The Charismatic movement?

[notuptome]

Interestingly enough that when God moved in Acts and men spoke in tongues all of the hearers understood without the need for an interpreter.

In Genesis when God judged men at the tower of Babel language was confused and no one understood the other. When Israel was taken into captivity they were taken by peoples whose languages they did not understand.

Angels never spoke in any angelic language but always in human languages so as to be understood. Again no need for an interpreter.

So are tongues in the lips of the speaker or in the ears of the hearer? I suggest that hearing with understanding comes from God and hearing only by interpretation comes from man. The tongues from God seem to be distinct from the tongues of men.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[RickyZ]

Interestingly enough that when God moved in Acts and men spoke in tongues all of the hearers understood without the need for an interpreter.

In Genesis when God judged men at the tower of Babel language was confused and no one understood the other. When Israel was taken into captivity they were taken by peoples whose languages they did not understand.

Angels never spoke in any angelic language but always in human languages so as to be understood. Again no need for an interpreter.

So are tongues in the lips of the speaker or in the ears of the hearer? I suggest that hearing with understanding comes from God and hearing only by interpretation comes from man. The tongues from God seem to be distinct from the tongues of men.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

1 Cor 14 27If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret

So Paul didn't understand that here is no need for an interpreter...

Very interesting

 

[phil36]

It's interesting to note that there is confusion over people having or proclaiming to have the 'gifts of the spirit' - healing people and God actually doing the healing etc through the prayers of his saints. There is a huge difference between the two.

I suspect that on the whole most in the charismatic movement are confused over this.... even cessationists believe God can and still heals.

 

[Blain]

I would like to remind everyone that we are called to be love and to speak in a Christ like manner. I know that emotions get high and it can be hard to not allow them to affect your response but we are after all in a fight against the flesh every day are we not? I do not enjoy seeing my brothers and sisters in Christ getting mad at each other and speaking un Christ like to each other, I would much rather see everyone disagreeing but doing so in a mature and loving manner.

 

[wattie]

The churches in the NT did not have a bible. They had the Torah, but not the bible. Referring to your comment that they were biblically sound.

Just saw your reply now sorry

yeah.. the Old Testament is part of the bible.. in the NT Jesus started His churches.. making a particular pattern of doctrine and practice with them. They would be biblically sound.. in terms of having a particular pattern as set out in the bible when they started. Some churches erred from this yes.. eg.. Corinth.. but you can just read Paul's writing to churches to see there was a particular pattern that marked God's churches.

Anyway..

point being.. the Torah is the Old Testament..so they didn't have the complete Biblios..'books' but had the complete books in process.

Still biblically sound

 

[Stephen63]

My, my, my..... Someone wants to talk about a movement, & before it gets started well, it's judged as whacked & made up..... then someone else comes outta nowhere & attacks the Op with a plagiarism judgement that's a total joke, while others still refuse to read all their Bibles to see plainly what is written therein.

My point..... suppression of the truth. Attack the messenger (Op), attack the movement, & dance all around the scripture references that actually support it.

Did anyone notice what all these guys have in common? Unbelief, & lack of TRUE discernment. This in a nutshell puts them all on the same side. At least that's how Jesus looks at it.....

Matthew 12:30-35 (KJV)
[SUP]30 [/SUP]He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. [SUP]31 [/SUP]Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. [SUP]32 [/SUP]And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. [SUP]33 [/SUP]Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit. [SUP]34 [/SUP]O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. [SUP]35 [/SUP]A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.

It's true..... the more important it is to God, the more Satan tries to supress it.

Better get used to it..... we're THAT close to the end.

 

[DP]

Man, WHAT are you smoking?

By that remark of surprise, it only further proves the unknown tongue you've been hearing cannot be understood by the majority present, which is just the opposite of what manifested on Pentecost.

And ideas of 15 or more languages floating around in the air in a band of confusion is quite funny, not even close to the events written in Acts 2.

Each person heard them speak in their 'own' language of birth when the Apostles spoke on that day. Naturally it means the Apostles heard themselves speak their native language. But someone from Egypt heard in their native language, and a born Greek heard in their native language, and one born in Persia heard in their native language, etc. The Greek dialectos (dialect) in that Acts 2 chapter is very specific in meaning known languages and dialects of the world.

Acts 2:6-8
6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
KJV

 

[kohelet]

No one here prepared to take that challenge I offer of proving what the true cloven tongue is per Acts 2???

You would think that those who so strongly support the speaking of the gibberish tongue that requires someone to interpret would want to know what the Scriptures declare about it.

But all I hear is a mocking of that.

DP, the cloven tongues, according to Acts 2:3, were tongues of fire that appeared above people.

We don't find teaching about tongues in the early church (and today) here, but in 1 Corinthians 12-14. Paul wrote that he didn't want the church to be misinformed about this matter and provided teaching on it. Acts relates what happened at Pentecost (historical narrative) whereas the 1 Corinthians passage is didactic.

 

[Willie-T]

Interestingly enough that when God moved in Acts and men spoke in tongues all of the hearers understood without the need for an interpreter.

In Genesis when God judged men at the tower of Babel language was confused and no one understood the other. When Israel was taken into captivity they were taken by peoples whose languages they did not understand.

Angels never spoke in any angelic language but always in human languages so as to be understood. Again no need for an interpreter.

So are tongues in the lips of the speaker or in the ears of the hearer? I suggest that hearing with understanding comes from God and hearing only by interpretation comes from man. The tongues from God seem to be distinct from the tongues of men.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

In all this mess, that bolded sentence was the only plain, clear statement written..... yet, not even that question was really clearly answered. I so weary of people trying to throw in "churchy-sounding" jargon to make their answers appear "righteous", or something, when they, apparently, can't just straightforwardly answer a simple question.

