Is Speaking In Tongues Biblical Today?

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Yes, the chapter is on love which is the highest fruit of the Holy Spirit.

Not so my dear sister. This again displays how there can be so much difference in our thinking on tongues and gifts.

Real history and Bible Scriptures tell us that the Corinthian church was divided over a variety of issues. One such issue, addressed in chapters 12-14, was the use or actually the miss-use of "tongues. Paul reminds the Christians in Corinth that the purpose of tongues was to build up the body of Christ.

In chapter 14, he emphasizes that prophecy is more important in public worship than tongues, because it builds up the church better than speaking in tongues. Between these two chapters is chapter 13, revealing love as the key virtue that moves us to use all our gifts to build up Christ’s church and he does that with "comparison" explanation.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You cannot be saved without receiving the Holy Spirit, right? What is the purpose Jesus gives us the Holy Spirit? To speak in tongues? No! To kill the flesh. To have power not to sin. Without holiness, no one will see God.

The gifts are on top of that main reason. What is the reason for the "best" gifts, such as the "hearing" gifts. We hear a word of wisdom, we hear a word of knowledge, we hear prophecy, we hear the interpretation of tongues. It is for fellowship with God, and the building of faith. Prayer is no longer a one way conversation, like a telegram. It is a telephone. But one thing about prayer. What if the prayer is not God's will? What then? Does He even hear us? I've thought about this, and dwelt on 1 John 5:14-15

14 Now this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us, whatever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we have asked of Him."

In other words, God is faithful to positively answer our prayers that are according to His will. The false idea that God sometimes says, "No" is false. The burden is on us to pray according to His will. It is the Spirit of God who knows the will of God. This is the main reason for speaking in tongues. To pray perfect prayer. Therefore, I will pray with the Spirit, and I will pray in my understanding.

Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. 27 Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

So who does the uttering? WE DO! They are ecstatic utterances.

17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God; 18 praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to this end with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints

Now the debate should be is there two kinds of tongues or just one. I have learned there are two. Praying TO God perfect prayer and praise - the one He gives to all who believe and is baptized - Mark 16; and receiving messages FROM God, that require supernatural interpretation. This is the gift of diverse kinds of tongues of 1 Corinthians 12. And as the end of the chapter says about apostles, prophets, etc. this office of receiving messages in tongues from God as well as those who are given the gift of interpretation of tongues is not given to all, but a few.

I really do hate to have to disagree with you again but you are just not Biblically correct.

God absolutely says NO to some prayers. Prayer is always answered in one of 3 ways..........
1) YES.
2) NO.
3) LATER.

B.M. Palmer in Theology of Prayer, tells of a woman who had spent the summer away from her children, and was quite anxious to get back to them. When she learned that all the rooms on a certain steamer were taken, she wept bitterly. Because she couldn't get a passage on any other ship, she was detained two weeks in NYC. But the sorrow of being delayed was turned into thanksgiving when, within a few days, she learned that the vessel that denied her passage was buried at the bottom of the Atlantic. She didn't see the "no" as a wonderful answer to prayer until the whole story unfolded.

If God always answered our prayers YES the way we want Him too, my grandson would still be alive.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
And why do you think this is so prolific in Charismatic circles? It is because of the false doctrine that has traditionally been taught, namely: "tongues is the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit," and further confirmed by the false idea that "every person who is baptized in the Spirit speaks in tongues". Such false ideas are not supported by the scripture and is one of the main reasons why we are here debating the subject.

You commonly judge others based on your pet doctrines, but whenever someone judges you based on doctrine, you get upset, which is hypocritical. It appears to me that you just want to argue to try to win an argument or get the last word in, rather than receive the truth, because every time we say something that makes Biblical and hermeneutical sense, you avoid it like the plague. You either go to judgment, or nitpick at what you think is wrong, or try an evasion by diverting attention to something else. The only thing I have seen you concede to is some statement that could be construed as agreeing with your Charismatic doctrine.

I'm here to say "stop the nonsense!" I have a clear challenge and question up that no one seems to want to address so far:
Is Speaking In Tongues Biblical Today?
Is Speaking In Tongues Biblical Today?
TD:)

We have a "Winner"!
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Nothing he wrote was not true. It still would have been an "exaggeration" if he had said, it I could speak the tongues of every nation, or tongues of man and animals. Why say angels, if they didn't have a distinct language that God understands. What you fail to understand is that the tongues were not meant to be understood by anyone present. The understanding only came through the supernatural gift of interpretation of tongues. It wasn't someone who naturally understood every language and interpreted the tongues naturally. So tongues are not meant to be understood by you or anybody else, or even a linguistic. God makes foolish the wisdom of men. If you are not willing to humble yourself, you will never begin to understand why God made this gift to be mocked and spoken against.

My dear sister, it would be a blessing if you would give us some Scriptures to validate your Pentecostal agenda.

You just said.............
"So tongues are not meant to be understood by you or anybody else, or even a linguistic."

