They Spoke in Tongues? Not in Acts !!!

[Stryder06]

Total Onslaught - 225B - Strange Fire.avi

 

[Yarddog]

If scripture is relative, and God is the Author of the scriptures, then doesn't that make God relative?

Yes, God is always relative and when he gives someone a gift, we should see that gift as relative and not try to cause them to doubt their gift.

No one had experienced the Advent of Christ before, but certain people knew what to look for. I've never been pulled over for trying to evade an officer, that doesn't mean I don't know the outcome of that pursuit. Someone that says they are speaking in tongues, if it isn't according to what the bible says it is, then they are experiencing something, but it isn't from God.

No one has proved that tongues is the way that JAL has interpreted it to be. He has only given his interpretation. The only person who truly knows is the person who has experienced the gift.

If you have never experienced the gift, how do you understand the gift. Scripture does not define all the boundaries of the gift but does give us some indications of its use.

 

[Stryder06]

Yes, God is always relative

I thought that God said that He doesn't change, but is the same yesterday, today, and forever more?

...and when he gives someone a gift, we should see that gift as relative and not try to cause them to doubt their gift.

Gifts from God are never relative, but are meant to edify the church, and lead others to Christ. If the gift is from God there is no problem, but tongues as they are known today are not from God.

No one has proved that tongues is the way that JAL has interpreted it to be. He has only given his interpretation. The only person who truly knows is the person who has experienced the gift.

How do we know that the advent happened the way it did? Is that given to personal interpretation? God is not the Author of confusion.

If you have never experienced the gift, how do you understand the gift. Scripture does not define all the boundaries of the gift but does give us some indications of its use.

Again, confusion is not of God. Paul, in reference to tongues, said that if there is no one to translate that they ought to be silent. He also asked what good would it do to speak in tongues and have someone come in to your gathering that didn't understand what you were saying. Such an individual would surely think the group of people to be crazy and leave. This is what Paul said.

I've never experienced jail but I know it's a place I don't want to be. If we can't discern between that which is from God and that which is not, than we're in trouble wouldn't you say?

 

[JAL]

Allow me to be more clear. The term "witness" probably refers to the office of evangelist, to a person who appointed to the full-time job of seeing Christ, hearing Him, and testifying (prophesying) as directed by Him, for the sake of evangelism. This involves a fairly advanced prophetic anointing, perhaps what Scripture calls a "double-portion."

There are lower levels of prophetic anointing. For instance Numbers 12:6-8 depicts Moses on a higher level of prophetic anointing than the other prophets. God wants all of us to rise to the higher level.

A prophetic gifting was fairly widespread in the early church, but most did not have a "double-portion". Most were on a lower level of prophecy, which did allow them to evangelize on occasion as the Spirit led, but generally this task was left to the true evangelists - the "witnesses" - those with the "double-portion" (so to speak). Look at it this way. Nowhere do the epistles command an entire congregation to go out and preach the gospel - because that was the task of the witnesses. On the other hand, an entire congregation IS commanded to seek the gift of prophecy (1Cor 14:1).

Hello JAL,
I would say that any of us can witness by simply being honest about how we feel about Jesus, to another person.

But this idea seems to be a man-made tradition. I don't see that Scripture defines evangelism this way. If an atheist asks me a question about what I believe, then I will respond to him. But I'm not going to go out on the street corner seeking atheists to preach to.

God didn't create you to evangelize. He created you to know Him. Therefore His will for your life will tend to prioritize prayer. You cannot "choose" to prophesy at whim and will (that wouldn't be true prophecy). You have to dedicate yourself to prayer until God endues you with prophetic message after prophetic message. As Luke tell us, "And Anna, the prophetess, never left the temple, but worshipped and fasted day and night." More to come...

 

[JAL]

No doubt that what occurred at Pentecost was an outpouring given for witnessing, but to say that it was prophetic in nature without knowing exactly what was spoken is only a personal opinion.

