TONGUES false teaching.

(Cont'd from previous)


Stop exaggerating and misrepresenting what I said. I did not say "every single leader," nor did I say "everyone..." Your words are a gross exaggeration. I said that P/C leaders (some of them) are rightly acknowledging that some tongues are counterfeit. Those leaders are calling for P/C leaders everywhere to clean up their house. Dr. Michael Brown is one of them, and he says that other P/C leaders he knows are saying that also.


This response doesn't make a difference. It's easy to see that there are only 3 sources of an action, practice, or doctrine. God, the devil, and man. But leaving the devil out, I'm following Jesus' question to the Jewish leaders: "John's baptism--is it from God or men?" And the obvious answer is, if it's not from God, then it's from men. I'm simply asking the same question: Is modern tongues from God or from men? And since claims don't make a difference (based on 62 pages of debate in this thread), I'm asking for evidence.

And my saying "If it isn't from God, then it's from men" is simply a logical statement, and has nothing to do with opinion. Unless, of course you say that if it isn't from God then it's from the devil. I guess that might make it an opinion.


They would have agreed that what the apostles were doing was miraculous, since it was obvious to everyone.


Why bring satan into this, unless that's what you're afraid of?


No, since I never claimed tongues have ceased, I don't have to prove that. Rather, the burden of proof is on you because you claim you have the same tongues as in the Bible. Isn't this your claim? Are you claiming that your tongues is the miraculous languages they spoke in Acts 2? Are you claiming this or not?


Your usage of the term "secular" is obviously derogatory based on the context here, and I think you use it to give yourself an excuse to reject what I'm saying. But just because something is "secular" doesn't make it untrue. Just because something is written by an unbeliever doesn't make it automatically incorrect. Yet there are linguists who are Christians, in case you don't know that.

If by "generalization" you mean "stereotyping," then I deny that's what I'm doing. I speak in generalities because I'm not saying that all P/Cs are the same, and I'm not pointing out individuals. For example, when I say that P/Cs are notorious for exaggerations, I didn't say they all exaggerate (although you've done it here).


It looks to me like the more you talk, the more you prove my words true, since you are grossly exaggerating what I said, and misrepresenting it. If you need the detail, I can spell it out for you.

Are these real tongues or fake? You decide.

God bless you dear, for you don't know any better

Are you bitter about something? ,,, want to share it?

So you don't believe that God orchestrates righteousness through secondary means (called the Providence of God)? I believe that God heals people through the actions of doctors and known medical procedures. I believe that God punishes evildoers through the actions of police, detectives, and court justice, and they need forensic evidence to do that, and I believe that God guides men to present and show that evidence. If you don't believe that, it's your prerogative. But I say you're wrong about that, God does work through forensic evidence, just as He does through historical evidence.

If I saw a clear miracle myself, such as Jesus raising the dead, I would be satisfied that it was a bonified miracle, since I saw what I considered forensic evidence, being an eyewitness of the event. However, if I didn't carry something from the scene to prove my words, then my testimony of what I saw would only be a story to someone else. They might believe or not. But if there were multiple witnesses saying the same thing about the same event (all being eyewitnesses), then the credibility of it would be much stronger. Then that would be called historical evidence. If I had something to carry from the scene that corroborated my testimony, it would be more credible because of the corroborating evidence, and that's called forensic evidence.

Just because I question the authenticity of modern tongues doesn't mean I'm mocking or anything like that. I think there is far too much assumption on this issue, and I also think that people have too much emotion invested in it to make any objective assessment.


Your idea that we have the Holy Spirit to lead us into all the truth is a nice theory, but doesn't work in real life. In the first place, Jesus said that to His disciples, not to you and me. This is why the apostle John wrote "he who is of the truth listens to us." The apostles are the ones who explained what Jesus taught. Secondly, the churches historically have disagreed and had controversies, all claiming to have Holy Spirit led doctrine. So church history shows that your idea is not true. Thirdly, God doesn't dictate to us everything He wants us to know. The Bible says "study to show yourself approved of God, a workman who does not need to be ashamed (of his ignorance), rightly interpreting the word of truth."

The real is described in Acts 2. The fake is shown prolifically in Charismatic churches everywhere (at least everywhere I went when I followed them for 25 years), in addition to TV and youtube. So I'm asking you now, since you cared enough to respond, are you willing to present evidence that there is even one real tongues event that can be examined for authenticity?


I agree that there are many errors among the P/Cs (Pentecostals and Charismatics). But I'm personally not addressing them right now, except that in my experience not only in media, but also in churches, that many P/Cs are known for exaggeration. To the degree that when someone says "I speak in tongues," it is not credible. They may sincerely believe that what they have is a gift of God, but the evidence shows on closer examination, what they have is not a language and not miraculous. I can give you details, if you need it.


I agree that the Bible doesn't say when the gifts will cease, except "when the perfect comes," which I take as the new heavens and new earth. There is only 1 verse I know of that has an implication of the ceasing of signs and wonders and gifts of the Spirit, and that is Heb. 2:4, since the writer of Hebrews excludes himself from it, and he said "those who heard" did those things. And I take "those who heard" refers to those people who were eyewitnesses to Jesus.

I think maybe the jury is still out on that issue, so debating it hasn't made much of a difference (at least in this forum after 62 pages of debating). This is why I believe that only solid evidence will tell us one way or another, that the gift of tongues hasn't ceased, if indeed there is just one person who has the authentic gift as described in Acts 2. If that's the case, then cessationists would have to reevaluate their position. Would you agree?