Do you not realize that Paul said exactly the opposite??????

In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul is elevating teaching and preaching over tongue speaking. In fact, Paul says that tongues are not a sign for believers, but for unbelievers (verse 22), while prophesy (preaching) is not for unbelievers, but for believers.

So if people want to edify the Church, it is done through prophesy and teaching, and not through tongue speaking, according to scripture.

This is one thing you must judge your Church by; if people start speaking in tongues, and there’s no interpreter to tell you what they’re saying.

Why?
Is that for show? Is that just a display to show that they are so spiritual and righteous? And is that a practice for a humble servant of God
 
Upvote 0

rrobsr

Active Member
Jan 9, 2017
172
88
73
Julian, CA
Visit site
✟26,828.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well that's good to hear that you know of churches that do interpret. I sure am glad to be wrong about that. I've noticed that people are real shady about believing in things unseen or "not in scripture" as if, if it's not in scripture then it's not true and can't exist, and that couldn't be further from the truth. What about revelation from the Spirit?! That's spoken of in scripture but if someone were to say, the Holy Spirit told me...da da da, then it wont be believed. I've been trying to learn a new language lately, one I call Christian diplomat, lol.

If the Spirit ever reveals something to me that isn't able to be found in scripture and I want to share it...I'll just say the Lord impressed upon me this or that rather than say He gave me revelation. I tried to share on one board when God spoke to me audibly to pray for a Brother who needed help and got called a false prophet, a satanist, liar and all sorts of stuff. God don't need your help to heal someone...He doesn't. But he honored me by letting me participate in helping someone. Something about our free will I think, sometimes heaven wont move on something unless prayed for or released to by us. I haven't got it quite all figured out yet but I suspect that our prayers mean more and help more than people realize they do.

The Bible is chock full of religious leaders calling true men of God false prophets (and worse), including Jesus himself. Consider it a badge of honour.

The mere fact that I've seen interpretation of tongues in the church is not what makes it true. It's in the scriptures (1 Cor 12:10) and that's what makes it true.

Of course Christians can get revelation from God. There are 3 different revelation manifestations listed in 1 Cor 12:8-10. Word of Knowledge is learning something that is not possible to learn via your 5 senses. God telling you your friend needs help certainly qualifies. Word of Wisdom is what to do with that knowledge, in your case, pray for the guy. What could possibly be wrong with that? Nonetheless, some will find fault. Ignore them. The third revelation manifestation is Discerning of Spirits. Wouldn't you think that those manifestations just might be useful in a Christian's walk? I'd sure say so.

All revelation you get from God will always line up with the scriptures. It will never contradict them.

Speaking in tongues is for one's private prayer life. Among other things it edifies or builds up the individual believer (1 Cor 14:4). However, when in a public gathering (church or other fellowship meeting) if one speaks in tongues that same person must interpret so the whole assembly receives edification (1 Cor 14:4). The manifestation of prophecy is equal to tongues with interpretation and it also edifies the whole assembly. Read 1 Cor 14:4-5. The reason verse 5 says prophecy is "greater" than tongues with interpretation is because it indicates a more mature or developed group of Christians. Tongues is a "sign" to them that don't have much believing (1 Cor 14:22), so it is most useful in a group of new believers. A group of more mature believers do not need that sign, so they can go straight to prophecy. Both tongues with interpretation and prophecy are messages to or from God to edify. Prophecy is not necessarily about the future.

There is one gift, holy spirit. We can't see spirit with the five senses so God made the nine manifestations available so the believer can operate the power of God in the senses realm. It is possible for each believer to operate all nine manifestations. One need only to be taught and believe. Indeed the nine manifestations are a big part of the whole armour of God (Eph 6:11-13).

Why Christians deny the ability to get word of knowledge, word of wisdom, discerning of spirits, faith, healing, miracles, and prophecy is beyond me. I'm sure I'll be called on the carpet for even suggesting a born again believer can operate all nine manifestations, but, oh well. The Bible clearly says we will do the works that Christ did and then some (John 14:12). Did he not do all the things listed in 1 Cor 14:8-10 with the exception of tongues and interpretation of tongues (they weren't available until Pentecost)? According to John 14:12 the only reason someone would NOT operate the manifestations is because they don't believe everything Jesus said. I'll probably get flamed really good for saying that, but I stand by the plain language of John 14:12 (He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also) regardless of what I'm called. God calls me his dear child and that's good enough for me.

I'll be praying for your continued growth in the knowledge of God and his word. He wants you to know (Eph 3:16-19, 2 Pet 1:3, et. al.).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The Bible is chock full of religious leaders calling true men of God false prophets (and worse), including Jesus himself. Consider it a badge of honour.

The mere fact that I've seen interpretation of tongues in the church is not what makes it true. It's in the scriptures (1 Cor 12:10) and that's what makes it true.

