Tongues Again???

[presidente]

I absolutely believe is the genuine Biblical Tongues where unbelieving Jews hear every word of it in their own native language and dialect. The problem is NONE of Charismatic Tongues even come close to what the disciples did.

I've heard your 'experience' line of reasoning before. I notice you have a really low standard of proof against spiritual gifts, but you don't accept 'experience' arguments from accounts of those who have heard God praised through speaking in tongues, in their own languages in more recent times.

We are finished.

So you said at the beginning of the thread. If you keep promoting error, I am within my rights to point it out.

I am also within my rights to point out that you shut down the conversation or say you've heard it all before when I point out the error in your posts. I asked the question again of how Paul would expect interpreting tongues to edify the congregation if the tongues being spoken were actually pagan tongues. And of course, when faced with a question you can't answer, you want to shut the conversation down. It has been typical of your responses throughout the thread.

 

[presidente]

John MacAthur has some of the worst teachings on speaking in tongues I've ever heard. There is an old video on YouTube where he talks about I Corinthians 14. I don't know if this was before he started teaching verse by verse, but he makes assertion after assertion that are easily debunked by just reading verse by verse through the text, at least if you assume the passage is inspired by God and that Paul is a faithful teacher of the Gospel.

It's the same garbage that VCO promoted earlier, the idea that the speaking in tongues in the passage is demonic. But John MacArthur has asserted that the use of the singular or the plural in reference to speaking in tongues is the key to understanding the passage. Aside from being a nonsensical approach to scripture-- changing the whole meaning of a word based on whether its plural--it doesn't stand up to examination.

Look at an interlinear (e.g. scripture4all online) and you can see that the use of plural for 'tongue' or 'tongues' in the KJV sticks with the Greek. In I Corinthians 14, we see Paul's willingness to both speak in a tongue and to speak in tongues.

In the audio I listened to John MacArthur departs from verse by verse, and goes on a diatribe against the very speaking in tongues in scripture. He asserts the Corinthians were speaking in 'pagan tongues' using the oracle of Delphi as the key to the passage. It is not mentioned in the passage. He tries to tie 'he speaks mysteries with his spirit' to the Greek mystery religions, when Paul uses the same Greek word translated 'mystery' in other passages in a positive sense. The mystery of Christ is a good thing.

It's the same approach to butchering culture and history the liberals use to promote homosexuality and any number of false agendas.

I checked out Charismatic Chaos many years ago through interlibrary loan. You can read one of his books and probably find some examples of flakiness in the Charismatic movement, and probably some legit stuff that he has unbiblical complaints about. In his book, he wrongly asserted that the apostles did not go into trances, even though Acts says that Peter went into a trance and that Paul went into a trance.

He asserts that there are no reliable historical record of certain gifts in history. This seems disingenuous since he is either writing off those considered orthodox in the first century of Christianity as having unreliable accounts without telling us the accounts exist, or he is pretending he actually knows something about historical references to spiritual gifts that he doesn't. He's probably parroting a theologian in the 1800's who asserted that without doing his research.

He doesn't have a solid argument against the gifts, but rather a theory that miracles occurred during times when revelation was being given, a flawed thesis if you look at the evidence (former DTS professor Jack Deere gives a counterargument in Suprised by the Power of the Spirit). He also expects spiritual gifts in the last days, which are characerized by the Spirit being poured out on all flesh and by prophesying, dreams, and visions, to conform to some pattern of Old Testament evidence.

 

[fredoheaven]

The Bible teaches this also
Matthew 11:27
All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.




This type of judging is a huge problem in this thread.



There is nothing in the Bible that cancels the teaching that the Spirit gives gifts, including the working of miracles, to believers today. As you pointed out God can do miracles, signs, and wonders as He wills. It would be foolish for men to presume to say that God cannot do signs and wonders now

Great, you have quoted a Bible verse that says to whomsoever the Son will “reveal” him.

Question: Is Christ words of “whomsoever” includes you in this instance?

