Tongues

Biblicist · #11 16th May 2012, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by Yahu

How does tongues separate the 'Word of Faith' people?

I doubt if there is any really difference in opinion between classic-Pentecostals and ‘word of faith’ adherents regarding tongues as they are broadly a subset of the classic-Pentecostal movement.

Where things can become problematic is with how the wof movement has an over preponderance for adopting odd doctrinal positions and there are probably some odd understandings of tongues that exist within this system; this is what sets it apart from classic-Pentecostalism and the charismatic movement. Of course most wof supporters would probably see themselves as being classic-Pentecostals but for many Pentecostals there exists a degree of reluctance with acknowledging that the wof movement is indeed a legitimate expression of the Full Gospel.

To my way of thinking, the wof movement has essentially been a destructive element much the same as the latter-rain and new apostolic renewal has been.

Yahu · #12 16th May 2012, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Biblicist

I doubt if there is any really difference in opinion between classic-Pentecostals and ‘word of faith’ adherents regarding tongues as they are broadly a subset of the classic-Pentecostal movement.

Where things can become problematic is with how the wof movement has an over preponderance for adopting odd doctrinal positions and there are probably some odd understandings of tongues that exist within this system; this is what sets it apart from classic-Pentecostalism and the charismatic movement. Of course most wof supporters would probably see themselves as being classic-Pentecostals but for many Pentecostals there exists a degree of reluctance with acknowledging that the wof movement is indeed a legitimate expression of the Full Gospel.

To my way of thinking, the wof movement has essentially been a destructive element much the same as the latter-rain and new apostolic renewal has been.

Oh, I agree that the WoF doctrine is screwy. I attended a charismatic bible college and when I got there found out it was WoF based. I wasn't familiar with WoF before I attended. Needless to say, I only stayed the 1st year. I just didn't see any difference in how tongues was treated verses a non-WoF charismatic church.

I had heard that college only taught scripture, not doctrines of man. It turned out to be a bold face lie so I switched over to Lee University (Church of God) to take Hebrew before I left. Actually I was booted from the WoF college for not bowing down to their domination and dictating what doctrines I had to believe. I had heard it was a school specializing in spiritual warfare. It turned out that the director was in the most need of deliverance IMO and my primary gift is discernment of spirits. I call the place 'Zona's school of witchcraft and wizardry' to learn how to turn your bible into your own personal spell book by reciting these magic words. They were not at all receptive to anyone with a prophetic gift. The place was literally ruled by Jezebel. There was no place for an Elijah there. I did learn spiritual warfare but it was against the spirits operating within that place. I also learned how NOT to run a ministry so it wasn't a total waste.

Bob Carabbio · #13 17th May 2012, 10:37 PM

ltwin · #14 18th May 2012, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by Biblicist

Originally Posted by Yahu

How does tongues separate the 'Word of Faith' people?

I doubt if there is any really difference in opinion between classic-Pentecostals and ‘word of faith’ adherents regarding tongues as they are broadly a subset of the classic-Pentecostal movement.

Where things can become problematic is with how the wof movement has an over preponderance for adopting odd doctrinal positions and there are probably some odd understandings of tongues that exist within this system; this is what sets it apart from classic-Pentecostalism and the charismatic movement. Of course most wof supporters would probably see themselves as being classic-Pentecostals but for many Pentecostals there exists a degree of reluctance with acknowledging that the wof movement is indeed a legitimate expression of the Full Gospel.

To my way of thinking, the wof movement has essentially been a destructive element much the same as the latter-rain and new apostolic renewal has been.

I completely agree with this. Being a lifelong Pentecostal and being raised in a WOF church, I can tell you that beliefs about speaking in tongues and the baptism of the Holy Spirit are exactly the same as classical Pentecostals. In fact, I never even heard the term "Word of Faith" until I started doing research about my religious heritage. We just called ourselves Pentecostal or Full Gospel. Our beliefs about faith, positive confession, healing, and money were just presented as what the Bible said.

Most Pentecostals I have personally had contact with have seemed to me to be Word of Faith as well, so I don't have much real world experience with non-WOF Pentecostals. But from what I've read, it seems that WOF churches are far more likely than regular Pentecostals to fall into aberrant and heterodox teachings.

