SPEAKING IN TONGUES: Help make this the DEFINITIVE learning thread

Servant of Jesus said:

ARBITER01 and OSCARR (and anyone else who wishes to respond)- could I ask you three questions:

1. Why did Jesus not speak in tongues, or instruct His disciples to do so?

Click to expand...

First of all, we really can't say for sure that He didn't .. although why would He?
Tongues purpose is what ? (According to Scripture)

2. Do you think speaking in tongues is a salvation issue?

Click to expand...

Not according to Scripture..

3. Do you think those who speak in tongues are "better" Christians?

Click to expand...

Well, DUH


JK
No, not at all "better" Christians.
IMO we ALL fall short of the glory of God.
Tongues is helpful to the believer in that it
"Edifies" him. We are told to "build yourselves
up in your most holy faith"
They said to you, “In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” 19These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit. 20But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit. 21Keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.
22Be merciful to those who doubt; 23snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

With regard to the latter point, I have provided the example of a school in Canada (Pacific Academy) that bases admission on an applicant's parents ability to speak in tongues- how do you respond to that practice?

Click to expand...

I would guess that in their eyes, praying in tongues is an indication that the person has
the Spirit and believes in the gifts of the spirit.
I can understand why they might have such a policy.
(Agreement/ walking together...)
I personally believe that you can be filled with the Spirit and never
choose to operate in any of the gifts.
But again, I can understand why they might choose such policy.

mark kennedy said:

First of all Tongues are human languages,...

Click to expand...

If they're human languages, why would you need an interpreter?
Paul said not to speak in tongues unless someone can interpret.

Speaking in a language that no one understands defeats the purpose of a gift of the Holy Spirit and Paul makes the abundantly clear.

Click to expand...

Purpose of tongues is to bless God and edify yourself, thus strengthening
your part of the body.

Thirdly, Pentecostalism is a relatively new movement and the New Testament indicates that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit are evidenced by the fruits of the Spirit, not the manifestations. This is far more significant then our Charismatic and Pentecostal brethren seem to realize, many facets of this movement require careful discernment.

Click to expand...

Good idea for another thread.

I come here looking to open up a dialog, seek out the meaning of the Scriptures and enjoy the fellowship and mutual edification of this fascinating topic. Be patient, I am going through a transitional period right now but I have been in prayerful study on this topic for a long time and relish the opportunity to both learn and share from the many facets.

May all things be done unto edifying,
Mark

Click to expand...

[/QUOTE]
I absolutely love your attitude!
God bless you as you (and we) learn and grow!

sunlover

sunlover1 said:

First of all, we really can't say for sure that He didn't .. although why would He?

Click to expand...

Jesus prayed, and we read about His prayers,
so it was not in unknown charismatic tongues..
He also taught us how to pray
and it was not with unknown charismatic tongues either.
It was with the Spirit and with understanding also, at the same time...

If they're human languages, why would you need an interpreter?
Paul said not to speak in tongues unless someone can interpret.

Click to expand...

if the tongue is a foreign (unknown) one to them in the assembly...then use an interpreter.

speak the Hebrew tongue to a Greek audience and you'd need an interpreter....

else ono one would understand your words..

they would not even know when to say AMEN...

you'd be as barbarians to each other...

you'd be speaking to the wind, or JUST to God,

and they in the audience would not be edified by your words...

Purpose of tongues is to bless God and edify yourself, thus strengthening
your part of the body.

Click to expand...

ouch...the purpose of tongues is to spread the Word of God into all nations...the Great Commission...

languages=tongues.....tongues=langauges.....even English.


19Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
20Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
21In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

diversities of langauges///diverse kinds of langagues (1Cor12)
AMEN

zeke37 said:

now I ask...what is more important to the Body?

a personal prayer language where the pray"er" does not even know what he thinks, or a gift that allows the spread of the Word of God into all nations and tongues...so that folks from all over the planet can understand and come to God???

Click to expand...

Well by scripture, the person praying will not know what he/she is saying,..

1Co 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret.

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

Click to expand...

Paul advocated that we seek the gift of interpretation, otherwise we wouldn't know what we were saying, which goes right back to what Paul said before,...

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

Click to expand...

