The Need to Speak in Tongues at Home

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Even though there have always been suggestions that some tongues that can be spoken within the congregational setting in a known human language, I would be inclined to take such statement as with a grain of salt. We know from Scripture that tongues are always given in unintelligible utterances which only the Godhead can understand, so any break from this would indeed be unusual. Of course, I would deem at least 99.99% of such claims to be either the result of hearsay or a misunderstanding of what people had heard.

For instance, I know that a particular individual within a large prayer meeting that I used to attend would able to occasionally pray in Spanish when everyone was speaking words of praise to the Father in tongues, where I have little doubt that there are stories out there where some will 'rightfully' claim that they once heard someone speaking in tongues in Spanish. When we were speaking about this he told me that as he was unable to break through in tongues and to save any embarrassment he would praise God in Spanish so that he could give the impression that he was able to pray in the Spirit!!

If anyone were to hear an atheist visitor cursing God in their own language which was different to that of the majority of the congregation then they should advise some of the Deacons that this is happening and the person can be told to be quiet and/or leave the meeting. If anyone is heard speaking in a human language during times of praise and worship then this will always be generated by the person who is speaking without any need for any demonic assistance.

The reality is that this whole point is based on a lie made up by a disgruntled person over 50 years ago who opposed tongues, and the story has been repeated ad nauseum ever since. The problem is that no one can cite any incidents with factual details involving dates, times, location, and names of people involved.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

.
Hey, you forgot the scoundrel Todd Bentley, he should have been at the top of your list!

Do we have the whole story about Bentley - how many hundreds of people who accepted Christ through his ministry? Did he fall from grace? Did he repent and was restored later? What did his friends in the ministry say about him? I would hesitate calling him a scoundrel before knowing the full facts. I am not saying that he is perfect, but is anyone?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Don't tell that to my friend Oscar. He claims to have spoken fluently in an African dialect he never learned.

I never said that. I said that my friend spoke in an African dialect which was understood by a visiting African who told my friend that he was praising and glorifying God.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

No, Bentley is there. You missed him among the dozens of other disgraced Pentecostal and charismatic leaders. Easy thing to do seeing as there are so many.

You'd better add King David to your list of disgraced people. He was an adulterer and a murderer. Therefore he must have been false and not worthy of credit in the same way as you are saying about the others.

 

[swordsman1]

Your relating of the "sins" of these prominent ministries is not biblical. A person who is in the fruit of the Spirit does not pass on gossip and negative reports of other people, even if it is true. Gossiping is a work of the flesh. You take pride in saying things are or are not biblical. I think you should take the log out of your own eye, otherwise readers of the forum might think that you are a hypocrite.

What log? You have got that verse about logs and specks the wrong way round. It means we are not to criticize others for their minor indiscretions when we have far greater sins in our own lives. If we have not raped, committed adultery, stolen church funds, addicted to drugs or booze, etc then we are entitled to judge others who have, especially if they are church leaders.

Jesus said "Watch out for false prophets. . . . By their fruit you will recognize them". Therefore it is in the interest of the body of Christ to expose the bad fruit of charlatans. If they repent of their sins then fine, but they should not be allowed to step straight back into a leadership roles (many of the can't as they are in jail):

1 Tim 3:1-4 "Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect."​

It is certainly wrong to make judgements on people based on unproven allegations - John 7:24 "Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.” But judging others correctly, if they have been found guilty, is quite biblical.

 

[swordsman1]

I never said that. I said that my friend spoke in an African dialect which was understood by a visiting African who told my friend that he was praising and glorifying God.

Sorry, my mistake. I should have said:

"Don't tell that to my friend Oscar. He claims to have spoken fluently in the Maori language which he never learned."

Whether Maori or African, for once I would agree with Biblicist when he says: "Of course, I would deem at least 99.99% of such claims to be either the result of hearsay or a misunderstanding of what people had heard."

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

What log? You have got that verse about logs and specks the wrong way round. It means we are not to criticize others for their minor indiscretions when we have far greater sins in our own lives. If we have not raped, committed adultery, stolen church funds, addicted to drugs or booze, etc then we are entitled to judge others who have, especially if they are church leaders.

Jesus said "Watch out for false prophets. . . . By their fruit you will recognize them". Therefore it is in the interest of the body of Christ to expose the bad fruit of charlatans. If they repent of their sins then fine, but they should not be allowed to step straight back into a leadership roles (many of the can't as they are in jail):

1 Tim 3:1-4 "Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect."​

It is certainly wrong to make judgements on people based on unproven allegations - John 7:24 "Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.” But judging others correctly, if they have been found guilty, is quite biblical.

