Speak in Tongues - essential :

[1stcenturylady]

Can someone without the gift of tongues pray with "groanings too deep for words"? Or do only a special extra spiritual caste of Christians have access to this deep groaning so that, so that for the rest of us when words fail us, the Spirit is not present or available to us in those moments.

-CryptoLutheran

No, someone with even low maturity like the Corinthians can "come short in no gift."

Speaking in tongues is usually what every Spirit-filled believer does in obedience to God. It is up to us whether we use it or not.

 

[Ken Rank]

Speaking in tongues is usually what every Spirit-filled believer does in obedience to God.

And herein lies the problem... I am not a Spirit filled believer and walk in disobedience because I don't speak in tongues?! All that kind of statement does is divide brethren... and God is not in the business of dividing light from light.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Then why did you also say:

Was the Lord lying to you?

But now that your method of attaining the gift does not match 1 Corinthians you have decided you do not have the GIFT of tongues after all, despite what the Lord "told" you, but rather the ABILITY of tongues and so the theology of 1 Corinthians no longer applies. How very convenient. Like the others who have now decided they don't have the GIFT, you can disregard all the theology and regulations that Paul gave regarding tongues because you have something different. Wonderful. You can now freely speak in tongues in church without interpretation along with everyone else at once, as Paul's instructions no longer apply.



So the disciples in Acts didn't have the gift of tongues after all, they had the ABILITY? And you have the same ABILITY as them? Not the Corinthian GIFT of tongues.

How do you decide whether you have the GIFT or the ABILITY of tongues? Do you toss a coin? Do they sound different? Is the ABILITY speaking in a foreign language as the disciples did in Acts?

What exactly is the difference between the GIFT and the ABILITY of speaking in tongues?

If you don't want the gifts of the Spirit, fine. Why not try the FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT?

 

[1stcenturylady]

And herein lies the problem... I am not a Spirit filled believer and walk in disobedience because I don't speak in tongues?! All that kind of statement does is divide brethren... and God is not in the business of dividing light from light.

Today, centuries of biases against speaking in tongues must be chiseled away through coming to believe they are even for us. The first century Christians had no biases to deal with first, so even the most immature Christian, like the Corinthians, could speak in tongues. But, even back then, not all who had the ability chose to. Paul even said, "I would that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you prophesy."

 

[Anto9us]

exaggerated hypothetical examples

and Polycarp in an "exagggerated hypothetical example" gave his body to be burned in very old age

What is your INSIDE TRACK to know that Paul only "imagined" all these things; and you being the AUTHORITY on "things he actually did" eh?

Were you THERE, Swordsman?

giving up ALL your possession

many early Christians did THAT -- Ananias and Sapphira got zonked for lying about the sum...

 

[redleghunter]

1Co 13:1

Though I speak with the tongues of men
and of angels,
and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

Is it an "established rule of hermeneutics" that angellos here means "non-human being" as it does many other times elsewhere in the New Testament?

1 Cor 13:1 clearly establishes the possibility of non-human languages being spoken as a charismatic gift.

Period.

There is that possibility. I agree.

We should also consider Paul's use of hyperbole in those verses as well:

1 Corinthians 13: NKJV

13 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.

 

[Anto9us]

That AGAPE trumps all the charisma is obvious, (in 1 Cor 13)
but this in no way makes the charismaton IMAGINARY or any more "unreal"

than the devil's offer to Jesus "I'll give you all these kingdoms if you worship me"

Never it was an option that the Devil could not really offer those kingdoms;

Never is it an option that the "exaggerated examples" of the "things less than AGAPE" -
are "unreal" and totally HYPOTHETICAL
never an option that they cannot and do not happen

 

[redleghunter]

Careful now, speaking in tongues is for self edifying. If done in church one needs someone to interpret.
As to not being a child of the most high should you not be able or speak in tongues, it's not biblical.
Christ's body has many members all with different functions. I honestly wouldn't advocate this to new believes, instead of aiding them as babes, you might just make them feel unwanted or like they have done something wrong.