Of course Christians can get revelation from God. There are 3 different revelation manifestations listed in 1 Cor 12:8-10. Word of Knowledge is learning something that is not possible to learn via your 5 senses. God telling you your friend needs help certainly qualifies. Word of Wisdom is what to do with that knowledge, in your case, pray for the guy. What could possibly be wrong with that? Nonetheless, some will find fault. Ignore them. The third revelation manifestation is Discerning of Spirits. Wouldn't you think that those manifestations just might be useful in a Christian's walk? I'd sure say so.

All revelation you get from God will always line up with the scriptures. It will never contradict them.

Speaking in tongues is for one's private prayer life. Among other things it edifies or builds up the individual believer (1 Cor 14:4). However, when in a public gathering (church or other fellowship meeting) if one speaks in tongues that same person must interpret so the whole assembly receives edification (1 Cor 14:4). The manifestation of prophecy is equal to tongues with interpretation and it also edifies the whole assembly. Read 1 Cor 14:4-5. The reason verse 5 says prophecy is "greater" than tongues with interpretation is because it indicates a more mature or developed group of Christians. Tongues is a "sign" to them that don't have much believing (1 Cor 14:22), so it is most useful in a group of new believers. A group of more mature believers do not need that sign, so they can go straight to prophecy. Both tongues with interpretation and prophecy are messages to or from God to edify. Prophecy is not necessarily about the future.

There is one gift, holy spirit. We can't see spirit with the five senses so God made the nine manifestations available so the believer can operate the power of God in the senses realm. It is possible for each believer to operate all nine manifestations. One need only to be taught and believe. Indeed the nine manifestations are a big part of the whole armour of God (Eph 6:11-13).

Why Christians deny the ability to get word of knowledge, word of wisdom, discerning of spirits, faith, healing, miracles, and prophecy is beyond me. I'm sure I'll be called on the carpet for even suggesting a born again believer can operate all nine manifestations, but, oh well. The Bible clearly says we will do the works that Christ did and then some (John 14:12). Did he not do all the things listed in 1 Cor 14:8-10 with the exception of tongues and interpretation of tongues (they weren't available until Pentecost)? According to John 14:12 the only reason someone would NOT operate the manifestations is because they don't believe everything Jesus said. I'll probably get flamed really good for saying that, but I stand by the plain language of John 14:12 (He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also) regardless of what I'm called. God calls me his dear child and that's good enough for me.

I'll be praying for your continued growth in the knowledge of God and his word. He wants you to know (Eph 3:16-19, 2 Pet 1:3, et. al.).

You said................
"Why Christians deny the ability to get word of knowledge, word of wisdom, discerning of spirits, faith, healing, miracles, and prophecy is beyond me."

That is easy.

1 Corinthians 13:8 says so....................
"Love never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish."

The gift of prophecy in the apostolic church was not forthtelling the truth of the written Word, but declaring truth which had been specially and directly revealed by the Holy Spirit to the "prophet" in the absence of the written New Testament revelation. It was, like the gift of "knowledge," the sovereign enduement of special direct revelation of truths now contained in the canonical New Testament Scriptures.

Both "prophecy" and "knowledge," therefore, were of necessity "tie-overs" to supply the church's practical needs until the New Testament Scriptures became available. In exactly the same way, although not so directly and indispensably useful as "prophecy" and "knowledge," were tongues, unless interpretation of the tongue's message was present.

"For we know in part, and we prophesy in part." 1 Corinthians 13:9.

"In part [Greek-piecemeal, partially, bit by bit] we know and in part [same word] we prophecy." The apostolic gift of knowledge by direct inspiration because it received truth only partially and piecemeal- here in this church assembly a little, there in that church assembly a little, the gift was incomplete and gave only a part of God's truth. The same was true of declaring the truth of the partial and piecemeal revelation. Therefore the gift was lacking and temporary until the complete revelation was given which is the complete New Testament.

"But when that which is perfect is come and reguardless of what anyone may say, the word in Greek-
'to teleion', means the completed and final THING, which can only mean 'the New Testament Scriptures'. Then that which is in part [partial or piecemeal revelation through the gift of directly inspired prophecy and knowledge before the New Testament was given] shall be done away with [shall be superseded, rendered unnecessary and meaningless, because no longer needed and so shall be canceled and done away with]."

This is the same Greek word used of "prophecies" and "knowledge" in verses 8 and 11, "I put away childish things."

The Apostle Paul employs two graphic illustrations to make his point. The first is that of a person growing up from up from childhood into adulthood. The second is that of looking into a mirror to see oneself. Concerning the first illustration the apostle says: "When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, I used to think as a child, I used to reason as a child. But when I became an adult I put away childish things."

He is contrasting "that which is perfect" [the completed, final, and fully authoritative Scriptures of the New Testament], which he likens to an adult male, with "that which is in part" [the piecemeal incomplete revelation directly from the Holy Spirit through the exercise of prophecy, tongues, and knowledge], which he likens to a child.

