s just no evidence whatsoever of modern tongues-speech here. The speaker understands perfectly well what he’s saying; again, it’s the audience who doesn’t understand, and thus does not benefit.

When referring to something spoken, there are no Biblical references to "tongues" that do not refer to, nor that cannot be explained in light of, real, rational language(s). Usually not understood by those hearing it/listening to it, but always understood by the speaker; it's his native language.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
1 Cor 13:8 is not there just to fill space on the page.

There is much said about tongues but none of what is said is biblical. Yes the 1900's Pentecostals were wrong. Nothing they did was biblical and that has not changed to this day.

The bible is the only thing that can be seen as the perfect which signifies the end of tongues, prophecy and knowledge.

Gods word does not change. The truth does not change. Men's hearts are changeable and no one can know them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger


The Azusa events are not even remotely close to what some charismatic movements are creating and turning this into. To say that those in 1900 who Spoke in Tongues under the true outpouring of the Holy Spirit are related to today's flopping around like a fish out of water is creating a false version of what God did and now what man has invented.
 

Kavik

Senior Member
Mar 25, 2017
795
159
43
Speaking in tongues must be in a literal language and I have yet to see any verifiable proof from linguists that a person with no knowledge of a language can suddenly be carried away to speak in another language. I wish this ability to speak in another language were true, as a professor of Spanish linguistics at the community college level, I would love to find a quick way for my students to learn another language!
As a linguist, I agree with what you're saying - yes, the word "glôssa" in ancient and Koiné Greek, means "language" (well, actually it means the physical organ of the tongue, but by extension, 'language').

You are correct, there are no known provable cases of xenoglossy - anywhere. Plenty of anecdotes circulating around, but nothing concrete.

See post #624 - essentially expands on what you're saying.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
The Azusa events are not even remotely close to what some charismatic movements are creating and turning this into. To say that those in 1900 who Spoke in Tongues under the true outpouring of the Holy Spirit are related to today's flopping around like a fish out of water is creating a false version of what God did and now what man has invented.
I wasn't there in 1900 to witness what transpired but there is no biblical support for the event. You cannot say it was a genuine true outpouring of the Holy Spirit because you cannot know with any degree of certainty. Tongues are producing today what the were producing in Corinth which was confusion.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
12,999
4,309
113
1 Cor 13:8 is not there just to fill space on the page.

There is much said about tongues but none of what is said is biblical. Yes the 1900's Pentecostals were wrong. Nothing they did was biblical and that has not changed to this day.

The bible is the only thing that can be seen as the perfect which signifies the end of tongues, prophecy and knowledge.

Gods word does not change. The truth does not change. Men's hearts are changeable and no one can know them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
1cor 13:8-10 is not there to fill spaces and neither is the verses above 8 or after 10. You fail to see That Jesus HImself said

You shall receive power after the Holy Spirit has come ON you. this was said well before the 1900s. Nothing they did was Biblical were you there at the founding of the pentecostal movement? The word of God is perfect yes amen, however, your understanding of it is not. You don't believe the word of God is perfect, you think your understanding is. God's word doesn't change truth but neither did HIS willingness to have a relationship with man by the Holy Spirit. This is well established in the Old Testament.

You think you are better for your knowledge of God's word you think learn more of the word makes you better. Wrong! :) try applying to your life.
you can't because you are prideful and hateful.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
1cor 13:8-10 is not there to fill spaces and neither is the verses above 8 or after 10. You fail to see That Jesus HImself said

You shall receive power after the Holy Spirit has come ON you. this was said well before the 1900s. Nothing they did was Biblical were you there at the founding of the pentecostal movement? The word of God is perfect yes amen, however, your understanding of it is not. You don't believe the word of God is perfect, you think your understanding is. God's word doesn't change truth but neither did HIS willingness to have a relationship with man by the Holy Spirit. This is well established in the Old Testament.

