do any of you believe tongues are necessary

[OzSpen]

Alive,

I wrote:

Jesus did not "clearly" state that believers would speak with new tongues as per Mark 16:17 as this verse is not in many of the NT manuscripts (MSS). Some MSS end the chapter with 16:8. Some MSS insert additional material after v. 14.

You responded:

This is the danger in the modern translations. It puts doubt on segments of the Word of God. The NIV casts "doubt" on 40 verses in the New Covenant. Don't get me started about that. Thanks God for the Holy Spirit! He explained about the modern versions, confirmed the 40 verses in "doubt" and gave revelation and understanding about tongues. He backed it up with signs following.

The problem is not with modern translations, as they rely on the oldest Greek texts that have been found and not the later Greek MSS of the Textus Receptus.

The danger is that the Textus Receptus, on which Tyndale's, Luther's, and the KJV translations are based, has ADDED TO the Greek texts.

I don't expect that you want to hear that copies of MSS are copies of copies and that the earlier the text, the better (not perfect) the chance of being closer to the original MSS (the autographa).

Sainainiticus???? Would you please learn to spell Sinaiticus?

Regards, Oz

 

[Alive_Again]

I suppose the whole thing about what the Holy Spirit said is secondary?

Also, spelling is not the issue. It's whether or not those verses are relevant in your life.

The texts are always copies. One argument is that they do wear out. The older ones that don't look as worn out and have questionable origins (whether they are older or not) are arguably not as used, and possibly for good reason.

But God had everything to do with what ended up in the Bible. Although none of the translations are perfect, leaving out scriptures is not God's will and neither is putting a disclaimer in the Word. Considering the promises in the Mark scriptures, leaving them out only seems as demonic as leaving out "Lucifer", and "this kind only comes out by prayer and fasting".

 

[OzSpen]

Alive,

I suppose the whole thing about what the Holy Spirit said is secondary?

Also, spelling is not the issue. It's whether or not those verses are relevant in your life.

What is relevant is whether the MSS texts that we have are accurate. Relevance, without accuracy, is pointless.

Oz

 

[Alive_Again]

If you limit your "reliance" on those sources then you will fall "prey" to the very reason why they are not there. You will be deprived of those promises and have no faith in those areas because faith comes by hearing the Word. The only other way is by hearing the voice of the Spirit when you read "anything".

Does not Mark end funny in the texts you're relying on? Is it not apparent that something is missing?

Maintaining a listening ear then is the first order of the day so it will not be up to your intellect to filter that which is of God. Although you must be honest with yourself, by doing this you will present yourself teachable before God. You will also need to change your declaration regarding these verses, because they are a "judgment".

 

[RisingSpirit]

When the Spirit of God falls upon a person for the first time and they find themselves praising the Lord in tongues it certainly brings out more than just a smile.

Sounds good to me but I think I installed a pressure valve in my soul and received it slowly. How else can I describe that I have been baptized by the Holy Spirit? What I got was extreme compassion like the ancients.

I remember working with a lady at my workplace, many years ago and she claimed that she had the ability to tell that I wasn't saved and didn't have the filling of the Spirit. I regret saying I had beer the night before. Most interesting talk from her was a night that she could smell demons.


I never heard the end of it.

 

[RisingSpirit]

If you limit your "reliance" on those sources then you will fall "prey" to the very reason why they are not there.

I got my information from those that crossed into China in the late days of the apostles. Quite a collection of Christian history buried there.

The problem is that the new ancient agers stole techniques from the early Christians and today we claim them to be from the devil while used them in our own worship.

 

[Alive_Again]

I got my information from those that crossed into China in the late days of the apostles. Quite a collection of Christian history buried there.

You seem to be hinting at "texts" that add to the Word. At the same time, you're vouching for texts that take away from the Word.

The problem is that the new ancient agers stole techniques from the early Christians and today we claim them to be from the devil while used them in our own worship.

What "techniques" are you referring to?

 

[RisingSpirit]

You seem to be hinting at "texts" that add to the Word. At the same time, you're vouching for texts that take away from the Word.