What you are trying to do is teach something other than what our apostles taught, which would be heresy my friend.

mark kennedy said:

I'm arriving a little late and I really have not had time to read the thread or closely examine the proof texts. I think I have a fairly unique view of the Pentecostal experience but that is not to say it's anything new. It will probably be a few weeks before I have time to do this subject justice but let me give you a brief and concise post outlining my position.

First of all Tongues are human languages, of the 13 nations mentioned in Acts 2 there were 11 languages spoken. Scholars have long held that each of the 11 apostles came out of the upper room each speaking the language of the ones being addressed. Bear in mind that attendance to this feast was mandatory under Levetical law, wherever the Jew were they were required to be in Jerusalem for this feast.

Secondly, tongues were being misused in the Corinthian church and I Corinthians should be understood in that light. Speaking in a language that no one understands defeats the purpose of a gift of the Holy Spirit and Paul makes the abundantly clear.

Thirdly, Pentecostalism is a relatively new movement and the New Testament indicates that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit are evidenced by the fruits of the Spirit, not the manifestations. This is far more significant then our Charismatic and Pentecostal brethren seem to realize, many facets of this movement require careful discernment.

On a personal note I get most of my theology from the same tradition Pentecostals come from and yes, you guys do too have a tradition and a theology. It's actually a very long tradition and a very sound theology. While I don't believe that this 'experience' is New Testament tongues this movement teems with New Testament believers and the largest body of lay ministers I am aware of being active in modern Christiandom.

I come here looking to open up a dialog, seek out the meaning of the Scriptures and enjoy the fellowship and mutual edification of this fascinating topic. Be patient, I am going through a transitional period right now but I have been in prayerful study on this topic for a long time and relish the opportunity to both learn and share from the many facets.

May all things be done unto edifying,
Mark

Click to expand...

Sup brother! Glad to see you stopped by . . . been a LONG time.

Scholars have long held that each of the 11 apostles came out of the upper room each speaking the language of the ones being addressed.

Click to expand...

Problem is the antecedant usage tho:

Acts 2:1-4
When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.
NASU

Who is "they"?

Antecedently, "they" is:

Acts 1:15-16
15 At this time Peter stood up in the midst of the brethren (a gathering of about one hundred and twenty persons was there together), and said, 16 "Brethren,
NASU

the brethren which consisted of 120 people. I do understand that the pericope of the choosing of Matthias is in between, BUT the narrative never separates the Apostles from the 120 . . . further it would be the 12 coming out to speak now, as the 12th position that Judas left vacant is now filled. Either way tho, 11 speaking or 12 speaking, it doesnt cut it because the GROUP of believers/brothers is what is referred to as "they" are part of the entire group referred to in 1:26 as distinct from the Apostles.

First of all Tongues are human languages

Click to expand...

That is one of the issues at hand, and one that you and I never finished!

In later posts we can go through why we believe that textually, linguistically and historically this is not the case.

Secondly, tongues were being misused in the Corinthian church and I Corinthians should be understood in that light.

Click to expand...

Amen, I would add tho, that the cause for the teaching should not color the positive aspects that he highlights IN THE PROPER USAGE OF THE CHARISM.

Speaking in a language that no one understands defeats the purpose of a gift of the Holy Spirit and Paul makes the abundantly clear.

Click to expand...

Not QUITE right, speaking in a language that no one understands WITHOUT INTERPRETATION WHILE IN A GROUP SETTING defeats the usage of the MINISTRY of tongues to a congregation . . . I think that this is a bit more semantically and textually correct.

Thirdly, Pentecostalism is a relatively new movement and the New Testament indicates that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit are evidenced by the fruits of the Spirit, not the manifestations.

Click to expand...

I would WAY differ . . . but this is not a discussion on SPirit Baptism . . . we can do that one separate tho . . . I would love to discuss that too.

This is far more significant then our Charismatic and Pentecostal brethren seem to realize, many facets of this movement require careful discernment.

Click to expand...

Absolutely . . . many are even heretical, and severly heretical. I do believe that many Pent/Charis's do not emphasize the character changes that the Spirit brings from a walk that is in line with Gal 5 . . . and they should JUST AS MUCH AS THE MANIFESTATIONS OF THE SPIRIT. Otherwise there is no substance to the showing of the Spirit in the lives of transformed sinners in the light of the cross.