You think you are better for your knowledge of God's word you think learn more of the word makes you better. Wrong! :) try applying to your life.
you can't because you are prideful and hateful.
The filling with the Holy Spirit with power is not so one can speak in tongues. You have a wrong focus on why God fills men with the Holy Spirit. Men are filled beginning in Acts so they can minister the word of God to the people. Men are filled with the Holy Spirit so they can fulfill the ministry to which every believe is called. Mat 28:16-20.

You don't have to like it but you cannot change what God has said and what God does in believing hearts.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
12,999
4,309
113
The Azusa events are not even remotely close to what some charismatic movements are creating and turning this into. To say that those in 1900 who Spoke in Tongues under the true outpouring of the Holy Spirit are related to today's flopping around like a fish out of water is creating a false version of what God did and now what man has invented.
Biker his bias causes him to not look into what really happens.



here is the truth and he knows it as do other here with this doctrinal position.

RC Sproul, Macarthur, other reformers and Calvinist that hold to or have held to in the past
Cannot prove 1 Corthinians 13:8-13 is speaking on the Canonization of the 66 books of the Bible. They were called on it and sense has backed down. many Are upset because they lose on the very word of God.
They hold to the 1cor 13;8-10
Now that we have the Bible the gifts of the Holy Spirit are not needed anymore. Just one problem, outside of 1cor `3:8-10 they have no proof to support this understanding Biblically.

In fact, many other Theologians of the Calvinist and reformers teach this in 1cor 13:8-10 is more about Jesus, not the Bible coming to completion. They know this. Yet they were caught trying to combat those of the Charismatics and Pentecostals who were foolish in the way they used the gifts which we were all in agreement with Because many of them( charismatic) did things that were embarrassing to non- charismatic. Many used academia to discredit those" ignorant Pentecostals". They can't do that anymore.

We have our degrees and education and still have the Biblical support to the Holy Spirit gifts for today.

1cor 13:8-10 teaching of the gifts have ceased was debunked. They are mad now.
So now they are trying to use outside the Bible they claim to be so authoritative like Macarthur had to use the pagan practice to suggest it is of the devil in his "strange fire". It was not that he was trying to address the foolishness barking like a dog laughing out of control, no, Pentecostals are taught that, it is an error and would not be a part of it. Macarthur said all of it was of the devil.

and had to look outside the doctrine of Pentecostals and use paganism like Indian Kundalini. The problem is the only thing used in 1904 Azusa Street was a KJV Bible. Rev. Seymour would as a black man on that day would have been thrown out of Bible school to even bring that into the class. And we know this. Those who use 1cor 13:8-10 belive or would have you think

Those who are Christians who read Acts 1:8 1cor chapter 12-14 and the Book of Acts who said this is for us all today and began to ask The Lord for the power of the Holy Spirit the devil came and took over all of them.

WOW! I did not know the devil was more powerful than God? The Bible I read does not support that.

So they are mad
and instead of dealing with

the few on tv they want to discredit the whole thing, knowing the fastest growing Church today is Full Gospel churches.

we have seminaries, Bible colleges, universities, and serve in many places around the world taking the Message of the Lord Jesus Christ.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
12,999
4,309
113
The filling with the Holy Spirit with power is not so one can speak in tongues. You have a wrong focus on why God fills men with the Holy Spirit. Men are filled beginning in Acts so they can minister the word of God to the people. Men are filled with the Holy Spirit so they can fulfill the ministry to which every believe is called. Mat 28:16-20.

You don't have to like it but you cannot change what God has said and what God does in believing hearts.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
never said that you did. The initial evidence of one Filled with the Holy Spirit in the book of Acts was speaking in tongues or prophesying. If your argument is now

" The filling with the Holy Spirit with power is not so one can speak in tongues. "

I agree and we said. The filling or what is known as the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is as Jesus said in Acts 1:8 and in Luke 24:49
all the Gospel where Jesus said to go and wait. You will be empowered from on high. I don't a wrong focus you refuse out of pride to see what many have said repeatedly and what Jesus said in Acta 1:8