It's more than "only a personal opinion." Peter said it was a fulfillment of Joel's promise, "I shall pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and they SHALL prophesy." Again, I can't "prove" anything from Scripture. The weight of the evidence, however, points to prophecy.

The exact content of the message probably isn't critical to my main point. I'm using the term "prophecy" primarily in the sense of a message inspired by God for public proclamation. It doesn't have to involve foretelling. There is no limit to the number of possible topics involved. God can say anything He wants. If the message is fully inspired, given for public proclamation, and fully intelligible to the audience, it's what I have in mind here by the term "prophecy". If you like, then, we can revise my formula, we can say that "witnessing involves inspired utterance" (instead of "prophetic" utterance). Fine with me. I'm willing to compromise on that point.

John is considered a prophet because he spoke of future things. Jesus, who had not yet been revealed. This does not mean that witnessing is restricted to prophetic utterances or that the main reason is prophetic in nature. Witnessing for the Apostles and other believers was about telling the Gospel. Prophesying and other miracles are Spiritual aids to help those witnessing.

I do not insist that the witness must hold the office of a prophet. Technically, a witness is the office of evaneglist, and he may or may not be a prophet. However, I do insist that he wield an anointing prophetic in nature, i.e. identical in essence to that of the prophets. A mere witness, if he is not really a prophet, probably won't be involved in foretelling. But he will be involved in inspired speech (prophetic utterances for the sake of evangelism).

​

I personally won't tell a person, who says that they have experienced speaking in tongues, that they haven't.

Well, in some cases doing so might be a little rude, but it's not going to stop me from forming opinions, at least.

I don't believe that actual God given tongues is speaking gibberish.

Agreed, I do believe in the gift of tongues, a message in a language known to God (and perhaps to angels) but unknown to men. My opinion is that probably less than 10% of Pentecostals have actually experienced such a true gift of tongues. Most of them seem to be speaking gibberish.

I do believe that tongues can be either a known language or an unknown language which may include a heavenly tongue.

If it's a known language (known to some men), it would be one unknown to the speaker and to the audience, because Paul says that no one present on the scene understands the tongues-speaker.

 

[Yarddog]

I thought that God said that He doesn't change, but is the same yesterday, today, and forever more?

What definition of relative are you using? We seem to be using it differently.
Relative- having reference or regard; relevant; pertinent

Gifts from God are never relative, but are meant to edify the church, and lead others to Christ. If the gift is from God there is no problem, but tongues as they are known today are not from God.

Using my meaning, God is always relative or pertinent.
pertaining or relating directly and significantly to the matter at hand; relevant

How do we know that the advent happened the way it did? Is that given to personal interpretation? God is not the Author of confusion.

Stop confusing things by providing a personal interpretation which cannot be proven then.

Again, confusion is not of God. Paul, in reference to tongues, said that if there is no one to translate that they ought to be silent.

He said that they should be silent and speak to themselves and to God.
1 Cor. 14:28 But if there is no interpreter, the person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God.
Surely you wouldn't want someone to not speak with God, would you?

He also asked what good would it do to speak in tongues and have someone come in to your gathering that didn't understand what you were saying. Such an individual would surely think the group of people to be crazy and leave. This is what Paul said.

The only ones who should be confused are the unbelievers or uninstructed.
23 So if the whole church meets in one place and everyone speaks in tongues, and then uninstructed people or unbelievers should come in, will they not say that you are out of your minds? Paul never spoke "against" tongues. They are a gift of the Holy Spirit and all gifts should be cherished. Tongues are not as important as other gifts but when God gives a gift, we are to open that gift and seek understanding on how to use it properly.

I've never experienced jail but I know it's a place I don't want to be. If we can't discern between that which is from God and that which is not, than we're in trouble wouldn't you say?

We should discern but not eliminate all tongues as being faked. I have listened to many people talk about having the gift of tongues and haven't seen a reason to doubt them, as of yet. I have never been to a Pentecostal Church or another charismatic Church service. I do know that there is a Charismatic movement in the Catholic Church and tongues is part of the service. I have no reason to doubt that it is not valid but I would have to be there to be able to see what God would reveal.