Having to depend upon prophecy, tongues, and knowledge for instruction and edification until the completed New Testament became available was similar to childhood in the experience of the church. Speaking in tongues, for instance, had a purpose in the apostolic church like the chatter of the child has a similar purpose in childhood and like the child's thinking and reasoning processes have a similar purpose in his growing up into manhood. The same was true of knowledge and prophecy. But now that the church has grown up into adulthood, so to speak, with a complete revelation given it, it has 'put away childhood things'; that is, it has set aside as superseded [same word as in verse 8] tongues, prophecies and knowledge, as having no needful place in its adult life, and belonging only to its childhood requirements.
 
Upvote 0

Biblicist

Full Gospel believer
Mar 27, 2011
7,023
992
Melbourne, Australia
✟43,594.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
The real problem and danger of the cessassionist is that he must necessarily deny any and all working of the Holy Spirit today. The cessassionist must say in every case, "The Holy Spirit did not do that. That is not the work of the Holy Spirit."

And at some point, he has run into Mark 3:29.
Yes, Mark 3:29 is certainly a frightening passage which is one of the reasons that since the 1970's we have seen the rise of the new and sizable category of Christian who is neither Continuist or cessationist who are known as being "Open-but-cautious". These are the ones who have realised that the humanist foundations of the cessationist worldview stand in opposition to the Word of God but for whatever reason, they may be theologically Continuist ("Open-but cautious") but choose to remain as practical cessationists. [Open-but-cautious] Mmm...sounds like a few AoG congregations that I have been too!

For those who have kept an eye on the Church since the 70's we would be well aware that the vast majority of Evangelicals would fall somewhere within the "Open-but-cautious" category, though those who claim to be Evangelical but speak and live as if they are liberals would be more on the Left wing.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RDKirk
Upvote 0

rrobsr

Active Member
Jan 9, 2017
172
88
73
Julian, CA
Visit site
✟26,828.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You said................
"Why Christians deny the ability to get word of knowledge, word of wisdom, discerning of spirits, faith, healing, miracles, and prophecy is beyond me."

That is easy.

1 Corinthians 13:8 says so....................
"Love never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish."

The gift of prophecy in the apostolic church was not forthtelling the truth of the written Word, but declaring truth which had been specially and directly revealed by the Holy Spirit to the "prophet" in the absence of the written New Testament revelation. It was, like the gift of "knowledge," the sovereign enduement of special direct revelation of truths now contained in the canonical New Testament Scriptures.

Both "prophecy" and "knowledge," therefore, were of necessity "tie-overs" to supply the church's practical needs until the New Testament Scriptures became available. In exactly the same way, although not so directly and indispensably useful as "prophecy" and "knowledge," were tongues, unless interpretation of the tongue's message was present.

"For we know in part, and we prophesy in part." 1 Corinthians 13:9.

"In part [Greek-piecemeal, partially, bit by bit] we know and in part [same word] we prophecy." The apostolic gift of knowledge by direct inspiration because it received truth only partially and piecemeal- here in this church assembly a little, there in that church assembly a little, the gift was incomplete and gave only a part of God's truth. The same was true of declaring the truth of the partial and piecemeal revelation. Therefore the gift was lacking and temporary until the complete revelation was given which is the complete New Testament.

"But when that which is perfect is come and reguardless of what anyone may say, the word in Greek-
'to teleion', means the completed and final THING, which can only mean 'the New Testament Scriptures'. Then that which is in part [partial or piecemeal revelation through the gift of directly inspired prophecy and knowledge before the New Testament was given] shall be done away with [shall be superseded, rendered unnecessary and meaningless, because no longer needed and so shall be canceled and done away with]."

This is the same Greek word used of "prophecies" and "knowledge" in verses 8 and 11, "I put away childish things."

The Apostle Paul employs two graphic illustrations to make his point. The first is that of a person growing up from up from childhood into adulthood. The second is that of looking into a mirror to see oneself. Concerning the first illustration the apostle says: "When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, I used to think as a child, I used to reason as a child. But when I became an adult I put away childish things."

He is contrasting "that which is perfect" [the completed, final, and fully authoritative Scriptures of the New Testament], which he likens to an adult male, with "that which is in part" [the piecemeal incomplete revelation directly from the Holy Spirit through the exercise of prophecy, tongues, and knowledge], which he likens to a child.

Having to depend upon prophecy, tongues, and knowledge for instruction and edification until the completed New Testament became available was similar to childhood in the experience of the church. Speaking in tongues, for instance, had a purpose in the apostolic church like the chatter of the child has a similar purpose in childhood and like the child's thinking and reasoning processes have a similar purpose in his growing up into manhood. The same was true of knowledge and prophecy. But now that the church has grown up into adulthood, so to speak, with a complete revelation given it, it has 'put away childhood things'; that is, it has set aside as superseded [same word as in verse 8] tongues, prophecies and knowledge, as having no needful place in its adult life, and belonging only to its childhood requirements.[/QUOTE
 
Upvote 0

rrobsr

Active Member
Jan 9, 2017
172
88
73
Julian, CA
Visit site
✟26,828.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You said................
"Why Christians deny the ability to get word of knowledge, word of wisdom, discerning of spirits, faith, healing, miracles, and prophecy is beyond me."