Welcome to CF.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Was the Lord lying to you?.................despite what the Lord "told" you.......

I'm the one who used the quotation marks around the word "told". There was a reason for that which anyone not looking to belittle the idea of people hearing from the Lord in various ways can readily understand.

The word gift was used in a general manner because, as I clearly told you before, every good thing we have from the Lord is a gift of some kind.

If you want me to go back and edit and explain those posts I won't be doing it. I've given you enough information for you to know where I'm coming from.

I have received an alert from the forum that you have been following me since last Tuesday. Your attitude is heading toward belligerence. I doesn't take a spiritual gift for me to see the connection.

But now that your method of attaining the gift does not match 1 Corinthians you have decided you do not have the GIFT of tongues after all, despite what the Lord "told" you, but rather the ABILITY of tongues and so the theology of 1 Corinthians no longer applies.

Neither the method of receiving nor the use of the tongues in the Book of Acts matches that of the Corinthians either.

Nor does the idea of asking by faith for the Holy Spirit as instructed by the Lord match the methods of attainment in the Book of Acts.

..............How very convenient.

Getting snarky as expected.

Convenient or not - it is the simple truth of the matter.

Like the others who have now decided they don't have the GIFT, you can disregard all the theology and regulations that Paul gave regarding tongues because you have something different. Wonderful.

I can't speak for others. But I have disregarded nothing of the sort.

You can now freely speak in tongues in church without interpretation along with everyone else at once, as Paul's instructions no longer apply.

Why would I want to do such a thing when Paul's instruction do apply and I have never said otherwise.

So the disciples in Acts didn't have the gift of tongues after all, they had the ABILITY? And you have the same ABILITY as them? Not the Corinthian GIFT of tongues.

I didn't say that I had the same ability as the disciples in Acts.

As for the gift of speaking in other languages - I have never experienced doing that and have had no leading of the Holy Spirit nor the occasion in my life to step out in faith to find out.

How do you decide whether you have the GIFT or the ABILITY of tongues? Do you toss a coin? Do they sound different?

Snarky again????

"Toss a coin" - nice quip about something important from the scriptures.

Yes - since you asked - praying in the Spirit apparently sounds different from what was the sound made in the Book of Acts - at least at Pentecost.

Is the ABILITY speaking in a foreign language as the disciples did in Acts?

It could have been a one time ability and it could have been a gift of God which was irrevocable. It seems to be the former since it is not mentioned again in the same vein.

What exactly is the difference between the GIFT and the ABILITY of speaking in tongues?

The gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable and yet I see temporary abilities in Acts and elsewhere.

Peter and Paul didn't have the "gift" of escaping from prison and yet they had the ability. Paul had the ability to live through a stoning. I wouldn't call it a gift though.

We are told to pray in the Spirit. It is done by faith and there is nowhere that that ability is called one of the gifts.

It doesn't appear that I have the gift of speaking in other languages. But I do have the ability to pray in the Spirit. Beyond that I have not said.

Since you are bent on becoming snarky and belligerent - that will do it for us from now on - if you can see fit to stop following me it would be nice.

At least, though, please stop addressing me with non-productive and snarky posts.

Thanks.

 

[Biblicist]

Ah, that old chestnut.

Look at the verse in context:

1 Cor 13:1-3 "If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing."

Paul uses five conditional IF statements in 1 Cor 13:1-3 which were both hypothetical (they were imagined scenarios, not things he actually did). . .

Aren't we all silly bunnies, here we were for many hundreds of years presuming that Paul actually prophesied, so tell us, was Paul maybe fibbing when he tells us that he prophesies or was he maybe employing a bit of hyperbole.

I staggers me that you still try and pull this tired old humanist line, which I grant probably works on the less astute and with those who are essentially theologically illiterate, but I suppose that we can put it all down to CNN theology - fake news.

