Speaking in tongues
- Thread starter Blain
- Start date
-
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.
C
is this tangled mess the way one rightly divides the word of truth?
.....
THE FORMER AND LATTER RAIN AND THE REIGN OF GRACE!
There is nothing in the context to give any Christian the Scriptural right to support the doctrine taught by some today, that the former rain, (Holy Spirit baptism), fell on the day of Pentecost, and the latter out-pouring of the Spirit is falling on the twentieth century Pentecostalists. The out-pouring of the Holy Spirit is prophesied in Joel 2:28 and 29, and it is true that water sometimes speaks of the Holy Spirit. (John 7:38 and 39). But Joel knew nothing of this present age, this present dispensation and reign of grace. So Joel prophesied nothing concerning the Body of Christ. (Colossians 1:24 to 28). So Joel 2:23 to 28 and Acts 2:16 to 22 in Israel’s Kingdom program must be studied in the light of the reign and dispensation of grace. (Ephesians 3:1 to 15 – Romans 5:21)
...
sort it out for me please.
include Latter Rain Theology.
i have some errands to do today but otherwise look forward to seeing you rightly divide the word of truth - start by the correct definition of what that means.
also, if you could expound on what pauls' dispensation of grace was, it'll help wrap this up quickly.
(not really, but i can hope).
thank you
.....
THE FORMER AND LATTER RAIN AND THE REIGN OF GRACE!
There is nothing in the context to give any Christian the Scriptural right to support the doctrine taught by some today, that the former rain, (Holy Spirit baptism), fell on the day of Pentecost, and the latter out-pouring of the Spirit is falling on the twentieth century Pentecostalists. The out-pouring of the Holy Spirit is prophesied in Joel 2:28 and 29, and it is true that water sometimes speaks of the Holy Spirit. (John 7:38 and 39). But Joel knew nothing of this present age, this present dispensation and reign of grace. So Joel prophesied nothing concerning the Body of Christ. (Colossians 1:24 to 28). So Joel 2:23 to 28 and Acts 2:16 to 22 in Israel’s Kingdom program must be studied in the light of the reign and dispensation of grace. (Ephesians 3:1 to 15 – Romans 5:21)
...
sort it out for me please.
include Latter Rain Theology.
i have some errands to do today but otherwise look forward to seeing you rightly divide the word of truth - start by the correct definition of what that means.
also, if you could expound on what pauls' dispensation of grace was, it'll help wrap this up quickly.
(not really, but i can hope).
thank you
biblical studies: Title Title Title
A Chart of the Judgments
Make no mistake...where does it say that it has ceased?
There are still unbelievers out there that need to experience those miracles.
And speaking in other languages as a gift of God is as real as someone being healed of cancer or any other miracles that happen in this world today.
If you believe the tongues miracle has ceased then it would be the same as saying all miraclws have ceased.
Because those miracles are for unbelievers to witness and believers to experience.
There are still unbelievers out there that need to experience those miracles.
And speaking in other languages as a gift of God is as real as someone being healed of cancer or any other miracles that happen in this world today.
If you believe the tongues miracle has ceased then it would be the same as saying all miraclws have ceased.
Because those miracles are for unbelievers to witness and believers to experience.
zone, I tend to believe that differences between you and me are results of our responses in regard to where we were burned by a belief system. I have been burned as a believer and as a pastor within my Pentecostal denomination. Of course, what most people do is leave, never to return again, because we want to leave our pain and embarrassment behind. I am no different than you. But what I felt like I had to do was to prove to myself whether any of this nonsense was true or not. I found out that some of it was. The bottom line is, the Bible says these things are true. The book of Acts is true. No amount of fakery, false prophecy, false teaching, or tele-evangelism will change that. It is written. I am not going to try to twist it because I don't like it. God's word is God's word, period. I don't like what I see in Pentecostal and charismatic circles today. I don't like what I see in the other denominations, either. I believe it has something to do with apostasy within the church. That, I think, something we can all agree on.
ok...i'm a little confused here.
i thought you were cessationist.
correction on that then.