That is easy.

1 Corinthians 13:8 says so....................
"Love never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish."

The gift of prophecy in the apostolic church was not forthtelling the truth of the written Word, but declaring truth which had been specially and directly revealed by the Holy Spirit to the "prophet" in the absence of the written New Testament revelation. It was, like the gift of "knowledge," the sovereign enduement of special direct revelation of truths now contained in the canonical New Testament Scriptures.

Both "prophecy" and "knowledge," therefore, were of necessity "tie-overs" to supply the church's practical needs until the New Testament Scriptures became available. In exactly the same way, although not so directly and indispensably useful as "prophecy" and "knowledge," were tongues, unless interpretation of the tongue's message was present.

"For we know in part, and we prophesy in part." 1 Corinthians 13:9.

"In part [Greek-piecemeal, partially, bit by bit] we know and in part [same word] we prophecy." The apostolic gift of knowledge by direct inspiration because it received truth only partially and piecemeal- here in this church assembly a little, there in that church assembly a little, the gift was incomplete and gave only a part of God's truth. The same was true of declaring the truth of the partial and piecemeal revelation. Therefore the gift was lacking and temporary until the complete revelation was given which is the complete New Testament.

"But when that which is perfect is come and reguardless of what anyone may say, the word in Greek-
'to teleion', means the completed and final THING, which can only mean 'the New Testament Scriptures'. Then that which is in part [partial or piecemeal revelation through the gift of directly inspired prophecy and knowledge before the New Testament was given] shall be done away with [shall be superseded, rendered unnecessary and meaningless, because no longer needed and so shall be canceled and done away with]."

This is the same Greek word used of "prophecies" and "knowledge" in verses 8 and 11, "I put away childish things."

The Apostle Paul employs two graphic illustrations to make his point. The first is that of a person growing up from up from childhood into adulthood. The second is that of looking into a mirror to see oneself. Concerning the first illustration the apostle says: "When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, I used to think as a child, I used to reason as a child. But when I became an adult I put away childish things."

He is contrasting "that which is perfect" [the completed, final, and fully authoritative Scriptures of the New Testament], which he likens to an adult male, with "that which is in part" [the piecemeal incomplete revelation directly from the Holy Spirit through the exercise of prophecy, tongues, and knowledge], which he likens to a child.

Having to depend upon prophecy, tongues, and knowledge for instruction and edification until the completed New Testament became available was similar to childhood in the experience of the church. Speaking in tongues, for instance, had a purpose in the apostolic church like the chatter of the child has a similar purpose in childhood and like the child's thinking and reasoning processes have a similar purpose in his growing up into manhood. The same was true of knowledge and prophecy. But now that the church has grown up into adulthood, so to speak, with a complete revelation given it, it has 'put away childhood things'; that is, it has set aside as superseded [same word as in verse 8] tongues, prophecies and knowledge, as having no needful place in its adult life, and belonging only to its childhood requirements.

It makes more sense that that which is perfect refers to the return of Christ when the new heavens and new earth will definitely qualify as perfect.
 
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
This doctrine that there are different kinds of tongues (and that one kind is what modern Pentecostals is practicing) is not supported by the scripture. It is only supported by a cultic-type bias of interpreting various verses taken out of context. The nature of tongues did not change from Acts to 1 Cor. If it did, the scripture would tell us it did, but it doesn't. The wrong method of interpreting scripture is to try to cram your personal experience into how the scripture reads, and this requires reading the text with a pretext.

The method I use is to simply ask what does the scripture say clearly. If we use Acts 2 as the precedent on the details of tongues, its purpose, how used, and what it looked like, we see it fits perfectly with 1 Cor. You cannot say that because Paul said "he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men, but to God" that he means the nature of tongues changed from Acts to 1 Cor., because in Acts the tongues they were speaking were to God, not to men. It was prayer, praise and worship, and declaring the mighty acts of God, and they were directing the prayer to God. The fact that unbelievers heard what they were praying and understood it is the proof that what they did was miraculous.

Now let me interject an experiential hypothesis here: the first moment that a person is filled with the Spirit, do you think that person will speak (or shout, or whatever) to God, or do you think it will be to men? The fact that in Acts 2 it says nothing about them speaking to the crowd, we must assume that they were speaking to God. "Divers tongues" in the 1 Cor. context is the same various languages that were spoken in Acts 2. Your doctrine that there were 2 kinds of tongues is simply not true.
TD:)

What do you think I'm saying about Acts being different than 1 Corinthians? How do you believe the Jews understood their languages in Acts 2?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
This doctrine that there are different kinds of tongues (and that one kind is what modern Pentecostals is practicing) is not supported by the scripture. It is only supported by a cultic-type bias of interpreting various verses taken out of context. The nature of tongues did not change from Acts to 1 Cor. If it did, the scripture would tell us it did, but it doesn't. The wrong method of interpreting scripture is to try to cram your personal experience into how the scripture reads, and this requires reading the text with a pretext.

