• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

SPEAKING IN TONGUES: Help make this the DEFINITIVE learning thread

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
in the bible tongues means languages, not private charismatic or ecstatic prayer
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
in the bible tongues means languages, not private charismatic or ecstatic prayer
Paul never mentioned anything ecstatic about speaking in tongues. There is no thought in his teaching linking the use of tongues with any kind of hyped up emotions. The idea of of "ecstatic" comes from misinformed commentators who might have attended or heard about one or two meetings of the Pentecostal lunatic fringe. Most standard Pentecostal and Charismatics whom I know would poo poo the idea that anyone had to get into a hyper emotional state to speak or pray in tongues.

I would say that any negative comment about Charismatic tongues from any person who had never been associated with a Pentecostal/Charistmatic church as a long-term member or church leader, would be unreliable and full of misinformation. Frankly, they would be just spouting parrot fashion stuff they had heard, rather than spending quality time with Pentecostal believers, getting to know them, and seeing Pentecostalism as it really is from the inside, rather than one or two attendances at a rowdy Sunday night meeting where there could be a combination of the stable members and the lunatic fringe. Most people who are genuinely wanting to find out the truth about Charismatics would discuss issues with stable responsible members and be prepared to listen and be teachable.

But prejudice about Pentecostal/Charismatic issues blinds people and stops them finding out what is real and true and being able to distinguish it from the fleshly practice. And so they throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Wouldn't some anti-Charismatics be more honest and ethical by going back to their own churches and getting on with serving God in their own areas, stop slandering and defaming Charismatics and Pentecostals and leaving them alone to get on with serving God in their own way?
 
Upvote 0
S

Servant of Jesus

Guest

Would you mind describing how you distinguish between a hyper-active, tongue speaking "normal" Pentecostal member from a member of the "Pentecostal lunatic fringe"?

Are they still part of the "Pentecostal lunatic fringe" if they have someone there to interpret for them?
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
In my twelve years with the Pentecostal church, I never saw a hyper-active tongues speaking member. I never saw many hyper active Pentecostals at all. The ones I saw were normal Christians enjoying church, worshiping God and enjoying the preaching of the Word, just like any other Christians.

Perhaps the Pentecostal church is quieter than those in the USA where I believe there are many more hyper-active people in it.

All the the 12 years, I saw only one person holy rolling on the floor, and he was viewed as an oddity in a church which was considered to be at the cutting edge of Pentecostalism at the time.

The "lunatic fringe" people who I met had issues other than speaking in tongues, and these people were clearly recognised by the leadership as such.

The leaders of every Pentecostal church I worked with were stable, experienced men of God who preached sound doctrine and strong taught self control in any approach to God in worship. One pastor I knew used to pray for people who became hyper in his services, because he believed that they needed setting free from a contrary spirit that was causing them to behave that way.

The only differences that I have seen between Pentecostals and other denominations is that Pentecostals believe in using the nine gifts of the Holy Spirit, where other denominations are content with three hymns, a reading, a couple of prayers, and preaching. There are no prophecies, words of knowledge, words of wisdom, miracles, exercises of extra faith, discerning of spirits, or healing in those services. The basic conduct of members in both types of churches is basically the same. Pentecostals usually are somewhat more passionate about their faith and show more enthusiasm about Christ and what He has done for them, and are more expressive in their worship of Him, but I would not say that they are hyper-active.

Maybe you have had such a limited fellowship with Pentecostals that you have only seen a limited few of what would be considered as the "lunatic fringe" in most Pentecostal churches.
 
Upvote 0

sunlover1

Beloved, Let us love one another
Nov 10, 2006
26,146
5,348
Under the Shadow of the Almighty
✟102,311.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Most standard Pentecostal and Charismatics whom I know would poo poo the idea that anyone had to get into a hyper emotional state to speak or pray in tongues.

Right and I've never met any of these ... luny types either.
My church is just as conservative as the next if you were to visit..
well except for our worship perhaps. We do get ...quite joyful
(God still likes joy, amen? )
 
Upvote 0

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
IMO you are in the minority if you are NOT part of the "lunatic fringe" with regards to tongues.

that is the majority and why overall,
the word ecstatic is used to describe the charismatic/Pentacostal tongue

I would say that any negative comment about Charismatic tongues from any person who had never been associated with a Pentecostal/Charistmatic church as a long-term member or church leader, would be unreliable and full of misinformation.
of course you would say that.
I've seen mild and lunatic fringe and everything inbetween
at the same service...
but always the lunatic fringe is represented

2 of my good friends are Pentacostal

Frankly, they would be just spouting parrot fashion stuff they had heard, rather than spending quality time with Pentecostal believers, getting to know them, and seeing Pentecostalism as it really is from the inside,
hey, that would be me!!!! as just explained

unless what you are teaching is not biblically or emotionally sound.