YOu shall receive power after the Holy Spirit has come on you to be my witnesses. So, please stop speaking untruthfully.
I have said this and so have many others. it is not about me it is what the Word of God says.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
The Azusa events are not even remotely close to what some charismatic movements are creating and turning this into. To say that those in 1900 who Spoke in Tongues under the true outpouring of the Holy Spirit are related to today's flopping around like a fish out of water is creating a false version of what God did and now what man has invented.
I received the gift 40+ years ago, while I was in my room praying, same today as it was then.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
I received the gift 40+ years ago, while I was in my room praying, same today as it was then.
The same way as those according to the foundation of the tongues doctrine.(the easy to read version)

The people say, “Who does he think he is trying to teach and explain his message to? Does he think we are babies who were at their mother’s breast only a very short time ago? He speaks to us as though we were babies: “Saw lasaw saw lasawQaw laqaw qaw laqawZe’er sham ze’er sham.”So God will use this strange way of talking, and he will use other languages to speak to these people. In the past he spoke to them and said, “Here is a resting place. Let those who are tired come and rest. This is the place of peace.”But they would not listen to him. So the Lord’s words will be senseless sounds[c] to them:“Saw lasaw saw lasaw.Qaw laqaw qaw laqaw. Ze’er sham ze’er sham.”When the people try to walk, they will fall backwards. They will be defeated, trapped, and captured. Isaiah 28:9-13

Or the way the Son of man Jesus avoided refusing to have a faith after the works of his own fleshly experiences but rather as a apostle he did the will of the father. The Lord rebuking the spirit of the father of lies.

Giving Jesus the words as it is written again and again . Not as we experience the unknown wonderments. .Scripture alone reveals the unseen spiritual understanding.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
The same way as those according to the foundation of the tongues doctrine.(the easy to read version)

The people say, “Who does he think he is trying to teach and explain his message to? Does he think we are babies who were at their mother’s breast only a very short time ago? He speaks to us as though we were babies: “Saw lasaw saw lasawQaw laqaw qaw laqawZe’er sham ze’er sham.”So God will use this strange way of talking, and he will use other languages to speak to these people. In the past he spoke to them and said, “Here is a resting place. Let those who are tired come and rest. This is the place of peace.”But they would not listen to him. So the Lord’s words will be senseless sounds[c] to them:“Saw lasaw saw lasaw.Qaw laqaw qaw laqaw. Ze’er sham ze’er sham.”When the people try to walk, they will fall backwards. They will be defeated, trapped, and captured. Isaiah 28:9-13

Or the way the Son of man Jesus avoided refusing to have a faith after the works of his own flesh but rather as a apostle he did the will of the father. . The Lord rebuking the spirit of the father of lies.

Giving Jesus the words as it is written again and again . Not as we experience unknown wonderments. .Scripture alone reveals the unseen spiritual understanding.
I don't have a clue on what your response i. trying to project.

One thing I do know is I received the gift 40+ years ago, while I was in my room praying, same today as it was then.
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,212
2,547
113
The debate and topic of tongues is truly a fascinating one but I think we can overthink or overcomplicate it. The threads title in question is the purpose of speaking in tongues and that purpose like all the other gifts is for edification both for the church and for ourselves the gits in general are for building strenghtening and to empower us and others.
Anyone however can say they speak tongues but there are sadly many fake ones out there this is because people fail to understand what tongues is and how it is used and for what purpose, others believe in tongues but think that it is evidence of salvation and thus implies unless you speak tongues you are not saved other still don't believe in it for different reasons some were damaged by so called tongue speakers some don't agree with it because it contradicts what their own doctrnial views is and can be a bit bias seeing it as scriptural truth but in reality it is really their own understanding and views and can be blind to that fact without even knowing it and yet still others can believe in it and think they have it but because of their lack of understanding of the gift can feign it and this is what causes damaged to others because if it is not truly of the spirit it only damages and severs the connection of it with others which produces people like the what I described above who were damaged by it and thus refuse to accept it as truth or a gift that is for today.

This is not a gift to be taken lightly and not to be exercised with abandon because it is one of the more powerful gifts but this also makes it a double edged sword. Just as with taking caution to claim to be a prophet and claiming to speak for the lord we have to take caution with using this gift because it too is also in many ways speaking for the lord because the words spoken are of the spirit and if done so it can have great power both for our own selves and the church however if done in the flesh it can in the same way cause great damage to us and the church as well.

