I have two questions regarding tongues ?

[Devorim]

I'm no expert on this subject by any means, but as for acting "foolish"...remember that when the Holy Spirit fell on the disciples/first Christians, people on the street heard and saw them and thought they were, literally, drunk.

Blessings to you as you work this out between you & God. xo

Yeah, I mentioned that in paragraph 5 of my post just above yours.

Some more of the things I don't understand:
If the H Spirit is using a tongue to speak through, why can He not teach some of those who speak in tongues to not falsely accuse with that tongue, to not be mean with that same tongue, etc.?

I am serious! What is the reality-break here FOR SOME? I would like to know, if I become a tongues-speaker, is the H Spirit strong enough the make me nicer and strong enough to use my tongue (and thus my typing fingers) to glorify Him in my other words?

 

[Biblicist]

I am going to be real honest with you here, and this may be offensive to some. It’s just that I am not interested in speaking in tongues for the sake of speaking in tongues.

That’s a valid point where it probably is a bit odd to blandly pray in the Spirit without being conscious of praising God in this way or where we maybe allow the Holy Spirit to intercede on our behalf regarding a specific matter. I know that many of us may choose to praise God in the Spirit (tongues) without any specific purpose where we allow the Spirit to offer words of praise and adoration to him while we're maybe mowing the lawn, walking down a supermarket isle etc but I would not deem this to be speaking in tongues for its own sake.

I believe that the H Spirit knows my native language and does not need to use a language I don’t know to get anyone’s attention. However, as on the Acts day of Pentecost, if there was someone who did not know G-d and did not know English, and He chose me to tell them the Good News, I would gladly submit to the H Spirit to speak to them in a language I do not know.

When we speak in tongues the Holy Spirit will always direct his words to the Father (never to man) in angelic sounds, so there is really no opportunity to gain anyone’s attention (other than the Fathers I suppose); though we could certainly gain the wrong type of attention if we were to stand up in the middle of a Sunday message on in the middle of a school classroom where we loudly launch out in tongues – probably not a good thing to do!

As for the Day of Pentecost, when the 120 (or many of them) were speaking in tongues in known human languages, they were not actually speaking a Gospel message to the unregenerate Jews but words of praise and adoration to the Father.
As for their being any evangelistic benefit with tongues to a people group who have not as yet heard the Gospel, I’m not all that sure as to how this would work as even the unregenerate Jews who heard the disciples speaking in their own tongues were thoroughly confused and if Peter had not of provided a Gospel message in their native Aramaic then the day would have been lost where the Jews would have walked away none the wiser as to what was happening. As we have no Biblical record of anyone speaking a Gospel message in a tongue then I don’t think that we need to bother ourselves with this very unlikely scenario.

Does the Spirit ever speak to someone (be it a Believer or unbeliever) through tongues? Even though we hear supposed "testimonies" to this type of activity, I grant that it could be possible but the Scriptures do not give us any hint or examples where this has occurred; anyway, that's the purpose of prophecy and the word of knowledge.

Regarding the word ecstatic and tongues, this is what my husband and I were used to: this is what we saw in the old church. I was horrified, for example, when I saw a lady I loved completely lose it, shouting out, acting out in an embarrassing way. Would the H Spirit do this? Really? Decades ago, when I asked a similar question, I was answered something like, “I would rather act a fool for the H Spirit than refuse Him.” That is not an answer.

Would the gentle H Spirit really desire one to look foolish for Him? I don’t find, in the Bible, that acting foolishly glorifies G-d in any way whatsoever. When the Bible says that some thought the disciples to be drunk, only in our imaginations do we translate that to mean they were acting like fools, because that is what we have seen in our time. Some of you (Biblicist, Oskarr, Bob Carabbio, Receiver, Itwin for example) have brought up the idea of order. That does not seem to be compatible with acting foolishly. The “acting foolishly” may be fun for some, but He is not a clown, and He is Holy G-d, NOT to be used to create a circus atmosphere. He deserves our complete respect!