Lookin forward to your return from your tour ma' man.

Gods safety upon you there!

I thank God for motivating new contributors here that are providing additional food for thought.

And thank you everyone for keeping the conversation so civil and uplifting.

.

zeke37 said:

Jesus prayed, and we read about His prayers,
so it was not in unknown charismatic tongues..
He also taught us how to pray
and it was not with unknown charismatic tongues either.
It was with the Spirit and with understanding also, at the same time...


if the tongue is a foreign (unknown) one to them in the assembly...then use an interpreter.

speak the Hebrew tongue to a Greek audience and you'd need an interpreter....

else ono one would understand your words..

they would not even know when to say AMEN...

you'd be as barbarians to each other...

you'd be speaking to the wind, or JUST to God,

and they in the audience would not be edified by your words...



ouch...the purpose of tongues is to spread the Word of God into all nations...the Great Commission...

languages=tongues.....tongues=langauges.....even English.


19Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
20Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
21In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

diversities of langauges///diverse kinds of langagues (1Cor12)
AMEN

Click to expand...

languages=tongues.....tongues=langauges

Click to expand...

You keep saying this, but it is simply NOT true:

1. It also refers to the literal tongue of the mouth
2. It does refer also to ecstatic speech, still considered a language

ARBITER01 said:

Well by scripture, the person praying will not know what he/she is saying,..

Click to expand...

I guess you forgot verse 15-17 then...you know, the verses that directly follow the one you quoted...
15What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

why BOTH at the same time?????

16Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.

get it???

Paul advocated that we seek the gift of interpretation, otherwise we wouldn't know what we were saying, which goes right back to what Paul said before,...

Click to expand...

lol. if the audience does not understand your tongue,
then seek an interpreter to interpret your tongue into their tongue,
so that they can understand what you are tyring to teach them,
and THEN they can come to God...when they understand

What you are trying to do is teach something other than what our apostles taught, which would be heresy my friend.

Click to expand...

ya, really???
I'll stick with the Christ's teaching on prayer,
especially since Paul was not even addressing private prayer in 1Cor14...
as a matter of fact,Christ taught the Disciples exactly how to pray....

so who do I believe? Jesus Christ or Mat, Oscar and ARBITER01 ????

pause......obvious answer.....unpause....

speak a foreign langauge to an audience and no one would understand you...only God would.
what is in your mind, your understanding of scripture and Psalms, would bear no fruit
the other (listeners) is not edified...
even if you give thanks well, the audience doesn't even know when to say AMEN

get it?

Mathetes the kerux said:

You keep saying this, but it is simply NOT true:

1. It also refers to the literal tongue of the mouth
2. It does refer also to ecstatic speech, still considered a language

Click to expand...

how can ecstatic charismatic utterances be a langauge...lol.
look up the definition of "language" and let me know what you find.

yes, tongue can refer to the literal tongue of the mouth,
with which we communicate in our own langauge (tongue)

in the Bible, tongues never refers to ecstatic speech.....ever.
you could never prove that it does...
you say that you can prove that others called ecstatic speech "tongues",
outside the bible but you cannot prove it to me
nor those of us who are against the practice...
so you cannot really prove it at all.

reason: the bible does not teach it at all.

zeke37 said:

how can ecstatic charismatic utterances be a langauge...lol.
look up the definition of "language" and let me know what you find.

yes, tongue can refer to the literal tongue of the mouth,
with which we communicate in our own langauge (tongue)

in the Bible, tongues never refers to ecstatic speech.....ever.
you could never prove that it does...
you say that you can prove that others called ecstatic speech "tongues",
outside the bible but you cannot prove it to me
nor those of us who are against the practice...
so you cannot really prove it at all.

reason: the bible does not teach it at all.

Click to expand...

how can ecstatic charismatic utterances be a langauge...lol.

Click to expand...

Remember the Testament of Job? Ecstatic utterance was the whole point that we went there . . . and these ecstatic utterances were considered HOLY SPEECH.

Not saying that this is what is spoken of in Scripture (tho I believe it is and you do not), just saying that the concept of ecstatic unintelligible speech is within the meaning of tongues (glossais).

