Tongues Again???
- Thread starter 88
- 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.
whether you think it's bad fruit or not doesn't move me either VCO because I believe what I said.
You said it's vain repetitions, gibberish, isn't for today, and who knows what all. You might as well say it's demonic. If you haven't already. I get all these comments mixed as to who said what. But, I know they are negative and accusing.
And we we all know who the accuser is. An interesting observation. Why is both grace and tongues the subjects that bring the most division?
I don't know but am asking the Lord why.
You said it's vain repetitions, gibberish, isn't for today, and who knows what all. You might as well say it's demonic. If you haven't already. I get all these comments mixed as to who said what. But, I know they are negative and accusing.
And we we all know who the accuser is. An interesting observation. Why is both grace and tongues the subjects that bring the most division?
I don't know but am asking the Lord why.
I'd expect different content in the posts is the objective is to show that his beliefs are Biblically supported. I don't see any Biblical support in his posts for the idea that the Corinthian church, or part of it, was imitating pagan behavior by speaking in tongues. His evidence for that is quoting pagan sources about their practices, making assertions about pagan sources without evidence (ignoring posts asking for evidence), and posting information about pagan temples in Corinth.
Posters post well reasoned arguments from scripture to him. He then accuses the poster of posting based on feelings and experience.
I don't discriminate in my posts. On this topic, if someone is a cessationist, I won't him to have faith in what the Bible says about spiritual gifts. If an unbeliever reads, I want him to have faith in God. If a believer who believes in spiritual gifts reads, I want his faith to grow by considering the word of God. If someone can learn from what I post, I want him to learn. If someone holds to a false doctrine, I want to challenge that and have him rethink it.
Telling someone who posts a well reasoned argument from scripture that he holds to his beliefs because of feelings and emotions, and impugning his motives without evidence, without addressing the points from scripture, is insulting. I am not surprised that VCO has encountered so many arguments on this issue. He also says these posts resort to name-calling. I haven't seen that.
I think he blocked me because I pointed out that certain of his assertions did not fit with what scripture taught and had no scriptural backing, and the similarity between attributing gifts of the Spirit in the text of scripture to pagan sources and the warning Christ gave in the unpardonable sin passage. This was not 'attacking the person.' I did attack the false ideas.
I don't want anyone to be deceived, whether the individual came from a cessationist or continuationist background.
Implying that someone is a false prophet is as much of a personal attack as saying that someone is working together with Satan.
There is a Biblical place for pointing out when individuals are teaching error. VCO posted a quote from a commentary from an author who promotes the idea that 'a tongue' in I Corinthians was a pagan practice. I pointed out that this does not fit the text. He insisted to 'agree to disagree', but kept promoting his false ideas.
It is not inherently wrong to point out when someone is contradicting scripture, or that someone's ideas are dangerous or unbiblical.
Posters post well reasoned arguments from scripture to him. He then accuses the poster of posting based on feelings and experience.
I don't discriminate in my posts. On this topic, if someone is a cessationist, I won't him to have faith in what the Bible says about spiritual gifts. If an unbeliever reads, I want him to have faith in God. If a believer who believes in spiritual gifts reads, I want his faith to grow by considering the word of God. If someone can learn from what I post, I want him to learn. If someone holds to a false doctrine, I want to challenge that and have him rethink it.
Telling someone who posts a well reasoned argument from scripture that he holds to his beliefs because of feelings and emotions, and impugning his motives without evidence, without addressing the points from scripture, is insulting. I am not surprised that VCO has encountered so many arguments on this issue. He also says these posts resort to name-calling. I haven't seen that.
I think he blocked me because I pointed out that certain of his assertions did not fit with what scripture taught and had no scriptural backing, and the similarity between attributing gifts of the Spirit in the text of scripture to pagan sources and the warning Christ gave in the unpardonable sin passage. This was not 'attacking the person.' I did attack the false ideas.
I don't want anyone to be deceived, whether the individual came from a cessationist or continuationist background.
Implying that someone is a false prophet is as much of a personal attack as saying that someone is working together with Satan.
There is a Biblical place for pointing out when individuals are teaching error. VCO posted a quote from a commentary from an author who promotes the idea that 'a tongue' in I Corinthians was a pagan practice. I pointed out that this does not fit the text. He insisted to 'agree to disagree', but kept promoting his false ideas.