do you have any documentation that believers are miraculously speaking in known human languages (without learning them) before unbelievers (where? where is this happening?) and as a result of that sign (the miracle) the message is irrefutable?
videos? anything?
what message is being spoken?
it should be easily seen...where is it?
i thought you were cessationist.
correction on that then.
do you have any documentation that believers are miraculously speaking in known human languages (without learning them) before unbelievers (where? where is this happening?) and as a result of that sign (the miracle) the message is irrefutable?
videos? anything?
what message is being spoken?
it should be easily seen...where is it?
hi stephen.
there aren't many differences between us, that i see. i agree with you on lots of things.
confusedrolly bad news for you)
just you're in a certain denomination believing certain things, and ditto myself.
we could express it as having been "burned" i guess; and i suppose that's true.
but in what way was i burned?
just through gossip or some unimportant non-essential?
or something way bigger and more powerful?
and extremely dangerous?
none of it is unknown to me, stephen...i'm totally aware of all the practices and such; which passages are used to proof text and explain things; all the history etc.
i didn't not 'return' due to pain or embarrassment (though i was certainly humiliated before the Lord after having over-ridden/ignored the warning from the Holy Spirit NOT to take part).
i didn't return (except as an observer) because it's faulty.
for all the reasons posted, many times over.
am i not supposed to say it's faulty when i know it is?
i do love you stephen, and everyone else here.
you have every reason to doubt that i guess, at this time.
ultimately that's not for me to deal with.
just saying it doesn't prove anything.
k......ttyl bud
zone
there aren't many differences between us, that i see. i agree with you on lots of things.
confusedrolly bad news for you)just you're in a certain denomination believing certain things, and ditto myself.
we could express it as having been "burned" i guess; and i suppose that's true.
but in what way was i burned?
just through gossip or some unimportant non-essential?
or something way bigger and more powerful?
and extremely dangerous?
none of it is unknown to me, stephen...i'm totally aware of all the practices and such; which passages are used to proof text and explain things; all the history etc.
i didn't not 'return' due to pain or embarrassment (though i was certainly humiliated before the Lord after having over-ridden/ignored the warning from the Holy Spirit NOT to take part).
i didn't return (except as an observer) because it's faulty.
for all the reasons posted, many times over.
am i not supposed to say it's faulty when i know it is?
i do love you stephen, and everyone else here.
you have every reason to doubt that i guess, at this time.
ultimately that's not for me to deal with.
just saying it doesn't prove anything.
k......ttyl bud
zone
Some do not seek it in its entirety. Some may seek 70% of its basic truth, but won't touch the other 30% because of the damage that has been done to their lives, or because it demands more commitment, etc. There are always reasons why some folks will steer around small percentages, instead of wanting the whole 100 %.
hi stephen.
there aren't many differences between us, that i see. i agree with you on lots of things.
confusedrolly bad news for you)
just you're in a certain denomination believing certain things, and ditto myself.
we could express it as having been "burned" i guess; and i suppose that's true.
but in what way was i burned?
just through gossip or some unimportant non-essential?
or something way bigger and more powerful?
and extremely dangerous?
none of it is unknown to me, stephen...i'm totally aware of all the practices and such; which passages are used to proof text and explain things; all the history etc.
i didn't not 'return' due to pain or embarrassment (though i was certainly humiliated before the Lord after having over-ridden/ignored the warning from the Holy Spirit NOT to take part).
i didn't return (except as an observer) because it's faulty.
for all the reasons posted, many times over.
am i not supposed to say it's faulty when i know it is?
i do love you stephen, and everyone else here.
you have every reason to doubt that i guess, at this time.
ultimately that's not for me to deal with.
just saying it doesn't prove anything.
k......ttyl bud
zone
there aren't many differences between us, that i see. i agree with you on lots of things.
confusedrolly bad news for you)just you're in a certain denomination believing certain things, and ditto myself.
we could express it as having been "burned" i guess; and i suppose that's true.
but in what way was i burned?
just through gossip or some unimportant non-essential?