(ya know you can concede this, esp from the historical cultural evidence, that it is at least within the meaning of the terms and still not budge on your interpretation of the text . . . Matter of fact . . . to not concede this with the evidence that clearly points contrary, would be jus plain silly. U dont loose any ground bro . . . but u do show yourself willing to integrate all the facts).

you say that you can prove that others called ecstatic speech "tongues",
outside the bible but you cannot prove it to me

Click to expand...

R u serious . . . wow . . . I guess you didnt read the text that we were referring to. Anyone who reads the text without bias can clearly see the ecstacy and unintelligibility in the text.

Again, to concede that ecstatic unintelligible speech is within the accepted meaning of the terms does not weaken your position Zeke . . . sheesh . . .

It just means that you need to stop saying "glossa='s known human intelligible speech" cause it doesnt SIMPLY = that . . . there is MORE in the accepted meaning of the word.

And to say otherwise would be like arguing that the world is flat with a picture of a round earth in front of you.

Again, it doesnt weaken your position cause this does nothing to your spin on the text anyway.

zeke37 said:

I guess you forgot verse 15-17 then...you know, the verses that directly follow the one you quoted...

Click to expand...

You mean those verses that are connected with the preceding verse 13?,..

1Co 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret.

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

1Co 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

1Co 14:16 Else if thou bless with the spirit, how shall he that filleth the place of the unlearned say the Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he knoweth not what thou sayest?

1Co 14:17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.

Click to expand...

If you don't have the gift of interpretation, you do not understand the tongue, and neither will the church if GOD speaks through you by utterance.

Sorry zeke, your just trying to teach heresy to folks. Scripture is not hard in this area, especially for those of us who are quite experienced in this already.

ARBITER01 said:

If you don't have the gift of interpretation, you do not understand the tongue, and neither will the church if GOD speaks through you by utterance.

Click to expand...

How can anyone know that someone has the gift of interpretation, and are not just babbling?

If someone claims to have the gift of prophecy, then their prediction will be tested when it comes true or not. If someone has the gift of healing, then that will be demonstrated when someone is prayed over, and is miraculously cured of a disease or disability.

So how can someone who claims to have the gift of interpretation be distinguished from someone who is a charlatan?

Sorry zeke, your just trying to teach heresy to folks. Scripture is not hard in this area, especially for those of us who are quite experienced in this already.

Click to expand...

Heresy: a belief that rejects the orthodox tenets of a religion.

I would suggest that accusing zeke of heresy is a bit over the top. And trying to make your case by invoking the "I'm more experienced" argument is disappointing.

Servant of Jesus said:

How can anyone know that someone has the gift of interpretation, and are not just babbling?

If someone claims to have the gift of prophecy, then their prediction will be tested when it comes true or not. If someone has the gift of healing, then that will be demonstrated when someone is prayed over, and is miraculously cured of a disease or disability.

So how can someone who claims to have the gift of interpretation be distinguished from someone who is a charlatan?



Heresy: a belief that rejects the orthodox tenets of a religion.

I would suggest that accusing zeke of heresy is a bit over the top. And trying to make your case by invoking the "I'm more experienced" argument is disappointing.

Click to expand...

How can anyone know that someone has the gift of interpretation, and are not just babbling

Click to expand...

2 fold:

1. The accompanying gift of discernment of spirits
2. The previous excerised gift of interpretation within the congregation deemed appropriate by the leaders of the church

Servant of Jesus said:

How can anyone know that someone has the gift of interpretation, and are not just babbling?

If someone claims to have the gift of prophecy, then their prediction will be tested when it comes true or not. If someone has the gift of healing, then that will be demonstrated when someone is prayed over, and is miraculously cured of a disease or disability.

So how can someone who claims to have the gift of interpretation be distinguished from someone who is a charlatan?



Heresy: a belief that rejects the orthodox tenets of a religion.

I would suggest that accusing zeke of heresy is a bit over the top. And trying to make your case by invoking the "I'm more experienced" argument is disappointing.

Click to expand...

First, get a better definition of heresy,..

Heresy - Definition

And yes, what zeke is trying to do is teach against the established church norm.

Secondly, experience is a required aspect of the gifts. Without sharing and learning from others how GOD operates many of these gifts through them, there are aspects of them that a Christian may not ever learn correctly. All of these gifts operate spiritually, as well as Spiritually, and carefully observing and asking questions from those already used by GOD in the different ministries is paramount.

