Speaking in tongues

Tongues is prophesying or declaring the will of God . the question is what does it do as a sign? What does the sign confirm.

Let's back up and review... your words:

My response:
Only if you believe "the perfect" refers to the canon of Scripture. Otherwise, there is no problem.

Your response:
My response:
Relevance?

Your response:
I don't see any connection between your comments and mine. So I ask again: what is the relevance of your post? Are you tracking with the conversation or just throwing in random comments?

Not according to Scripture. However, I've pointed this out to you repeatedly, and you have thus far refused to read the Scripture for yourself and allow it to correct you.

lol FYI Salvation is a gift you want to re-think that again. The Gifts of the Holy Spirit are called gifts because the word of God calls them gifts and because they are from the Holy Spirit that makes them important. No one has said it is more important then salvation. You like strawman building I see.

And we must also keep in mind that there is a difference between a gift and an office

never said that either now you are an untruthful person. Yep out o f your mouth comes what in your heart.

Uhm... the power of God and the presence of the still-working Holy Spirit?

Truth is only available to those who are willing to question what they think they know. And Garee has said several times that he has concluded his study and is no longer questioning.

That was answered in chapter 12 , 13 and 14 . Whydo so many miss it ?

the gifts do the following :

1cor 12


:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

:11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

chapter 13

Love is the motivating reason the gifts are to be used in

chapter 14:

2 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.

:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.


:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.


:22 Wherefore tongues 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 which believe.

:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

In the unit chapters of 12 to 14 nothing says the gifts have ended nor does it say they will cease because the bible came to be. as we see in chpater 14 Paul is clear as he was led by the Holy Spirit to say verse 39 in chapter 14 after all of the other things said before.

If those who think the gifts are not important would be correct if chapter 14 was not written.

Hi thanks for the reply .

In regard to the word "doubt" I am not scholar, just one who loves the word of God, the defender of the Christian's new faith that works in those who believe or have faith . I offer in a hope of sharing bread.

Doubting in not the same as faith, believing but a source that can lead to believing

Doubt leads to the unseen truth or exposes a lie. The word is neutral it can be used in blessing and a curse. The best of example of doubt working as a living hope is found in the gospel message in Isaiah 53 .This is where the father and Son worked together in perfect harmony to each other. As the father struck the Son of man Jesus,. Jesus cries out to father not seen, The father strengthening encouraging him to finish the work of salvation. After suffering when the doubt came Jesus again turned doubting into in a living Hope as he sought after Him not seen . Together that work gives of the peace of God that surpasses all human understanding the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

I would think the father of lies who accuses the brethren day and night would say to doubt is to not believe holding a person in false fear. . But clearly doubt is not the opposite of faith. Unbelief, no faith is.

Natural man is typified as having no faith when it comes to hearing God who gives us His faith as it is written .

Below... to "not believe" is to have no faith not doubt . their no faith does not make the faith of Christ that works in us as if there was none


Romans 3:3 For what if some did "not believe?" shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

The question was not in regard to the gift as if it was seen .What does the sign (that seen) point to and what does it confirm?

Yet you portray yourself as a scholar, as having studied all that is necessary, and are actively working to keep new Christians from taking hold of all God offers them.

And yet you don't believe in the gifts, and therefore you do make them of no effect.

Lord knows I'm not saying 'don't rail against the charlatans'. But when you throw the baby out with the bath water, you go too far.

I am always looking for new things in a hope of helping others. What to do you think the sign connected with tongues points to and confirms? Is the law found in 1 Corinthians 14:21 -22 subject to change.

I believe in all the gifts. Making them into sign so that we can walk by sight after the three avenues of the father of lies is what I am studying today.

Can we create faith by looking or observing something as if the kingdom of God could come by observation? Or who hopes for what we already do have . As babes in Christ have a living hope that will not become sight until all receive the promise our new incorruptible bodies. We must remember we are not what we will be as if we did wrestles against flesh and blood the things seen
when we receive that promise it will confirm we had the faith needed to complete the living hope.

And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: Hebrews 11:39

Adding to the babies bath water can be going to far... just as easily

I suggest there are no parts missing from the book of the law the Bible. what we had in part.. we have in whole. No babies bath water of the word needed.

If those who think the signs are not important to expose those who refuse to hear prophecy (the evil generation) of natural unconverted men ) It would be correct if chapter 14 was not written. Seeing they still refuse to hear and repent as some do.

I think that is how the spirit of error turns things upside down by a oral tradition of men.... taking away the faith of God that gives us the true understanding.