What "techniques" are you referring to?

Simple breathing for a start. The air in our space.
China didn't have a great wall that divided the West from the East. To think no one thought of going eastward from Jerusalem isn't feasible. 2000 years of no one walking East to share the Spiritual things of God is far fetched. Whatever was taught in the West ought to be taught just a few hundred mile East. The taught included teachings of Worship. They had plenty of time to shared the Gospel but most Christians talk China is like Hell.

 

[RisingSpirit]

You seem to be hinting at "texts" that add to the Word. At the same time, you're vouching for texts that take away from the Word.

Are you referring the 66 books in the Bible or the 73 books in the Bible?

 

[Alive_Again]

There are only 66 books in the Bible. There are many other gnostic writings that oppose what is already revealed in the Word. It is safe to say that when they do, they are ministering deception. God never opposes Himself.

It is obvious to me that you have taken on "eastern ways" and incorporated them into your walk. If you do, God holds back the anointing because He only confirms the Word. You have only to judge your own life by looking at your fruits. Are they of the divine nature? Do you bear fruit of the Holy Spirit or the works of the flesh? Do you struggle with areas of sin on a repetitive basis? If you do, this points to letting the enemy into your "gates". Judge yourself as the Word is serious about this.

 

[OzSpen]

Alive,

Maintaining a listening ear then is the first order of the day so it will not be up to your intellect to filter that which is of God. Although you must be honest with yourself, by doing this you will present yourself teachable before God. You will also need to change your declaration regarding these verses, because they are a "judgment".

Romans 12:2 states:

Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

Biblical Christianity never follows your epithet, "it will not be up to your intellect to filter that which is of God".

Biblical Christianity NEVER says to throw out the mind and never use it. We must have the mind renewed by biblical means. God never says to give us the intellect/mind.

Which Bible are you reading?

Regards, Oz

 

[JesusFreak4L]

I dont think that you need to speak in tongues to be saved. Nope. I know plenty of people who can't and have never spoken in tongues that are in heaven now! (My grandpa for example pastor for 55+ years in the Mennonite denomination and he is in Heaven partying it up with the Lord!)

 

[OzSpen]

Alive,

There are only 66 books in the Bible. There are many other gnostic writings that oppose what is already revealed in the Word. It is safe to say that when they do, they are ministering deception. God never opposes Himself.

You are a supporter of the long ending of Mark 16. Does that mean you support the KJV or the NKJV?

Are you aware that there were more than 66 books in the original KJV of 1611 because it included the Apocrypha. The KJV that we use today is a 1769 revision, but the original KJV has more than 66 books in it.

So which Bible are you advocating?

Oz

 

[Alive_Again]

Biblical Christianity never follows your epithet, "it will not be up to your intellect to filter that which is of God". Biblical Christianity NEVER says to throw out the mind and never use it. We must have the mind renewed by biblical means. God never says to give us the intellect/mind.

I'm talking about the renewed mind. The work is from the spirit out into the mind. The unity is in our spirits. We get the mind of Christ as we yield our spirits (not just our minds).

"This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:"
Eph 4:17-18

The gentiles are led by their unrenewed minds, which of course is vanity. They are ignorant of the Spirit's leading in our spirits.

"And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness."
Eph 4:23-24

I would never say to not use your mind. That is not really even possible. But we don't walk according to our intellect, which is what I'm saying.

I said: "Maintaining a listening ear then is the first order of the day so it will not be up to your intellect to filter that which is of God."

Maintaining a "listening ear" or a hearing heart. If Peter walked according to his intellect, he would not have wanted to walk on the water (impossible). He was led by the Spirit even though the intellect would have stopped him if it could have. That's why we should not let our (unrenewed) intellects reign.

If your intellect decides what to believe, you are not led of your spirit. The spirit renews your mind and it follows your spirit. Your heart can say one thing and your mind another. Always follow your heart.

"And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."
Romans 12:2

Your mind will never figure out on its own the will of God. It must find out through the spirit. If you change the order, you will walk carnally.