As to your original question, tongues, as well as prophecy and interpretation, are utterances by two sources in Christianity, human spirit or the Holy Spirit. In church gatherings, the source is to be The Holy Spirit operating the gift in a ministry form, not the human spirit. If a person steps out by their spirit to try and operate a gift like tongues, it will be immediately apparent to the spiritually mature believers in the crowd, and the leadership of the church is to stop that person from speaking of their own accord. This is true for all of the gifts that operate in ministry fashion in the assembly.

You may not like that answer, since it doesn't give a clear-cut way to choose, but these gifts are to be operated by GOD in the assembly, not by the person, and it is GOD who will point out an offender operating in the flesh to the assembly.

Mathetes the kerux said:

Remember the Testament of Job? Ecstatic utterance was the whole point that we went there . . . and these ecstatic utterances were considered HOLY SPEECH.

Not saying that this is what is spoken of in Scripture (tho I believe it is and you do not), just saying that the concept of ecstatic unintelligible speech is within the meaning of tongues (glossais).

(ya know you can concede this, esp from the historical cultural evidence, that it is at least within the meaning of the terms and still not budge on your interpretation of the text . . . Matter of fact . . . to not concede this with the evidence that clearly points contrary, would be jus plain silly. U dont loose any ground bro . . . but u do show yourself willing to integrate all the facts).



R u serious . . . wow . . . I guess you didnt read the text that we were referring to. Anyone who reads the text without bias can clearly see the ecstacy and unintelligibility in the text.

Again, to concede that ecstatic unintelligible speech is within the accepted meaning of the terms does not weaken your position Zeke . . . sheesh . . .

It just means that you need to stop saying "glossa='s known human intelligible speech" cause it doesnt SIMPLY = that . . . there is MORE in the accepted meaning of the word.

And to say otherwise would be like arguing that the world is flat with a picture of a round earth in front of you.

Again, it doesnt weaken your position cause this does nothing to your spin on the text anyway.

Click to expand...

all I can say is that the testiment of Job is not scripture...and could be fantasy.....we cannot even date it.

plus, I do not concede that the Bible ever speaks of ecstatic tongues.
further, you have not proven your stance to me even about the testiment of Job, but I said I'd be willing to concede it's possibility

but PROOF? no friend..no proof.

ARBITER01 said:

First, get a better definition of heresy,..

Heresy - Definition

And yes, what zeke is trying to do is teach against the established church norm.

Click to expand...

actually, you'd might be suprised...the church norm is not speaking in tongues as charismatic ecstatic utterances.
IMO it is not I that teaches heresy...it is not I that make void the Words of God, by your tradition.
it is not I that mumbles to God....

so what is the established church norm and what is not???
seems to me you've got rose tinted glasses on Bro.
seems to me it is your practice that is unorthadox...and against the established church norm

Secondly, experience is a required aspect of the gifts. Without sharing and learning from others how GOD operates many of these gifts through them, there are aspects of them that a Christian may not ever learn correctly. All of these gifts operate spiritually, as well as Spiritually, and carefully observing and asking questions from those already used by GOD in the different ministries is paramount.

As to your original question, tongues, as well as prophecy and interpretation, are utterances by two sources in Christianity, human spirit or the Holy Spirit. In church gatherings, the source is to be The Holy Spirit operating the gift in a ministry form, not the human spirit. If a person steps out by their spirit to try and operate a gift like tongues, it will be immediately apparent to the spiritually mature believers in the crowd, and the leadership of the church is to stop that person from speaking of their own accord. This is true for all of the gifts that operate in ministry fashion in the assembly.

You may not like that answer, since it doesn't give a clear-cut way to choose, but these gifts are to be operated by GOD in the assembly, not by the person, and it is GOD who will point out an offender operating in the flesh to the assembly.

Click to expand...

shame

Thanks Mtk and A01 for your comments- and that really is a good site for definitions.

And you're right- I would be very concerned about a minister or "spiritually mature" members of the church deciding in the example that you cited of what is appropriate church behavior or not. We have had far too many instances where this kind of situation has led to a complete abuse or misinterpretation of our faith; some of the televangelists that support "prosperity ministry" come to mind. Jim Jones and his cult at Jonestown in Guyana are probably an extreme example.