The Jews who mocked God by refusing to hear prophecy but rather said we will do whatsoever our mouths declare .Thery were found guilty of their turning things upside down time after time, The same spirit of error works today. We are made aware of his motive of operation

saiah 29:16Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

You could say that evil generation that walks after what the eyes see (no faith) were surprised when the apostle turned it right side up with the gospel

Acts 17:6 And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also;

Things of God or those of men.?

Verse 5 actually mentions 'utterance.' Paul was starting out an epistle, and one passage in it would address 'utterance' gifts-- tongues, interpretation, and prophecy.

Paul says, 'So that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.' He does NOT say, "So that ye come behind in no spiritual gifts, except the ones Roger who will live in the 21st century will want us to exclude, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

In Acts 2, there were those present who actually heard the disciples speaking in other languages.
As other posters pointed out, this is a straw man argument.

I've asked you this kind of stuff before. I think you just skip over it.

Are you implying that the Corinthians who spoke in tongues only spoke in tongues because they were looking for a sign that they believed God? Paul said he thanked God, "I speak with tongues more than ye all.'

So let me ask you, do you think Paul was looking for a sign that he just believed God? He did speak in tongues, so is your accusation leveled at him?

I have never heard a preacher preach that you should speak in tongues so that you can know that you believe God. You seem very confused about what other people believe or don't believe and about how to communicate this in your message.

You seem very confused about what you believe. In one post, you write about speaking in tongues as something possible to do by studying. Here, you seem to think it can only be done if God were 'still adding new prophecy.' If you do not know what you believe, it is hard for us to comment on it. Maybe that explains why your posts seem so confused and confusing.

I believe I Corinthians 14:21. But I interpret it to fit Paul's argument in the passage. What you seem to be doing is interpreting it in a way that contradicts the rest of the passage.

In I Corinthians, we see in chapter 12 that 'divers tongues' and 'interpretation of tongues' are real, legitimate gifts and manifestations of the Spirit. Paul does not condemn those who exercise these gifts as unbelieving. In I Corinthians 14, we see that Paul wanted that all his readers would speak in tongues-- an activity that edifies oneself-- but rather that they would all prophesy, an activity that edifies the church. He also encourages that a tongue be interpreted in church to edify the body. My interpretation of verse 21 is consistent with these facts. When I point these things out to you, you just ignore them, and continue with your obviously wrong misinterpretations of what Isaiah means in the passage.

A believer having, exercising, believing in, or desiring a spiritual gift is not a basis for condemning him as having a lack of faith. This is an area where you seem really confused and think you have arrived at a spiritual understanding. Jesus did signs. Signs are not bad.

1. Some people hear the word without seeing signs and believe.
2. Some people see signs and respond in faith.
3. Some of those people saw signs but would have responded in faith without the signs.
4. Some people would reject the word whether they saw signs or not.

Jesus rebuked a crowd He had fed miraculously who were demanding a sign and said 'A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign.' But that does not mean that all who seek signs are wicked and adulterous. The disciples asked for the sign of His coming in Matthew 24, and He did not rebuke them.

Let us consider some of the groups of people who believed after seeing Jesus, the apostles, or other disciples do something supernatural.
-- Nathaniel believed after Jesus said He saw Him under a fig tree. Nathaniel was probably shocked that Jesus knew he'd been under a fig tree when Philip called him.
-- Peter followed Jesus after seeing a miracle of his nets being filled.
-- The woman at the well believed after Jesus told her about her five husbands.
-- Thomas believed in the resurrection after seeing the risen Lord.
-- Samaritans believed after Philip performed signs among them.
-- Paul believed after encountering a heavenly vision of Christ in which he was blinded.
-- Elymas believed after seeing Saul/Paul declare that Elymas would be blind, and it happened.

Jesus said, "Except ye see signs and wonders, ye shall not believe', before healing someone. So signs can play a role in bringing some men to faith. But others reject the word even after seeing signs.

It seems like you learn something, then unlearn it quickly. Why is this? Several pages back, you agreed with me that not all revelation from God has to be put in the Bible. The prophecies of Saul or the prophets from Shiloh who met him, or the prophecies of the prophets hid in a cave from Jezebel are not in the Bible.

Now you are back to this unbiblical idea that revelations have to be added to the book of Revelation.

Also, back then, they used scrolls. The early part of the chapter calls the book of Revelation, or the scroll of Revelation, a 'scroll' or book. And the end, there is a warning against adding to the scroll/book. Nowadays, we bind all these books together in one codex-- what we now call a book. But that's now what the Scroll of Revelation actually says. You are eisegeting modern technology back into the Bible and reinterpreting the passage to refer to adding to the whole Bible.