 

[Biblicist]

That AGAPE trumps all the charisma is obvious, (in 1 Cor 13)

So you are saying that our individual ability to love trumps the Power and ministry of the Holy Spirit, so I guess then that we have no need for the Holy Spirit within the life of the Church.

 

[Biblicist]

And herein lies the problem... I am not a Spirit filled believer and walk in disobedience because I don't speak in tongues?! All that kind of statement does is divide brethren... and God is not in the business of dividing light from light.

As a tongues speaking Pentecostal I certainly recognise that all those who have confessed Jesus as their Lord and Saviour that they are in fact Spirit filled, which of course goes against the views of those who are classic-Pentecostals such as the AoG who hold to the position that the Baptism in the Holy Spirit is subsequent to our initially being sealed in the Spirit, but this is an increasingly minimal view where most Pentecostals such as myself now acknowledge that the Baptism in the Holy Spirit is soteriological and not necessarily one of subsequence.

 

[Biblicist]

I agree... but definitions matter. If @Biblicist is saying that praising the Father through the power of the Holy Spirit is only through tongues, then I would reject that conclusion.

Gosh... worship (shachah in Hebrew) means to bend and bow but within that is a picture of submission (we don't bow before anyone we don't "serve"). So anything we do based on our submission can be worship... from prayer or singing in praise... to walking in our calling and even being obedient. If we do this because of our submission to His Lordship... that is worship and it doesn't have to include tongues.

Worship is certainly multi-faceted and not only limited to how we can praise the Father in tongues, where I would view congregational singing (in English) as a higher form of corporate worship before the Lord than with how an individual can sing praises in the Spirit (tongues).

Having said this, during times of personal praise and worship our ability to be able to offer words of praise and adoration to the Father in the Spirit (tongues) has no equal.

When we consider prayer, even though there is certainly value with many praying in their native tongue, I seriously doubt if this can match the ability of a number of people praying in the Spirit (tongues) to the Father on a specific issue, nothing that man could do would ever come close to that of the ability of the Holy Spirit who can speak perfect intercessory prayers to the Father - nothing would come even close.

So when it comes to worship, which all Believers can partake of, we need to be very specific about what we mean when we speak of worship and also with its location.

 

[Anto9us]

So you are saying that our individual ability to love trumps the Power and ministry of the Holy Spirit, so I guess then that we have no need for the Holy Spirit within the life of the Church.

No, Biblicist, that is not what I am saying.

1 Cor 13 AFFIRMS the need for Holy Spirit gifts, as I see it, it just puts AGAPE as the highest motive, and I don't know that "our individual ability to love" is even an adequate description of AGAPE, which KJV translates CHARITY, and even that old english word used to have more connotations than when we say 'charity' today, like "pennies for the poor" etc.

maybe just like you saying that corporate prayer "in the spirit" can do things "above and beyond" other forms of prayer, AGAPE to me means MORE than our individual ability to LOVE, as we use LOVE in English for everything like "I LOVE chicken-fried steak" to I love this or that, or this or that person, or this or that kind of music, and so on.

 

[Anto9us]

It seems to me that several "Tongues-affirming" believers have posted in this thread, and NONE have put forth the concept that "one MUST speak in Tongues in order to be saved"; rather - many have explicitly stated that is not so.

 

[Bollweevil]

Absolutely !!!

Receive the Holy Ghost and the immediate outward evidence speaking in tongues as the spirit gives direct undefileable contact with GOD !

Just as in the beginning ..Acts 2v4.. included Mary the mother of Jesus....

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (MUST)

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth....according to the word, to pray in the Spirit :

1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

1Co 14:2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Ac 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


the first 2 is your part...the third is Gods seal of approval !

Holy Ghost + speaking in tongues .. no tongues no Spirit..

Ro 8:9 .............Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Not to be confused with the demonstration IN THE CHURCH (max 3) to show you are who you say you are !!
when you pray..go to your closet, private place and pray...


confess Jesus Christ..his way...