 

[visionary]

Hey, is this where I should jump in and get all rude, belligerent and attack those who disagree with or are attempting to discredit my faith?

anytime that happens.. you as well as any other beleiver should humbly pray about it, especially since it has a solid and clearly committment to reading the scripture as is.

 

[JAL]

Logically, there is a fairly compelling reason to associate evangelism with the gift of prophecy. Allow me to explain.

Prophets often needed full credibility - at times instant credibility - in the eyes of the people. I'll give two examples. (1) Moses commanded Israel, "Slaughter seven nations in order to take possession of Canaan." This isn't the sort of command you should obey "just because Moses is a prophet." Even a prophet can backslide. You need to KNOW (i.e. be fully certain) that the command is from God.

(2) Or suppose someone in the neighborhood walked up to you and said, "The religious beliefs you currently hold are largely false. I am the true God. Come fullow me." (This is what Jesus said to His disciples). Should you believe such a man? Were the disciples foolish for believing Christ? Here again, you need to KNOW (i.e. be fully certain) that the message is true, or truly from God.

It works like this. An aspect of prophetic ministry is that God often endued the message with instant credibility. He does this by sending His Spirit into the hearts of the audience as to persuade them that the true God is speaking through the prophet. We say that the Holy Spirit CONVICTS the listener that the message is from God. Thus when Jesus told the Twelve, "I'm the true God, come follow me.", He was speaking as a prophet, with a Spirit of conviction persuading them that He spoke the truth.

Now here's the problem. If the Holy Spirit is going to create the conviction that the message is from God, the message should indeed be fully inspired. In other words the Spirit of conviction (which most people admit is necessary for plenally effective evangelism) naturally goes hand in in hand with prophetic utterance.

Suppose that I stand on a street corner to preach the gospel without the gift of prophecy. As such, there probably won't be a strong Spirit of conviction. Chances are that few people will repent, because my message lacks credibility for lack of the Spirit of conviction. Logically, then, the gift of prophecy is the best empowerment for evangelism.

 

[annrobert]

Speaking to God as the Spirit gives power to is "gibberish"?
Yikes!
For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God.
Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.
I can't see how your understanding of tongues fits in with all of Scripture.

 

[Frogster]

There are facts to remember to those who grieve the Spirit and call it "jibberish".

There were men from every country there,in the upper room.

Acts 2:5 Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven.


So that is why one understood the language that was familiar to him.However, a person from Rome might have interpreted the language of the Mesopotamian,as "jibberish",because he did not understand that language.


In a small gathering,believers might not know the language of a person that is speaking in tongues,however someone on the planet familiar with the language,would not call it "jibberish".There are many documented stories of people praying in tongues,glorifying God,and someone from a foreign country can understand the language.

Paul spoke in tongues,and said he did not know the language,yet said there are many languages,which confirms Acts 2.So not knowing the language does not mean it is "jibberish".

1 Cor 14:10 There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning,

Paul recognized that some may not understand the language,but he also knew it was from God.

1 Cor 14:9 So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air.

What I am saying is,each understood his own language,from where he lived.And unless you have people from every nation around you,when you pray in tongues,some,like even Paul,will not understand the language.


Acts 2:8 And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language?

 

[Frogster]

 

[sunlover1]

Logically, there is a fairly compelling reason to associate evangelism with the gift of prophecy. Allow me to explain.

Prophets often needed full credibility - at times instant credibility - in the eyes of the people. I'll give two examples. (1) Moses commanded Israel, "Slaughter seven nations in order to take possession of Canaan." This isn't the sort of command you should obey "just because Moses is a prophet." Even a prophet can backslide. You need to KNOW (i.e. be fully certain) that the command is from God.

(2) Or suppose someone in the neighborhood walked up to you and said, "The religious beliefs you currently hold are largely false. I am the true God. Come fullow me." (This is what Jesus said to His disciples). Should you believe such a man? Were the disciples foolish for believing Christ? Here again, you need to KNOW (i.e. be fully certain) that the message is true, or truly from God.

