Tongues and Fruit of the Spirit...

[frederickdoc]

The Bible is very clear concerning the gifts of the Spirit:

[1Co 12:7-11, 28-30 KJV] 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. 8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; 9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; 10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another [divers] kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: 11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. ... 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. 29 [Are] all apostles? [are] all prophets? [are] all teachers? [are] all workers of miracles? 30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

If you trust your Bible you can’t be deceived.

You know I don't have a Bible .. The Kjv Thomson chained edition best Bible 1969 ? Strong's & amplified I suppose daily religion classes gospel storys memorize stuff did help
But I had To do as Paul did and go back with The holy Spirit into the scriptures and then take vompair notes of the Holy spirit with other Spirit filled knowers of Him.
So truth I trust Him more in Me . Than The book .Holy Spirit knowd What is written in me and that completes me and yes I dwell in the word All the Time . I'm just amazed on how his seperated People are ..I only know One foundation get to the water wash better so he can Abide inside you all.i like new things the spirit has to share .
Is the
Everlasting Gospel a witness to The Book of Life? Behold this Come and see .or at least just Come

 

[DavidLamb]

You know I don't have a Bible .. The Kjv Thomson chained edition best Bible 1969 ? Strong's & amplified I suppose daily religion classes gospel storys memorize stuff did help
But I had To do as Paul did and go back with The holy Spirit into the scriptures and then take vompair notes of the Holy spirit with other Spirit filled knowers of Him.
So truth I trust Him more in Me . Than The book .Holy Spirit knowd What is written in me and that completes me and yes I dwell in the word All the Time . I'm just amazed on how his seperated People are ..I only know One foundation get to the water wash better so he can Abide inside you all.i like new things the spirit has to share .
Is the
Everlasting Gospel a witness to The Book of Life? Behold this Come and see .or at least just Come

If you don't have a bible, I wonder why not? Your details show that you live in the US, so you are not in a country where bibles are difficult or impossible to obtain. Memorising bible passages is good, but you would need an astounding memory if you were to remember the whole bible. It contains approximately three quarters of a million words.

Incidentally what are vompair notes?

 

[frederickdoc]

If you don't have a bible, I wonder why not? Your details show that you live in the US, so you are not in a country where bibles are difficult or impossible to obtain. Memorising bible passages is good, but you would need an astounding memory if you were to remember the whole bible. It contains approximately three quarters of a million words.

Incidentally what are vompair notes?

Compair Notes lol.
You are correct no way I can memorize The Word . Best I can tell you
It's written on in The holy Spirit ,He brings up what he wants me to behold then I use the whole word + He helps me put it together.
yes on can find scripture to compair .
If I tell you that I Am sealed would you know that as truth?

 

[frederickdoc]

Compair Notes lol.
You are correct no way I can memorize The Word . Best I can tell you
It's written on in The holy Spirit ,He brings up what he wants me to behold then I use the whole word + He helps me put it together.
yes on can find scripture to compair .
If I tell you that I Am sealed would you know that as truth?

• They Still Spoke Without "Scripts": When Peter and John were arrested and put on trial before the powerful Sanhedrin .Peter did not have a defense attorney or a prepared statement. The KJV notes that Peter, "filled with the Holy Ghost," spoke with such supernatural authority that the rulers marveled, recognizing they were unlearned men who had "been with Jesus."

The pattern for the Church became clear: Prepare your bags, but let the Holy Spirit guide your mouth.

 

[rewriter]

2 Cor. 13:1 records the biblical principle for confirming truth: “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” This teaches that God’s principles are not founded upon isolated statements, but are confirmed through consistent witness and agreement throughout Scripture.

Scripture repeatedly reveals that speaking in tongues occurred immediately when individuals were filled with the Holy Spirit. This pattern is clearly witnessed in Acts 2:4, Acts 10:44–46, and Acts 19:6. Together, these passages establish a consistent biblical testimony concerning the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit. Jesus Himself declared that tongues would accompany believers (Mk. 16:17), and Isaiah prophetically spoke of God speaking “with stammering lips and another tongue” (Isa. 28:11).

Speaking in tongues and the fruit of the Spirit should not be confused. Speaking in tongues provides the initial evidence of receiving the infilling of the Holy Spirit, whereas spiritual fruit provides the enduring evidence that a person is truly indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

Fruit does not automatically appear the moment the Holy Spirit comes to dwell within a believer, but is progressively produced as a born again person matures in Christ. Jesus taught that a tree is known by its fruit (Matt. 7:16–20), and Paul described the fruit of the Spirit as love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance (Gal. 5:22–23). Jesus also taught that abiding in Him results in spiritual fruitfulness (John 15:4–5).

Over time, fruit becomes evident throughout the believer’s lifelong journey with the Lord. Paul’s prayer in Phil. 1:9–11 reflects ongoing spiritual growth, and Peter teaches that believers are to continually add spiritual virtues to their faith so they may become fruitful and mature in Christ. (2 Peter 1:5-8)

The initial evidence and the enduring evidence serve different purposes. One confirms the reception of the Holy Spirit, while the other reveals the continuing work of the Spirit within the life of the believer.

You properly reference that truth must be attested to by two or three eyewitnesses, however you then cite one single witness three times to prove that tongues are an initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit. Luke wrote Acts, Luke is a single individual. A person under oath making the same claim in a court of law three different times in his testimony is not three different accounts, rather it is the same claim made three different times and fails to meet the requirements for two or three eyewitnesses. And that neglects to mention that Luke admits to reporting hearsay, which is deemed virtually worthless when it comes to knowing the truth.

That tongues is a real experience is well established. Paul is just one of the sources available, but there are other ancient writers attesting to it as well as numerous people to this day.

 

[frederickdoc]

You know I don't have a Bible .. The Kjv Thomson chained edition best Bible 1969 ? Strong's & amplified I suppose daily religion classes gospel storys memorize stuff did help
But I had To do as Paul did and go back with The holy Spirit into the scriptures and then take vompair notes of the Holy spirit with other Spirit filled knowers of Him.
So truth I trust Him more in Me . Than The book .Holy Spirit knowd What is written in me and that completes me and yes I dwell in the word All the Time . I'm just amazed on how his seperated People are ..I only know One foundation get to the water wash better so he can Abide inside you all.i like new things the spirit has to share .
Is the
Everlasting Gospel a witness to The Book of Life? Behold this Come and see .or at least just Come

You properly reference that truth must be attested to by two or three eyewitnesses, however you then cite one single witness three times to prove that tongues are an initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit. Luke wrote Acts, Luke is a single individual. A person under oath making the same claim in a court of law three different times in his testimony is not three different accounts, rather it is the same claim made three different times and fails to meet the requirements for two or three eyewitnesses. And that neglects to mention that Luke admits to reporting hearsay, which is deemed virtually worthless when it comes to knowing the truth.

That tongues is a real experience is well established. Paul is just one of the sources available, but there are other ancient writers attesting to it as well as numerous people to this day.

Truth I only have one witness .Btw He has All judgement and Anointing
He speaks it's final.
Tell me who is gonna contest The Holy Spirit ?

 

[rewriter]

Truth I only have one witness .Btw He has All judgement and Anointing
He speaks it's final.
Tell me who is gonna contest The Holy Spirit ?

The requirements for the eyewitnesses are that they are available to be questioned by anyone, and if you accept the HS as inspiring scripture, it is the HS who set the requirement of 2 or 3 eyewitnesses. Thus, are you claiming that the HS contradicts himself and that anyone, including nonbelievers, may be allowed to directly question him?

 

[Wansvic]

You properly reference that truth must be attested to by two or three eyewitnesses, however you then cite one single witness three times to prove that tongues are an initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit. Luke wrote Acts, Luke is a single individual. A person under oath making the same claim in a court of law three different times in his testimony is not three different accounts, rather it is the same claim made three different times and fails to meet the requirements for two or three eyewitnesses. And that neglects to mention that Luke admits to reporting hearsay, which is deemed virtually worthless when it comes to knowing the truth.

That tongues is a real experience is well established. Paul is just one of the sources available, but there are other ancient writers attesting to it as well as numerous people to this day.

I've never heard what you suggest concerning the 2-3 witness rule.

And even if what you say were true, that Luke was supposedly a single witness is faulty.

"Luke likely gathered the information for the referenced chapters through direct interviews with eyewitnesses and church leaders while traveling with the Apostle Paul.

Acts 2 (The Day of Pentecost): Learned from Peter and other original apostles. Luke spent time with these leaders in Jerusalem.

Acts 8 (Philip and the Ethiopian): Obtained directly from Philip the Evangelist. Luke and Paul stayed at Philip's house in Caesarea.

Acts 10 (Peter and Cornelius): Directly recounted by Peter, likely during Luke and Paul’s extended stay in Caesarea, where this event originally took place.

Acts 19 (Paul’s ministry in Ephesus): Recorded from Luke's firsthand, eyewitness perspective, as he accompanied Paul during these specific missionary journeys.

Paul and Barnabas: Luke traveled extensively with Paul. This proximity gave him direct access to details about Paul's conversion and early missionary journeys.The Caesarean Circle: During Paul's two-year imprisonment in Caesarea, Luke had ample time to interview Philip the Evangelist, his daughters, and local elders.The "we" passages are sections in the Book of Acts where the narrative shifts from the third person ("they") to the first-person plural ("we" or "us"). This shift indicates the exact moments Luke joined Paul’s traveling party as an eyewitness.Acts 16:10–17 (Troas to Philippi): The pronoun shifts to "we" at Troas. This indicates Luke joined the journey here and traveled to Philippi, where the "we" sections temporarily stop.Acts 20:5–15 (Philippi to Miletus): The first-person plural resumes years later when Paul returns to Philippi. Luke rejoins Paul to sail across the Aegean Sea.Acts 21:1–18 (Miletus to Jerusalem): Luke documents the voyage to Judea. He uses "we" up until their arrival and meeting with James in Jerusalem.Acts 27:1–28:16 (Caesarea to Rome): Luke rejoins the narrative for the sea voyage to Rome. He provides an eyewitness, highly detailed account of the famous shipwreck at Malta." AI

 

[DavidLamb]

Compair Notes lol.
You are correct no way I can memorize The Word . Best I can tell you
It's written on in The holy Spirit ,He brings up what he wants me to behold then I use the whole word + He helps me put it together.
yes on can find scripture to compair .
If I tell you that I Am sealed would you know that as truth?

Thanks for replying. Certainly the Holy Spirit helps us remember and understand God's word, but we shouldn't use that as a reason for not owning and reading the bible. After all, we read of the Bereans in Acts, who checked by reading the bible (of course the only had the Old Testament then) to see whether Paul's preaching was true:

(Act 17:10) Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews.
(Act 17:11) These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.

Paul himself requested:

(2Ti 4:13) Bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas when you come—and the books, especially the parchments.


The books and parchments were probably the Scriptures, though I would agree we are not told that.

So using the Holy Spirit as a reason for not having a bible seems wrong.

 

[Aussie52]

You properly reference that truth must be attested to by two or three eyewitnesses, however you then cite one single witness three times to prove that tongues are an initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit. Luke wrote Acts, Luke is a single individual. A person under oath making the same claim in a court of law three different times in his testimony is not three different accounts, rather it is the same claim made three different times and fails to meet the requirements for two or three eyewitnesses. And that neglects to mention that Luke admits to reporting hearsay, which is deemed virtually worthless when it comes to knowing the truth.

That tongues is a real experience is well established. Paul is just one of the sources available, but there are other ancient writers attesting to it as well as numerous people to this day.

Hi Rewriter.
One of the problems with your view of speaking in tongues is that the New Testament 'tongues' were known languages (Acts 2). The 'tongues' on display today are not known languages but rather what linguists have called, 'free vocalization'.
Now I see this as a problem as to the authenticity of modern day speaking in tongues.
How can one claim to have the same gift as Acts 2, when what you have is not known languages?

 

[rewriter]

Hi Rewriter.
One of the problems with your view of speaking in tongues is that the New Testament 'tongues' were known languages (Acts 2). The 'tongues' on display today are not known languages but rather what linguists have called, 'free vocalization'.
Now I see this as a problem as to the authenticity of modern day speaking in tongues.
How can one claim to have the same gift as Acts 2, when what you have is not known languages?

Well as one who has been around when people are speaking in tongues, I can affirm that in at least some cases today, known languages are being spoken. In one case it was I language that I happened to know and later when I saw the speaker's sister I asked how he happened to be so fluent in it and she said that she had no idea as he had never studied it but only had a couple of years of high school study in a different language and no language studies in college..

Additionally, I am aware of multiple studies which acknowledge that the gift of tongues grants people the ability to speak in known languages, often obscure ones or ancient one, but as well as can be established, languages known to at least a few people.

The other problem is reconciling Acts 2 with Paul's comments about tongues in 1 Corinthians where Paul seems to acknowledge that not every tongue will be understood by all, perhaps not even by any person present, hence the need for someone with the ability to interpret.

 

[Aussie52]

Well as one who has been around when people are speaking in tongues, I can affirm that in at least some cases today, known languages are being spoken. In one case it was I language that I happened to know and later when I saw the speaker's sister I asked how he happened to be so fluent in it and she said that she had no idea as he had never studied it but only had a couple of years of high school study in a different language and no language studies in college..

Additionally, I am aware of multiple studies which acknowledge that the gift of tongues grants people the ability to speak in known languages, often obscure ones or ancient one, but as well as can be established, languages known to at least a few people.

The other problem is reconciling Acts 2 with Paul's comments about tongues in 1 Corinthians where Paul seems to acknowledge that not every tongue will be understood by all, perhaps not even by any person present, hence the need for someone with the ability to interpret.

It seems to me that you are using the usual Pentecostal/Charismatic assumption that the source of a message in 'tongues' is always from God. The fact is that it can also be from a more infernal source.
I am reminded of a case in New Zealand of a man who gave a message in 'tongues' in a Church meeting. In the congregation was an old Maori, who later stated that the message in 'tongues' was in an old dialect of Maori and that the message was cursing Jesus.
So, I believe your argument fails as it is based on a false assumption.

 

[rewriter]

It seems to me that you are using the usual Pentecostal/Charismatic assumption that the source of a message in 'tongues' is always from God. The fact is that it can also be from a more infernal source.
I am reminded of a case in New Zealand of a man who gave a message in 'tongues' in a Church meeting. In the congregation was an old Maori, who later stated that the message in 'tongues' was in an old dialect of Maori and that the message was cursing Jesus.
So, I believe your argument fails as it is based on a false assumption.

I am quite aware of the possibility of an entity not the HS being behind tongues in some cases. I am also aware of the false assumptions that are made regarding tongues by nonbelieving scholars. I think you miss the hidden message in the account of Acts 2. I was present when an old Lakota responded to a person speaking in tongues and declared that the person had a terrible accent, but that his message about God was very interesting and that he wanted to learn more.

 

[Aussie52]

I am quite aware of the possibility of an entity not the HS being behind tongues in some cases. I am also aware of the false assumptions that are made regarding tongues by nonbelieving scholars. I think you miss the hidden message in the account of Acts 2. I was present when an old Lakota responded to a person speaking in tongues and declared that the person had a terrible accent, but that his message about God was very interesting and that he wanted to learn more.

I draw your attention to the episode in Acts 16:16-18. where a girl was following Paul proclaiming, 'These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to us the way of salvation'.
On the surface, this sounds very sound and orthodox. The reality however was, she was 'possessed with a spirit of divination'.
This demonstrates that messages can be spoken out that sound correct, are scriptural, but come from a demonic source.
The contention that because it sounds OK, then it must be from God is false. I contend that much that passes as 'tongues' today is demonic in origin.
We must at all times, 'test the spirits'.

 

[rewriter]

I draw your attention to the episode in Acts 16:16-18. where a girl was following Paul proclaiming, 'These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to us the way of salvation'.
On the surface, this sounds very sound and orthodox. The reality however was, she was 'possessed with a spirit of divination'.
This demonstrates that messages can be spoken out that sound correct, are scriptural, but come from a demonic source.
The contention that because it sounds OK, then it must be from God is false. I contend that much that passes as 'tongues' today is demonic in origin.
We must at all times, 'test the spirits'.

Yes, the incident you cite involved a "python spirit" associated with Apollos. That is why I do not venture into some churches, the spirits residing there and I do not get along and if I attend a service, someone will pay a price for that. I prefer that should someone have to pay a price that they volunteer, even if out of ignorance.

 

[EddieM]

Can someone explain to me what this verse means about the gift of tongues:

Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is not for unbelievers but for believers. 1 Cor 14.22

 

[JohnRH]

Scripture repeatedly reveals that speaking in tongues occurred immediately when individuals were filled with the Holy Spirit. This pattern is clearly witnessed in Acts 2:4, Acts 10:44–46, and Acts 19:6. Together, these passages establish a consistent biblical testimony concerning the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit. Jesus Himself declared that tongues would accompany believers (Mk. 16:17), and Isaiah prophetically spoke of God speaking “with stammering lips and another tongue” (Isa. 28:11).

Is that descriptive or prescriptive?

The initial evidence ... confirms the reception of the Holy Spirit ...

Confirms to who: the one who receives the Holy Spirt or onlookers?

 

[Aussie52]

Can someone explain to me what this verse means about the gift of tongues:

Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is not for unbelievers but for believers. 1 Cor 14.22

Paul in v 21 quotes from Isa 28:11-12. This quote has reference to the nations of Israel and Judah. It is about the judgement of God in sending them into exile for their rebellion. It is there, in exile that God speaks to them through the Babylonian voices, as a means of judgement, but they do not hear His voice.
Paul likens 'tongues' as a sign of judgement to unbelievers, that is the Jews, that rejected Christ and the Gospel.
Prophecy on the other hand, was a source of revelation and instruction to believers.
These were temporary gifts superseded by the completed canon of Scripture.

 

[rewriter]

Paul in v 21 quotes from Isa 28:11-12. This quote has reference to the nations of Israel and Judah. It is about the judgement of God in sending them into exile for their rebellion. It is there, in exile that God speaks to them through the Babylonian voices, as a means of judgement, but they do not hear His voice.
Paul likens 'tongues' as a sign of judgement to unbelievers, that is the Jews, that rejected Christ and the Gospel.
Prophecy on the other hand, was a source of revelation and instruction to believers.
These were temporary gifts superseded by the completed canon of Scripture.

Can you please support your claim that tongues and prophecy were temporary gifts superseded by the canon And please remember that Paul, who wrote 2 Timothy 3:!6 did not recognize the NT as scripture. In fact, it was not finished before 2 Timothy was written.

 

[Aussie52]

Can you please support your claim that tongues and prophecy were temporary gifts superseded by the canon And please remember that Paul, who wrote 2 Timothy 3:!6 did not recognize the NT as scripture. In fact, it was not finished before 2 Timothy was written.

Tongues, Prophecy, word of knowledge/wisdom were all 'revelation gifts'. God used these gifts, along with Apostles & Prophets to teach the young Church new truths, not yet revealed eg. salvation, body of Christ, Kingdom of God etc. The finished canon of the New Testament was God final revelation to the Church, thus making the 'revelation gifts' redundant.
The gifts/ministries of Apostle and Prophet were 'foundational' ministries, Eph 2:20. Once the Church was built, they also became redundant too.