By putting those statements about the ministries on a public forum you run the risk of litigation being brought against you. You can be challenged in court to bring proof of your allegations and your right to make them. There are laws protecting even convicted criminals from slander, even if you believe the allegations are true. Newspaper editors have to do deep and comprehensive research to ensure their facts are right. Some have had to face expensive law suits because they made unsupported statements. You have to prove beyond doubt that your motive for publishing these statements is absolutely sound and is supported by reliable evidence and not just hearsay.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I only believe I spoke the Maori language on that one only occasion because a Maori lady told me I did. I never have claimed that I speak fluent Maori when I speak in tongues. I have learned some Maori since and I can recognise it when it is spoken so I know I have never spoken that language in tongues since that day. So, if I spoke Maori now, it wouldn't be tongues now because I would be speaking a language I have now learned.

 

[swordsman1]

By putting those statements about the ministries on a public forum you run the risk of litigation being brought against you. You can be challenged in court to bring proof of your allegations and your right to make them. There are laws protecting even convicted criminals from slander, even if you believe the allegations are true. Newspaper editors have to do deep and comprehensive research to ensure their facts are right. Some have had to face expensive law suits because they made unsupported statements. You have to prove beyond doubt that your motive for publishing these statements is absolutely sound and is supported by reliable evidence and not just hearsay.

You can only be sued for libel if you knowingly make a false accusation and make it out to be true. You cannot be sued if it is true. In the cases I mentioned they have either admitted their sin or have been convicted by a court of law (with many of them behind bars).

 

[swordsman1]

I only believe I spoke the Maori language on that one only occasion because a Maori lady told me I did. I never have claimed that I speak fluent Maori when I speak in tongues. I have learned some Maori since and I can recognise it when it is spoken so I know I have never spoken that language in tongues since that day. So, if I spoke Maori now, it wouldn't be tongues now because I would be speaking a language I have now learned.

That's what I said. You claim to have spoken Maori fluently (in the past).

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

You can only be sued for libel if you knowingly make a false accusation and make it out to be true. You cannot be sued if it is true. In the cases I mentioned they have either admitted their sin or have been convicted by a court of law (with many of them behind bars).

Libel can be something which is true but has been made public with the wrong motives. However, to drag a person's failures through the public arena is punishing them multiple times and violates Christ's law of love. Even while we were yet sinners, Christ loved us and gave Himself for us. By this, you are obligated to have the same love for those ones you are publicising as you would for your closest brothers and sisters in Christ in your own church. If the Lord turned the spotlight on to yours and my shortcomings and failures, then He might see things in us that are just as bad in His eyes. But He loves us and has clothed us in His righteousness. You might find this hard to take, but those whom you are dragging through the public arena are also clothed with the righteousness of Christ because they have embraced Christ as Saviour. I don't think you are viewing these people as Christ views them. Jesus said that the measure of judgment you exert on others, the same measure will be exerted on you. This may mean that the skeletons in your closet could be dragged out and made public for all to see. But if you decide to love these ones as Christ loves them, then Christ will also love you in the same way.

How much time have you spent praying for the people on your judgment list? That would have more moral value to God than all the judgment you are heaping on them. I know that because you are judging these ones, you are not praying for them, so perhaps when you stand before God in the Judgment, He may ask you, "Why did you never pray for these ones? If you did, their restoration to effective ministry for Me might be accomplished sooner; and perhaps they may never have failed in the first place. So why did you not obey Me, when I instructed you to pray for your brethren in ministry?" What will you say or do then?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

That's what I said. You claim to have spoken Maori fluently (in the past).

I must have done for a Maori-speaking lady to have understood what I was saying when I didn't. Oh. And it wasn't blasphemy either, so that argument goes down like a lead zeppelin.

 

[swordsman1]

Libel can be something which is true but has been made public with the wrong motives. However, to drag a person's failures through the public arena is punishing them multiple times and violates Christ's law of love. Even while we were yet sinners, Christ loved us and gave Himself for us. By this, you are obligated to have the same love for those ones you are publicising as you would for your closest brothers and sisters in Christ in your own church. If the Lord turned the spotlight on to yours and my shortcomings and failures, then He might see things in us that are just as bad in His eyes. But He loves us and has clothed us in His righteousness. You might find this hard to take, but those whom you are dragging through the public arena are also clothed with the righteousness of Christ because they have embraced Christ as Saviour. I don't think you are viewing these people as Christ views them. Jesus said that the measure of judgment you exert on others, the same measure will be exerted on you. This may mean that the skeletons in your closet could be dragged out and made public for all to see. But if you decide to love these ones as Christ loves them, then Christ will also love you in the same way.

How much time have you spent praying for the people on your judgment list? That would have more moral value to God than all the judgment you are heaping on them. I know that because you are judging these ones, you are not praying for them, so perhaps when you stand before God in the Judgment, He may ask you, "Why did you never pray for these ones? If you did, their restoration to effective ministry for Me might be accomplished sooner; and perhaps they may never have failed in the first place. So why did you not obey Me, when I instructed you to pray for your brethren in ministry?" What will you say or do then?