I could be tempted to say that for some, about the only satisfaction/benefit that they may gain from Spiritual worship is when they manage to make themselves look a bit foolish, which is probably another way of them gaining a bit of attention to themselves – so, I won’t say it.

 

[Biblicist]

I am serious! What is the reality-break here FOR SOME? I would like to know, if I become a tongues-speaker, is the H Spirit strong enough the make me nicer and strong enough to use my tongue (and thus my typing fingers) to glorify Him in my other words?

Our ability to be able to pray in the Spirit has nothing to do with any elevated spiritual state and I'm the first to acknowledge that those of us who can pray in the Spirit (tongues) that we are probably no more "nicer or stronger" than anyone else, though I would say that those who have embraced the Spirit in this way will be more likely to be a bit more spiritually cognisant.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

This idea of speaking in tongues has bothered me for years, but this is the first time I have brought it up to my husband to this extent. As we talked, I learned he agrees a lot with some of you and with what I have been thinking. That’s good. That means we can converse about this and think

The following are my opinions:

I am going to be real honest with you here, and this may be offensive to some. It’s just that I am not interested in speaking in tongues for the sake of speaking in tongues. I believe that the H Spirit knows my native language and does not need to use a language I don’t know to get anyone’s attention. However, as on the Acts day of Pentecost, if there was someone who did not know G-d and did not know English, and He chose me to tell them the Good News, I would gladly submit to the H Spirit to speak to them in a language I do not know.

It has all to do with the purpose of tongues. The purpose for me is a supplement to private prayer. Lots of time I want to pray but I just can't think of what to pray for, so tongues for me gives me the ability to fellowship with God in the Spirit any time any where. Paul taught against speaking in tongues in front of others because folks will think they are mad, just in the way you have observed tongues speakers in your environment and came to the same judgment of them. Some early Pentecostals did report being able to speak real languages they never learned in order to get the Gospel to foreigners. But this seems to be rare today. There were misguided folks in the early days who believed because they could speak in tongues they could go over to places like China and be able to speak in tongues and be understood. Of course, they were disappointed and returned home disillusioned. So there is a lot of shonky non Biblical teaching about tongues and that is the problem. Paul's teaching is the most reliable and can be trusted.

Regarding the word ecstatic and tongues, this is what my husband and I were used to: this is what we saw in the old church. I was horrified, for example, when I saw a lady I loved completely lose it, shouting out, acting out in an embarrassing way. Would the H Spirit do this? Really? Decades ago, when I asked a similar question, I was answered something like, “I would rather act a fool for the H Spirit than refuse Him.” That is not an answer.

Such people are not fools for Christ. They are just fools. If you study Galatians 5 where it talks about the fruit of the Spirit, you see how the Holy Spirit would cause a person to conduct him/herself appropriately. Self control is a fruit of the Spirit, but there are many who choose to forget it or just plain ignore it. You will never find in Acts or the Epistles any reference of what the lady you observed exhibiting such uncontrolled and embarrassing behaviour. This is an example of the flesh rather than the Spirit.

Would the gentle H Spirit really desire one to look foolish for Him? I don’t find, in the Bible, that acting foolishly glorifies G-d in any way whatsoever. When the Bible says that some thought the disciples to be drunk, only in our imaginations do we translate that to mean they were acting like fools, because that is what we have seen in our time. Some of you (Biblicist, Oskarr, Bob Carabbio, Receiver, Itwin for example) have brought up the idea of order. That does not seem to be compatible with acting foolishly. The “acting foolishly” may be fun for some, but He is not a clown, and He is Holy G-d, NOT to be used to create a circus atmosphere. He deserves our complete respect!

Paul certainly taught in 1 Corinthians 14 that everything (not some things) are to be done decently and in order. Outlandish, uncontrolled and embarrassing displays are certainly not decent, nor are they in order. It is an insult to the Holy Spirit to make Him out to be a clown. It is like a steam train having all the steam going out the whistle instead of through the driving wheels.