People often forget the power words have and so it is easy to just speak things even the most simple words can heal or destory and yet people use words so relentlessly. God himself spoke existance into being and he knows the power words have especially done so in the spirit so tongues is one of those gifts that one needs to greatly take into consideration.

The gift has never gone away and even if it did the fact that we commune with God in the spirit would bring forth the gift because we are a generation who has lost it's way we have forgotten what it really means to be a christian what it really means to be strong and what it really is to be intimate with God. The world sees us as hypocrites and mocks us and they are not completely off base either. love brings into existance all things in the believer, no matter what we are lacking in the spirit or flesh love fulfills and brings forth all of it the motivation of love is what brings forth the gift itself because that is the power of the spirit
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
Biker his bias causes him to not look into what really happens.



here is the truth and he knows it as do other here with this doctrinal position.

RC Sproul, Macarthur, other reformers and Calvinist that hold to or have held to in the past
Cannot prove 1 Corthinians 13:8-13 is speaking on the Canonization of the 66 books of the Bible. They were called on it and sense has backed down. many Are upset because they lose on the very word of God.
They hold to the 1cor 13;8-10
Now that we have the Bible the gifts of the Holy Spirit are not needed anymore. Just one problem, outside of 1cor `3:8-10 they have no proof to support this understanding Biblically.

In fact, many other Theologians of the Calvinist and reformers teach this in 1cor 13:8-10 is more about Jesus, not the Bible coming to completion. They know this. Yet they were caught trying to combat those of the Charismatics and Pentecostals who were foolish in the way they used the gifts which we were all in agreement with Because many of them( charismatic) did things that were embarrassing to non- charismatic. Many used academia to discredit those" ignorant Pentecostals". They can't do that anymore.

We have our degrees and education and still have the Biblical support to the Holy Spirit gifts for today.

1cor 13:8-10 teaching of the gifts have ceased was debunked. They are mad now.
So now they are trying to use outside the Bible they claim to be so authoritative like Macarthur had to use the pagan practice to suggest it is of the devil in his "strange fire". It was not that he was trying to address the foolishness barking like a dog laughing out of control, no, Pentecostals are taught that, it is an error and would not be a part of it. Macarthur said all of it was of the devil.

and had to look outside the doctrine of Pentecostals and use paganism like Indian Kundalini. The problem is the only thing used in 1904 Azusa Street was a KJV Bible. Rev. Seymour would as a black man on that day would have been thrown out of Bible school to even bring that into the class. And we know this. Those who use 1cor 13:8-10 belive or would have you think

Those who are Christians who read Acts 1:8 1cor chapter 12-14 and the Book of Acts who said this is for us all today and began to ask The Lord for the power of the Holy Spirit the devil came and took over all of them.

WOW! I did not know the devil was more powerful than God? The Bible I read does not support that.

So they are mad
and instead of dealing with

the few on tv they want to discredit the whole thing, knowing the fastest growing Church today is Full Gospel churches.

we have seminaries, Bible colleges, universities, and serve in many places around the world taking the Message of the Lord Jesus Christ.



I absolutely believe in Speaking in Tongues, but I totally reject the idea of crawling around like some animal in heat trying to get mated. I am all for getting Spiritually full and taking off running, jumping, clapping, shouting out to God. But projecting the body in contorted ways seems more on lines with the movie series "the Exorcist" and demon possession than Godly possession.

Next are we allowing heads to spin and turning pale blue while speaking ancient Aramaic?
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
I received the gift 40+ years ago, while I was in my room praying, same today as it was then.

That's my point, Azusa was the real deal. Some of these actions we see within the False Doctrine Churches of Prosperity Gospel are nowhere near being aligned with God!
 
