Why can’t i speak in tongues as a Christian

Yes, my point was it is willed and gifted like tongues. If it was same that everyone should speak in tongues then I should expect everyone to heal as well.

Same as well.

the empowering of the Holy Spirit as HE comes UPON the believer was not confirmed by healing was it? No. It was evident by the speaking in Tongues or Prophesying. Your rational is not biblical.

So how do you obtain the gifts without the Holy Spirit?

well first off you don't

there is many working of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer as Jesus said in John chapter 14, 15, and 16 and Acts 1:8

1. the Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin so they see their need to repent and need for salvation. as Jesus said
2. The Holy Spirit comes to live inside the believer, as Jesus said
3. the Holy Spirit lead us and guides us into all truth AS JESUS SAID
4. The Holy Spirit comes upon the believer to empower them to be a witness as Jesus said in Acts 1:8
5. The Holy Spirit is the distributor of HIS gifts to the Believer as He will for the betterment of the Church as 1cor chapter 12 states.

The believer has the Holy Spirit in them but must seek to have HIM come upon a person to be an effective witness of Christ's resurrection which the empowerment of the Holy Spirit is for. As Jesus said in Acts 1:8 and Luke 24

Elo the holy Spirit is not for the world but believers. What some don't think about is .. if we seek ask for the holy Spirit we will never get another spirit or Christ was a liar. He said how much more will your heavenly Father give the holy Spirit to them that ask. Any believer that ask will only get the holy spirit they can not get any other spirit.

When I was about 15 I went to this bible study where they always said "if we say anything that is not in the bible do not believe us". Every now and then they would ask if I wanted the holy Spirit. They never pushed it. One Friday night I said yes. Elo I had heard of the holy spirit so said yes. So I sit in this chair and he reads only what the bible says and then asks me again do I want it. I say yes. He prays a very very short prayer then just stops and says "that's it you got it".

Elo what does Gods word say about what He says? If He said it He will do it. His word will never come back to Him void. So Christ aka GOD said if you ask for the holy Spirit your Father will give it. Me? I would say Father forgive me if I doubted. I would then ask again and would read out loud Luke 11:13 then I would rejoice and praise Him. No matter what I feel like. Just ask then let it go.. never give it another thought. KNOW not wonder KNOW Your Father always hears you. Did you know that? OH you are so loved. So know you asked He will give it . He said He will and He is not like man PRAISE GOD!

So after he said "thats it you got it" no one said a word so I get up go sit down (It was at someones house that was bed ridden) the second I sat down tongues just came out. See they believed the word of God. No doubts no listening to this person or that not this Church or that Church. Luke 11:13 is very clear. So you ask again this time knowing He heard you knowing you got it. YES you got it! I felt nothing. Nothing had changed. I was young and I just simply believe them. He said I got it so I believed. So you ask you WILL get it. No matter how you feel what it looks like sounds like you praise Him after you ask knowing He gave you what you asked for.

The sweet holy Spirit is only for believers. One must be saved to get it. Now not saved trying to ask you can get a spirit that is not of God..only if your not saved. So if it helps your faith KNOW I am now praying for you.. and HE WILL give you the holy spirit. Believe His word not what man says. You read Luke 11:13 and others where they just prayed and they received the holy Spirit. HAHA were do you think this desire comes from? YOUR FATHER! So I don't lie nor speak things I heard someone say only what I know. So I will be praying for you for I know no doubt He hears me... its that name faith in that NAME! JESUS CHRIST. Like the song right now NO MATTER WHAT.....GOD YOU ARE ALWAYS FAITHFUL.. what are the odds its playing now. Luke 11:13.. GOD IS FAITHFUL TO HIS WORD! No matter what! OH YES PRAISE GOD GLORY TO JESUS.

And yes He haha is faithful He has never once failed.

A "Rose" by any other name.

Nope - it "Proves" nothing.