But again, no one adds a prophecy to the Bible unless they add it to the Bible. Have you ever in your life seen someone try to add a prophecy or interpretation of tongues to the book of Revelation?

Did you take a bunch of phrases, writing them on pieces of paper, throw them in a hat, and then pull them out and write them in the order in which they came? That's word salad up above. It is hard to know what you mean. How about shorter sentences with one idea per sentence?

[quote[
No such thing as "sign gifts" we walk by the exclusive faith that alone comes from hearing prophecy[/quote]

Usually, people who believe God works through the I Corinthians 12 gifts do not call them 'sign gifts.' 'Sign gifts' is typically used by those who want to put gifts into different categories and say the gifts in the category they do not like are for the past. So they call the supernatural-looking ones 'sign gifts' and relegate them to the past, often without even trying to come up with a Biblical argument for it.

Jesus did miracles. The apostles did miracles. Are you condemning their faith? Paul spoke in tongues. Was he walking by sight?

Peter and Paul did miracles. Do you think they walked by faith, or did they walk by sight? After Jesus called him out of the boat, when Peter had faith, he could walk on water. When he doubted, he sank.

How do you explain Peter walking on water with your confused interpretation of 'we walk by faith, and not by sight.' Walking by faith did not prevent Paul from being a miracle-worker. Jesus would even say things like 'according to your faith be it unto you' before performing some supernatural feat. So their faith actually allowed for the miraculous to occur. All this contradicts your confused understanding and misinterpretations of these scriptures you quote.

I think you should choose another word instead of 'represent' so we can know what you mean.

Moses did miracles. Does that mean he refused to believe prophecy alone? Maybe in his case, he had a bit of doubt. But Jesus did not commit the sin of unbelief, and He did miracles.

It is not true that witnesses of signs only witnessed them because of unbelief. At least, the Bible does not say that. Jesus answered the disciples request for the sign of His coming and of the end of the age. There is no indication that it was because of unbelief that the shepherds watching their flocks by night were told the sign of the babe wrapped and swaddling clothes and lying in a manger. They were told 'Peace on earth. Good will toward men.'

Now Zacharias did respond to a message from an angel with unbelief. The sign he was given was the unpleasant sign of being mute until the birth of his son.

What you do is the same thing many other advocates of false doctrine do. They take some principle and streeeeeeetch it to a very unbiblical extreme. So there are these so-called hyper grace people that say that all future sins are forgiven, and that you do not even need to confess your sins, even though the Bible says 'and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him' and 'if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins' and 'forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.'

They hold their broad philosphy as more important than the details of scripture.

It's like Quakers who were so against the excesses of ritual and outward form, that they explained away water baptism and actual attempts to practice partaking of holy communion.

We need to look at all of the scriptures. I know you do not have a good excuse for promoting your error. I know I have pointed out ot you many times the things I mentioned in this post. It is true that God did signs in Egypt, a nation who were holding his people, and whose leader had a hard heart against God. But God also gave shepherds to whom his angels declared 'peace. good will toward men' the sign of the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger. Jesus gave the twelve apostles the sign of His coming.

Since all the details do not fit your broad pronouncement about the use of signs, your broad pronouncement is false and unbiblical. Your statement that, "Signs throughout the scripture represent those who refuse to believe prophecy alone. " is clearly not true in every case.

In some cases, but not all. And speaking in tongues, in addition to being a sign to them that believe not, is a spiritual gift given to the body for the common good. It edifies the speaker. One who gives thanks to God in tongues 'giveth thanks well'. If speaking in tongues interpreted, the interpretation edifies the church.

Again, we have to accept all the Bible says on the subject. We are not to take one verse on the topic and misinterpret it to mean something that contradicts other parts of the Bible on the subject, as you are doing with tongues. Some of the verses you contradict are in the very same chapter with the verses you like to quote.

You evade the truth that the perfect is the completed canon of scripture. You cannot receive that the truth revealed is the word of God as in the completed canon of scripture. Christ the Word of God made flesh and now the word of God delivered to the saints.

Only by ignoring the simple truth can you continue to engage in practices that are not taught in the word of God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Come on you are kidding right? Verse 5 all utterance and all knowledge is not speaking of tongues and gifts of the Holy Spirit as described in chapter 12 thru 14.

Your adoration of tongues has taken you around the bend and far away from knowledge of the Word of God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I love sound doctrine not the capricious smattering of biblical interpretations you cobble together.

For the cause of Christ
Roger