Being filled with the Holy Spirit vs tongues

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I'm really not talking about 'prayer meetings'. So, if I'm hearing you correctly, you believe that when we are praying in tongues with no interpretation it's NOT OK in public. But if we're singing in tongues with no interpretation it IS OK in public, because it has "amazing harmony"? and I can't wait to hear from the radically "ungifted/unlearned" here, as to your belief that the 'have nots' would have no problem with Charismatics singing in uninterpreted tongues. Why not? For the very same reason they say we're wrong for praying in uninterpreted tongues. I mean, singing in GIBBERISH and BABBLE is still gibberish and babble and 'not from God' to them......RIGHT? Remember, for me it's about the jewel of consistency for theological positions. I'm struggling with your split POV right now. But I'm pretty sure NOT ONE "ungifted" person will stand up and agree with me to defend their 'consistent theological view'. But that's only because IT'S ME saying they won't.


Brother, here's my problem with your logic. You're applying a 1st century bible application to a 21st century church. And my bible, in speaking to a first century Charismatic church, concerning their 'public gatherings' says this;

1CO 14:26 What then, brethren? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

So it seems to me, that today's churches pretty much don't even come close to the standard of the first century church. Indeed, in the church I attend (800), 2 elders have personally told me that a majority may not even be saved. I appreciate their honesty....and totally agree. I also believe our church has just as good, if not better, percentage than any other sizable church in town.

LUK 18:8 I tell you, he will vindicate them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of man comes, will he find faith on earth?"


Thank goodness....this last sentence has revived my hope for you brother. And for the record, I personally believe that our past home group gatherings more represented the church of the bible than any 'Sunday morning' public gathering of today. IOW, first century bible doesn't even apply to the majority of the 'great apostasy' churches of 21st century today....IMO. We now, more than ever, need to learn to be led of the Spirit and less bound by inherited carnal minded 'past theologies' that no longer apply.

For the first 12 years of my Christian life, I was associated with churches that had people freely praying and speaking in tongues in every meeting, and they didn't worry about it. They just enjoyed themselves and had fun at church.

Frankly, I don't care where I speak in tongues, but I am respectful and sensitive to those who don't pray in tongues and who would be spooked out by it. My wife has heard me pray in tongues just once in all the 29 years we have been married, and that was when I gave an interpreted tongues message over my daughter when she was baptised in an AOG church.

The only reason I take the time to distinguish where and when it is best to pray in tongues is for those who make an issue of it, otherwise my attitude is that if folk don't like people praying in tongues around them at church, well, too bad, how sad!

As far as being led by the Spirit, if we are living by the Spirit, we are being led all the time whether we realise it or not. I am led by the Spirit from the moment I get up in the morning until when I go to sleep at night. Knowing that, I just get on with life and enjoy my day whatever happens.

 

[W2L]

I empty out fear and anxiety and am filled with joy and peace.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

Evidently you are a cessationist. I'm not. I believe in everything God has for us.

BTW, I wanted to ask you about your avatar. Is that a real lightening strike caught on camera? It's cool.

Apparently, the "doctor" has left the building, based on all the bye's he's declared. He couldn't be a cessationalist, because he at least admitted to two incidences of "genuine tongues" in his years of experience. So, even though he seems to prefer mostly tare-run churches, he couldn't have been a cessationalist.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

I would trust the church in the Bible was everything it was supposed to be, any church today? not so much.

So before i could answer the question posed, I'd have to see the church, and make sure they are what they say they are.

See, I may well be one to think they are "mad", because unlike the biblical church that only appeared that way to the ungifted, today's church may very well be. I'd just have to see for myself.

Why? you'll soon see.

What Bible are you reading where you get the idea that they only appeared that way to the ungifted? In the upper room, were they speaking out loud in tongues, because they knew people outside heard them and would be able to translate? They didn't even know such a thing existed.

When Cornelius and his crew started speaking in tongues, who were they speaking in tongues to? And why? When Paul "spoke in tongues more than all of you", did he just talk, and talk, and talk in tongues in public or was he speaking in private prayer in tongues to get to that point of realizing that he was being given mysteries through the tongues he spoke and interpreted?

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

You limit the Holy Spirit too much. He is not constrained to groaning. And, again, the verse you would have to quote to justify what you claim talks about how the Holy Spirit intercesses for us to God.