Also, WOF churches are very authoritarian, with the pastor and his family basically owning the church (I know from personal experience). From what I read, it seems that denominational Pentecostals vote on their pastors and they have some protection from dominating pastors by being tied to denominations.

bred11six · #15 22nd May 2012, 12:13 AM

Originally Posted by Yahu

How does tongues separate the 'Word of Faith' people?

They just hold to some bizarre doctrines about speaking blessings and healing without meeting the requirements. They have just turned their bibles into their spell books to speak magic words.

As to my position on tongues, well is has several uses:
1) for your prayer closet
2) to give a tongue, it be interpreted as a prophetic message
3) to supernatural give you a language that the hearer understands

The bible clearly states that tongues is speaking unto God. Paul says in 1 corinthians 14:39 that we should not forbid to speak in tongues.

didaskalos · #16 23rd May 2012, 09:55 AM

1. There is the Holy Spirit enabled "Diversities of Tongues from 1 Corin 12. This is supernatural because it is operated via the Holy Spirit and can be understood by someone present.

2. There is the "unknown tongues" of 1 Corin 14 which is our spirit praying to God. It is NOT supernatural but rather "merely spiritual" because it comes from our own spirit (not I but Christ lives in me).
"when I pray in an unknown tongue, MY spirit prays..."
This is also known as the "new tongues" which Jesus said all believers would speak.
You have already spoken in new tongues, we all have. It may have been nothing more than a groan or a cry out to God. He heard it and by his divine power knew exactly what you were saying.

#2 is for all intents and purposes gibberish that only God can understand by His divine power.

Yahu · #17 23rd May 2012, 10:58 PM

Originally Posted by bred11six

The bible clearly states that tongues is speaking unto God. Paul says in 1 corinthians 14:39 that we should not forbid to speak in tongues.

-
How did what I say even imply anything to do with forbidding tongues?

But it should be done without confusion. " but let all things be done comelily and with order."

If given in public within a service, it should have an interpretation or should not be given. Prophecy >>> tongues. When given as a prophetic word within an assembly, that is the greatest form of tongues. There is a difference between forbidding the unruly misuse of tongues and forbidding the entire practice.

Tongues given without interpretation within an assembly is dangerous. A false gift of tongues may be speaking curses over the assembly under the control of the enemy.

bred11six · #18 24th May 2012, 01:26 AM

Originally Posted by Yahu

-
How did what I say even imply anything to do with forbidding tongues?

But it should be done without confusion. " but let all things be done comelily and with order."

If given in public within a service, it should have an interpretation or should not be given. Prophecy >>> tongues. When given as a prophetic word within an assembly, that is the greatest form of tongues. There is a difference between forbidding the unruly misuse of tongues and forbidding the entire practice.

Tongues given without interpretation within an assembly is dangerous. A false gift of tongues may be speaking curses over the assembly under the control of the enemy.

I didn't know charismatic group agree with tongues because they don't like word of faith preaching.

ltwin · #19 24th May 2012, 04:12 AM

Originally Posted by bred11six

I didn't know charismatic group agree with tongues because they don't like word of faith preaching.

Speaking in tongues has been an essential characteristic of Pentecostalism since it started in 1906. When the Charismatic Renewal started in the 1960s, tongues was a big part of it. The Word of Faith movement only actually emerged as a distinct thing in like the 1970s or 80s. So, the modern day teaching on and practice of speaking in tongues is older than the Word of Faith Movement, and WoF teachers are just inheriting teaching that already existed. They haven't made up anything new in this area.

Most Pentecostal denominations believe that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. There are other evidences, outcomes and results that Pentecostals ascribe to Spirit baptism (Other immediate results include giving God praise, having joy, and desiring to testify about Jesus. Enduring or permanent results include Christ glorified and revealed in a greater way, a deeper passion for souls, greater power to witness, a more effective prayer life, greater love for and insight into the Bible, and the manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit.)

Charismatics believe that speaking in tongues is one of the gifts of the Spirit and that it should not be forbidden but used to build up the body of Christ. However, they are less prone to make it the "initial physical evidence" of Spirit baptism.

Yahu · #20 24th May 2012, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by bred11six

I didn't know charismatic group agree with tongues because they don't like word of faith preaching.

You don't make any sense. I already asked how WOF doctrine differed concerning tongues earlier in the thread. I don't see any difference between WOF verses non-WOF on the tongues issue.

The only commonality on not liking WOF is because this is a non-WOF forum.