I already posted many scriptures well before Acts 2 of people being filled, Baptised with the Holy Spirit that are not tongues. Acts 2 is not the first occurance.

Book The Faith Healers by James Randy

Acts 2
5 There were some godly Jews in Jerusalem at this time. They were from every country in the world. 6 A large crowd came together because they heard the noise. They were surprised because, as the apostles were speaking, everyone heard in their own language.

7 They were all amazed at this. They did not understand how the apostles could do this. They said, “Look! These men we hear speaking are all from Galilee.[a] 8 But we hear them in our own languages. How is this possible? We are from all these different places: 9 Parthia, Media, Elam, Mesopotamia, Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, 10 Phrygia, Pamphylia, Egypt, the areas of Libya near the city of Cyrene, Rome, 11 Crete, and Arabia. Some of us were born Jews, and others have changed their religion to worship God like Jews. We are from these different countries, but we can hear these men in our own languages! We can all understand the great things they are saying about God.”

I cor 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Lists some gifts by importance and tongues is listed at the last, leste important.

"
Problems with the Principle
There are numerous problems with seeking to apply this principle throughout the Bible. These problems are likely the reason I could not find a single book on hermeneutics that promotes this idea as a legitimate tool for understanding the text. They may also be the reason no biblical writer employs this methodology to determine the meaning of a term they utilized.

Problem #1: It is Demonstrably False
The first major problem is that it fails in so many cases. I recently heard a speaker cite the “principle of first mention” to define the meaning of an important word. In this case, he said that we know the word “day” refers to a 24-hour time period because this is its clear meaning when it is first mentioned in the Bible. The major problem with this claim is that it simply is untrue. The first time the word “day” appears in the Bible is found on the first day of the creation week.

The word day appears twice in this verse, and both times it translates the Hebrew noun yom. What does it mean? Well, according to a speaker I recently heard, the word refers to a 24-hour time period because that is how it is used the first time it is mentioned. However, that is clearly not the case in Genesis 1:5. It is easy to see that the first occurrence of day in the Bible refers to a period of less than 24 hours, because it only refers to the daylight portion of the day.

The example given by the speaker failed to support his point. Obviously, the meaning of this word is extremely important for believers involved in debates over the Bible’s teaching about the age of the earth, but using a demonstrably false argument does not help our case. Instead, using such an argument may weaken our case in the minds of our detractors because they can refute such a claim and think that our other arguments are just as invalid.

Let’s look at another example to show why this principle is not very helpful. The third word of the Hebrew text of the Bible is ’elohim, which in this verse is correctly translated as “God.” In fact, this word appears over 2,000 times in the Old Testament and roughly 90 percent of the time it does indeed refer to God. One might argue that this is the word’s fundamental meaning, for it certainly is the most common meaning; but the word also refers to beings who most certainly are not God. For example, the Ten Commandments begin with the command, “You shall have no other gods (’elohim) before me” (Exodus 20:3). Of course, this verse refers to the prohibition of worshiping the gods of the surrounding nations. But the word ’elohim is also used to refer to angels (Psalm 8:5; cf. Hebrews 2:7), demons (Deuteronomy 32:17), and the spirit of Samuel6 called up at Saul’s request by the medium at Endor (1 Samuel 28:13). So even though God is by far the most common and significant translation of ’elohim, it would be inaccurate to say that this is the word’s fundamental meaning. By comparing the four other ways it is used in Scripture (false gods, angels, demons, and the departed spirit of a man), we can reasonably claim that the fundamental meaning of the term is to identify an entity whose primary abode is the spiritual realm.

Problem #2: Context Determines the Meaning
One of the most important principles in hermeneutics, if not the most important, is that the context determines what a given word means in a given setting. If the principle of first mention should be followed, then we could easily make all sorts of interpretive mistakes.