Didn't say that the Spirit is constrained to groaning. God ONLY speaks and works through the Spirit in the Earth today; have u been baptized with Him?[/QUOTE]

How and why did you twist our posts so it makes it look like you said what I said and vice versa? You are not the one who said "you limit the Holy Spirit to groaning."

 

[Kenny'sID]

What Bible are you reading where you get the idea that they only appeared that way to the ungifted?

Only appeared "mad".

 

[Hillsage]

Exactly, and you both believe there are two manifestations. The gift for inside the church with interpretation that only a few receive, and the more common prayer language given to all. You were sounding silly disagreeing to your own beliefs.

Maybe "silly" or "silly" maybe, because you possibly don't understand.

He said;

The Gift of Tongues is only for a few believers. Worshipping with new tongues is for ALL believers.

It is EITHER; 'tongues are for ALL believers and worshiping in tongues is for ALL believers' OR 'the gift of tongues is for a FEW believers AND THEREFORE worshiping in tongues is also for a FEW believers'. His inconsistency is illogical thinking IMO. I think my answer is consistently logical compared to his inconsistent logic.

Unless he differentiates between Gift of Tongues from the Holy Spirit, and 'new tongues' from my/our spirit. Something he's never done when I've asked.

He said;

The Gift of Tongues is a specific one and it is exercised within a fellowship by a minority of saints.

I disagree; IF by "the Gift of tongues" he means the prayer tongue of our/my spirit to God. My prayer tongue is 'primarily' private, but can be corporately exercised with '100% of the saints' in a charismatic assembly, all praying in their spirit's tongue.

If he means the Gift of tongues' from the Holy Spirit coming upon me and manifesting a human tongue through me that I don't know, then we would agree. But that tongue was manifested on the day of Pentecost by, and not by "a minority of saints" (as he states above), but by All the saints. And it was manifested to everyone who wasn't "within a fellowship" (as he mandates above) by ALL those saints. Again, inconsistency of his stated theological opinion which I again don't agree with.

I hope this new found understanding helps you rethink your logic and my apparent 'silliness'.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

The real Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is not when those like myself question much of what is being claimed to be now happening in Charismatic circles, but when those in WoF and health and Wealth are claiming to be speaking and teaching for God, but are really giving forth heresies in name of Christ!

Again, I don't have anyone to protect. Those that are doing wrong, God will judged. But, while some might be overstepping their bounds in one direction, how can you not say that claiming God's gifts aren't for today isn't overstepping your bounds in the other direction.

In one statement, Jesus said "speaking a word against the Holy Spirit" is unforgiveable. But, the immediate context wasn't saying he did or didn't do it something. It was saying that what He did, He did by an ungodly power. So, your false doctrine and doubting doesn't appear to cross into blasphemy, as long as you don't claim it is coming from another spirit without knowing for sure that it is. Whether God considers that you are "speaking a word against the Holy Spirit" when you claim "tongues of today are fake, because the gifts have ceased", I don't know. But, he may. And, if you don't think the gifts are for today, you are in no position to distinguish the real from the fake.

I know tongues and healing and prophesy are real and for today, and I would still be really hesistant to interfere without God giving very clear in-the-moment guidance, since in the parable of the tares and the wheat, we are told they God won't have His servants separate them, because they may accidently uproot wheat in the process--meaning the wheat can look dangerous close to tares. And, God was more concerned about keeping the wheat than He was about removing the tares from their midst.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

Only appeared "mad".

That's a very weird version of the Bible. I've never heard of it before. As long as you have been told you are wrong, we don't need to discuss the issue further.

 

[Kenny'sID]

That's a very weird version of the Bible. I've never heard of it before. As long as you have been told you are wrong, we don't need to discuss the issue further.

I think you are misunderstanding something, but doesn't matter, we got nothing to discuss anyway. I tried that with you and you evaded every single question I asked you as I recall, making it impossible to have a balanced discussion/debate.

But at the same time, people reveal so much when they do that.

 

[Hillsage]

What Bible are you reading where you get the idea that they only appeared that way to the ungifted? In the upper room, were they speaking out loud in tongues, because they knew people outside heard them and would be able to translate? They didn't even know such a thing existed.