I had mentioned in an earlier post that to my chagrin, in @ 1997, I had spoken in “tongues” once, on that pastors last night in that church — the pastor who had been removed through lies and gossip. I would rather be silent than speak in tongues because I want to make a spectacle of myself or have a good time. I very highly value the times I have spoken in English then wondered where that had come from, knowing I do not have either the wisdom or intelligence to say what I’d said. My husband agreed. He said he had also experienced this.

This is why you should develop the use of tongues in private with God. This is what it is designed for. You can't make a show of yourself before God, because He would come at you saying, "Why are you behaving like that?" The trouble is that many of those who put on a show in church do not spend a lot of time in private fellowship with God. They have never developed that quietness and confidence of one who spends much time with Him. The one who loves private fellowship with God don't feel the need to make themselves seen and heard in church. I have always loved my private times with God because I can relax knowing that I don't have to impress anyone, and I can say what I think without attracting criticism. I tried praying in tongues over someone in a meeting once. I got quite intense. Afterward a friend with a sense of humour told me (I am bald by the way), that I looked like a big red lollipop! That fixed me good. I believe that it was Jesus in him telling me to stop being so ridiculous and to cease making a spectacle of myself like that. So, I am much more restrained when I pray for people in public.

So bottom line: I have a lot to learn, and I intend to learn. Retirement is less than a month away now, and I look forward to using my new-found time studying.

Thank you SO MUCH, everyone.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I'm no expert on this subject by any means, but as for acting "foolish"...remember that when the Holy Spirit fell on the disciples/first Christians, people on the street heard and saw them and thought they were, literally, drunk.

Blessings to you as you work this out between you & God. xo

The key words are that the crowd thought they were drunk. From what I observe in drunk people when I have seen them is that they are very joyful and tend to sing and laugh. There is no comparison between that and some of the out of control and foolish behaviour that is seen in some churches. Also, there is no reference later on in Acts that anyone continued to act that way.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Yeah, I mentioned that in paragraph 5 of my post just above yours.

Some more of the things I don't understand:
If the H Spirit is using a tongue to speak through, why can He not teach some of those who speak in tongues to not falsely accuse with that tongue, to not be mean with that same tongue, etc.?

I am serious! What is the reality-break here FOR SOME? I would like to know, if I become a tongues-speaker, is the H Spirit strong enough the make me nicer and strong enough to use my tongue (and thus my typing fingers) to glorify Him in my other words?

You are correctly reflecting what James says in his epistle! Should blessing and cursing come from the same tongue? If so, then those folks are still in the flesh and are carnally minded. If that is the case, they are heading toward death and they may still need to be saved. There is a difference between being religious and being Christian. A genuine born again Christ uses his tongue for blessing not cursing. The devil is the accuser of the brethren, and anyone accusing others is still thinking like one still under the devil's dominion; in other words, still unsaved, no matter how religious they may seem to be. James says that true religion (or being born again) is characterised by the person having total control over their tongue.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Our ability to be able to pray in the Spirit has nothing to do with any elevated spiritual state and I'm the first to acknowledge that those of us who can pray in the Spirit (tongues) that we are probably no more "nicer or stronger" than anyone else, though I would say that those who have embraced the Spirit in this way will be more likely to be a bit more spiritually cognisant.

Correct! When a person is born again, they receive the anointing. There is only one anointing and that's when it is given. There is no such thing as a great anointing, less anointing, light anointing or heavy anointing. It is just anointing. A person is filled with the Spirit because they are anointed. Every born again Christian has the same anointing. This is the anointing that teaches us all things. Although there are different offices in the church, there is no such thing as being anointed for this or anointed for that. "Elevated spiritual state" is pure nonsense. There is nothing in the Epistles about that. This is a New Age thing.