So are tongues in the lips of the speaker or in the ears of the hearer?

 

[notuptome]

1 Cor 14 27If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret

So Paul didn't understand that here is no need for an interpreter...

Very interesting

So you are going with tongues of men requiring interpretation? That would of course necessitate that they be human languages to facilitate interpretation.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

My, my, my..... Someone wants to talk about a movement, & before it gets started well, it's judged as whacked & made up..... then someone else comes outta nowhere & attacks the Op with a plagiarism judgement that's a total joke, while others still refuse to read all their Bibles to see plainly what is written therein.

My point..... suppression of the truth. Attack the messenger (Op), attack the movement, & dance all around the scripture references that actually support it.

Did anyone notice what all these guys have in common? Unbelief, & lack of TRUE discernment. This in a nutshell puts them all on the same side. At least that's how Jesus looks at it.....

Matthew 12:30-35 (KJV)
[SUP]30 [/SUP]He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. [SUP]31 [/SUP]Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. [SUP]32 [/SUP]And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. [SUP]33 [/SUP]Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit. [SUP]34 [/SUP]O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. [SUP]35 [/SUP]A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.

It's true..... the more important it is to God, the more Satan tries to supress it.

Better get used to it..... we're THAT close to the end.

Here we have the depth of the movement.

Just believe and it will be all good. Don't consider what that pesky bible teaches. Just give into the spirit and go where it takes you.

The word of God is pure may that be what issues from your mouth.

In the end time men will gather to themselves those who will teach them what they want to hear.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

In all this mess, that bolded sentence was the only plain, clear statement written..... yet, not even that question was really clearly answered. I so weary of people trying to throw in "churchy-sounding" jargon to make their answers appear "righteous", or something, when they, apparently, can't just straightforwardly answer a simple question.

So are tongues in the lips of the speaker or in the ears of the hearer?

Repeating the question is not a direct answer to the question.

The question is phrased to provoke thought.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[ember]

It's interesting to note that there is confusion over people having or proclaiming to have the 'gifts of the spirit' - healing people and God actually doing the healing etc through the prayers of his saints. There is a huge difference between the two.

I suspect that on the whole most in the charismatic movement are confused over this.... even cessationists believe God can and still heals.

ah yes...the confused Charismatics

Paul must have been some dumb man

sheesh

good work Sherlock

 

[ember]

Repeating the question is not a direct answer to the question.

The question is phrased to provoke thought.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

well, yah wanna know what it makes me think?

probably not

 

[Willie-T]

In all this mess, that bolded sentence was the only plain, clear statement written..... yet, not even that question was really clearly answered. I so weary of people trying to throw in "churchy-sounding" jargon to make their answers appear "righteous", or something, when they, apparently, can't just straightforwardly answer a simple question.

So are tongues in the lips of the speaker or in the ears of the hearer?

I hold that when someone "speaks in tongues", a sound comes out of their mouths.

This sound is not English, German, Spanish, or French. Not a known language. It is just a sound that not a soul on earth understands from their own learning or experience.

But, it IS a "sound" instigated and authored by God. (Not just sounds a particular speaker chooses to formulate.)

I believe, that when that sound reaches whomever God intended for it to reach, they either understand it, or they don't. If they don't understand it, they just hear strange sounds.

However, if someone DOES feel they understand it, then they can "interpret" the sound.... even though they may only speak nothing but their one single native tongue (which is the same language as all the others in the audience, who cannot make out anything but an odd sound.)

When that "interpreter" tells the rest of the people what the original speaker is meaning to convey.... He/she is NOT interpreting German, Spanish, or French. He/she is simply speaking out what God has put on his/her mind and heart as they listened to the sounds coming from the mouth of the original speaker.

 

[Blain]

Speaking in tongues? well here is my understanding of it, in acts when the apostles spoke in tongues the different ppl of different languages each heard them speak in their own language which is very odd to see a jew speak say spanish or germen or something not saying this the specific languages they spoke but is an example. I have heard the gift of tongues spoken many times within the nt but this is the only actually example I have seen where tongues was actually recorded happening in the bible and it wasn't an unknown holy language that needed an interpreter.

Of course I also am not saying that such a language is not part of the gift but as I said I have only seen one example of this happening in the bible. But I also have to ask in order to understand this mysterious gift better what is the point of this gift itself? how does it work in God's kingdom and what does it do for the believer?

 

[ember]

you know, though, that the Charismatics do not just speak in tongues, right?

people always get so hung up on tongues and yet there is far far more to the spiritual gifts!

 

[Blain]

you know, though, that the Charismatics do not just speak in tongues, right?

people always get so hung up on tongues and yet there is far far more to the spiritual gifts!

exactly that is why I was asking what I did in my post above

 

[Willie-T]

Speaking in tongues? well here is my understanding of it, in acts when the apostles spoke in tongues the different ppl of different languages each heard them speak in their own language which is very odd to see a jew speak say spanish or germen or something not saying this the specific languages they spoke but is an example. I have heard the gift of tongues spoken many times within the nt but this is the only actually example I have seen where tongues was actually recorded happening in the bible and it wasn't an unknown holy language that needed an interpreter.

Of course I also am not saying that such a language is not part of the gift but as I said I have only seen one example of this happening in the bible. But I also have to ask in order to understand this mysterious gift better what is the point of this gift itself? how does it work in God's kingdom and what does it do for the believer?

But, I read that each "hearer" was his own interpreter.

 

[Blain]

But, I read that each "hearer" was his own interpreter.

where did you read this? I read that each person was amazed because they heard them speaking in their native language, if the hearer was it's own interpreter in a sense this is true as they recognize their native tongue from these apostles but in the same way it's the same as you recognizing my words in the english language. the kind of interpreter we are discussing is one who recognizes a holy and unknown language