Have You Received the Holy Ghost Since You Believed?
- Thread starter Wansvic
- 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.
1 Corinthians 14:14 KJV
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth,
John 4:24 KJV
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit...
1 Corinthians 14:15 KJV
What is it then? I will pray with the spirit,... I will sing with the spirit,...
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
If no unbelievers are present, they are not being used as a sign, they are being used for their other purpose, Spirit-praying.
"For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth,"
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
You seem to be using your starting axiom, that there are 2 types of tongues, so you believe the tongues that Paul is referring to there are actual foreign languages, so does not apply to heavenly languages?
Yes.
No. The heavenly kind.
Why do you think it would NOT apply to heavenly languages?? (a.k.a. Heavenly languages ARE a sign to the unbelievers, whether they grasp that fact or not. They still "see" or in this case "hear" the sign.)
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Simple, heavenly languages are unverifiable, they cannot serve as signs if no one can tell whether they are real or fake.
How could the "shabala la" kind of tongues, ever convince unbelievers that God is real? Have you ever met an actual unbeliever who listen to those kind of tongues and think God was actually present?
You are operating on a false supposition that something has to be understood in order to be used as a sign. MULTITUDES of people couldn't tell if Jesus was real or fake (I could quote the references if you need them) and that had nothing to do with the FACT that Jesus was a sign unto them.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
And Paul cannot be referring to heavenly languages there.
The context in the verse before that, as I said, was based on the time Israel spent in exile in Assyria during the OT, described in Isaiah 28:11.
Don't tell me you actually regard Isa 28:11 as heavenly language too?
No, I am saying for a miracle to be a sign, it must be verified. Healings can be verified, someone being raised from the dead can be verified, turning water into wine can be verified.
Jesus did all those signs in the gospel of John for people to believe he is their promised son of God (John 20:30-31).
The nation rejected Jesus as their Messiah, not because they could not tell the signs that Jesus performed were real or fake, but they simply refuse to believe in him, as stated after the resurrection of Lazarus where the high priests said in John 11
43 And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.
44 And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.
45 Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him.
46 But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done.
47 Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles.
48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,
50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.
I just reread this and it brings out what seems to be another fault in your testing process. Too heavy reliance on the opinion or concensus of man and too little reliance on the input or opinion of God.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Yep, too heavy reliance on some kind of consensus.
A sign is a sign the moment it is performed, not the moment it is "verified". What does that even mean?
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
It means people can tell whether it is real or fake.
If you claim to have spoke in tongues (actual foreign languages), can it be verified that that you had not learnt that language before, but you are now speaking actual foreign languages?
That verification was recorded for us in Acts 2:5-12, where Jews from every nation were there to verify that those tongues were not the heavenly language kind, but actual foreign languages.
If you claim to have healed someone and call that a sign, can it be verified that that person was indeed sick before, and is now well?
If you claim to have raised someone from the dead, can it be verified that that person was indeed dead before, and is now alive?
Hope that is clear enough? You cannot just go "shabala la" with your mouth and then claim that those are "signs from God" to an unbeliever. No one can verify whether those are real or not.
I could also say the same about your doctrine too. You began with an axiom that "there are 2 different types of tongues", even though nothing in scripture clearly speaks of that distinction, not even in 1 Cor 14.
I don't rightly care if someone verifies whether or not I was actually sick before I got healed. Or if my daughter ACTUALLY had a nose bleed before God healed her and actually removed all the blood except for that which was already thrown away. Or if that kitten was actually flat on the road before God had it fully recover after being prayed for. I just thank him throughout. Whether someone else believes it happened is between them and God but that has NOTHING to do with whether or not it happened.
I think that's a laughable concept!
But I'll post this and view what was written next.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
I think that's a laughable concept!
But I'll post this and view what was written next.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Truthfully, I began with an thought similar to yours, but admitted to myself that I wasn't sure and wouldn't be satisfied with "It looks like". So I took it to God until he made it clear (in this case by the hearing of someone explaining what is actually being said about tongues in 1 Corinthians 14, etc). And then I tested it BY USE once God gave it to me just like he gave it to them.
And I apologize that this particular post is likely made unnecessarily hard to receive but the potential offensiveness of my last post/rant.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
I should have said "I rightly don't care". It would have been more accurate.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
You are not an unbeliever so naturally, you don't care.
I am saying, for a sign be a sign, that God is indeed present, it must be verifiable with your senses. Its all in scripture, think of Gideon's request to God in Judges 6
17 And he said unto him, If now I have found grace in thy sight, then shew me a sign that thou talkest with me.
18 Depart not hence, I pray thee, until I come unto thee, and bring forth my present, and set it before thee. And he said, I will tarry until thou come again.
19 And Gideon went in, and made ready a kid, and unleavened cakes of an ephah of flour: the flesh he put in a basket, and he put the broth in a pot, and brought it out unto him under the oak, and presented it.
20 And the angel of God said unto him, Take the flesh and the unleavened cakes, and lay them upon this rock, and pour out the broth. And he did so.
21 Then the angel of the Lord put forth the end of the staff that was in his hand, and touched the flesh and the unleavened cakes; and there rose up fire out of the rock, and consumed the flesh and the unleavened cakes. Then the angel of the Lord departed out of his sight.
22 And when Gideon perceived that he was an angel of the Lord, Gideon said, Alas, O Lord God! for because I have seen an angel of the Lord face to face.
As I stated to you before, Israel always require a sign. But for us in the Body of Christ, we walk by faith and not by sight.
You do agree that 1 Cor 14 passage is not a clear statement that there is such a thing as tongues as a heavenly language right? There are some verses that could be used to get that doctrine if one insists, but that is about it.
But because you don't like to use the principle of bible interpretation where we "let clear scripture guide us to interpret unclear ones", that is why you can come up with that doctrine, that you now consider an axiom, which means its unquestionable.
I really liked that whole posting but only am addressing particular statements..
Not verifiable... just observable. A person may not believe what they are seeing, but by that point the sign has already been seen. They are accountable for what was presented to them. They SHOULD take it to God and find out...but that's up to them.
Not always do christians walk by faith. IF they walk, perhaps they walk by faith, but I think a lot of the time they/we sit on their/our haunches.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Looks like you have different understanding of what "signs for unbelievers" means then.
I suspect you are forced to conclude as such, because you already begun with the axiom "There are 2 types of tongues, one of which is a heavenly language", and you consider that as unquestionable.
Since you are absolutely certain that is true, when you try to understand what Paul was trying to say in 1 Cor 14:22, even when vs 21 placed that in the context of unbelieving Israel hearing the Assyrian language, which they did not understand, you end up concluding that heavenly languages can also serve as signs to unbelievers.