We are all the same in Christ. There is a nonsense teaching that some believers have "authority" and some have more authority than others. A load of bull. Jesus said that all authority has been given to Him, and there is no record of Him giving authority to anyone else. We minister for Christ, not with our own authority, but in the authority of the Name of Jesus. This is what Peter and John said in Acts 3: They said, why are you looking on us as if by our own power or authority that this man has been healed? This man was healed in the Name of Jesus Christ whom you crucified. (my paraphrase).

We are all the same. The anointing we have received is the right to use the Name of Christ to minister for Him. There are only two types of people - those who have faith in His Name and those who don't. Those who don't have faith in His name still need to be saved. Those who have faith in His Name have exactly the same access to His power, although they may have different offices and ministries in the church, We all partake of the same Spirit. There is no distinction between one partaker and another. We partake of the Spirit according to our faith. We either believe God's Word or we don't. There is no weak or strong faith in the Epistles, that is, for New Covenant Christians. It is either faith or unbelief.

 

[Devorim]

Thank you, everyone. I have some major studying to do. Really appreciate your help.

 

[Biblicist]

Correct! When a person is born again, they receive the anointing. There is only one anointing and that's when it is given. There is no such thing as a great anointing, less anointing, light anointing or heavy anointing. It is just anointing. A person is filled with the Spirit because they are anointed. . .

Even though we have our differences with regard to the provision of healing within the New Covenant (which I have found to be stimulating), we have both recognised the many errant teachings about this supposed “anointing” which goes beyond our reception of the Holy Spirit, which has been the cause of much harm to the Body over recent decades in particular.

As all the members of the Body are to be the New Covenant priesthood and not just a few salaried staff members, it would be wonderful if the various members of the Body of Christ would be aware that they are able to allow the Holy Spirit to function through them particularly in one of the four Spirit operated Offices (ie, powers, healings, prophecy & tongues/articulation) which are four of the eight Offices; as many congregations are not all that accommodative to these Spiritual roles (including many so-called Pentecostal churches), the Holy Spirit has still provided 9 Manifestations of the Spirit where two are healings and powers, so individuals can still minister in these two areas though they may not be as affective if they were incorporated into the life of the local congregation.

. . . . . . .

As a footnote, the 9 Manifestations of the Spirit (1Cor 12:7-11) are not the same as the 8 Congregational Offices (1Cor 12:28-30). As many comentators have the habit (including Pentecostals such as Gordon Fee) to refer to there being "various list of spiritual gifts", this practice has been the cause of a lot of confusion where most people have very little idea not only what a spiritual gift is but with what the difference is between a Manifestation of the Spirit (aka, spiritual gifts) and with the 8 Congregational Offices (1Cor 12:28-30).

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Even though we have our differences with regard to the provision of healing within the New Covenant (which I have found to be stimulating), we have both recognised the many errant teachings about this supposed “anointing” which goes beyond our reception of the Holy Spirit, which has been the cause of much harm to the Body over recent decades in particular.

As all the members of the Body are to be the New Covenant priesthood and not just a few salaried staff members, it would be wonderful if the various members of the Body of Christ would be aware that they are able to allow the Holy Spirit to function through them particularly in one of the four Spirit operated Offices (ie, powers, healings, prophecy & tongues/articulation) which are four of the eight Offices; as many congregations are not all that accommodative to these Spiritual roles (including many so-called Pentecostal churches), the Holy Spirit has still provided 9 Manifestations of the Spirit where two are healings and powers, so individuals can still minister in these two areas though they may not be as affective if they were incorporated into the life of the local congregation.

. . . . . . .

As a footnote, the 9 Manifestations of the Spirit (1Cor 12:7-11) are not the same as the 8 Congregational Offices (1Cor 12:28-30). As many comentators have the habit (including Pentecostals such as Gordon Fee) to refer to there being "various list of spiritual gifts", this practice has been the cause of a lot of confusion where most people have very little idea not only what a spiritual gift is but with what the difference is between a Manifestation of the Spirit (aka, spiritual gifts) and with the 8 Congregational Offices (1Cor 12:28-30).