For example, the first mention of the word seed is found in Genesis 1:11, and it refers to the seeds of various plants. Although this is the most common use of the Hebrew noun zera throughout Scripture, most Christians would likely disagree that it is the most significant meaning. Just two chapters later, we read that there is enmity between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman, and that the seed of the woman will crush the head of the serpent. Since this is generally viewed as a Messianic prophecy, then surely this use of zera is more significant than a seed that is dropped into the ground.

Later in Genesis, we see the word used in another way. God tells Abram [Abraham] that he would give the land to Abraham’s descendants (zera). The Greek word sperma is often used to translate zera in the Septuagint, and it is frequently used in the New Testament in much the same way as zera. Paul cites the promise to Abraham several times. In Galatians 3:16, Paul uses the fact that zera is a collective noun (as is the Greek sperma) to make the point that the promise made to Abraham about his zera was about Jesus Christ. Interestingly enough, in Romans 4, Paul cites the same promises about Abraham’s seed and this time focuses on Abraham’s many descendants.

These two different uses of zera/sperma are very significant, but they do not match the first use of the word in Genesis 1:11. And there is another important use of sperma in the New Testament. In 1 Corinthians 15:35–45, the planting of seeds is used to set up a metaphor for the nature of man’s resurrection body. How could we ever understand the meaning of these key passages if we resorted to the principle of first mention?

Defenders of this principle certainly agree that context is important in determining the meaning of a word. But this brings up the next problem with the proposed principle.

Problem #3: Too Flexible to Be a Genuine Principle
If the “first mention” is supposed to set the stage for the meaning of a given term throughout Scripture but can be overridden by the context of other passages, then what is the point in even talking about the “first mention”? Why would it even matter how it is used the first time in the Bible if the meaning is determined by the word’s context?

Of course, several examples could be given where the first mention of a word is the primary or most important definition, as we saw with ’elohim earlier. But can we really build a standard hermeneutical principle upon a practice that only works some of the time?

As we have seen, some proponents hold to a softer version of this principle. That is, instead of the first mention providing the word’s primary or most important definition, the first mention at least establishes the tone for all the richness of meaning that will emerge. Putting this version of the principle into practice makes the definition so vague as to strip it of value. Even if the first mention introduces us to a word and hints at some of the deeper meanings of the term, we still need to look at the context in which it is used to determine its meaning. Once again, the first mention principle carries little, if any, interpretive value.

Problem #4: A Word Might Have Multiple Significant Meanings
The principle of first mention also fails to account for the fact that many key biblical terms have multiple significant meanings that are not at all apparent at their first mention. Take the word light, for example. The first mention of this word appears in Genesis 1:3: “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light.” The word is contrasted with darkness in the following verse. Clearly, the meaning of this word in context refers to something that illuminates a given area to enable sight, and in this case to distinguish between day and night. Keep in mind that this verse does not refer to the creation of the sun, which was created on the fourth day.

This is the most common use of the Hebrew word ’or and the Greek term phōs that is roughly equivalent to it. Both are regularly translated as light throughout the Old Testament and New Testament, respectively. Certainly, this an important word, but is this use truly the most important meaning of the term? Does it establish the richness with which the term would later be used? Consider John 1:9, which tells us that Jesus, “The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world.” Or what about Jesus’ own words when he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” (John 8:12)? While there are similarities between these two uses of light, the former refers to literal physical light while the latter is used metaphorically to refer to the spiritual illumination that God gives to man. Indeed, it would be difficult to demonstrate that the first mention of light in Genesis 1:3 could ever properly introduce the profound meaning described in the Gospel of John.