Let’s see what the Bible says as to whom Christ really speaking:

Mathew 11:1 And it came to pass, when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples, he departed thence to teach and to preach in their cities.
Matthew 11:7 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind?
Matthew 11:20 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not:
Well, the Bible speaks of these things to the house of Israel, where they can show or perform signs and wonders, perform healing, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead and cast out devils.

Matthew 10: 4 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
8Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.
9Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses,
10Nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy of his meat.
11And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
12And when ye come into an house, salute it.
13And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.
14And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.


Ho, ho! my friend, I said “…as on those days of the Apostles.” When the Bible teaches it some ceases, I have to believe it, otherwise, that interpretation is already unbiblical. SOLA SCRIPTURA!

 

[presidente]

AND is is your eisegesis that is in serious ERROR.

As I said before, "there is nothing new under the sun", coming from your side of the fence.

That is why I have grown to dislike discussing this subject with any of the Charismatics or Pentecostals. I have not heard any new arguments in 20 years or more. Give it up already and agree to disagree. I post to encourage non-Charismatics.

The difference between our posts is that I deal with actual verses of scripture. If someone challenges me on a point, I'll answer and address it.

I will point out details as to why your eisegesis is in error.

For example, I asked you, if the Corinthians were speaking in pagan tongues, why would Paul want the tongue interpreted to edify the church?

I don't think you can answer that or a number of other objections.

I asked for specific evidence that pagan priests told people to 'speak in tongues' by saying "say 'Batta, Batta'." I want some real primary source, not conjecture by someone writing an anti-spiritual-gift polemic. By your use of scripture, I know I can't trust you that you have properly interpreted historical information. I asked for evidence.

You give none. And of course, you want to shut off conversation.

The difference is, I prove and demonstrate that you are engaging in eisegesis. You just assert that I am. If I'm shown to be wrong about my interpretation of scripture, I'll change my beliefs. Can you honestly say the same about yourself? When you are shown to be wrong, you shut the conversation down.

If you don't want to participate, that's up to you. What I see you do is say you don't want to participate when you are shown to be wrong, or say you've heard it all before, and then you keep on going, promoting the same false ideas.

To all, does anyone else there agree with this man that the Corinthians were speaking in pagan tongues? If so, why would you think Paul would think the interpretation of tongues would edify the church?

 

[presidente]

Great, you have quoted a Bible verse that says to whomsoever the Son will “reveal” him.

Question: Is Christ words of “whomsoever” includes you in this instance?

Let’s see what the Bible says as to whom Christ really speaking:

Mathew 11:1 And it came to pass, when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples, he departed thence to teach and to preach in their cities.
Matthew 11:7 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind?
Matthew 11:20 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not:
Well, the Bible speaks of these things to the house of Israel, where they can show or perform signs and wonders, perform healing, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead and cast out devils.

Matthew 10: 4 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
8Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.
9Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses,
10Nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy of his meat.
11And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
12And when ye come into an house, salute it.
13And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.
14And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.


Ho, ho! my friend, I said “…as on those days of the Apostles.” When the Bible teaches it some ceases, I have to believe it, otherwise, that interpretation is already unbiblical. SOLA SCRIPTURA!

I'm not really sure of your point in quoting those scriptures.

Also, are you trying to point out your misuse of prepositional phrases?

Are you saying Christ did not reveal the Father to you? Do you know the Father?

Let's use the word 'revelation' in a Biblical way.

Scripture trumps what men say about it.

 

[Cee]

Why did Paul say it was an unknown tongue, but you say it is a known tongue?
Why do you say tongues is for speaking to Jews when Paul says it is to speaking to God?

For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.

You're right there is nothing new under the sun. Scripture has been saying this for a long, long, long, time. Some believe it and some don't.

AND is is your eisegesis that is in serious ERROR.

As I said before, "there is nothing new under the sun", coming from your side of the fence.

That is why I have grown to dislike discussing this subject with any of the Charismatics or Pentecostals. I have not heard any new arguments in 20 years or more. Give it up already and agree to disagree. I post to encourage non-Charismatics.