There is healing outside the church as part of the preaching of the gospel. That's where it was originally before it was brought into the religious system and formalised. At that point the real power was lost and all that remained was the doctrine. The statement "they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover" is open to every believer and it is directed to the healing of the unconverted outside the church.

 

[Receiver]

Correct! When a person is born again, they receive the anointing....

Jesus details the born again experience saying:
"The wind bloweth where it listeth, and you hear the sound thereof, but cannot tell whence it comes, and whither it goes: so is every one that is born of the Spirit. "

He continues ...

"If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" (v12)

Earthly things cas be senses with our earthly senses, so he's not talking about spiritual "hearing". This is confirmed by the apostles in Acts where after hearing the speaking in tongues it was stated that the speakers had *just receivd* the Holy Spirit.

Just as a baby cries when it is born, so people speak in tongues (cry "Abba Father"), when they are born again (Galatians 4:6).

 

[Dave-W]

Thanks, but I think you misunderstood my question, there are three records of believers supernaturally speaking in a human language -

Actually Acts 2 is the ONLY incident of that.

 

[Receiver]

Actually Acts 2 is the ONLY incident of that.

No, Peter identified what happened in Acts 10:44-46 as equivalent to Acts 2
"the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning" (11:15)

then again in Acts 19 it is known precisly when people receive God's (invisible) Spirit by "speaking in tongues".

In 1 Corinthians 14:11 Paul describes it as "as a barbarian", barbarians speak human language.

If you understand what speaking in tongues is primarily for you will begin to see what nonsense it is to teach that only som Christians have the ability ...

Zechariah 12:10 says
"I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications"

It is "supplications", prayer, "praying in the Spirit" whereby the natural mind is not relied upon, it ministers the love, joy and peace "that passes understanding". (See also 1 Corinthians 14:2, 4)

 

[Dave-W]

But the acts 10 incident with cornelius was different. they all spoke the same language - there were no other native tongues. Did they speak in tonges? Yes. Were they known languages? The bible does not say they were, so that is an extrabiblical assumption.

In Acts 19.6 a distinction is made between tongues and prophecying. The latter is always in a known language. So the indication would be the former is not.

It still stands the only place in scripture where it is recorded they spoke in known languages as "tongues" is Acts 2.

Indeed you need to take into accout Pauls words here:

1Cor 14.2 For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to human beings but to God, for no one listens; he utters mysteries in spirit.

 

[Receiver]

But the acts 10 incident with cornelius was different. they all spoke the same language

says who?

- there were no other native tongues. Did they speak in tonges? Yes. Were they known languages? The bible does not say they were, so that is an extrabiblical assumption.

Point one it says tongues not tongue
Point two, to require known languages is extrabiblical.
Just because they were identified in Acts 2 doesn't mean they always have to be, any more than the fact that Jesus was baptised in the river Jordan means that we all have to be.

The only scriptural requirement is that they are unknown to the speaker, beyond his/her mind, other people are not required to identify what language is being spoken for it to be the real thing.

Neither is there a requirement to receive the Spirit in the presence of someone else, you receive through faith and desire, it's between you and God and you will know when yopu do the same way all the disciples (jew and gentile) did, the new tongue signifies the new heart, there is one unchanging new covenant and just like other covenants God gives a specific sign ... no sign means you have not yet entered in.

 

[Dave-W]

But the acts 10 incident with cornelius was different. they all spoke the same language

says who?

Says Luke when he wrote the book. Peter preached to everyone, and there is no mention of any need for a translator. They seemed to understand him just fine.

 

[Receiver]

Says Luke when he wrote the book. Peter preached to everyone, and there is no mention of any need for a translator. They seemed to understand him just fine.

Peter preaching wasn't speaking in tongues. Peter was interrupted by them speaking in tongues! That's how he knew they had just received the same as him.

