The reason why that is stated is because in the Book of Acts we see this gift operated when one was baptized with the Holy Spirit or Prophesied. as a normative. Also the human mind is unfruitful in this unless there is an interpretation those on the opposing side want a translation Tongues & interpretation is the same as Prophesying found in 1cor 14.
examples of speaking in tongues - need verification and explanations, please
- Thread starter zone
- 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.
I would offer the idea of a “sign gift” as that seen is not represented in the gospel .A person will not find gift and sign working together, all die not receiving the promise of a new body.
We walk or understand God by the things not seen, the eternal as spiritual words and not after that seen the temporal.
Signs are for those who believe not prophecy… the one source of the unseen spiritual for those who do exercise the faith of Christ as the same Spirit of faith, according as it is written. It works in us as our new faith previously serving dead faith or what scripture calls, no faith
And the Lord said unto Moses, Bring Aaron's rod again before the testimony, to be kept for a token against the rebels; and thou shalt quite take away their murmurings from me, that they die not Number 17:10
The law of signs as to its purpose…
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying the revealer of the things not seen) serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.1 Corintians 14
And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.And the Lord said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod. (of rebellion as those who believe not prophecy ) And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it. And the Lord said unto Moses, Put forth thine hand, and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand, and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand: That they may believe that the Lord God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee. And the Lord said furthermore unto him, Put now thine hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom: and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow. And he said, Put thine hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again; and plucked it out of his bosom, and, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh.And it shall come to pass, if they (those with no faith) will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign,(which speaks of their rebellion) that they will believe the voice of the latter sign. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.
Leprosy the sign of no spiritual life . The second sign the gospel as that which creates or restores as new incorruptible life.
Above it again reveals signs are not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serves not for them that believe not (no faith, sign seekers ), but for them which believe.
The Rod that represents the rebellious in the parable below
Take the rod, and gather thou the assembly together, thou, and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the rock before their eyes; and it shall give forth his water, and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock: so thou shalt give the congregation and their beasts drink.And Moses took the rod from before the Lord, as he commanded him. And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock? And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also. Numbers 20
We walk or understand God by the things not seen, the eternal as spiritual words and not after that seen the temporal.
Signs are for those who believe not prophecy… the one source of the unseen spiritual for those who do exercise the faith of Christ as the same Spirit of faith, according as it is written. It works in us as our new faith previously serving dead faith or what scripture calls, no faith
And the Lord said unto Moses, Bring Aaron's rod again before the testimony, to be kept for a token against the rebels; and thou shalt quite take away their murmurings from me, that they die not Number 17:10
The law of signs as to its purpose…
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying the revealer of the things not seen) serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.1 Corintians 14
And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.And the Lord said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod. (of rebellion as those who believe not prophecy ) And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it. And the Lord said unto Moses, Put forth thine hand, and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand, and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand: That they may believe that the Lord God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee. And the Lord said furthermore unto him, Put now thine hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom: and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow. And he said, Put thine hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again; and plucked it out of his bosom, and, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh.And it shall come to pass, if they (those with no faith) will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign,(which speaks of their rebellion) that they will believe the voice of the latter sign. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.
Leprosy the sign of no spiritual life . The second sign the gospel as that which creates or restores as new incorruptible life.
Above it again reveals signs are not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serves not for them that believe not (no faith, sign seekers ), but for them which believe.
The Rod that represents the rebellious in the parable below
Take the rod, and gather thou the assembly together, thou, and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the rock before their eyes; and it shall give forth his water, and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock: so thou shalt give the congregation and their beasts drink.And Moses took the rod from before the Lord, as he commanded him. And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock? And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also. Numbers 20
Praying in the Spirit is to be built up in faith, past our understanding: it goes to show the trouble in this generation to get past our understanding. There is even teaching that to get past our understanding leaves us open to the spiritual realm and vulnerable to demon oppression and since we don't know what we are saying when praying in tongues, how would we know if its from the Lord. Maybe from some who has no understanding and cant get past what they thinks they knows. But Living for the praise of God paralyses the enemy. "Out of the mouth of babes you have perfected praise." Jesus had stopped in the middle of a sentence from the old testament, "Out of the mouth of babes you have ordained strength to still the enemy." "The Joy of the Lord is our strength." Praying in tongues is the best weapon to overcome temptation: Paralysing the enemy. "Praying in the spirit with all prayer and supplication for all the saints." Expressing thanksgiving to God to enter His presence doesn't need language of understanding obviously. Neither does a babe need to be understood by his parents for them to know the joy he has in their presence, neither do we need to understand the song of a bird to know he is expressing joy, even to God.