But prejudice about Pentecostal/Charismatic issues blinds people and stops them finding out what is real and true and being able to distinguish it from the fleshly practice. And so they throw out the baby with the bathwater.
indoctrination of some,
has their tradition of man,
making void the Word of God...
changing the meaning of a whole chapter,
to pretty much the exact opposite of the intent

turning the rules for spreading the Word of Christ into all languages,
into charismatic private prayer vs.
congregational charismatic interpretation


perhaps it is put on some of those anti-Charismatics
to be a voice of reason and understanding to the masses

to not only give others an alternative understanding of tongues,
one that makes sense and is not confusing
or opposite of what tongues already means in the bible,
for those with legit questions....,
but also to help the immature grow in Christ
and drop seeds that will one day grow with God's help
and allow them to come out of their cultic delusion/tradition of man,
no matter how well intended they may be

to be men in understanding
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
As I pointed out in the other thread: You are giving your reasons you don't believe it is God's will for you. Your views are subjective, just like mine. Others who read them are free to choose for themselves.

But I do want to make the point is that if a person doesn't believe in the gifts of the Spirit as they are practiced today, then that person does not believe in the baptism in the Holy Spirit as practiced among Pentecostals and Charismatics today. The trouble is that they are the only churches that are demonstrating anything like the evidence of being baptised and filled with the Spirit as described in the New Testament.

If in churches, prophecy, miracles, healing are not happening, then there is no demonstration of the Spirit, therefore there is no evidence that the Holy Spirit is active in the services. This is because the nine gifts of the Spirit are the ways in which the Spirit is active in Christian services. If these are not activated, there is no evidence that the Spirit is there at all. If churches decide to reject the operation of the gifts of the Spirit, then they are rejecting the method in which the Spirit works to strengthen Christians. Therefore all the service has left are natural activities based on the flesh, because the Spirit, being rejected, is absent.

It is true that the Lord said, "When two or three are gathered together in my Name there I am in the midst", He may be present as an observer, but He can't do much because He has ordered it that He works among Christians by the operation of the Spirit. If the Spirit is not permitted to work through Christians with the spiritual tools that He has provided, then He has to stand in a corner, bound and made helpless by unbelief - the rejection that the Spirit works through supernatural gifts today.

What this means is that services are made up of three hymns, a Bible reading, some prayers and a moral sermon, with a cup of tea and scones afterward. So, instead of Christians going home full of the Spirit, they are going home full of tea and scones!

This is the outcome of a dry, formalised religiousity that is all that exists if the Holy Spirit cannot freely be active in church services.
 
Upvote 0

sunlover1

Beloved, Let us love one another
Nov 10, 2006
26,146
5,348
Under the Shadow of the Almighty
✟102,311.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others

Everyone loses.

But they don't realize the difference Oscarr... so... perhaps this is what they prefer.
And it IS somewhat 'scary' to get out of that comfort zone and taste and see.
I would still be having scones and tea if it weren't for people praying for me i bet.


 
Upvote 0

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
As I pointed out in the other thread: You are giving your reasons you don't believe it is God's will for you.

no...the reason given are for all of us, not just me

Your views are subjective, just like mine. Others who read them are free to choose for themselves.

I agree...they are free to choose

But I do want to make the point is that if a person doesn't believe in the gifts of the Spirit as they are practiced today, then that person does not believe in the baptism in the Holy Spirit as practiced among Pentecostals and Charismatics today.

of course

The trouble is that they are the only churches that are demonstrating anything like the evidence of being baptised and filled with the Spirit as described in the New Testament.

or, not even close

If in churches, prophecy,

prophesy is not what you think it means, in 1Cor14
prophesy in 1Cor14 is speaking about the already written prophesy's found in the bible

miracles, healing are not happening, then there is no demonstration of the Spirit, therefore there is no evidence that the Holy Spirit is active in the services.

evidence is undeniable..
charismatic tongues are deniable
what happened in Acts2 was not deniable


you assusme chariamstic tongues as a gift,
and others do not

what does scones and tea have to do with tongues?
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
what does scones and tea have to do with tongues?
The expression was taken from a Chinese pastor who ministered to us once. He said that Chinese Evangelical Christians went home filled with the Spirit after their Sunday services, and that Western Christians went home full of tea and scones.
 
Upvote 0

Paul.

I think therefore I post
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2008
324
35
Australia
✟194,141.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Divorced
well, when I speak, I can certainly hear myself and my language just fine

Yes you do and so do I when I talk to other people. That is the way everyone experiences ordinary verbal communication. It follows that, since Acts 2 is not describing ordinary verbal communication, your experience during ordinary verbal communication is therefore not necessarily the same as what the disciples experienced during a miraculous work of God. Do you agree?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
you could never convince me that they did not themselves understand each other.

whether the langauge that came out of their mouth was their own or not....

they certainly understood each other...
 
Upvote 0

Paul.

I think therefore I post
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2008
324
35
Australia
✟194,141.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Divorced
well, when I speak, I can certainly hear myself and my language just fine


you could never convince me

I am not here to convince you, I am here to discuss what the Bible says, to understand other Christians interpretations of God's Word and to have my own interpretations scrutinized.

you could never convince me that they did not themselves understand each other.

whether the langauge that came out of their mouth was their own or not....

they certainly understood each other...

What scripture has convinced you that each disciple understood what the other disciples were saying when they spoke in tongues in Acts 2?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
1And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
3And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
5And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
6Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.



14But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
15For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
18And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

hi

so, what they did was prophesy...
it has to be understood to be prophesy...


the miracle that happend then, was directly for teaching with understanding.
They spoke to each other for that purpose, to understand perfectly...
and then to the crowd...
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
the miracle that happend then, [/COLOR]was directly for teaching with understanding.
They spoke to each other for that purpose, to understand perfectly...
and then to the crowd...
Of course you missed out some significant verses between your quotes which list all the different languages that were spoken by the 120. Now these were native Galileans. So you mean that they had a natural fluent knowledge of all the languages listed? So these Galileans had learned and could fluently speak the language and dialects of Crete, Arabia, Parthia, Asia, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Libya, and Rome? These people had never been further afield than their native Galilee and Jerusalem, and you are telling me that they were able to educate themselves and be able to speak the national languages and regional dialects of all these countries without ever going there? How do you explain that?

This is what puzzled all these pilgrims when they heard their own dialects being spoken, because they knew that the people speaking were Galileans who could never have known all those languages. That's what they said: "How can this be, seeing that these people are Galileans?" Galileans were known as simple folk who depended on fishing for a living. Everyone knew that they would not have been sophisticated enough to have a fluent command of all the languages and regional dialects of the then known world. That is why some, who may have heard as gibberish the languages they did not understand, said that these people were drunk and just babbling in an alcoholic stupor. That's when Peter got up and explained what was going on.

It is quite convenient that you would miss those verses out because any person reading the verses closely would have reasonable doubts about your theory that when the 120 spoke the languages, they could all understand each other. Given the description of the languages spoken, it was a total impossibility for that to be.

Those verses describing the languages put such a hole in your theory big enough for a London bus to be driven through with plenty of room to spare!
 
Upvote 0

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Of course you missed out some significant verses between your quotes which list all the different languages that were spoken by the 120.

I did not miss them...

I was answering Paul's question about my opinion

Now these were native Galileans. So you mean that they had a natural fluent knowledge of all the languages listed?

of course not...the miracle that God sent obviously did tho.

So these Galileans had learned and could fluently speak the language and dialects of Crete, Arabia, Parthia, Asia, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Libya, and Rome?

no...it was a miracle gift from God...for a reason..
and it was not self edification
it was to spread the mighty works of God (Christ Messiah) to all of those present


those are your misconceptions...
I never ever thought that, let alone have said that


Oscarr, I agree with you on this point...
I don't know how youcould have ever thought I did not

That is why some, who may have heard as gibberish the languages they did not understand, said that these people were drunk and just babbling in an alcoholic stupor. That's when Peter got up and explained what was going on.

no...every single man there heard it in his own language, bar none...
even the ones that Peter lifted his voice up to.

