Speaking in tongues

***Contrary to the KJV one word addition, the Pentecost report in Acts stated that the visitors to Jerusalem heard their own languages being spoken by the Disciples. "Unknown" was the word that shouldn't have been added. Also, did you know that the dictionary creator Webster knew some of over 20 languages?

I have experienced all of the spiritual gifts (and even singing in a tongue), but I hate that many believe and pressure all new Christians and even old Christians to speak in tongues to prove that they are truely saved. When John the Baptist parents were filled with the Spirit, they didn't speak in tongues. And what does Ephesians 5 say after the verse that says "be filled with the Holy Spirit"? I wrote an essay a short Bible study tool about such. About What Follows Being Filled with the Holy Spirit-- https://app.box.com/s/huj8qk1ibholuugtilvqmhb0gei6anx7 . Also reread John 14-17, Romans 8, and Galatians 5-6 about living by the Holy Spirit.

your statement is not correct. Church History has many eyewitness accounts of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit 1550 to 1900 .

Martin Lurther: was known to speak in Tongues
ULRICH ZWINGLI: The long-standing passion for a spiritual renewal
John Calvin : Calvin’s reformation experiences were a product of his association with the Huguenots
Huguenots: historical study of Medieval Pentecost
Qauker: moving of the Spirit as they waited on the Lord in their midst.
The Wesley's : John and Charles Wesley; Wesley’s journals abound with references to Pentecostal-like demonstrations that occurred among his followers during his meetings.
Edward Irving : experienced charismatic gifts that powerfully stirred London (and all England as well as Scotland).
Charles Finney: Finney could have easily described the remarkable intensity of his unique experience in the words of Paul in Romans 8:26,27: “But the Holy Spirit prays for us with groanings that cannot be expressed in words. And the Father who knows all hearts knows what the Spirit is saying, for the Spirit pleads for us believers in harmony with God’s own will” (NLT43). Paul is probably referring to the believer’s experiences of praying in ecstatic utterances (“tongues”), motivated by the Holy Spirit.
Dwight L. Moody :
Following is Moody’s own account of the results: “I was crying all the time that God would fill me with His Spirit. Well, one day, in the city of New York — oh, what a day — I cannot describe it, I seldom refer to it; it is almost too sacred to name. … I can only say that God revealed Himself to me, and I had an experience of His love [so] that I had to ask him to stay His hand. [After that] I went to preaching again. The sermons were not different; I did not present any new truths, and yet hundreds were converted. I would not be placed back where I was before that blessed experience for all the world — it would be as the small dust of the balance.”45

From that moment Moody’s ministry was noticeably enriched. By his own admission, many more people came to the Lord, people were often healed, some prophesied under the anointing of the Holy Spirit, and some even spoke with tongues. Spiritual gifts similar to those recorded in Acts also occurred.

The empowrring of the Holy Spirit is well documented in the word of God and in Church History. Historical data , Eyewitness accounts, mighty revivl meeting were 100's were saved. Local news papers recorded the movements Chruches were built because of it. Just as it was done in the Book of Acts From the starting of the church to 1900's.

The Spirit filled the apostles again in Acts 4, so it is not bad if it happens multiple times if that is your argument.


In Acts 8, the Spirit had not fallen upon the Samaritans yet, even though they had accepted the word Philip preached and had been baptized in water. The apostles then laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.

I was not talking about God who uses people through his Holy Spirit in certain situations. I was talking about that baptising with the Holy Spirit as second expierience. Nor Luther, nor Calvin ore Zwingli taught that.
This doctrine came up with the pentecostal movement in 1901. Which reasons are orherwise there that this date is seen as the beginning of the pentecostal movement? And it is interesting that at the same date pope Leo xiii dedicatet the new century to the Holy Spirit.
And it is really questioning that the gift of speaking in tongues is, so far know always taught as a result for the baptism with the Holy Spirit, but not as normal given gift, like othe

Show me where the Bible says God did this to mock the Jews. If you cannot, you should not say that He was mocking them lest you bear false witness of God.... unless you claim a modernextrabiblical revelation that God was mocking them.