Incorrect.
Tongues is the Bible evidence of receiving the indwelling Holy Spirit.
These signs shall follow them that believe ...
The gift that most people are greatly confused about (1Corinthians 14)
is the gift of diversity of tongues or speaking out in a diverse tongue
this is done only at worship meetings and is to be followed by interpretation
The Greek word for sign(s) in Mark 16 is quite different to the Greek word for
gift(s) in 1Corinthians 14:
Tongues is the Bible evidence of receiving the indwelling Holy Spirit.
These signs shall follow them that believe ...
The gift that most people are greatly confused about (1Corinthians 14)
is the gift of diversity of tongues or speaking out in a diverse tongue
this is done only at worship meetings and is to be followed by interpretation
The Greek word for sign(s) in Mark 16 is quite different to the Greek word for
gift(s) in 1Corinthians 14:
The 'they shall speak in new tongues' (Mk. 16:17) has nothing to do with modern tongues; it simply means that as people spread the word of Christianity, they would need to do so by learning and speaking to people in their own languages- 'new' languages for the ones spreading the message, but certainly not to those whose native language it is.
There's no specific word 'gifts' in 1 Cor. 14 - 'pneumatikos' just means "spiritual (things)". So, yes 'sign' in Mark 16 (sêmeion) is definitely different than in 1 Cor. 14.
When Paul speaks of 'divers kinds of tongues', he uses the word 'genos' - which carries the connotation of 'types/kinds related by family' (same root in the word 'genealogy'). He's talking about various language families here; a clear reference to real rational languages; not modern tongues-speech.
"Tongues" as evidence of the indwelling of the H/S certainly does not seem to apply across the board. There are passages in the Bible where people are said to be filled with the H/S, yet zero mention of "tongues" (e.g. John 20:20).
Quick question - “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” is mentioned in the New Testament epistles only one time; in 1 Cor. 12:13. It is described in the past tense and “evidence of tongues” is not mentioned at all. How is this reconciled with the modern understanding/concept?
To the OP's original request - Here's an example of someone speaking modern tongues/glossolalia - in the comments below the video, I have shown a transcription and comments of what was uttered for the first 25 seconds or so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqL2km7l3mA
There's no specific word 'gifts' in 1 Cor. 14 - 'pneumatikos' just means "spiritual (things)". So, yes 'sign' in Mark 16 (sêmeion) is definitely different than in 1 Cor. 14.
When Paul speaks of 'divers kinds of tongues', he uses the word 'genos' - which carries the connotation of 'types/kinds related by family' (same root in the word 'genealogy'). He's talking about various language families here; a clear reference to real rational languages; not modern tongues-speech.
"Tongues" as evidence of the indwelling of the H/S certainly does not seem to apply across the board. There are passages in the Bible where people are said to be filled with the H/S, yet zero mention of "tongues" (e.g. John 20:20).
Quick question - “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” is mentioned in the New Testament epistles only one time; in 1 Cor. 12:13. It is described in the past tense and “evidence of tongues” is not mentioned at all. How is this reconciled with the modern understanding/concept?
To the OP's original request - Here's an example of someone speaking modern tongues/glossolalia - in the comments below the video, I have shown a transcription and comments of what was uttered for the first 25 seconds or so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqL2km7l3mA
I would suggest reading the law of signs verses prophecy very carefully they appose each other.It is found inverse 22 of 1 Corinthians 14. It the key to understanding the purpose for signs
Tongues asa sign = God mocking an outward Jew by Him choosing all the other nations inthe world to bring new prophecy ,theword of God, giving other nations earsto hear what the Spirit is saying…..
Seeing the unbelieving Jew (no faith) wouldnot hear prophecy as that in which they made to no effect by and through the “oraltraditions of the fathers”
The law that reveals signs is for those who “do not believe prophecy”. And prophecy is for those who do walk by faith. Those who by the oral tradition of men make it(prophecy) to no effect .
The law that pertains to signs inform us signs are not for the believers, Prophecy as the revealer of things not seen alone is.
We must becareful in how we hear that we do not go above that which is written.
No suchthing as a sign gift as evidence of anything .Again we walk by faith the unseen
eternal.