S

Scribe

Guest
Well,. one thing, I did never "Attacked" someone personally. If you claim that I did, then please show me.
What I do not believe is that the pentecostal / charismatic teaching about the baptism with the Holy Spirit and as proof for that the gift of speaking in tongues is from God.
And special not in the way it came to germany in 1907. In my eyes this teaching is the greatest spliting among believers. It makes All non tongue speakers to 2nd class believers and rejeckter of Christ, because of not searching this gift. Maby you dont realize this
Thats why I asked specific questions. I got answers, but no one did answer the questions I had.

I never again will join here an thread about speaking in tongues.
Our Lord may bless you.
Wait.. before you swear off the topic forever I wanted to address your statements. I have heard this similar complaint from some brothers I know in real life who are true believers and reformists in doctrine and they seem to be presenting the elitists argument as the reason why they do not think that the current pentecostals are correct. I see this as more of a false accusation directed toward most pentecostals. Most pentecostals such as the Assemblies of God churches in America, (at least the colleges, and pastors, and members who understand the doctrine) do not teach that our brothers who do not believe in the Baptism of the Holy Spirit with the gift of speaking in tongues are less saved, or have less of a relationship with Christ. We believe that they are born again and have the Holy Spirit and all that comes with the sanctification through the work of the Holy Spirit that that involves.

But let me address this "elitist argument" accusation and its logic. Would you agree with me that if there are two pastors called to ministry and one of them prays daily for the Lord to help him fulfill his ministry, and one does not that the pastor who prays daily will probably have a more effective ministry? I think most will agree with that statement. If so, they are not claiming that the pastor who does not pray is not SAVED. They are not claiming that the pastor who does not pray is a second class christian. They ARE claiming that his ministry would be benefited by much prayer and that it is Gods method to answer prayers and we cannot expect the same results if we do not pray.

Now the Pentecostal believer (at least the ones in my circles) believe that you are not going to experience the benefits of the gifts of the Holy Spirit for ministry if you do not believe they are for today. You are still saved by faith in Christ and the Holy Spirit still works in you to sanctify you but you will not experience the benefits of speaking in tongues if you do not believe they are available for you today. That does not make you a second class Christian, that DOES make you one who is missing out on what could be yours (at least from the perspective of the sincerely believing pentecostal)

To be offended by that is not reasonable. If you believed in this gift of speaking in tongues and its benefits wouldn't you be motivated by love to encourage others and if they rejected it wouldn't you feel a little sad about that? You may encounter weird people who say stupid things but they should not be considered the spokesmen for the doctrinal statements of the pentecostal movement. I know this will not change anyone's mind, only the careful reading of scripture and sound hermeneutics can do that, but at least I hope you see the difference between our belief that believers who do not speak in tongues are missing out and this false claim that this is an elitist attitude. To say you are missing out should not be twisted to say that we think you are second class. That logic is inflammatory and not representing the true feelings of pentecostals at all. I wish the reformists apologists would stop thinking this argument sounds logical to the pentecostal because it doesn't.
 
May 19, 2020
3,050
1,275
113
When I became born again ,not long after I started to speak in tongues in the church...I have no idea what I was saying.......

I haven’t spoken in tongues for at least 25yrs......so not sure why the Lord gave them to me.
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,212
2,547
113
I absolutely believe in Speaking in Tongues, but I totally reject the idea of crawling around like some animal in heat trying to get mated. I am all for getting Spiritually full and taking off running, jumping, clapping, shouting out to God. But projecting the body in contorted ways seems more on lines with the movie series "the Exorcist" and demon possession than Godly possession.

Next are we allowing heads to spin and turning pale blue while speaking ancient Aramaic?
I agree completely. I went to a pentecostal church one time and saw people suddenly running around the church during praise it was something I have never seen before I saw two things in that, I saw in the actual sense a kind of joy that we can have in the spirit but I could also sense how fake it was. I had people lay hands on me but again it was fake I can tell when the spirit is active and when it isn't. And with people doing healing by slaping the forehead and people stubling and falling down maybe it can be that way for some as I myself have been overwhelmed by the spirit before but for the most part I don't think healing requires a slap on the forehead and us falling down either.

We have a spiritual radar built into us but most don't seem to know how to use it and so they can be lead into these false places of spiritual action