"While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word ... For they heard them speak with tongues"

 

[camphigrades]

Yeah, I mentioned that in paragraph 5 of my post just above yours.

You sure did, didn't you? I promise I read all you wrote the first time, and I even went back and re-read it just now, and it took me twice to see that sentence. I don't know how I missed it, but I did! :o You make a good point, and Oscarr validates it:

The key words are that the crowd thought they were drunk. From what I observe in drunk people when I have seen them is that they are very joyful and tend to sing and laugh. There is no comparison between that and some of the out of control and foolish behaviour that is seen in some churches. Also, there is no reference later on in Acts that anyone continued to act that way.

Very interesting take on it. I'm learning. As I said before, I have no knowledge or expertise on this subject at all...only what I've thought on myself...and I'm learning much from you here. Like Devorim said, it's the best "learning" thread I've ever seen on this subject, and it's much appreciated...and needed.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I want to make a point about the gift of tongues.

We can talk about it until the cows come home, but the truth is that we do what we believe. We can discuss tongues at length and go through all the whys and wherefores, but a person who truly believes in the gift of tongues and the importance of using it is the person who actually does it.

If a person is not making the effort to step out in faith and to start using the gift of tongues, then it merely proves that they don't really believe in it. If they did, they would be doing all they could to exercise their faith and try to start using the gift.

When I saw a person arguing against the simple, private use of tongues before God, and bringing in all sorts of non-Biblical complications, and talking about it as an ecstatic emotional thing accompanied by weird, out of control behaviour, then I just know that the person doesn't believe in the gift of tongues at all and he might as well get a pair of scissors and cut 1 Corinthians 14 out of his Bible, because he is merely showing that he doesn't believe what Paul is saying there, or he is trying to twist what Paul is saying into something that Paul is not saying. Until he is prepared to ask sincere questions on how to enter into it so he can know how to exercise his faith, his comments should be ignored so they don't confuse genuine seekers for the gift of tongues.

 

[Devorim]

I want to make a point about the gift of tongues.

We can talk about it until the cows come home, but the truth is that we do what we believe. We can discuss tongues at length and go through all the whys and wherefores, but a person who truly believes in the gift of tongues and the importance of using it is the person who actually does it.

If a person is not making the effort to step out in faith and to start using the gift of tongues, then it merely proves that they don't really believe in it. If they did, they would be doing all they could to exercise their faith and try to start using the gift.

When I saw a person arguing against the simple, private use of tongues before God, and bringing in all sorts of non-Biblical complications, and talking about it as an ecstatic emotional thing accompanied by weird, out of control behaviour, then I just know that the person doesn't believe in the gift of tongues at all and he might as well get a pair of scissors and cut 1 Corinthians 14 out of his Bible, because he is merely showing that he doesn't believe what Paul is saying there, or he is trying to twist what Paul is saying into something that Paul is not saying. Until he is prepared to ask sincere questions on how to enter into it so he can know how to exercise his faith, his comments should be ignored so they don't confuse genuine seekers for the gift of tongues.

Do you know -- one time when I was widowed, after some really bad experiences with men in my old church, I stood angrily over my Bible with scissors in hand, fully prepared to cut out all the Scriptures about marriage? The only thing that stopped me was turning the pages and seeing the Scriptures on the other side of the first one I was about to cut out.

I learned my lesson that day, and I am in no way going to cut out Scriptures about speaking in tongues, as you would suppose. I enjoyed what you wrote -- that "tongues"-in-cheek thang!

No, I am interested in learning what the Bible says and intends when it brings up tongues. Since I was taught about tongues so poorly, since I am only now trying to learn the truth about tongues, I intend to learn as much as i can through what I read here and, especially, through the Bible. I can read a bit of Koine Greek, so I expect that to help. I can read a little more Hebrew, so I will reread Scriptures in Isaiah and any other places in the older Scriptures as well about this issue.

I was fooled by the old church; I do not intend to be fooled again. I want Truth, and I want to know the Truth.