Signs are stumbling blocks . Prophecy for those who do believe the word of God
For theJews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:But we preach Christcrucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; 1Cor.1:22-23
Theunconverted Jews required a sign to confirm they believed. As if there weresign gifts. They stumbled over thecross.
The law below applies to any sign .Experiencing the unknown is not the validation of spiritualtruth
22 Whereforetongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not:but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them whichbelieve.1Corinthians 14 :22
Forwith stammering (mocking ) lips and another tongue(other than Hebrew)will he speak to this people.Isiah 28:11
They wouldnot hear prophecy it mocked the unconverted Jew when they hear prophecy coming toall the nations of the world coming to the gentiles. The mocking coming fromGod was a sign against them. No outward sign for the believer other than theydid believe the word as God interpreted it in their own language.
Towhom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; andthis is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. Isiah 28
They didnot enter the Sabaath rest because as we are informed in Hebrews 4 they did notmix faith, the unseen eternal in what they did hear.
God is using the situation of bringing newprophecy through the Gentiles .Stammering lips are mocking lips. God is mockingthe outward Jew who did make the prophecy of God to no effect through their ownoral tradition. The sign of rebellion points to them who believes not prophecy. Notthe new prophecy he was brining through Peter .
It’s a sign of rebellion not a sign of unity as evidence someone has the Holy Spirit butjust the opposite. The sign to the believe is they heard God not seen. It’s howsigns are used throughout prophecy (scripture) there is no outward evidence if wewalk by faith. Not one new creature has received the goal of our faith our new incorruptiblebody.
Again readthe law of faith in verse 22 of 1 Corinthian 14 slowly prayerfully.
It’s clearly the ones God mocked when he prophesied to other nations other than the Jew .
I would offer research on how signs alone and not signs and wonders working together areused throughout the Bible .The counterfeiters ,the father of lies motive of operation is to turn things upside down and take way the understanding we do receive fromthe Holy Spirit. The sign is not for the beliver.
Tongues asa sign = God mocking an outward Jew by Him choosing all the other nations inthe world to bring new prophecy ,theword of God, giving other nations earsto hear what the Spirit is saying…..
Seeing the unbelieving Jew (no faith) wouldnot hear prophecy as that in which they made to no effect by and through the “oraltraditions of the fathers”
The law that reveals signs is for those who “do not believe prophecy”. And prophecy is for those who do walk by faith. Those who by the oral tradition of men make it(prophecy) to no effect .
The law that pertains to signs inform us signs are not for the believers, Prophecy as the revealer of things not seen alone is.
We must becareful in how we hear that we do not go above that which is written.
No suchthing as a sign gift as evidence of anything .Again we walk by faith the unseen
eternal.
Signs are stumbling blocks . Prophecy for those who do believe the word of God
For theJews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:But we preach Christcrucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; 1Cor.1:22-23
Theunconverted Jews required a sign to confirm they believed. As if there weresign gifts. They stumbled over thecross.
The law below applies to any sign .Experiencing the unknown is not the validation of spiritualtruth
22 Whereforetongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not:but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them whichbelieve.1Corinthians 14 :22
Forwith stammering (mocking ) lips and another tongue(other than Hebrew)will he speak to this people.Isiah 28:11
They wouldnot hear prophecy it mocked the unconverted Jew when they hear prophecy coming toall the nations of the world coming to the gentiles. The mocking coming fromGod was a sign against them. No outward sign for the believer other than theydid believe the word as God interpreted it in their own language.
Towhom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; andthis is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. Isiah 28
They didnot enter the Sabaath rest because as we are informed in Hebrews 4 they did notmix faith, the unseen eternal in what they did hear.
God is using the situation of bringing newprophecy through the Gentiles .Stammering lips are mocking lips. God is mockingthe outward Jew who did make the prophecy of God to no effect through their ownoral tradition. The sign of rebellion points to them who believes not prophecy. Notthe new prophecy he was brining through Peter .
It’s a sign of rebellion not a sign of unity as evidence someone has the Holy Spirit butjust the opposite. The sign to the believe is they heard God not seen. It’s howsigns are used throughout prophecy (scripture) there is no outward evidence if wewalk by faith. Not one new creature has received the goal of our faith our new incorruptiblebody.
Again readthe law of faith in verse 22 of 1 Corinthian 14 slowly prayerfully.
It’s clearly the ones God mocked when he prophesied to other nations other than the Jew .