Discerning of spirits is the supernatural ability given by the Holy Spirit to perceive the source of a spiritual manifestation and determine whether it is of God (Acts 10:30-35), of the devil (Acts 16:16-18), of man (Acts 8:18-23), or of the world. It is not mind reading, psychic phenomena, or the ability to criticize and find fault.

Suppose that I stand on a street corner to preach the gospel without the gift of prophecy. As such, there probably won't be a strong Spirit of conviction. Chances are that few people will repent, because my message lacks credibility for lack of the Spirit of conviction. Logically, then, the gift of prophecy is the best empowerment for evangelism.

If you are standing on a street corner preaching the gospel (which we're told to
do, so you'd be acting in obedience) God would definitely work through you,
and in the hearers.. (He will prosper what you put your hand to)

 

[JAL]

Discerning of spirits is the supernatural ability given by the Holy Spirit to perceive the source of a spiritual manifestation and determine whether it is of God (Acts 10:30-35), of the devil (Acts 16:16-18), of man (Acts 8:18-23), or of the world. It is not mind reading, psychic phenomena, or the ability to criticize and find fault.

Sure, but that's not telling us HOW He gives discernment. Instant credibility is a work of the Spirit convicting (convincing) us that the prophet is speaking God-given truth. He does this by stirring up within us a feeling of certainty. If that certainty reaches 100% (i.e. we are fully convinced), we can no longer question the message.

If you are standing on a street corner preaching the gospel (which we're told to do, so you'd be acting in obedience) God would definitely work through you,
and in the hearers.. (He will prosper what you put your hand to)

God doesn't PLENALLY prosper every decision I make, if some of those decisions are incorrect. With respect to evangelism, for instance, it's important to try to determine the best way to go about it. We shouldn't just ignore the biblical evidence at hand. That evidence suggests that the best way to go about evangelism is to pray for the gift of prophecy. The emphasis of the church should be on prayer (because God created us to fellowship with Him), not on evangelism.

 

[JAL]

Incidentally, Sunlover, why do you say that God has told me to stand on a street corner preaching the gospel? He told His witnesses to do that (i.e. those who saw and heard Him face to face), but He hasn't told ME to do that.

 

[annrobert]

Discerning of spirits is the supernatural ability given by the Holy Spirit to perceive the source of a spiritual manifestation and determine whether it is of God (Acts 10:30-35), of the devil (Acts 16:16-18), of man (Acts 8:18-23), or of the world. It is not mind reading, psychic phenomena, or the ability to criticize and find fault.

If you are standing on a street corner preaching the gospel (which we're told to
do, so you'd be acting in obedience) God would definitely work through you,
and in the hearers.. (He will prosper what you put your hand to)

again sunlover, great post.

 

[Stryder06]

What definition of relative are you using? We seem to be using it differently.
Relative- having reference or regard; relevant; pertinent

I'm sorry. When I think of relative I think of not absolute or independent. (relative - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)

Using my meaning, God is always relative or pertinent.
pertaining or relating directly and significantly to the matter at hand; relevant

Using your meaning.

Stop confusing things by providing a personal interpretation which cannot be proven then.

What makes it a personal interpretation? Is it personal simply because you disagree?

He said that they should be silent and speak to themselves and to God.
1 Cor. 14:28 But if there is no interpreter, the person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God.
Surely you wouldn't want someone to not speak with God, would you?

If you walk in to a strictly Spanish speaking church and the only language you know is English, should you stand up and start praising God and praying over the congregation, or should you sit and be silent and simply praise and pray to God yourself?

The only ones who should be confused are the unbelievers or uninstructed.
23 So if the whole church meets in one place and everyone speaks in tongues, and then uninstructed people or unbelievers should come in, will they not say that you are out of your minds? Paul never spoke "against" tongues. They are a gift of the Holy Spirit and all gifts should be cherished.