It is quite convenient that you would miss those verses out because any person reading the verses closely would have reasonable doubts about your theory that when the 120 spoke the languages, they could all understand each other.

why? it was a gift of God that allowed for perfect understanding...
for words to become prophesy to those who hear them...as in the fulfillments of Messianic references in Isaiah and the Pslams among others..
of course they understood each other...

the other cases in Acts do not have a crowd of others to hear and understand,
but instead it is only the one group...
so that throws your theory out,
that the tongues were not understood by those speaking them

Given the description of the languages spoken, it was a total impossibility for that to be.

for what to be? are you suggesting that the Gift from God that allowed for perfect understanding
was not given to the very ones that were actually speaking?
how obsurd

Those verses describing the languages put such a hole in your theory big enough for a London bus to be driven through with plenty of room to spare!
again...you're way off the deep end here Bro..

tootles
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
[/COLOR][/SIZE]
I did not miss them...

I was answering Paul's question about my opinion

Fair enough.
of course not...the miracle that God sent obviously did tho.


no...it was a miracle gift from God...for a reason..
and it was not self edification
it was to spread the mighty works of God (Christ Messiah) to all of those present

We are agreed there.
those are your misconceptions...
I never ever thought that, let alone have said that
I think that I was referring to your comment that you believe that the 120 understood the different languages they were speaking as if they learned them somewhere. But I see from your later comment that you are saying something a little bit different.


Oscarr, I agree with you on this point...
I don't know how youcould have ever thought I did not
It's good that this is clarified for both of us.
no...every single man there heard it in his own language, bar none...
even the ones that Peter lifted his voice up to.
OK.
why? it was a gift of God that allowed for perfect understanding...
for words to become prophesy to those who hear them...as in the fulfillments of Messianic references in Isaiah and the Pslams among others..
of course they understood each other...
Ah! So you are saying that when they started speaking the languages, God gave them the gift of understanding what they themselves were speaking. That's an interesting theory. It's a pity that the Scripture does not say that, but I have concede that it was a possibility but not probable.
the other cases in Acts do not have a crowd of others to hear and understand,
but instead it is only the one group...
so that throws your theory out,
that the tongues were not understood by those speaking them
The Scripture doesn't specify one way or the other. We are having to depend on Paul's later teaching about tongues in 1 Corinthians 14 to give us more clues about the nature of the gift.
for what to be? are you suggesting that the Gift from God that allowed for perfect understanding
was not given to the very ones that were actually speaking?
how obsurd


Well, it is not beyond the ability of God to do that. That's why I said that it is a possibility. But in the absence of any specific statements in Scripture to support it, it has to remain an interesting theory, like evolution...
again...you're way off the deep end here Bro..

tootles
You wouldn't expect any less than a good solid debate from me over these issues, would you?

The intrepid warriors are still slugging it out after the less resilient ones are giving up on this thread. But continue to bring it on! I;m having fun!
 
Upvote 0

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
I'd say it is more than probable thaty they understood each other...
they were after all, alone with each other in the house
at least at first...
...
there is nothing, biblically, up to THIS point in scripture,
to suggest that there was ever any charismatic prayer language or that tongues means something other than languages

our speaking tongue/language is either understood or it is not...


I think it would be wrong to assume that they did not understand each other,
especially when scripture says that they ALL understood...
regardless of where they were from...


The Scripture doesn't specify one way or the other.

well, it does...


1And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
3And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
5And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
6Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
7And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
8And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
9Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
10Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
11Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

so, they knew what they heard...and so did Peter, as he clarifies...

12And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?
13Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
14But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
15For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: 18And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

Peter understood what was happening,
and what he was saying...
he understood perfectly...
enough to know it was the same thing Joel spoke about in Joel2,
and that it was prophesy...
(about the wonderful works of God...ie. Christ)

they would not know that it was what Joel spoke of or that it was prophesy,
if they themselves did not understand...

We are having to depend on Paul's later teaching about tongues in 1 Corinthians 14 to give us more clues about the nature of the gift.
nope...1Cor14 is not about a charismatic prayer language
nor is it about the cloven tongues of fire that is seen and heard in Acts2


Well, it is not beyond the ability of God to do that. That's why I said that it is a possibility. But in the absence of any specific statements in Scripture to support it, it has to remain an interesting theory, like evolution...
what is theoretical, is when you say
they did not understand when speaking that cloven tongue...
that is the unproven theory..

there is nothing to suggest that they did not understand..
infact, the more than suggestion is quite the opposite.

You wouldn't expect any less than a good solid debate from me over these issues, would you?
nope....I enjoy it myself.

The intrepid warriors are still slugging it out after the less resilient ones are giving up on this thread. But continue to bring it on! I;m having fun!
alrighty-then
 
Upvote 0