My POV, for you to consider here J4C, is that on the day of Pentecost they weren't in 'the upper room' they were in 'the house of the Lord' celebrating PENTECOST. And the first tongue to come out of the disciples wasn't a 'tongue from the Holy Spirit to men', but a tongue from their spirits to God "which no man understands" and that's when this bestial or artificial sounding tongue drew the crowd.

ACT 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. 6 Now when this (tongue) was noised abroad/phone, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

STRONG's Greek #5456 phone: a tone (articulate, bestial or artificial);
Or as some said "drunk and mad" talk.

And it was their spirit's bestial/artificial sounding PHONE language which drew a crowd to the 'mad drunks'. And it was AFTER 'that' when the "multitude came together and was confounded" because the Holy Spirit subsequently manifested His 'Gift of Tongues' in languages of earthly men. But it was AFTER they'd received the promise of supernatural power of spiritual tongues from their spirit.

When Cornelius and his crew started speaking in tongues, who were they speaking in tongues to? And why? When Paul "spoke in tongues more than all of you", did he just talk, and talk, and talk in tongues in public or was he speaking in private prayer in tongues to get to that point of realizing that he was being given mysteries through the tongues he spoke and interpreted?

I think the very first 'tongue/language' will always be a spirit that's been un-muted and allowed to speak. The second tongue, maybe even the next sentence, can now be The Holy Spirit manifesting His message through our yielded spirit AND soul. But I can't prove this biblically.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Again, I don't have anyone to protect. Those that are doing wrong, God will judged. But, while some might be overstepping their bounds in one direction, how can you not say that claiming God's gifts aren't for today isn't overstepping your bounds in the other direction.

In one statement, Jesus said "speaking a word against the Holy Spirit" is unforgiveable. But, the immediate context wasn't saying he did or didn't do it something. It was saying that what He did, He did by an ungodly power. So, your false doctrine and doubting doesn't appear to cross into blasphemy, as long as you don't claim it is coming from another spirit without knowing for sure that it is. Whether God considers that you are "speaking a word against the Holy Spirit" when you claim "tongues of today are fake, because the gifts have ceased", I don't know. But, he may. And, if you don't think the gifts are for today, you are in no position to distinguish the real from the fake.

I know tongues and healing and prophesy are real and for today, and I would still be really hesistant to interfere without God giving very clear in-the-moment guidance, since in the parable of the tares and the wheat, we are told they God won't have His servants separate them, because they may accidently uproot wheat in the process--meaning the wheat can look dangerous close to tares. And, God was more concerned about keeping the wheat than He was about removing the tares from their midst.

Maybe the guy thinks that any teaching he doesn't agree with is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit!

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

My POV, for you to consider here J4C, is that on the day of Pentecost they weren't in 'the upper room' they were in 'the house of the Lord' celebrating PENTECOST. And the first tongue to come out of the disciples wasn't a 'tongue from the Holy Spirit to men', but a tongue from their spirits to God "which no man understands" and that's when this bestial or artificial sounding tongue drew the crowd.

ACT 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. 6 Now when this (tongue) was noised abroad/phone, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

STRONG's Greek #5456 phone: a tone (articulate, bestial or artificial);
Or as some said "drunk and mad" talk.

And it was their spirit's bestial/artificial sounding PHONE language which drew a crowd to the 'mad drunks'. And it was AFTER 'that' when the "multitude came together and was confounded" because the Holy Spirit subsequently manifested His 'Gift of Tongues' in languages of earthly men. But it was AFTER they'd received the promise of supernatural power of spiritual tongues from their spirit.

I think the very first 'tongue/language' will always be a spirit that's been un-muted and allowed to speak. The second tongue, maybe even the next sentence, can now be The Holy Spirit manifesting His message through our yielded spirit AND soul. But I can't prove this biblically.

I don't necessarily agree with your hypothesis, but I don't feel any need to argue about it, either. If I can't prove or disprove what you say with Scripture, I'm just not sure that it matters that we might think differently here. You know that value of tongues. Yay, God!