or something way bigger and more powerful?
and extremely dangerous?
none of it is unknown to me, stephen...i'm totally aware of all the practices and such; which passages are used to proof text and explain things; all the history etc.
i didn't not 'return' due to pain or embarrassment (though i was certainly humiliated before the Lord after having over-ridden/ignored the warning from the Holy Spirit NOT to take part).
i didn't return (except as an observer) because it's faulty.
for all the reasons posted, many times over.
am i not supposed to say it's faulty when i know it is?
i do love you stephen, and everyone else here.
you have every reason to doubt that i guess, at this time.
ultimately that's not for me to deal with.
just saying it doesn't prove anything.
k......ttyl bud
zone
i know but:
Re: Speaking in tongues
if this is not what people think it is....how serious are the faults?
stephen to the very best of my knowledge there are only a tiny portion of bad guys who are knowingly steering the AoG and other denoms in the wrong direction. we know who they were and who they are today and what their end game is.
the rest are people just tricked. it's smoke and mirrors.
AoG already purged this stuff out in 1949, as you know.
but of course it never went away totally, and now is everywhere.
whenever and wherever you have subjectivity and extra-biblical revelation taking the front seat in any assembly - you have an impending disaster.
we only really have two choices:
it's of God and these things are genuine gifts exactly like we read of in scripture,
OR
it's allowed by God, but is a counterfeit movement. something different.
...
it's really one or the other.
because try as i might; even with help from those in the movement, no one can identify God recording there would be something "like" or "renewed".
it's either continuation or cessation.
this is not some intellectual match - it's quite possibly spiritually critical.
if the issue of tongues is resolved, the rest collapses in on itself.
or, choose another favorite: the revived 'gift of prophecy'.
same thing. when tested, it collapses.
anyways...i'm sure we'll be discussing it more.
Re: Speaking in tongues
if this is not what people think it is....how serious are the faults?
stephen to the very best of my knowledge there are only a tiny portion of bad guys who are knowingly steering the AoG and other denoms in the wrong direction. we know who they were and who they are today and what their end game is.
the rest are people just tricked. it's smoke and mirrors.
AoG already purged this stuff out in 1949, as you know.
but of course it never went away totally, and now is everywhere.
whenever and wherever you have subjectivity and extra-biblical revelation taking the front seat in any assembly - you have an impending disaster.
we only really have two choices:
it's of God and these things are genuine gifts exactly like we read of in scripture,
OR
it's allowed by God, but is a counterfeit movement. something different.
...
it's really one or the other.
because try as i might; even with help from those in the movement, no one can identify God recording there would be something "like" or "renewed".
it's either continuation or cessation.
this is not some intellectual match - it's quite possibly spiritually critical.
if the issue of tongues is resolved, the rest collapses in on itself.
or, choose another favorite: the revived 'gift of prophecy'.
same thing. when tested, it collapses.
anyways...i'm sure we'll be discussing it more.
T
Everything you have said in this post so far is a twisting of scripture to fit what you believe. You don't believe in gifts of the spirit, that is fine. But to tell others that they are possessed for having and believing in this gift is wrong. This topic has been brought up 9 million times, let's leave this horse alone.
The Machine
The Machine
Many in this thread do not believe all of the gifts are still in existence.
One of the major hang ups is taking one of the manners of tongues as the only possible form of the gift.
From the Word I know of three types of manifestations of this gift.
First the Apostles, after receiving the Holy Spirit, spoke in the form of tongues where all the varied peoples present understood them in their own language.
Second is the gift of tongues spoken in an orderly manner in an assembly when there is one gifted with the gift to interpret what has been given by the Holy Spirit. If the latter is not available, tongues should not be spoken in the assembly since no one can know what has been spoken. If the person wants he may continue speaking in tongues to God edifying himself.
Third is the form of tongues where a person speaks the language of angels. This third may be the same as the second, either way it is glory to God Almighty.
I will always believe the Word before I will believe someone rescinding what the Word says.
One of the major hang ups is taking one of the manners of tongues as the only possible form of the gift.