The method I use is to simply ask what does the scripture say clearly. If we use Acts 2 as the precedent on the details of tongues, its purpose, how used, and what it looked like, we see it fits perfectly with 1 Cor. You cannot say that because Paul said "he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men, but to God" that he means the nature of tongues changed from Acts to 1 Cor., because in Acts the tongues they were speaking were to God, not to men. It was prayer, praise and worship, and declaring the mighty acts of God, and they were directing the prayer to God. The fact that unbelievers heard what they were praying and understood it is the proof that what they did was miraculous.

Now let me interject an experiential hypothesis here: the first moment that a person is filled with the Spirit, do you think that person will speak (or shout, or whatever) to God, or do you think it will be to men? The fact that in Acts 2 it says nothing about them speaking to the crowd, we must assume that they were speaking to God. "Divers tongues" in the 1 Cor. context is the same various languages that were spoken in Acts 2. Your doctrine that there were 2 kinds of tongues is simply not true.
TD:)

..
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Biblicist

Full Gospel believer
Mar 27, 2011
7,023
992
Melbourne, Australia
✟43,594.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
The completion of the canon is not an obscure concept. Paul and his readers would already be familiar with such a concept seeing as they already had one completed canon, the Old Testament. They knew that they were now under a new covenant. So it is quite reasonable for them to be expecting a completed New Testament to guide them in the new covenant age.
As much as I rarely delve into the views of the early Latin churchmen, nor do I even have any real interest with them, the PDF article that I referred to is interesting in that it reveals that these early churchmen, or at least with the ones that the author referred to, did not even entertain the idea that 1 Cor 13:10 possibly referred to the completion of the Canon of Scripture. If the cessationist understanding of telion was something that was commonly understood either leading up to or during the time of these early Latin churchmen then they would have undoubtedly discussed it, but what do we see, an apparent complete silence on your position.

If you think seeing the completed canon in this passage is cryptic, then the continuist interpretation is even more cryptic seeing that neither Christ nor his return is mentioned in the passage. Nowhere in scripture does the Greek word teleios ever refer to the return of Christ, the eternal state or anything eschatological. Nor does it fit the analogy of child maturing into an adult. Nor does it work with faith, hope & love outlasting the 3 gifts, if the faith and hope cease at the Parousia.
As Paul's primary focus with 1Cor 13 is with encouraging us to operate within the Holy Spirit through a constant attitude of love then who cares if teleios is used in this way elsewhere or not.

At the start of his letter to the Church throughout Achaia Paul quickly opened his letter with a direct Eschatological reference, though the English use of 'spiritual gift' in most of our translations is a bit narrow as it is better rendered as 'free-grace'. As Paul has already established an unambiguous connection between the Ministry of the Holy Spirit as we await the return of the Lord with his Kingdom, then there is no possibility that any of the listeners within Achaia would have considered a future Canon of Scripture as being a possibility.

1 Cor 1: 4 I always thank my God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus. 5For in him you have been enriched in every way—with all kinds of speech and with all knowledge— 6God thus confirming our testimony about Christ among you. 7Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed. 8He will also keep you firm to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9God is faithful, who has called you into fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.​

I could hardly imagine that even a single person within the various congregations within Achaia who heard Paul's letter being read out would ever entertain the notion that he was somehow speaking of a future completed Canon of Scripture.

The doctrine of cessationism is not based solely on this passage. There are many other passages that support it such as Eph 2:20 where it says the church was "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone". Foundations are only built once at the beginning of the structure, not when it is nearly complete. If apostles ceased at the end of the apostolic age, and few people would dispute that, then so did NT prophecy. Apostleship was also gift, so there is one gift that most people agree has ceased - so why not others that are also foundational?
As Paul is speaking of himself and the Twelve who were called as 'Apostles-of-Christ' and not just everyday apostles or church planters then your point is moot. As for those who are prophets', we do not know if Paul is speaking of the Old Testament Prophets or of the Apostles who were also prophets.

There is a third possible option that he was referring to the everyday congregational prophets; though this is a popular option it is hard to see Paul connecting the words of a general prophet was Canonical teaching. As to the meaning of this problematic passage, it is best left to the Continuist to address as it is not the type of ground that a cessationist is well suited to.


Then there is the obvious fact that the charismatic gifts did actually cease shortly after the apostolic age. The writings of the church fathers testify to that, and the doctrine of cessationism was widely accepted up until the start of the twentieth century with the rise of the Pentecostal and charismatic movements when people claimed that these gifts were now being restored. However these claimed gifts of tongues, prophecy, and healing do not match the biblical descriptions of those gifts.
You seem to be moving into a world of make believe as some of the early Latin churchmen admitted that the Manifestations of the Spirit were in operation at least into the third and fourth centuries; after this time as the Church had fallen into the 1000 years of the Dark Age we should not be surprised that the cessationist mindset then took over.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RDKirk
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Not so my dear sister. This again displays how there can be so much difference in our thinking on tongues and gifts.