It sounds like your theories and interpretations would lead you to disobey scripture, since the Bible says 'Despise not prophesyings. Prove all things. Hold fast to that which is good.'

The book that says not to go beyond what is written in how we think of the Lord's servants (I Corinthians) tells us to desire prophesying, which is clearly revelatory based on the context ('...if a revelation cometh to one who sitteth by....) The admonition to not go beyond what is written does not mean to reject prophecy, or else Paul would be contradicting himself in I Corinthians. Either scripture contradicts itself or you misinterpret scripture. I'll go with the latter explanation.
There is a warning not to add to the book of Revelation. I've never witnessed anyone who received a prophecy and added it to the book of Revelation. Revelation even predicts that two witnesses would come later and prophesy. So either Revelation is contradicting itself, or your interpretation is wrong again.

Everything I Corinthians 14 says about speaking in tongues, what it is for, and what it does, is true, not just one section, and your interpretation is not the point Paul draws from the passage.

Praising God in the heart is good, but the Hebrews 13:!5 says 'the fruit of our lips giving praise to His name'.

You come off as a bit confused. Usually people who do not believe in speaking in tongues say 'sign gifts.'

I am assuming you are a nonnative speaker of English. The grammar needs a bit of work in that quote to be comprehensible to us readers.

But when Christ's believing disciples who had been with Him through their sufferings asked for a sign, He answered them.

Matthew 24

3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

4 And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many.
(NKJV, emphasis in bold mine)

IN case you do not believe he was talking about a sign, look at these verses

30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

The disciples prayed for God to do signs and wonders.

Acts 4
29 Now, Lord, look on their threats, and grant to Your servants that with all boldness they may speak Your word, 30 by stretching out Your hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of Your holy Servant Jesus.”
(NKJV)

That does not fit with what you have been saying.

The idea of the baptism of the Holy Spirit as post-conversion was held to by some Methodists and some in the Holiness movement prior to 1900.

It was not uncommon. It is simply God brining a evil against the Jews who refuse to hear prophecy, the word of God.

Strong's lexicon #3934 1) mocking, derision, stammering 1a)mocking, derision 1b) stammerings

Stammering lips are mocking, lips of derision.

In effect the Holy Spirit is saying because you refuse to hear me but are simply empty words. Therefore because you have another kind of authority as oral traditions of men I will laugh at you when I come and bring my speech in all the nations of the world. (Acts 2)

When the Holy Spirit put his words on Peter's lips the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit interpreter gave ears to hear what he was saying to all of the nations that were there.. He did not say make a noise to hear oneself as evidence a person has the Holy Spirit as some assume.

The apostle Paul uses a passage taken from Isaiah 28:11 to describe how God speaks to the Christian church thru speaking in other tongues other than Hebrew alone.... yet for all that you would think they would repent, no, but they continue to do what so ever their own mouth says.

A good example of why he derided or mocked them is found in Jerimiah 44 below. In effect he is still mocking the unbelieving Jew .

The veil is rent and the unbelieving (no faith) Jews still will not hear the gospel But will certainly do whatsoever thing comes from our own mouths as the oral traditions of men .The same fault the Catholics follow after following after a law of the fathers as if they were a divine source of faith

As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw "no evil" Jerimiah44:16-17
.

It is the reason God mocked the unbelieving Jew. (no faith) Refusing to hold fast to that which is good (prophecy) They despised the prophesying of God as the eternal things of God not seen, in exchange for those of men, the temporal seen .(walking by sight) . As we are informed in Jeremiah 44..They said we will not hearken unto your prophecy we will certainly do whatsoever thing that comes from our own mouth

Agree, you should hearken unto "despise not prophesyings.'