One final example will drive this point home. Clearly, word is a vital concept in Scripture, which uses this term with different referents. Yet two of these referents are extremely important, and neither one of them matches the first use of the term, as we will see shortly. But this example also raises another crucial problem with the first mention principle. To apply this principle consistently, one must use the original languages of Scripture rather than relying on English translations. But some who tout the first mention do not really use the actual first mention because they are looking at an English translation that used a different English word to translate the same Hebrew word found elsewhere. For example, Morris cites Genesis 15:1 as the first mention of word. In this verse, it refers to the “word of the LORD.” But this is a translation of the Hebrew term dabar, which actually appears for the first time in Genesis 11:1 in which we are told that the whole world had one speech (dabar).7

So the first use of this term for word in Scripture has to do with the one language man shared prior to the Babel event. But the Bible definitely uses this term with much deeper meanings that would never have been guessed given the first mention in Genesis 11:1. For example, the second appearance of dabar is the passage cited by Morris: “After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision” (Genesis 15:1). Here and in many other Old Testament passages, word refers to “a message from or about God.”8

Some Christians have suggested that in passages about “the word of the LORD” coming to someone (in some cases, there was more than basic communication from God taking place) that the second Person of the Trinity was making an appearance to that individual. After all, the New Testament identifies Jesus Christ as “the Word of God” (Revelation 19:13). While it is plausible that the preincarnate Christ appeared in some of these cases, there is no reason to insert this idea into each Old Testament passage referring to the “word of the LORD.” Regardless of one’s view of this issue, the fact remains that either view carries a markedly different meaning than the first mention of dabar.

Is it fair to compare the first mention of dabar (Genesis 11:1) with its use in Genesis 15:1 where it appears as part of a phrase? Perhaps not, but this raises two more problems with the first mention principle.

First, those who hold to the principle of first mention as it concerns words or phrases generally agree that this principle holds across both testaments. That is, the first use of the word or phrase in the Old Testament has significant bearing in our understanding of the equivalent word or phrase in the New Testament. But if this is accurate, then remember that Jesus is famously referred to as the “Word” (Greek logos in John 1:1, 14). If one wants to limit the principle to each testament, so that we need to find the first use of logos in the New Testament, then one will be disappointed to learn that the Greek word is first used in Matthew 5:32 where it refers to the “reason” (Greek logou) of sexual immorality as a basis for divorce (the first use with identical form, logos, in the Greek New Testament is in Matthew 5:37). Whether one points to the first mention of the Hebrew or the Greek term for word does not in any way set us up for the rich, profound use of logos in the first chapter of John’s Gospel.

The second problem for those who seek to use the principle of first mention for the entire phrase is also a problem for many Christians who use theologically imprecise reasoning at this point.

The phrase “word of God” is used in at least three ways in Scripture. All of them are significant, but many Christians conflate these phrases and introduce serious error. Consider the following verses:

The first verse cited above refers to the message Paul was about to give to the crowd of Jews and Gentiles that had gathered in Antioch. Undoubtedly, his message contained references and allusions to Scripture, but he obviously did not read the entire Old Testament to them. The “word of God” in the second verse is closely related to the first use, but it likely refers to the Scriptures as a whole, at least those that were written up to that point. These two uses are tied closely together: one speaks of a message based on Scripture, and the other likely refers to Scripture itself." https://answersingenesis.org/hermeneutics/law-first-mention-legitimate-interpretive-principle/

" And that probably even the heavenly angels spoke to mortal Jews in Hebrew. According to Dr. Randall Buth the daily spoken language in Eretz Israel, the Land of Israel, at the time of the Lord Yeshua was Hebrew, not only Aramaic. "
https://www.israeltoday.co.il/read/did-yeshua-jesus-the-apostles-and-the-angels-speak-hebrew/
"the ministering angels do not attend to him to bring his prayer before God, as the ministering angels are not familiar with the Aramaic language, but only with the sacred tongue, Hebrew, exclusively. "
https://www.sefaria.org/Shabbat.12b.2?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
Angels have only spoken to me in Hebrew.

Hebrew was one of my first languages. People in worship services which I attended said to me that they heard Hebrew. I ask them do you speak Hebrew? they always say no. I point out I know Hebrew and not a word of Hebrew was spoken.