It is not inherently wrong to point out when someone is contradicting scripture, or that someone's ideas are dangerous or unbiblical.
No, I said we believe the Charismatic Tongues is a counterfeit, which almost all mainline Protestant Churches believe.
I said we believe it is nothing more than the same kind of ecstatic utterances that were used in the Worship of Apollo and other Mystery Religions as far back as 1100 B.C.
I said we believe those kind of ecstatic utterances were generated in the mind, and psychologists call them psychological phenomena or glossolalia, and are the same as in the Mystery Religions of old, non-Christian religions of today, as well as the Charismatics and the Pentecostals.
I said that because we believe those ecstatic utterance style of tongues are a psychological counterfeit, it would be easy for a demon to take control of the speaker's vocal chords, and curse Christ in a foreign language, right in the assembly, without the speaker even knowing it happened. I documented that very thing happening in two different churches years apart, via a personal interview, in my 6 month study of TONGUES. NO ONE IN EITHER CHURCH, including the PASTORS, believed that is what happened. Only the two different men who heard the languages and understood them, plus the guest Pastor present at both incidences, understood what had happened.
I said it is a fact that Dallas Theological Seminary students, decades ago, put the Interpreter to the TEST, in the largest Charismatic Church in Dallas. One of those students memorized the 23rd Psalm in Hebrew, and after two members of that Church spoke in their tongues, that student quoted his memorized 23rd Psalm in Hebrew. Sure enough the same gentleman that interpreted the first two, stood again and gave a very Biblical sounding INTERPRETATION, but not one word of it was from the 23rd Psalm.
I said we believe JESUS forbade a private prayer language of ecstatic babbling utterances. AND that JESUS gave us a model for all prayer, that DID NOT INCLUDE Charismatic tongues.
Matthew 6:7-15 (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,
[SUP]10 [/SUP] your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
[SUP]11 [/SUP] Give us today our daily bread.
[SUP]12 [/SUP] Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
[SUP]13 [/SUP] And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.'
[SUP]14 [/SUP] For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
[SUP]15 [/SUP] But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.
I said we believe the Bible Teaches that the Genuine Miracle of TONGUES was what the Apostles did, and is ONLY a sign for unbelieving Jews, who heard the Apostles and possibly some other Disciple speak proclaiming the Mighty works of GOD in their exact native "dialektos" (Language correct right down to the accent) of EACH of those unbelieving Jews. I said we believe THAT and only THAT is the Genuine TONGUES, and anything less is a counterfeit. I said we believe that when the Miracle Sign of Tongues, had been confirmed (confirming the Words that became our N.T.), to enough unbelieving Jews, the purpose for that Sign of TONGUES was fulfilled and therefore the Genuine TONGUES ceased.
I gave you multiple verses to support those positions and historical websites, and my list references for the research that I personally did. Now because we choose to put our faith in WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS, and what Historians have recorded, instead of in your ecstatic utterance experience; you responded by concluding: You are actually uniting with Satan to oppress your brothers and sisters."
Now if you want to quote me again, please copy paste what I said from here, instead of assuming you know/remember what said and what I meant.
Last edited:
Paul tells about the talking in tongues as the language of angels... He explains that it was his wish that all had the gift of the spirit to speak in tongues. He further goes on to explain that speaking in tongues only edifies the one speaking in tongues and that they should also be able to interpret what they say so that others can be edified in the spirit also. Paul explains that to an outsider, speaking in tongues my scare them away and cause them to think that the church has gone mad. Speaking in tongues is explained as a communication between the one speaking and God and that any confusion should be followed up with clarity by interpretation so that all may receive edification. It's explained by apostle Paul in the Word.
Did the person who stood up after the message in Hebrews quote the verse about not putting the LORD God to the test, or something along those lines? If someone prophesied, addressing deceptive speaking in tongues, I would not consider this evidence for your viewpoint.
As far people cursing Christ supposedly in tongues, I read your second-hand account. It's filtered through the witness. Why would you conclude all tongues in these churches are false based on that, and ignore testimonies about people hearing praises of God and other positive things 'in tongues' in their own languages. That's bad research methodology, and bad interpretation of partial results.
The Bible does not teach this.
An unsupported definition. Need more evidence.
Colloquial usage of 'dialect' in English is not proof of the definition of 'dialektos'.
A man-made theory not taught in scripture. Not part of the faith once delivered to the saints. We see the word preached being confirmed in scripture.