 

[Cee]

Being a Berean is searching Scripture with great eagerness not skepticism. That's what made them more noble minded. They were seeking to discover the things were true not false.

Acts 17:11 Now the Bereans were more noble-minded than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if these teachings were true.

But the problem is many people misinterpret His Word, and never realize it, because they lean on experience and feelings to confirm what is Truth. Instead of learning from the Bereans and searching the Scriptures confirming the True meaning by comparing one verse to other verses on the same subject.

 

[VCO]

I want to encourage those here who are Non-Charismatics,
so I will give you some video and online links that will help:


[video=youtube;mY8TOHPUQgo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY8TOHPUQgo[/video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVSLc0cqlZM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_8rA-PUpFw&list=PLNUq3RKxstWdNcS9T6TSlzJJuwn_Na5DF

The Truth About Tongues, Part 1

https://ihcc.org/Resources/GilRughMessages#7

https://ihcc.org/Resources/GilRughMessages#8

https://www.thetrumpet.com/article/...ble/the-plain-truth-about-speaking-in-tongues

Speaking in Tongues - Gift of Tongues

https://bible-truths.com/tongues.htm

Is speaking or praying in tongues Biblical? | Verse By Verse Ministry International


Plus, I am sure there are MANY other fine Bible Teachers, teaching what the Genuine gift of TONGUES was, compared to the Charismatic imitation.

 

[VCO]

Being a Berean is searching Scripture with great eagerness not skepticism. That's what made them more noble minded. They were seeking to discover the things were true not false.

I guess you did not read the post where I explained where my wife left the Pentecostal Church years before I met her. She spoke in tongues for years prior to having GOD put on her heart that every bit of the modern day Charismatic experience was PHONY.

I was hooked into seeking to speak tongues and habitually watching Kenneth Copeland before GOD put it on my heart two weeks into my six month sincere, DEEP study on the gift of Tongues, when GOD convinced me through HIS WORD that the Charismatic experience was a complete counterfeit of the genuine Gift of Tongues.

 

[fredoheaven]

I'm not really sure of your point in quoting those scriptures.

Also, are you trying to point out your misuse of prepositional phrases?

Are you saying Christ did not reveal the Father to you? Do you know the Father?

Let's use the word 'revelation' in a Biblical way.

Scripture trumps what men say about it.

Having picky on the scriptures you dealt with. Christ being the crown of revelation of God is and that Christ in the written record of the scriptures says, to Philippe "If you have known me, you have known the Father". So, in effect I have known Christ through the scriptures. What ever God reveals about His Father, has been revealed to us in the scriptures.

BTW. so what is "revelation in a biblical way" you are referring to? I love discussing Bible not anything else.

 

[presidente]

She spoke in tongues for years prior to have GOD put on her heart that every bit of the modern day Charismatic experience was PHONY.

So now you have three pieces of evidence for your view.
1. Extra Biblical revelation (supposed) (see quote above)
2. Experiences of others.
3. Eisegeting ideas into the text of scripture, even if they contradict with what the passage is saying.

 

[VCO]

Why did Paul say it was an unknown tongue, but you say it is a known tongue?
Why do you say tongues is for speaking to Jews when Paul says it is to speaking to God?

For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.

You're right there is nothing new under the sun. Scripture has been saying this for a long, long, long, time. Some believe it and some don't.

LOOK AGAIN, "unknown tongue"is only in the KJV and YLT and the word unknown is in italics in both Bibles, clarifying that it is NOT in the original language manuscripts at all.

Your whole theory is based on a word that NEVER REALLY WAS IN THE BIBLE.

 

[presidente]

LOOK AGAIN, "unknown tongue"is only in the KJV and YLT and the word unknown is in italics in both Bibles, clarifying that it is NOT in the original language manuscripts at all.

Your whole theory is based on a word that NEVER REALLY WAS IN THE BIBLE.