Scripture suggests (1) the rushing mighty Wind filled the house, then (2) there appeared "cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each one of them", then (3) they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, then (4) they began to speak with other tongues, as the [Holy] Spirit gave them utterance, then (5) devout Jews of every nation heard it "noised abroad", then came together as a multitude and were confounded because every man heard as if they spoke in his own language. (Acts 2:2-6)

Having been a teacher, when all 25-30 students are talking at once, it is just a very loud noise and it is hard to hear any one in particular. So, I can imagine the Holy Spirit descends and the loud noise created by 120 people loudly (as excited people would do) spoke in tongues in one location by the power of the Holy Spirit would draw people to say that the group was drunk as a possible explanation as to why they got so loud and disorderly, nor than the type of noise that was coming out. Also having had much experience getting drunk before God woke me up, I know that most police show up at parties after everyone is drunk, because the volume tends to go up. It isn't so much what they say that makes people think they are drunk it is the sheer volume at an unusual time. As they got closer, they heard in their own individual tongues--which is particularly remarkable to me. How they could hear their own language being spoken amidst 120 people all speaking at once seems to be a miracle in itself! I have often wondered if God doesn't actually work on the hearer's ears, rather than the speaker's language in the gift of tongues. I certainly couldn't prove that, but it is a little curiosity of mine.

Hillsage, it is also remarkable to me that in Acts 10, Peter and Cornelius were already able to communicate, so a tongue of a known language wasn't necessary. They recognized the Holy Ghost fell on them, by the fact that "they heard them speak in tongues, and magnify God." (Acts 10:44-46) I would say the believers who came with Peter could interpret Tongues and knew what was being said, because if Peter was able to communicate with them, they had at least one common language. If it was either of the two tongues already present, why would another tongue be necessary--other than for a sign to the Jews that the Gentiles had also been given the Holy Spirit. And, if they were speaking a known language that they already knew, why would the Scripture say they spoke in tongues, instead of they spoke in Hebrew or some language in particular?

 

[Hillsage]

I speak with tongues to worship in the Spirit. I speak out in English to bless my brothers in Christ Jesus.

Not scriptural. You don't "worship in the Spirit." You worship God the Father who is spirit in your spirit.

John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

PHI 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit,

Your spirit isn't the Spirit.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

Maybe the guy thinks that any teaching he doesn't agree with is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit!

As I work with older youth more and more, I am finding that a defensive reaction when they are accused of doing something wrong is often to try to find something wrong your side has done--like in some way that justifies what they are doing wrong--like some sort of variation on the "safety in numbers" theme. It seems like that was the tactic he applied in this situation.

But, it is possible that when people say they are doing something in the Holy Spirit's Name that He isn't really doing, that it is also blasphemy in God's sight.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

But, the hours comes, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeks such to worship Him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth. (John 4:23-4)

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

I think you are misunderstanding something, but doesn't matter, we got nothing to discuss anyway. I tried that with you and you evaded every single question I asked you as I recall, making it impossible to have a balanced discussion/debate.

But at the same time, people reveal so much when they do that.

Now Kenny, I'm not going to accuse you of being an unbeliever. But, in this particular topic, I feel like I am speaking with an unbeliever. You want me to communicate on the natural level about supernatural things that can't be understood on the natural level, then you accuse me of misunderstanding.

But, here is the problem. I'm the one with the living experience of praying in tongues. It doesn't take any faith to disbelieve that God doesn't give the gifts. I see things happen where God and Jesus are magnified and God has even chastised me for not using the gift of tongues that he gave me, so you can't tell me they aren't real or for today. That would be like me denying that there is a God after He woke me up when I didn't believe such a thing. Or like people telling me that God doesn't heal today, after I have personally seen people healed under my touch in places outside church. Man will never unconvinced me of something God has brought me into. To think it is possible borders between the natural dimensions of ignorance and irrationality.

 

[Pethesedzao]

Not scriptural. You don't "worship in the Spirit." You worship God the Father who is spirit in your spirit.

John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

PHI 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit,

Your spirit isn't the Spirit.

You can only fully worship in the Spirit if Jesus has baptized you with Him.

 

[Hillsage]

I don't necessarily agree with your hypothesis, but I don't feel any need to argue about it, either. If I can't prove or disprove what you say with Scripture, I'm just not sure that it matters that we might think differently here. You know that value of tongues. Yay, God!

I just believe that from my studies, which I certainly didn't go into depth with here do convince me. But I've followed you here enough to know that you 'got it' and that is what matters most IMO. But correct theology is pretty important too IMO.