It was the begining of the false signs and wonders called Charismatics (sign gifts) destroying the foundation in the Old testament as a ceremonial law. Which could not make perfect those who followed after it . In effect chasing after shadows. Like Peter Pan .

Amen! the book of prophecy the bible is full or made complete, perfect . Why go above that which is written by making a noise to hear oneself audibly and call that evidence a person has the Holy Spirit.? How could that profit other than to create a false pride?

2 Corinthians 5:7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight

I would suggest we do the home work study to show our own selves approved Of God and search as for a answer as for silver or gold. looking to the things not seen the eternal, faith, found in the various parables the unseen eternal meaning hid from natural unconverted man

He has not left us alone as orphans but gives us the 20 /20 prescription so that we can see clearer and search out His understanding.

While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.2 Corinthians 4:18

If it was an idea, it means not that it was practised. On the other side is this a very weak witness, that this should be biblical. It is then a man made doctrine. So is still the question which Spirit then is behind this doctrine.

wrong the doctrine did not come up in 1901 Lol

more like 53 -57 AD as we read 1cor 12, 13, and 14 and the Gospel of John Chapters 1 written about 70 AD . Instead of looking at the 1901 account of what those who saw in the word of God nd said "hey this is for us today and asked God for the empowering of the Holy Spirit. it was not a new doctrine because they got it from the Bible. Acts the false narrative of "new Doctrine " you say is wrong sir.

Having considered asking for the help of an interpreter of tongues? What do you think Charismatics did to the Old Testament ceremonial law? Do you think Gentile believers need to follow ceremonial law?

Look in the book of Acts. In chapter 8, the Samaritans believed and were baptized. In Acts 19, about 12 men who had previously been baptized with the baptism of John accepted the gospel and were baptized. But the Holy Spirit did not come upon them immediately. That occurred after Paul laid hands on them. In both there was time between new believers believing the gospel and being baptized with water and the time the Spirit came/fell upon them. In Acts 8, it said they had not yet received the Spirit. Would you say these believers were unsaved before the apostles came to visit them?

Who is doing that? Who is advocating that?

You keep repeating this line of thinking as though someone is disagreeing with you. Quote them, or drop the matter.

Paul said quench not the Spirit. Despise not prophesyings. Prove all things, Hold fast to that which is good.

He did not limit 'despise not prophesyings' to only the prophecies written in scripture, as you seem to be doing. Paul encouraged the Corinthians and all other genuine Christians to '...covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues' and commanded them to 'Let the prophets speak....' These prophecies are revelatory in nature because Paul wrote, 'If a revelation cometh to one who sitteth by....'


The 'perfect law of liberty' was perfect in the first century before the Bible was completed. The perfection Paul speaks of is the type of perfection such that Paul's understanding when he wrote I Corinthians will seem childish in comparison to what will come. He said when he was a child, he understood as a child, but when he becomes a man, he will put away childish things. Can you honestly say that the completion of the canon made your understanding so great that the apostle's understanding in the first century which he wrote in the Bible is childish to you?

LEt's look at the verse from I Corinthians 4 that you seem to be referring to:

6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

This is the same book where Paul lists 'divers tongues' among the manifestations of the Spirit and says 'forbid not to speak with tongues. The verse you are paraphrasing and misapplying is about Corinthians who thought to highly of certain religious leaders and were proud of their association with them. It is not a verse that should be used to reject and contradict Paul's teaching on prophecy, tongues, and other gifts of the Spirit in I Corinthians 12-14.

Do not despise the gifts of the Spirit which God gave for the edificaton of the church. Speaking in tongues edifies the speaker. Combined with interpretation, if spoke in church, it edifies the church. Let us stick with the teaching of scripture and not make up our own theories.

I think it was you that said tongues is not prophecy?

Even in 1. Cor. 12,13 and 14 you cant find this doctrine with the Holy Spirit given as empowering and the sign for that is speaking in tongues. Why the christians Continue in the churchhistory Has not this enlightning? Instead many cults came up, like the montanism.