Modern Charismatic and Pentecostal speaking in tongues fits the Biblical description in I Corinthians 14 in that the speaker typically speaks in a tongue he does not know. (He might understand through the gift of interpretation, such as in the passage.) The audience does not understand, just as in the passage, and the message needs to be interpreted if it is to be edified.
You have not supported the assertion that the Corinthians were speaking in pagan tongues, or this aspect of pagan religion had invaded the churches. You have not proven that regular pagans would speak in these type of utterances, as opposed to certain oracles or other demonized people considered special. You have not proven that it had the same type of characteristics of Christian speaking in tongues. You asserted that the priest of Apollo would say 'Say batta batta', but you have presented no primary source for that. Just assuming this happened and treating it as fact is irrational. Assuming that the Corinthians were emulating pagan practices by speaking in tongues as if it were fact, when there is no reference to it in I Corinthians is irrational. The existence of Apollo temples does not prove your whole theory.
Showing us historical evidence for a temple of Apollo in Corinth is showing historical evidence. Making up a theory about Apollos priests teaching people to say babblings or a theory about pagan babblings being spoken in the Corinthian church is not historical research or evidence. Its just making junk up and treating it as fact.
VCO put me on ignore after I made posts like this, so he can't see this if anyone wants to borrow my material. Others can read it. When I made well-reasoned responses, he accused me of basing my beliefs on feelings and insisted on agreeing to disagree, and commented on how he'd heard it all before, and people wouldn't listen to what he had to say.
Actually reading Paul's argument in context and understanding it isn't good enough for some posters. They want to bring in theories argued off of historical facts that aren't relevant based on the text, or else take a verse and read a lot of ideas into it that aren't there, quote that over and over again, and ignore the flow of argument in the passage.
Then when you point out the argument Paul is making and the flow of ideas in the passage, and specific verses that refute their argument, they like to accuse you of basing your beliefs on feelings rather than scripture, and ignore the scriptures you post and not address those specific issues.
But when you pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Matt. 6:7
Well, he isn't speaking about tongues because tongues weren't manifested until the day of Pentecost, the outpouring of holy spirit, poured out by Jesus Christ himself: Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of holy spirit, he has shed forth this, which you now see and hear. Acts 2:33 And if he was - scripture contradicts that in 1 Cor. 14:39b . . . forbid not to speak with tongues.
When I read Matt. 6:7 - it makes me think of the repetitious prayers operated in the Catholic church.
Well, he isn't speaking about tongues because tongues weren't manifested until the day of Pentecost, the outpouring of holy spirit, poured out by Jesus Christ himself: Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of holy spirit, he has shed forth this, which you now see and hear. Acts 2:33 And if he was - scripture contradicts that in 1 Cor. 14:39b . . . forbid not to speak with tongues.
When I read Matt. 6:7 - it makes me think of the repetitious prayers operated in the Catholic church.
Well, the different to all the different teachings people create in christianity is that the doctrine of the 2nd baptising is according the founders of this doctrine not a thing which is going out from people but from God himself, not the human create a doctrine, but the Holy Spirit actet. And this leads it to the conclusion: If it comes from the Holy Spirit, than all who deny this are wrong! And all christians which lived between the apostolic time and 1900 are was also wrong and lived without the 2nd baptising with the Holy Spirit. The point is I cant find this doctrine in the bible! Either it is hte Holy Spirit behind this, than this is for all christians. Ore another spirit is behind this doctrine, then we have to be careful to trust.
Yes Stone I read acts. To whom are Acts 1,4-5 is said? To the electet apostels! They had a special task. We know from Thomas that he has been in India f.e..
We can not simply take all what Jesus said to the apostels convey to us today! In the time of acts we find 3 different people groups in israel. Jews, Heathen (romans) and Samarians.
The events of given the Holy Spirit to the people we have 4 times. In Acts 2, 8, 10 and 19.
In acts 2 we find at pentecost the partfulfillment of Joel 2 and a proof for the jews that the Holy Spirit came to the followers of Christ. And the expection of the jews was that the Holy Spirit is only for them. In Acts 8 we read that also the samaritians which are more to see as an enemy to the jews, also received the Holy Spirit. And it was to see for the people, so that it was a proof to the Jews that it is gods will. In Acts 10 we read that God has prepared Peter first to accept that the Holy Spirit is also given for the heathen. And so given as it was in acts 2 at pentecost. Also this was a proof for the jews, that this was fom God. In acts 19 we find a 4th event. We read from the disciples from John the Baptist, which did not know about the Holy Spirit. So they recivied it and it is recordet also as an proof that the Holy Spirit is for all believers.