Scripture suggests (1) the rushing mighty Wind filled the house, then (2) there appeared "cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each one of them", then (3) they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, then (4) they began to speak with other tongues, as the [Holy] Spirit gave them utterance, then (5) devout Jews of every nation heard it "noised abroad", then came together as a multitude and were confounded because every man heard as if they spoke in his own language. (Acts 2:2-6)

And the word "house" is the word oikos in the Greek, which can be the 'house of God'.

3624 oikos {oy'-kos}of uncertain affinity
(1.b.2) the house of God, the tabernacle

LUK 19:46 Saying unto them, It is written, My house/oikos is the house/oikos of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves.

And what better house for 120 people to be gathered in to receive the prayer language of their spirit first before manifesting a 'gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit' to men.

Also, having studied the errors of capitalization I know for a fact that when they were filled with the holy spirit it was holy spirit power from the person of the Holy Spirit. This is a huge issue when dealing with the born again who think their individual body houses the Holy Spirit already and they don't need no baptism for anything more. Bad theology from pretty clear scriptures....if it's KJV anyway.

1 Corinthians 6:19 What? know ye Pl not that your Pl body sg is the temple sg of the Holy Ghost which is in you pl, which ye pl have of God, and ye pl are not your own?

YE, YOU and YOUR are plural in the KJV. THEE and THOU are singular. Most translations lose this understanding. This verse is not saying a singular Christian's body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. If it meant that, then body and temple should both be plural and not singular in the above verse.

WE as living stones make up the many membered corporate body of Christ and Jesus is the cornerstone of that temple.

EPH 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 ... Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: 22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

1PE 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house,

It's these kinds of theological errors, for centuries, that has led to so many mistakes in doctrinal understanding. And the only holy spirit in us is the same holy spirit which was in our cornerstone Jesus at his birth. And that's the spirit of Christ.

Hillsage, it is also remarkable to me that in Acts 10, Peter and Cornelius were already able to communicate, so a tongue of a known language wasn't necessary. They recognized the Holy Ghost fell on them, by the fact that "they heard them speak in tongues, and magnify God." (Acts 10:44-46) I would say the believers who came with Peter could interpret Tongues and knew what was being said, because if Peter was able to communicate with them, they had at least one common language. If it was either of the two tongues already present, why would another tongue be necessary--other than for a sign to the Jews that the Gentiles had also been given the Holy Spirit. And, if they were speaking a known language that they already knew, why would the Scripture say they spoke in tongues, instead of they spoke in Hebrew or some language in particular?

We're in total agreement, as I've seen you correctly use this event before with those who who who....well, lets just say who aren't 'EARNESTLY SEEKING the promise of supernatural holy spirit POWER pouring out from the Person of the Holy Spirit, which BTW, no one could "SEE or HEAR".

ACT 2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the (from the) Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

The PROMISE of the Father was POWER period. It was never the PERSON, it was holy spirit power SHED FORTH from the PERSON.

LUK 24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my (from the) Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

But hey, I'm rambling on. Time to quit and watch TV.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Now Kenny, I'm not going to accuse you of being an unbeliever. But, in this particular topic, I feel like I am speaking with an unbeliever. You want me to communicate on the natural level about supernatural things that can't be understood on the natural level, then you accuse me of misunderstanding.

But, here is the problem. I'm the one with the living experience of praying in tongues. It doesn't take any faith to disbelieve that God doesn't give the gifts. I see things happen where God and Jesus are magnified and God has even chastised me for not using the gift of tongues that he gave me, so you can't tell me they aren't real or for today. That would be like me denying that there is a God after He woke me up when I didn't believe such a thing. Or like people telling me that God doesn't heal today, after I have personally seen people healed under my touch in places outside church. Man will never unconvinced me of something God has brought me into. To think it is possible borders between the natural dimensions of ignorance and irrationality.

You've already told me all I need to know by your chosen silence on certain matters, just as others have, and saying I'm not a Christian because I don't agree with you personally is far from helping your case.

It's not Gods power I disbelieve, it's mans claims, and for that reason you say I'm not Christian then you can't even see how bizarre/self centered that sounds. Who do you think you are anyway?

And please don't give me that between natural dimensions and reality stuff. Christ proved he healed people and raised them from the dead, there with absolutely no "Oh you can't possibly understand" junk involved. He did it, he did it in front of people to people they knew were afflicted, hence they were positive it happened...period. So please don't insult us with the "It's a mystery beyond your comprehension" thing..