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.

package deal

obtain the Grace,Mercy and Faith that Jesus Christ has made avaliable to whomsoever will..

or have the adversaries religious confusion..just words no power !

When people spoke in different languages in the first century it was for the purpose of others to understand what was being said to spread the Gospel, it was not gibberish. Also the miracles of the apostles ended with them passing that gift to others; therefore that gift is not present in God's people today. Speaking in tongues was simply having everyone who was gathered together from many different places and with different languages to understand one another. There is no purpose of talking where noone can understand what is being said. If you're referring to speaking in tongues where what is being said is unintelligible; this has no purpose and is against God's will and what the scripture says.

1 Corinthians 14:20-28
20 Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature. 21 In the Law it is written, “By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers I will speak to this people, and even so they will not listen to Me,” says the Lord. 22 So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe. 23 Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad? 24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all; 25 the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you.
26 What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; 28 but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.

 

[Biblicist]

No, Biblicist, that is not what I am saying.

1 Cor 13 AFFIRMS the need for Holy Spirit gifts, as I see it, it just puts AGAPE as the highest motive, and I don't know that "our individual ability to love" is even an adequate description of AGAPE, which KJV translates CHARITY, and even that old english word used to have more connotations than when we say 'charity' today, like "pennies for the poor" etc.

In the post that I quoted you said "That AGAPE trumps all the charisma is obvious" which can only mean that our ability to love is greater than that of the Holy Spirit's ministry, which I realised at the time that it was not something that you meant to say but of course it can only be taken the way that I said.

But I do fully agree with your subsequent qualification that love is always to be our motivation when we allow the Holy Spirit to outwork through us, which of course is one of Paul's primary themes in 1 Cor 14. But even here this is still an often unforeseen caveat in place in that even when we fail to operate in love that the Holy Spirit can still outwork a healing for someone who we are ministering too, though if we fail to minister in love then even though the Holy Spirit is ministering healing to another we gain absolutely nothing if we are not walking within an appropriate degree of love.

 

[Biblicist]

When people spoke in different languages in the first century it was for the purpose of others to understand what was being said to spread the Gospel, it was not gibberish.

If this is the case then why do we not have any examples within the Scriptures where tongues has ever been used to communicate to others who do not speak our language, surely Paul would have discussed this idea if it were possible, but of course neither Paul nor any other Biblical writer gives this idea any credence.

Also the miracles of the apostles ended with them passing that gift to others; therefore that gift is not present in God's people today.

This particular idea falls flat very quickly when we consider how the early Latin churchmen have made mention up until the 4th century how the Holy Spirit still works this way through various Believers.

 

[Biblicist]

It seems to me that several "Tongues-affirming" believers have posted in this thread, and NONE have put forth the concept that "one MUST speak in Tongues in order to be saved"; rather - many have explicitly stated that is not so.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, here in Australia there would be hardly more than 1% of Pentecostals who believe in this errant doctrine; in the USA the figure could be maybe around 5-10% though amongst US charismatics it would be nearer to zero percent.

PS. By the way, I love your Avatar of James Harmensen.

 

[swordsman1]

and Polycarp in an "exagggerated hypothetical example" gave his body to be burned in very old age

Right, giving up your own life is the highest form of giving that Paul could imagine. Not the normal everyday expected degree of giving for someone with that spiritual gift.

In the same way speaking in the language of angels is not the normal expected operation of the gift of tongues. He is exaggerating to make the point that having gifts even to such lofty degrees would be worthless without love.

What is your INSIDE TRACK to know that Paul only "imagined" all these things; and you being the AUTHORITY on "things he actually did" eh?

Because he used the word "If". They are supposed examples.

many early Christians did THAT -- Ananias and Sapphira got zonked for lying about the sum...

But they weren't asked to give ALL that they had, right down to the clothes they were wearing. That was the exaggerated hypothetical example Paul gave here.