If I simply read this chapters it is clear to me why it is mentioned. I dont need to search for a meaning behind and also I cant create a new doctrine from this events.
If the doctrine from the 2nd baptising and as proof speaking in tongues would be biblical, than we would find easily a proof for this there and also a practice in the churchhistory. But we cant find without reading something in the text and createing a new meaning.
We can not simply take all what Jesus said to the apostels convey to us today! In the time of acts we find 3 different people groups in israel. Jews, Heathen (romans) and Samarians.
The events of given the Holy Spirit to the people we have 4 times. In Acts 2, 8, 10 and 19.
In acts 2 we find at pentecost the partfulfillment of Joel 2 and a proof for the jews that the Holy Spirit came to the followers of Christ. And the expection of the jews was that the Holy Spirit is only for them. In Acts 8 we read that also the samaritians which are more to see as an enemy to the jews, also received the Holy Spirit. And it was to see for the people, so that it was a proof to the Jews that it is gods will. In Acts 10 we read that God has prepared Peter first to accept that the Holy Spirit is also given for the heathen. And so given as it was in acts 2 at pentecost. Also this was a proof for the jews, that this was fom God. In acts 19 we find a 4th event. We read from the disciples from John the Baptist, which did not know about the Holy Spirit. So they recivied it and it is recordet also as an proof that the Holy Spirit is for all believers.
If I simply read this chapters it is clear to me why it is mentioned. I dont need to search for a meaning behind and also I cant create a new doctrine from this events.
If the doctrine from the 2nd baptising and as proof speaking in tongues would be biblical, than we would find easily a proof for this there and also a practice in the churchhistory. But we cant find without reading something in the text and createing a new meaning.
I come from lutherean background. Its new for me that he has taught the doctrine about 2nd baptism and as proof speaking in tongues. Have you some scripture proof? That the Holy Spirit bewared the church during churchhistory is clear to me. But you cant find evidence that the 2nd baptising with the proof speaking in tongues was taught.
I think it has to do with the manner of prayer, as vain empty , and not so much the repetition. We are to cry out in our anxieties repetitiously according to the right manner .Knowing we understand that He knows what we need even before we cry out.
Those who in vain cry out according to another manner other than our father are following after another Christ the anti-christ.
Like the Catholics vain repetitions as to what they call Holy Father, the Holy See, our Holiness .... the Pope as a daysman . .
They have turned His manner into many manners. To include a queen mother of heaven And are shown as those who refuse to call no man on earth father for one is in heaven
But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him. After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Mat 6:7
Those who in vain cry out according to another manner other than our father are following after another Christ the anti-christ.
Like the Catholics vain repetitions as to what they call Holy Father, the Holy See, our Holiness .... the Pope as a daysman . .
They have turned His manner into many manners. To include a queen mother of heaven And are shown as those who refuse to call no man on earth father for one is in heaven
But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him. After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Mat 6:7
Its good enough .
No one is ignoring the scriptures it seems you might be ignoring what it means to walk by faith and not by sight after our own experiences. It why the unbelieving Jew stumbled over the cross . They were hoping the kingdom of God could be of this world and would only believe if they saw a sign in respect to what they did perform.Indicating self righteousness.
No one is ignoring the scriptures it seems you might be ignoring what it means to walk by faith and not by sight after our own experiences. It why the unbelieving Jew stumbled over the cross . They were hoping the kingdom of God could be of this world and would only believe if they saw a sign in respect to what they did perform.Indicating self righteousness.
Even the first baptizing (water) is not evidence we have the Holy Spirit .No such thing as a sign gift. Signs are for those who believe not. Prophecy (the word of God )for those who are given the faith of Christ that works in the believer to both will and do his good pleasure as a imputed righteousness not of their own selves, so that we then can believe God.
Faith (Christ's) of God is the free gift not of our own selves as a source of faith according to His faith that works in us we are saved. His faith is not without works.
Faith (Christ's) of God is the free gift not of our own selves as a source of faith according to His faith that works in us we are saved. His faith is not without works.