I never said Paul spoke against tongues. Don't forget the latter part of that statement, where he says that if they all were prophesying that they could win over those who are unbelievers. What good does it do for an entire church to speak in an unknown tongue if no one understands them? But if all prophesy in a language that is understood then they can win souls over to Christ who are uninstructed.

Tongues are not as important as other gifts but when God gives a gift, we are to open that gift and seek understanding on how to use it properly.

Exactly! Do you really think a gathering of individuals going on where no one can understand what they are saying is using a gift right? God understand everything, why would He give us a gift to talk in language that no one else but He can understand, how would that help someone else?

We should discern but not eliminate all tongues as being faked. I have listened to many people talk about having the gift of tongues and haven't seen a reason to doubt them, as of yet. I have never been to a Pentecostal Church or another charismatic Church service. I do know that there is a Charismatic movement in the Catholic Church and tongues is part of the service. I have no reason to doubt that it is not valid but I would have to be there to be able to see what God would reveal.

Well I've seen it, heard it, and been in a service at my Uncles church where everyone started doing it save for myself, my dad, my sister, and our other uncle who is Muslim.
I know that God is not a God of confusion and I can promise you that there was not once ounce of order during that time. No edification except for those who were "in the Spirit."

 

[sunlover1]

Sure, but that's not telling us HOW He gives discernment.

Where does it tell us "how" God does it? I havent noticed that passage.

Instant credibility is a work of the Spirit convicting (convincing) us that the prophet is speaking God-given truth. He does this by stirring up within us a feeling of certainty. If that certainty reaches 100% (i.e. we are fully convinced), we can no longer question the message.

Hmm, interesting theory but why then have people throughout time closed their
ears to the prophets?
Even now, people dont come to God or don't follow His voice.
Jeremiah cried out to the people day and night and they just
continued in their folly, which led to chaos and trouble.
Would you say then that God sent a prophet and then shut
the peoples heart against that same message that HE alone sent?
Sounds sort of silly and our God isnt silly.

God doesn't PLENALLY prosper every decision I make, if some of those decisions are incorrect.

And of course He isnt going to prosper something that you put
your hand to if it's evil ! That's a crazy idea, huh?
But when you're in HIS Will... as in being a witness.

With respect to evangelism, for instance, it's important to try to determine the best way to go about it.

I never considered strategies. While I am beginning to understand that we don't
walk serendipitously, we still cannot know the heart of a man... concerning
evangelism. I personally don't so much tell folks that they need God as much as
I rather just pray for them and try to let my light shine in front of them.
For that matter, God so blesses His kids that even those who arent His cannot
help but see how extravagant and audacious His blessing is.

We shouldn't just ignore the biblical evidence at hand. That evidence suggests that the best way to go about evangelism is to pray for the gift of prophecy.

Really.
Hmm, I never considered that. Certainly it blows peoples minds (even Christians)
when you prophesy to them.. I weep like a baby when God speaks to me, no matter
the method of delivery. But it also blows their mind if some Christian gives them a
word of knowledge or lays hands on them and their infirmity leaves.. etc.

The emphasis of the church should be on prayer (because God created us to fellowship with Him), not on evangelism.

I'm with you, more fellowship; prayer, worship etc.
But let's not forget those who need Him too!

 

[JAL]

Where does it tell us "how" God does it? I havent noticed that passage.

Where does the word Trinity occur in Scripture? I haven't noticed that passage.

Hmm, interesting theory but why then have people throughout time closed their ears to the prophets?

Two reasons. First, conviction doesn't necessarily force you to OBEY the message. You can choose, for example, to kill the messenger just because you don't like what God is saying. Secondly, there are two types of conviction. (A) Where the Spirit is actually softening the heart to make it easier to repent. (B) Where the Spirit is simply pointing out your sin and declaring judgment (typically because God is fed up with softening your heart to no avail given your stubborness).

Even now, people dont come to God or don't follow His voice.
Jeremiah cried out to the people day and night and they just
continued in their folly, which led to chaos and trouble.
Would you say then that God sent a prophet and then shut
the peoples heart against that same message that HE alone sent?
Sounds sort of silly and our God isnt silly.

see above.