"For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God."
Romans 8:6-8

Being spiritually minded is not just thinking about God and the Bible. It is the receiving of the spiritual mind of Christ into our spirits, which produces life. It has to be received. Many think about God and have no life in them.

If your carnal mind reigns, you will not hear the Lordship of Jesus and will cloud or obscure the witness of the Spirit.

 

[OzSpen]

Alive,

I said: "Maintaining a listening ear then is the first order of the day so it will not be up to your intellect to filter that which is of God."

Maintaining a "listening ear" or a hearing heart. If Peter walked according to his intellect, he would not have wanted to walk on the water (impossible). He was led by the Spirit even though the intellect would have stopped him if it could have. That's why we should not let our (unrenewed) intellects reign.

These are your presuppositions. You invent them according to your version of spirituality. Don't you understand what you do when you say things like this on this Forum?

Your heart can say one thing and your mind another. Always follow your heart.

I have counselled individuals and families for 33 years and that is exactly what some Christians do. Follow the heart and they end up in adultery, etc. I've counselled Pentecostals with your kind of approach and their families are chaotic because the "heart" is not meant to be the aspect of humanity that decides. It is the whole human being who decides.

Oz

 

[JesusFreak4L]

Oz I think you need to not be so condemning towards others. I understand that you disagree with their thought process, but the way you condemn them and cut them down is very sad and to be honest pathetic. I think that you need to find another approach. It is a fact that people have differing views. Noone ever won anyone over by cutting them down. Just a side fyi to you man

 

[ARBITER01]

Alive,

I wrote:
You responded:

The problem is not with modern translations, as they rely on the oldest Greek texts that have been found and not the later Greek MSS of the Textus Receptus.

The danger is that the Textus Receptus, on which Tyndale's, Luther's, and the KJV translations are based, has ADDED TO the Greek texts.

I don't expect that you want to hear that copies of MSS are copies of copies and that the earlier the text, the better (not perfect) the chance of being closer to the original MSS (the autographa).

Sainainiticus???? Would you please learn to spell Sinaiticus?

Regards, Oz

Would you care to show us how the ending of mark is a corruption from mankind? Please use scripture.

 

[OzSpen]

Oz I think you need to not be so condemning towards others. I understand that you disagree with their thought process, but the way you condemn them and cut them down is very sad and to be honest pathetic. I think that you need to find another approach. It is a fact that people have differing views. Noone ever won anyone over by cutting them down. Just a side fyi to you man

With respect, I was cutting nobody down. "Heart" religion can be devastating in its impact and I was giving some examples of how that happens.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Arbiter,

Would you care to show us how the ending of mark is a corruption from mankind? Please use scripture.

So which Scriptures (Bible translations) are you prepared to accept as authoritative?

You ask a self-defeating question as the topic of the ending of Mark 16 relates to textual criticism (how one decides which are the best manuscripts). Please tell me how you can do that from any Bible translation that you consider authoritative.

Regards, Oz

 

[Alive_Again]

1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. 2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. 3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? 4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great. 5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted. 6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. 7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you. 8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
Mark 16:1-8

So they were told to tell the disciples Jesus was risen. They were afraid!!! The end!!! They didn't tell anyone or go into all of the world! It ended in fear!

That's where the NIV and many modern versions would like to leave it off. They finally put them back in with a disclaimer. The guys who do the NIV (under copyright) also did the gender nonspecific version of the "Word of God".

Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. 10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. 12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. 13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. 20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.
Mark 16:9-20

So these weren't present (or were removed) from the "oldest" manuscripts. Since when does something older make it more accurate? Remember these scrolls typically were well used and then destroyed. By reason of use they did not survive well. They took pains to copy them.

So you want one older from the trash. There's no doubt a reason why it was in the trash.

I'm quite satisfied that the Holy Spirit said that it was a work of the enemy that the texts ended up like they did. Of course you'll have to hear that for yourself. In the mean time, we have people in doubt about parts of scripture.