I would offer research on how signs alone and not signs and wonders working together areused throughout the Bible .The counterfeiters ,the father of lies motive of operation is to turn things upside down and take way the understanding we do receive fromthe Holy Spirit. The sign is not for the beliver.
Last edited:
There were only 12 speaking; not 120, and there were only two languages; not 16.
Most people assume its 120 individuals, but: Chapter one ends with the newly formed 12 apostles (i.e. the addition of Matthias to replace Judas). Chapter 2 begins with saying "...they were all with one accord in one place..." It's assumed that the "they" here refers to the 120, but the context goes back to the end of Chapter 1 and refers to the 12. Jesus' command in Chapter 1 concerning this event was to the apostles, not the 120.
There is other contextual "evidence" in Chapter 2 as well.
As concerns languages – the number most people come up with is due to a common misreading of the text. Take a closer look at Acts 2:9-11 – what do you notice? It’s not a list of languages, at all; it’s a list of nations and territories. Its inclusion is rather relevant, but more as a political statement than to demonstrate linguistic diversity. Part of the relevance of the list is that the places listed are specifically those lands and areas of the Jewish Diaspora (Cyprus and Syria are missing but that speaks to the purpose of the list’s inclusion into the narrative). Both the Western and Eastern Diaspora are represented.
So, what about the languages? Read the entire narrative again carefully. Did you notice anything? A few things may not be apparent at first, but they’re there.
First, if you read the entire narrative, not one language is ever referenced by name – not one. Why do you suppose that is?
Secondly, though there were Jews from ‘every nation under heaven’, nowhere in the entire narrative is it even remotely suggested that communication was ever an issue. Again, why do you suppose that is?
Lastly, at one point, Peter addresses the crowd – given the demographic make-up of the attendees, what language do you suppose he addressed them in?
In a nutshell, though you had Jews from all over the place, they only spoke two languages as their mother ‘tongues’: either Greek or Aramaic (depending on where they were from).
As it's too lengthy to post here in the forums, for a more in-depth look at the languages of Pentecost, see:
http://christianchat.com/blogs/kavik/12469-another-understanding-oetonguesa-pentecost-part-1.html
Most people assume its 120 individuals, but: Chapter one ends with the newly formed 12 apostles (i.e. the addition of Matthias to replace Judas). Chapter 2 begins with saying "...they were all with one accord in one place..." It's assumed that the "they" here refers to the 120, but the context goes back to the end of Chapter 1 and refers to the 12. Jesus' command in Chapter 1 concerning this event was to the apostles, not the 120.
There is other contextual "evidence" in Chapter 2 as well.
As concerns languages – the number most people come up with is due to a common misreading of the text. Take a closer look at Acts 2:9-11 – what do you notice? It’s not a list of languages, at all; it’s a list of nations and territories. Its inclusion is rather relevant, but more as a political statement than to demonstrate linguistic diversity. Part of the relevance of the list is that the places listed are specifically those lands and areas of the Jewish Diaspora (Cyprus and Syria are missing but that speaks to the purpose of the list’s inclusion into the narrative). Both the Western and Eastern Diaspora are represented.
So, what about the languages? Read the entire narrative again carefully. Did you notice anything? A few things may not be apparent at first, but they’re there.
First, if you read the entire narrative, not one language is ever referenced by name – not one. Why do you suppose that is?
Secondly, though there were Jews from ‘every nation under heaven’, nowhere in the entire narrative is it even remotely suggested that communication was ever an issue. Again, why do you suppose that is?
Lastly, at one point, Peter addresses the crowd – given the demographic make-up of the attendees, what language do you suppose he addressed them in?
In a nutshell, though you had Jews from all over the place, they only spoke two languages as their mother ‘tongues’: either Greek or Aramaic (depending on where they were from).
As it's too lengthy to post here in the forums, for a more in-depth look at the languages of Pentecost, see:
http://christianchat.com/blogs/kavik/12469-another-understanding-oetonguesa-pentecost-part-1.html
Last edited:
Partial quotes from Kavik...
I disagree completely with your premise.
Scripture clearly indicates that all of those regions spoke different languages, or at least different dialects. If all of those Jews present spoke the same language, there would be no astonishment and wonder that they all understood what was being said. It would have been taken for granted.
I disagree completely with your premise.
Scripture clearly indicates that all of those regions spoke different languages, or at least different dialects. If all of those Jews present spoke the same language, there would be no astonishment and wonder that they all understood what was being said. It would have been taken for granted.