From the Word I know of three types of manifestations of this gift.
First the Apostles, after receiving the Holy Spirit, spoke in the form of tongues where all the varied peoples present understood them in their own language.
Second is the gift of tongues spoken in an orderly manner in an assembly when there is one gifted with the gift to interpret what has been given by the Holy Spirit. If the latter is not available, tongues should not be spoken in the assembly since no one can know what has been spoken. If the person wants he may continue speaking in tongues to God edifying himself.
Third is the form of tongues where a person speaks the language of angels. This third may be the same as the second, either way it is glory to God Almighty.
I will always believe the Word before I will believe someone rescinding what the Word says.
The Bible is very clear on prophesy and tongues... let me address this.
1 CO 14:39 So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.
Pharisees also embraced tradition instead of God speaking directly to His people, they also said that Jesus was doing these things by "an evil power". Jesus said quite simply, a Kingdom divided can not stand. To think that the enemy is in charge, while people are being transformed by love, healing, and praising God all in the Name of Jesus is just ridiculous. It is the height of unbelief in the power of God, it is the pinnacle of a devoid gospel that has been preached with very little power.
It's time for us to leave a gospel in word only and embrace what we are called to do. Make disciple of nations, heal the sick, cast out demons, and love one another. We are called to expand His Kingdom. Those who belong to Him hear His voice.
C.
1 CO 14:39 So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.
Pharisees also embraced tradition instead of God speaking directly to His people, they also said that Jesus was doing these things by "an evil power". Jesus said quite simply, a Kingdom divided can not stand. To think that the enemy is in charge, while people are being transformed by love, healing, and praising God all in the Name of Jesus is just ridiculous. It is the height of unbelief in the power of God, it is the pinnacle of a devoid gospel that has been preached with very little power.
It's time for us to leave a gospel in word only and embrace what we are called to do. Make disciple of nations, heal the sick, cast out demons, and love one another. We are called to expand His Kingdom. Those who belong to Him hear His voice.
C.
L
To receive the gift of the Holy Spirit an individual must believe that the gift is available and being offered. Without the Holy Spirit it is impossible to know the things that God has prepared for us or His will concerning us. Anyone that says they believe and continues with a “skeptics’” approach, will not receive the gifts of God.
1 Corinthians 2:9-16
9]But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10] But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11] For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12] Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13] Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14] But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15] But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16] For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.
Personal Observations:
There is a major difference between a believer and a skeptic. The following is the definition in the context of this statement:
skep•tic
noun
1.
a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.
2.
a person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others.
3.
a person who doubts the truth of a religion, especially Christianity, or of important elements of it.
4.
( initial capital letter ) Philosophy .
a.
a member of a philosophical school of ancient Greece, the earliest group of which consisted of Pyrrho and his followers, who maintained that real knowledge of things is impossible.
b.
any later thinker who doubts or questions the possibility of real knowledge of any kind. Merriam-Webster
Just as Pyrrho, skeptics at the CC are not seekers of truth. The “skeptics” among us have taken a position that is “'sterile and unproductive and held by virtually no one except a few confused solipsists who doubt even their own existence'; Shermer & Freemen."
1 Corinthians 2:9-16
9]But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10] But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11] For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12] Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13] Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14] But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15] But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16] For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.
Personal Observations:
There is a major difference between a believer and a skeptic. The following is the definition in the context of this statement:
skep•tic
noun
1.
a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.
2.
a person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others.
3.
a person who doubts the truth of a religion, especially Christianity, or of important elements of it.
4.
( initial capital letter ) Philosophy .
a.
a member of a philosophical school of ancient Greece, the earliest group of which consisted of Pyrrho and his followers, who maintained that real knowledge of things is impossible.
b.
any later thinker who doubts or questions the possibility of real knowledge of any kind. Merriam-Webster
Just as Pyrrho, skeptics at the CC are not seekers of truth. The “skeptics” among us have taken a position that is “'sterile and unproductive and held by virtually no one except a few confused solipsists who doubt even their own existence'; Shermer & Freemen."
Last edited by a moderator: