Tongues and Fruit of the Spirit...

[Genez]

Funny I seen and heard The Devil and Heard Hell too ..anyway The Devil was trying to speak in Tongues Nastiest Sounds I ever heard .

So? You hallucinate?

 

[rewriter]

The Devil does not mimic tongues.
The Devil can only induce gibberish.
We do not get tongues like they were spoken in the earlier days of the church.

Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? Acts 2:8

.

There is a point many miss actually fairly easy to miss until you spot it. Look at the list of different countries represented for these languages and see if there is a surprise one hidden there. Just think, Judeans in Jerusalem, the capital of Judea, and people are surprised to hear them speaking in the local language. And then there is the mystery of why come regions were mentioned and others not referred to, and why the only difference between the list of groups supporting Vespasian from the beginning differs from the list in Acts 2 only by including Rome in the Acts 2 account. Why were regions such as Greece, North Africa, or Gaul not mentioned to further establish the universal nature of the languages spoken and why was Judeah included.

 

[Genez]

There is a point many miss actually fairly easy to miss until you spot it. Look at the list of different countries represented for these languages and see if there is a surprise one hidden there. Just think, Judeans in Jerusalem, the capital of Judea, and people are surprised to hear them speaking in the local language. And then there is the mystery of why come regions were mentioned and others not referred to, and why the only difference between the list of groups supporting Vespasian from the beginning differs from the list in Acts 2 only by including Rome in the Acts 2 account. Why were regions such as Greece, North Africa, or Gaul not mentioned to further establish the universal nature of the languages spoken and why was Judeah included.

I am not sure why you are asking that.

In Acts 2 the languages spoken were limited only to Jews attending, who spoke another language from where they lived when outside of Israel during their working year. They travelled back to Jerusalem for the High Holy Day.

 

[rewriter]

I am not sure why you are asking that.

In Acts 2 the languages spoken were limited only to Jews attending, who spoke another language from where they lived when outside of Israel during their working year. They travelled back to Jerusalem for the High Holy Day.

Then why were residents of Judea specifically referenced? Galileans spoke a different dialect than Judeans, but hardly a different language, unless you consider a Brooklyn accent to be a different language than a Texan one, but Judea is specifically mentioned in Acts 2:9.

And since according to Acts 2:5, Jews from EVERY NATION were present, why were so many nations not listed? North Africa was excluded, Gaul was excluded, Macedonia, Thracia Scythia, Rhodes, even Syria, just up the road a little way, were excluded. Why such a big coincidence?

 

[Lamar]

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.

There is nothing being confirmed in modern day tongues.
There are no "two or three witnesses" in modern day tongues.
"God's principles" are not found in the glossolalia of modern day Pentecostals.
There is nothing "consistent" about the glossolalia of modern day tongues.
Modern day tongues is clearly not in agreement with the tongues of scripture.

Claims of modern day tongues and its so called interpretation is a fraud.

Modern day tongues are at best a form of glossolalia.

Modern day interpretation of tongues is a sham.

Biblically tongues and its interpretation go hand in hand.

The phoniness of interpretation is clear evidence of both signs being bogus.

No two "interpreters" can give the same interpretation.

If modern day tongues were real then this should not happen.

 

[Wansvic]

so is prophesying

Yes. However, speaking in tongues was the initial sign.

 

[CS1]

Yes. However, speaking in tongues was the initial sign.

it is the one that is recorded most yes.

 

[frederickdoc]

So? You hallucinate?

I have the best drug

 

[frederickdoc]

Funny I seen and heard The Devil and Heard Hell too ..anyway The Devil was trying to speak in Tongues Nastiest Sounds I ever heard .

That there have been incidences of demonic tongues is well documented. If you think the devil can't mimic tongues, then you are very misled.

witness this myself I often wonder why but Satan copys everything he can . I know others same event, it's after HS indwelling ,definitely let me know & use The power in the name alone JESUS

 

[rewriter]

witness this myself I often wonder why but Satan copys everything he can . I know others same event, it's after HS indwelling ,definitely let me know & use The power in the name alone JESUS

Satan will use any tricks he can to deceive believers, and if he can get believers to cooperate with him, he wins even more. I have seen him deceive entire churches.

 

[Aussie52]

Satan will use any tricks he can to deceive believers, and if he can get believers to cooperate with him, he wins even more. I have seen him deceive entire churches.

There are many deceived believers that use this Forum.

 

[frederickdoc]

Satan will use any tricks he can to deceive believers, and if he can get believers to cooperate with him, he wins even more. I have seen him deceive entire churches.

That's Nothing compared to what I'm talking about .Im talking Heard Hell Seen the Ugly Snake Face
Depends R optional,!

 

[rewriter]

That's Nothing compared to what I'm talking about .Im talking Heard Hell Seen the Ugly Snake Face
Depends R optional,!

Sorry, I have no interest in a game of one upmanship with you. I know what I have seen, heard and experienced. There is very little proof that can be expressed, just as you could likely not prove anything you claim. Garden variety evil entities are the most likely encountered and are nasty enough. The big boys are a lot harder to find, they tend to settle in to one place and stay there, and send the low-level ones out to cause trouble and deceive/scare.

 

[Blade]

The Devil does not mimic tongues.
The Devil can only induce gibberish.
We do not get tongues like they were spoken in the earlier days of the church.

Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? Acts 2:8

.

A faith preacher when TBN was young and Paul and Jan were young.. said if you do not believe in speaking on tongues the gifts so forth. You believe in Jesus Christ as lord as your savior that is what matters most.

I am 65 and what happen to me with the holy Spirit was 100% exactly like what is written in Gods word. They just asked on night in the bible study if I wanted the holy Spirit. I was 15.. sure. No clue what it really was at all. I sat in this chair and do you know what he did? He read only the verses about the holy Spirit like luke 11:13 and so on. Never added any personal comment.

Yeah.... there was no one in my day telling me the gifts are dead or gone. That bible study.. if we say anything that is not written in the bible do not believe us. So He asks me again if I want the holy Spirit I say yes. He prays a very short pray and stops says "thats it you got it" It was years later .. you start to learn about faith. Do you have that kind of faith? They just believed God. God said.. just like He did in John 3:16-17. Meaning the same GOD spoke. If you ask the Father for the holy Spirit He will give it to those that ask. Do you just read that and don't question it you just believe it.

I remember walking back to my little truck in Hollywood very dark. I was just crossing the street He said "RUN" I as very happy coming from this Christian meeting. I thought run? Why I am not scared. The point I am getting to is what He said "when God tells you something you do not question it you just do it" To that I smiled said "yes sir" and ran. What are the odds I just get on the new street and pass this apartment building with dubbed doors yet very black in side. To people run out just as I pass jump in to some baby blue old car and drive backwards after me. Anyway..

So they in that bible study just believed if God said it.. if you asked you don't question you don't go by feelings or what you see. You walk by faith you live by faith you walk in the spirit you live by the Spirit. So I got up.. no one said a word.. I go to sit down and bam tongues just came out. OH praise GOD glory glory glory holy holy holy is our lord almighty.. yeah..its just there...its always there.. how this can be so much stronger so much newer today then the 1st day.. I don't know. He said you shall receive power after the holy Spirit comes on you. I had no one to tell me....its dead its gone. Just faith. Its always been like that with me. Its a choice.. its hard.. to walk by faith not sight not by how you feel. But there is such great joy and peace knowing you trust in Him.. He will always keep His word.. Neve said no.. I always stand on His word..not how I feel. I fall I make mistakes.. if I believe some silly doctrine..He will show me the correct way.. the fruit of the spirit 1st cor 13. So you know how He moves.

Anyway... I have seen every gift talked about in His word moving today. I would have to lie ..countless so many times to say its gone its dead. Yes ... but what matters most is you believe in Yeshua/Jesus Christ as lord.. oh that is all that matters. All I can say is.. just read and believe what HE said not what I say.. don't believe me... you ask you pray you seek you need to find this for your self.

Yes oh it was it is.... like day and night... I praise GOD forever he give me this gift and all that ask can receive that your joy may be full...

 

[JacobGilbert]

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.

Here’s the fatal flaw in your entire argument:


You just built a whole doctrine on three narrative examples in Acts, called it “consistent witness,” and then completely ignored that the epistles — which are the actual doctrinal teaching for the Church — never once teach what you’re claiming.


Paul never says:“After you believe, you must receive the Spirit with the initial evidence of tongues.”


Instead he says the exact opposite, repeatedly:

• “After that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise.” (Ephesians 1:13)
• “Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?” (Galatians 3:2)
• “If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.” (Romans 8:9)

There is zero passage in any epistle that teaches a two-stage experience with tongues as “initial evidence.” Not one.


Acts 2, 10, and 19 were unique transitional events as the gospel crossed major boundaries. They are not the normal Christian conversion pattern, and you cannot turn historical snapshots into mandatory doctrine when the letters to the churches say the opposite.


That’s not “two or three witnesses.” That’s eisegesis. The clear teaching of the epistles wins.

 

[frederickdoc]

Sorry, I have no interest in a game of one upmanship with you. I know what I have seen, heard and experienced. There is very little proof that can be expressed, just as you could likely not prove anything you claim. Garden variety evil entities are the most likely encountered and are nasty enough. The big boys are a lot harder to find, they tend to settle in to one place and stay there, and send the low-level ones out to cause trouble and deceive/scare.

What's wrong with you ? You lack understanding ? I see much other tHoly events ,even as the apostle yet they you adorn.
Upmanship It for the glory of God dA. I should just Rebuke you I rather say depart without accusation

 

[Aussie52]

Here’s the fatal flaw in your entire argument:


You just built a whole doctrine on three narrative examples in Acts, called it “consistent witness,” and then completely ignored that the epistles — which are the actual doctrinal teaching for the Church — never once teach what you’re claiming.


Paul never says:“After you believe, you must receive the Spirit with the initial evidence of tongues.”


Instead he says the exact opposite, repeatedly:

• “After that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise.” (Ephesians 1:13)
• “Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?” (Galatians 3:2)
• “If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.” (Romans 8:9)

There is zero passage in any epistle that teaches a two-stage experience with tongues as “initial evidence.” Not one.


Acts 2, 10, and 19 were unique transitional events as the gospel crossed major boundaries. They are not the normal Christian conversion pattern, and you cannot turn historical snapshots into mandatory doctrine when the letters to the churches say the opposite.


That’s not “two or three witnesses.” That’s eisegesis. The clear teaching of the epistles wins.

While I don't take the Pentecostal view of tongues, I, as a Wesleyan, do believe in a sanctification experience subsequent to regeneration. Luke in writing the Acts of the Apostles was both a historian and a theologian in one. This fact was demonstrated by the late I Howard Marshall, who showed that Acts is both descriptive and prescriptive in nature. Thus, it is both right and permissible to build a theological case for subsequency from Acts. Acts is not at variance with the Epistles, rather they complement each other.
The various accounts of believers receiving the Spirit subsequent to regeneration are not unique as you say. I must ask, are you using a dispensationalist lens when interpreting those events? If you are, then that would be, eisegesis.

There are in the Epistles, much evidence for a further 'experience' of the Holy Spirit, subsequent to regeneration, if you care to look for it. You quoted Eph 1:13. It was AFTER they believed, that they were sealed with the Holy Spirit. Yes, I believe the sealing with the Holy Spirit is a subsequent event after regeneration, the Baptism with the Holy Spirit, which is a sanctifying experience, not tongues.

So, there is a Biblical case for subsequency, and there are many theologians that hold to it, not just me.

Blessings.

 

[rewriter]

What's wrong with you ? You lack understanding ? I see much other tHoly events ,even as the apostle yet they you adorn.
Upmanship It for the glory of God dA. I should just Rebuke you I rather say depart without accusation

How would you go about PROVING your experiences/knowledge regarding the demonic? Anyone can make claims, but proving those claims becomes difficult. I can cite details of my experiences that fit with what people who are recognized as experts in the field by at least some others would acknowledge as fitting known facts, and thus being plausible, but such is not proof.

But how do you know when and where a demon is, what are the tell-tale signs you look for? The signs I look for are recognized by the WHO, although not linked by them with the demonic. They have no explanation as to how those signs can exist without specific physical causes, yet they do. Nor can the WHO explain how certain specific actions cause those inexplicable phenomena to suddenly vanish completely, yet they do. Now proving that those phenomena are linked to the demonic is a far different problem, but logically they are if one allows to the existence of demons. So again, what signs do you look for and how do you justify linking them to the demonic via some logical pathway.

 

[frederickdoc]

How would you go about PROVING your experiences/knowledge regarding the demonic? Anyone can make claims, but proving those claims becomes difficult. I can cite details of my experiences that fit with what people who are recognized as experts in the field by at least some others would acknowledge as fitting known facts, and thus being plausible, but such is not proof.

But how do you know when and where a demon is, what are the tell-tale signs you look for? The signs I look for are recognized by the WHO, although not linked by them with the demonic. They have no explanation as to how those signs can exist without specific physical causes, yet they do. Nor can the WHO explain how certain specific actions cause those inexplicable phenomena to suddenly vanish completely, yet they do. Now proving that those phenomena are linked to the demonic is a far different problem, but logically they are if one allows to the existence of demons. So again, what signs do you look for and how do you justify linking them to the demonic via some logical pathway.

Idk your on prove me or find it in bible? I just told the truth apparently you can't imagine this could happen.
.Jesus Recieve the Holy Spirit then went straight way to be tempted of Satan 40 days
use that. it is written thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God
other than that
I can't make any sense of what you're trying to say just call me a liar and keep it in your heart forever

 

[frederickdoc]

So? You hallucinate?

I give you best truth now. It was after that and dwelling of the Holy Spirit this event show me how to use the name Jesus. All I can tell you is it absolutely will make any flee I have the best drug is really the Holy Spirit it was joke to
Pointless question of an untamed tongue