The reason I list them is not to heap further punishment on those individuals, but to expose the carnality involved in the charismatic/pentecostal movement. For a movement that likes to call itself "Spirit filled", the activities of many of it's most prominent preachers demonstrate anything but Spirit filled lives. They do not walk according to the Spirit, but according to the flesh. If the Holy Spirit was at the heart of this movement it would be characterized by lives exhibiting the fruit of the Spirit. Instead it is characterized by wickedness, sexual sin, lavish lifestyles funded by fleecing their congregations, and all sorts of ungodly behavior. "By their fruit you will know them".

 

[Biblicist]

Have you forgotten about Acts 2, the only description of the gift of tongues in scripture? They were intelligible to the thousands of foreigners gathered there. In Corinth they were unrecognized only because nobody in the small Greek congregations knew the foreign language spoken.

Considering that you have been told on numerous occasions that Luke has recorded very little in Acts 2 regarding tongues then I am surprised that you still try and raise this very old and tired misdirection. Peter's evangelistic message that he delivered to the crowd does not even directly address the issue of tongues, which both Continuist and cessationist commentators have acknowledged for many decades, which is in stark contrast to Paul's comprehensive treatment of tongues and how we can pray in the Spirit within 1Cor 12, 13 & 14 where I am not sure if anything of substance regarding tongues could be added to his material.

As for your Greek congregations within Corinth, considering that Corinth was a Latin city, where it has been referred to as being "more Roman than Rome" then we would expect the primary congregations to be speaking in Latin, though there would undoubtedly be numerous Greek speaking congregations in the city and suburbs of Corinth particularly in the region north of the Peloponnese and in the lower parts of the Isthmus, for that matter, there were probably numerous other congregations that spoke in languages such as Hebrew, Farsi and Aramaic.

 

[Biblicist]

Do we have the whole story about Bentley - how many hundreds of people who accepted Christ through his ministry? Did he fall from grace? Did he repent and was restored later? What did his friends in the ministry say about him? I would hesitate calling him a scoundrel before knowing the full facts. I am not saying that he is perfect, but is anyone?

Considering the amount of material that has been written about the Bentley saga by not only Bentley himself but by his critics and even his many prominent supporters, then I think that we probably know about as much about him and the wickedness that he committed that could ever be known.

Even though a few may have certainly come to the Lord during his 'ministry', due to his ongoing wickedness and lack of repentance, this particular scoundrel has sadly caused more harm to the Body of Christ than maybe anyone else has been able to do for many decades. Even though we need to be careful as to what we say about anyone, when we consider the amount of negative press that his antics have created both within the Christian and secular media then we are compelled to speak up and address what he has done.

 

[tturt]

Since he's asks to be forgiven, so we continue in our criticism?

 

[Biblicist]

Since he's asks to be forgiven, so we continue in our criticism?

The problem with this approach is that I have heard of bank robbers who apologise after stealing from each bank that they rob, where they continue to steal and then apologise. As for Bentley I seriously doubt if he has an honest bone in his body. If he had any sense of shame he would acknowledge his many sins and leave the ministry and get a job away from Christian service - then we could all move on.

 

[tturt]

Not saying don't judge.

"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." Matt 7:1-2

Got enough going on without adding to it myself.

 

[Biblicist]

The reality is that this whole point is based on a lie made up by a disgruntled person over 50 years ago who opposed tongues, and the story has been repeated ad nauseum ever since. The problem is that no one can cite any incidents with factual details involving dates, times, location, and names of people involved.

If I am reading your post correctly, the account that I provided with the Spanish speaking Believer actually happend within a Pentecostal prayer meeting that he and I were attending during the mid 90's.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Considering the amount of material that has been written about the Bentley saga by not only Bentley himself but by his critics and even his many prominent supporters, then I think that we probably know about as much about him and the wickedness that he committed that could ever be known.

Even though a few may have certainly come to the Lord during his 'ministry', due to his ongoing wickedness and lack of repentance, this particular scoundrel has sadly caused more harm to the Body of Christ than maybe anyone else has been able to do for many decades. Even though we need to be careful as to what we say about anyone, when we consider the amount of negative press that his antics have created both within the Christian and secular media then we are compelled to speak up and address what he has done.

Perhaps it will be helpful for me to do some research on the man so I have all the facts. I was just remarking on the principle of the need to have discretion and that Paul told the Philippians to think on things that are of good report, praise, etc. Also, I can't help thinking about what a scoundrel king David was when he had it away with another man's wife after having lustful thoughts when he saw her bathing on the rooftop, and then deliberately had her husband murdered so he could have the woman for himself. Also, he was responsible for the death of the resulting baby afterward because of his sin with Bathsheba. But at least he repented...