I was going to point out the italics, but then I realized that his point may have been that Paul said, "no man understandeth him".

 

[VCO]

Why did Paul say it was an unknown tongue, but you say it is a known tongue?
Why do you say tongues is for speaking to Jews when Paul says it is to speaking to God?

For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.

You're right there is nothing new under the sun. Scripture has been saying this for a long, long, long, time. Some believe it and some don't.

My turn to ask three easy questions:

1 Corinthians 10:23-24 (KJV)
[SUP]23 [/SUP] All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
[SUP]24 [/SUP] Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth.

Now since we have established the words in italics mean that word is NOT in the origin language manuscripts, read those two verses without INSERTING the word wealth, like the KJV translators did.

1. Is it not clear that Paul is forbidding Self Edification in verse 24?

Now read the following verse and I will ask the second question:

1 Corinthians 14:4 (KJV)
[SUP]4 [/SUP] He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

2. Is it not clear that Paul gave us a reason not to speak in an unknown tongue, instead of the assumption it was something he wanted us to do?

This I think should cement in place the real meaning Paul intended in verse 4:

Matthew 6:7-9 (NIV)
[SUP]7 [/SUP] And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.
[SUP]8 [/SUP] Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
[SUP]9 [/SUP] "This, then, is how you should pray: "'Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name,
3. Now does not that above verse clarify that Jesus does not want us to pray in an unknown tongue, but rather in our OWN language making our requests understandable to both GOD and ourselves?


1 Corinthians 14:2 (KJV)
[SUP]2 [/SUP] For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

14:2-39 Although it is not indicated consistently in some translations, the distinction between the singular tongue and the plural tongues is foundational to the proper interpretation of this chapter. Paul seems to use the singular to distinguish the counterfeit gift of pagan gibberish and the plural to indicate the genuine gift of a foreign language (see note on v. 2). It was perhaps in recognition of that, that the King James Version (KJV) translators added consistently the word “unknown” before every singular form (see vv. 2, 4, 13, 14, 19, 27). The implications of that distinction will be noted as appropriate. Against the backdrop of carnality and counterfeit ecstatic speech learned from the experience of the pagans, Paul covers three basic issues with regard to speaking in languages by the gift of the Holy Spirit: (1) its position, inferior to prophecy (vv. 1-19); (2) its purpose, a sign to unbelievers, not believers (vv.20-25); and (3) its procedure, systematic, limited, and orderly (vv. 26-40). . .

The MacArthur Bible Commentary.

 

[presidente]

Here is a video I have seen that addresses the problems with John MacArthur's sermon on I Corinthians 14. This video deals with specific verses in the text. I've heard John MacArthur's sermon on YouTube before, too.



[video=youtube;jJUTT_Rhp08]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJUTT_Rhp08&t=2s[/video]

 

[VCO]

So now you have three pieces of evidence for your view.
1. Extra Biblical revelation (supposed) (see quote above)
2. Experiences of others.
3. Eisegeting ideas into the text of scripture, even if they contradict with what the passage is saying.

The following is the comment you diserve:

 

[presidente]

VCO if self-edification were forbidden, wouldn't praying and reading the Bible alone at home be forbidden?

 

[fredoheaven]

Here is my take on the "unknown tongue"

The “unknown” tongue in italics as provided in the scriptures simply refers to the language that is not being spoken in the Corinth Church and can be learned and understood if one interprets. This is not all about babble sounds without signification. It is language which is the other gifts of the Holy Spirit demanded it.

Is there such a gift of tongue during Paul's day? There is,but nowadays, None!

 

[VCO]

It has been my experience that these debates on this subject with Pentecostals and Charismatics always degenerate into these kind of personal attacks. Perhaps the best policy is to just flat ignore them.

 

[fredoheaven]

It has been my experience that these debates on this subject with Pentecostals and Charismatics always degenerate into these kind of personal attacks. Perhaps the best policy is to just flat ignore them.

Okay VCO, no further comment on my part for now. we'll let this pass...