Real history and Bible Scriptures tell us that the Corinthian church was divided over a variety of issues. One such issue, addressed in chapters 12-14, was the use or actually the miss-use of "tongues. Paul reminds the Christians in Corinth that the purpose of tongues was to build up the body of Christ.

In chapter 14, he emphasizes that prophecy is more important in public worship than tongues, because it builds up the church better than speaking in tongues. Between these two chapters is chapter 13, revealing love as the key virtue that moves us to use all our gifts to build up Christ’s church and he does that with "comparison" explanation.

Chapter 13 is the same as Matthew 7. Look Lord all the things I did in your name, and the Lord said, Depart from me, I never knew you, you workers of lawlessness.

The lawlessness is the lack of love. 1 John 3 describes if we hate our brother in Christ it is the same as murder. That is what was happening in Corinth. They had all the gifts but they were suing each other, and all trying to out-do the other with speaking over each other with their gifts. Therefore, even if I have every gift, but no love, I am nothing. Paul called them children. I think he was imagining the terrible twos.

Even now, we are debating what is the real purpose of 1 Corinthians 13, the love chapter. It refers to the gift, but the main purpose is about love, but because I am Pentecostal, you refuse to agree. I'm not going to play that game.
 
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
I really do hate to have to disagree with you again but you are just not Biblically correct.

God absolutely says NO to some prayers. Prayer is always answered in one of 3 ways..........
1) YES.
2) NO.
3) LATER.

B.M. Palmer in Theology of Prayer, tells of a woman who had spent the summer away from her children, and was quite anxious to get back to them. When she learned that all the rooms on a certain steamer were taken, she wept bitterly. Because she couldn't get a passage on any other ship, she was detained two weeks in NYC. But the sorrow of being delayed was turned into thanksgiving when, within a few days, she learned that the vessel that denied her passage was buried at the bottom of the Atlantic. She didn't see the "no" as a wonderful answer to prayer until the whole story unfolded.

If God always answered our prayers YES the way we want Him too, my grandson would still be alive.

Where in scripture does God answer prayer with a "no." Does 1 John 5:14-15 give no as a possibility? No, if we pray His will we will have what we prayed for. Did the woman pray God's will that He get her on that ship? No. It was not His will that she get on a doomed ship, so He didn't answer her prayer according to her will. The point is to seek God first to find out what His will is. John 15:7 tells us that then when we pray (when His spoken words to us are prayed), then we shall have whatever that was. That takes a conversation.
 
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
My dear sister, it would be a blessing if you would give us some Scriptures to validate your Pentecostal agenda.

You just said.............
"So tongues are not meant to be understood by you or anybody else, or even a linguistic."

Do you not realize that Paul said exactly the opposite??????

In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul is elevating teaching and preaching over tongue speaking. In fact, Paul says that tongues are not a sign for believers, but for unbelievers (verse 22), while prophesy (preaching) is not for unbelievers, but for believers.

So if people want to edify the Church, it is done through prophesy and teaching, and not through tongue speaking, according to scripture.

This is one thing you must judge your Church by; if people start speaking in tongues, and there’s no interpreter to tell you what they’re saying.

Why?
Is that for show? Is that just a display to show that they are so spiritual and righteous? And is that a practice for a humble servant of God

I don't know what you think my "agenda" is except to teach the same thing as Paul is. We actually agree on what you have just said. By themselves, tongues are not made to be understood by anyone. The only way to understand them is through interpretation of tongues. Do you agree, or continue to disagree? I am not saying the opposite. In some places Paul is showing us that tongues is a blessing to us, but the prayer language, is not for teaching. So to God, we should pray in our prayer language a lot. But in church, that is where we need to concentrate on learning.

I have gone into great detail on this, so you are either completely misunderstanding my plain English, or just scanning my posts to find something to disagree with. Even when I'm agreeing with you. :doh:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

tdidymas

Newbie
Aug 28, 2014
2,294
974
Houston, TX
✟153,913.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
What do you think I'm saying about Acts being different than 1 Corinthians? How do you believe the Jews understood their languages in Acts 2?
Well, I assumed that since you are bent on Charismatic bias, that you are coming from traditional Charismatic doctrine on the subject. My point is that there is not "2 kinds of tongues" as you described it in your post. Acts 2 is the fulfillment of the Mark 16 prophecy, and 1 Cor. is the same kind of tongues in Acts 2. There is not 2 kinds, such is a false idea that is based solely on the experience of false tongues of the modern tongues movement.