If folks stand and sing a hymn from a book without a snitch of praise in their heart is it real or fake? If the preacher preaches without unction, or if folks pray empty words with no faith? Happens all over America every Sunday.

So Rodney Howard Brown and Kenneth Copeland are genuinely speaking in tongues but their motives are impure? Am I understanding you correctly?

No I believe in godly prosperity ... Poverty is evil. I have always said to you that the problem is wrong theology. Bad theology leads to bad practices.

Doctrines [like healing and prosperity] are affected by wrong theology.

Theology is different from doctrines. For example we may all believe that salvation was bought for at the cross but if you believe in free will theology as opposed to free sovereign grace theology you will preach it differently and administer it differently.

Take for example the altar call, quite a modern practice in evangelism, barely 200 years old, it is a practice based upon freewill theology. Freewill doctrine always demands that we must do something in order to receive the grace of God, in this case we must go to the front and pray a prayer.

Now without a doubt many are saved for the gospel truth has been preached [though those who be saved start off on the wrong foot with God, believing always that they must do something in order to attain God's blessing].

But many are not saved at all, no work of grace has been done in their hearts, they come forward, they prayer the prayer as instructed and told they must stand upon the word of God and believe. But they were never saved.

But they are counted as saved, they come into the church as saved, who is to know? who is to question?

But now watch this closely.

If you apply this same method of doing something in order to receive God's blessing to say healing or prosperity you come unstuck, WHY?

Because it is instantly plain to all who see that all those who came forward for healing were not healed, some were but many were not. It is the same with prosperity, all are told they must first give in order for prosperity to work, so they all give but they do not all prosper.

The answer is to preach the truth. "God willest above all things that we may be in health and prosper even as our soul prospereth" of COURSE He does, just preach it and those who will believe will receive it according to God's will, but the blessing may come in different ways and different times as the Lord wills..

The application of sovereign grace theology would kill the bad practices of many health and wealth preachers at a stroke.

But I am AMAZED that anyone reading the scriptures should doubt that it is God's good will that His people should be in health and prosper along with their spiritual progress.

... if you is on mission as Paul and Barnabas were He may ask you to forfeit those blessings .... the rewards for that are great.

Are you bitter about something? ,,, want to share it?

Are you bitter about something? ,,, want to share it?

brother don't even worry about her, she is trolling. I have her on ignore

No one is agitated with you. Everyone is the boogeyman to you. But you haven't gotten off step one, proving tongues has ceased. Everything else is generalizations.

Lots of talk, chasing of tail, running in circles. Millions of people around the world speak in tongues. Not just Pentecostals. People fake being saved, does that mean salvation is fake? No, it doesn't. You have no facts, nothing but generalizations by people on Youtube. And to take something as sacred as the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues and demand as proof that people record themselves as proof to you has to be one of the most crass things I've heard on this forum, and that's saying something. Any "proof" given to you you'll deny, but you want everyone to take every word you say and every experience as gospel. Tongues aren't for you, alright. So don't seek them. But people who don't speak in tongues like you get nasty, and have to disprove tongues to make a point. You really are tiresome. Tongues can be faked, so can being a Christian, that doesn't make everyone else a fake.

No. Cessasionists can be just as bloody minded as any other closed minded Christian. I used to speak in a tongue. I lost the desire after a few years. I've prophesied but I've not had a message in tongues.

How often does someone speak with a microphone in their face? Pat Boone (I think) testified that one of his kids prayed in Latin. I heard a young woman testify that she started an orphanage in Haiti. She claimed that God gave her the gift of speaking the local language. She thought she was speaking English, but the hearer heard Creole.

How often is it necessary to speak a language you've not learned? Missionaries would find it most useful. I'm not sure that a film crew would be available to follow them around.

As I said before, my experience was that I spoke in tongues spontaneously. I was not seeking tongues (a really dangerous practice - demons can counterfeit tongues). I sought the baptism of the Holy Spirit. I refused to be pushed into just babbling something like a lot of Penty preachers promote. Part of my problem was that I hated being controlled by others and I saw the Penty thing as being out of control. Hence the 3 year delay. I had many people exhorting me. The more they pushed, the less inclined I was to accept. I saw the Penty thing as being for emotional people, because that's what I saw.

I met people from Teen Challenge Hawaii. I heard my first message in tongues in Hong Kong, an English missionary. I thought she was praying in Chinese. It was a very small meeting. The woman was Jacky Pullinger who wrote a book about working with the drug addicts there. I'd been saved a few months at that time.

I met people from Teen Challenge Sydney Australia. I was healed instantly of a chronic liver problem. I knew nothing about divine healing. The founder was an AOG pastor.

I was introduced to others who were also exhorting me. A friend took me to Calvary Chapel. It was wonderful. So peaceful and full of joy. I was dragged out the front to be prayed for. The guy just said, "It's ok, you are not ready." No pressure. I was much relieved.

So I've seen and heard the best and the worst. Eventually I realised that I needed the power of the Holy Spirit, and I began to seek for myself instead of people trying to push me into it. I do not regret waiting and testing what I saw and heard. God has graciously kept me from some of the deceptions that others I know succumbed to.

We encourage people to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit, We also try to be sure that they have a good foundation in Christ first.