If someone was speaking Biblical tongues today, they would not need to support it with interpretive acrobatics, because the scripture fully supports Biblical tongues which are real intelligible languages. But of course, we've been through all this, and of course you disagree.
TD:)
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Major1
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Well, I assumed that since you are bent on Charismatic bias, that you are coming from traditional Charismatic doctrine on the subject. My point is that there is not "2 kinds of tongues" as you described it in your post. Acts 2 is the fulfillment of the Mark 16 prophecy, and 1 Cor. is the same kind of tongues in Acts 2. There is not 2 kinds, such is a false idea that is based solely on the experience of false tongues of the modern tongues movement.

If someone was speaking Biblical tongues today, they would not need to support it with interpretive acrobatics, because the scripture fully supports Biblical tongues which are real intelligible languages. But of course, we've been through all this, and of course you disagree.
TD:)

I'm not disagreeing that they are real intelligible languages. Did you think I was? Where? If I went into a Chinese restaurant and went into their kitchen, do you think I would be able to understand anything they were saying to each other? No, but that doesn't mean they weren't speaking an intelligible language, just because I didn't understand, nor were they talking to me.

And by the way, I do not come from a traditional anything! I teach both Pentecostals and Cessationists.

And Acts was not the fulfillment of Mark, but of Joel 2. But it was the BEGINNING, not the END.

You seem to think that today is different from the 1st century. That everyone would be able to understand the gift of tongues? Is that what you are saying? I don't want to put words in your mouth like everyone is doing to me.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I will have to disagree with you my brother.

In the case of the apostles, this calling to office was direct, immediate and a personal-physical call by Christ Himself as head of the church. They were called to be "fishers of men," as Jesus showed in the miracle of the draught of fishes.

Paul also was a "chosen vessel" for the same purpose as recorded in Acts 9:15...................
"But the Lord said to him, Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel".

Paul must be understood as having seen Christ directly in heaven in such away that the barrier between heaven and earth was opened in his call.

The apostles had a unique task to perform, that of laying the foundation of the New Testament form of the church institute. Paul indicates this in Eph.. 2:20, when he says that the church is..............
'built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, of which Christ Himself is the chief Cornerstone."

In the latter part of the Mark 16, Christ is speaking to the "eleven," Mark 16:14. It is to them, and in them, to the church, that Christ gives the commission to go and preach the gospel.

What is often overlooked in this discussion, however, is the purpose of these signs: "...The Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following..." Mark 16:20; that is, their function was to confirm the apostolic Word. They were not intended for just any purpose.

It seems to me that the language of Mark is also overlooked most of time. Mark is speaking of the apostles when he says,"so then after the Lord had spoke unto them ...the eleven of verse 14 ...And they (the apostles) went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them...."
That is the exact words found in Mark 16:19, 20.

I have always marveled at how easy it is to overlook those words and the fact that Mark is speaking specifically of the Apostles. Now it is my opinion which by some does not amount to a whole lot, but if we really get down to where the rubber meets the road, those who say they speak in tongues today do it because they want to!!!! They read those Scriptures about the ELEVEN and say, well, that applies to me too!!!

Then it should also be noted that Mark speaks of the matter as a promise made which was fulfilled. "And these signs shall follow...( Mark 16:17)... And they went forth... with signs following," (Mark 16:20). Grammatically......those are all PAST TENSE words. The viewpoint of Mark is that Jesus promised it, it happened as promised, and it is now fulfilled and done. He speaks of something accomplished, not something continuing in the church. There is nothing in the text which suggests or intends to speak of something perpetual in the speaking of tongues in the church.

The gospel having been declared, confirmed, and set down in the Scriptures, the function of these signs is, in fact, fulfilled. They served the laying of the foundation of the church. That does not mean there is no abiding element, as both the commission to preach the gospel abides and the miracles confirming the gospel are recorded in Scripture. The miracles, which are intended to confirm the faith of believers, are now recorded in Scripture, and they are sufficient for our faith. The Scriptures were written by eyewitnesses of these things. To require miracles today or the need to speak in a gibberish unintelligible noise is to declare that the Bible is insufficient for faith.

not sure the point your trying to make, or I misunderstand it.... by Paul's own admission he was an apostle, just read the few verse of any of his epistles, not to mention there are countless numbers confirmed in scripture who speak in tongues so if you're trying to say it was reserved for the 11... well... it just doesn't make sense.
 
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
not sure the point your trying to make, or I misunderstand it.... by Paul's own admission he was an apostle, just read the few verse of any of his epistles, not to mention there are countless numbers confirmed in scripture who speak in tongues so if you're trying to say it was reserved for the 11... well... it just doesn't make sense.

I hope he wasn't saying that. Yikes! Did Cornelius become an apostle??? No, so that would be crazy to say such a thing.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
In my view it is not a case of malpractice and abuse of genuine gifts, but a case of them not being genuine gifts to start with. What people today call the gifts of tongues, prophecy and healing do not match the biblical descriptions of those gifts.

Clearly the Corinthians abused these gifts but Paul still address the abuse still as a gift of the HS, it may very well just be semantics or Paul being more diplomatic. Either way I don't defend abuse or unbiblical practices, call them what you will.
 
Upvote 0