Billy Graham, who I believe is one of the greatest evangelists of all time, admits that he never did have the gift of speaking in tongues, or witnessed it being used at any of his revival meetings. He has no doubt it is a miraculous gift of the spirit- but not something that he has ever experienced.

So I would have a real concern if a minister with the stature of Billy Graham was in a church where tongues were purportedly being spoken, and, Bible in hand, raised concerns about what was being done, and was shut-down.

.

ARBITER01 said:

First, get a better definition of heresy,..

Heresy - Definition

And yes, what zeke is trying to do is teach against the established church norm.

Click to expand...

So what percentage of Christians in the world belong to the Pentecostal church movement and therefore subscribe to the practice of speaking in tongues in the manner that the Pentecostal church prescribes?

.

Servant of Jesus said:

Thanks Mtk and A01 for your comments- and that really is a good site for definitions.

And you're right- I would be very concerned about a minister or "spiritually mature" members of the church deciding in the example that you cited of what is appropriate church behavior or not. We have had far too many instances where this kind of situation has led to a complete abuse or misinterpretation of our faith; some of the televangelists that support "prosperity ministry" come to mind. Jim Jones and his cult at Jonestown in Guyana are probably an extreme example.

Billy Graham, who I believe is one of the greatest evangelists of all time, admits that he never did have the gift of speaking in tongues, or witnessed it being used at any of his revival meetings. He has no doubt it is a miraculous gift of the spirit- but not something that he has ever experienced.

So I would have a real concern if a minister with the stature of Billy Graham was in a church where tongues were purportedly being spoken, and, Bible in hand, raised concerns about what was being done, and was shut-down.

.

Click to expand...

But,..... The gifts are operated by The Holy Spirit in the assembly,..

1Co 12:4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.

1Co 12:5 And there are diversities of ministrations, and the same Lord.

1Co 12:6 And there are diversities of workings, but the same God, who worketh all things in all.

Click to expand...

They are not natural talents that have material safeguards of some sort to manage them. For instance, the gift of prophecy. It is only operated in the assembly for 3 things,..

1Co 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.

Click to expand...

That gift is not operated to teach or anything else besides those three things. The people in the assembly that are discerning the gift and it's message, are only looking for the edification to their spirits when the message is being spoken, they are looking for an uplifting message, and certainly looking for the peace and comfort from the presence of The Holy Spirit when it is spoken.

That is just one example, but the point is, all of these gifts are Spiritual gifts, and they are not gauged by material means.

Jesus said there would be problems, as well as our apostles did, so no matter what is done, Christianity will never be clean of the shady characters that infiltrate it down here for wrongful reasons.

Servant of Jesus said:

So what percentage of Christians in the world belong to the Pentecostal church movement and therefore subscribe to the practice of speaking in tongues in the manner that the Pentecostal church prescribes?

.

Click to expand...

Well just going off of the wiki,..

The Assemblies of God (AG), officially the World Assemblies of God Fellowship, is a group of national Christian denominations which together form the world's largest Pentecostal body. With over 300,000 congregations and outstations in over 212 countries and territories serving approximately 57 to 60 million adherents worldwide,[1][2][3] it is the fourth largest international body of Christians.[4]

Click to expand...

From here,..

Assemblies of God - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's just the Assemblies of GOD, they are certainly not the only pentecostal denomination across the world operating in tongues, there are many, many more.

Sorry to be a bit behind, but I am in an unfortunate time zone where a lot happens by the time I get back to my computer after work.

zeke37 said:

wouldn't that be opposite of what you guys preach???closeness to God = charismatic tongues?

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Speaking in tongues is not a sign of closeness to God. We have the Holy Spirit inside of us, indwelling our spirit. That's about as close to God as we can get at present. Many people equate closeness to God as a sensory experience which may or may not be real, but may just be a set of religious feelings, and there is no guarantee that it is the Holy Spirit who is generating those feelings. Satan can replicate great religious feelings and make people feel "close" to God in order to try to get them to substitute emotional feelings for faith.

The gift of tongues is a communication tool from the believer to God. It is not designed to draw a person closer to God than they are already. We draw nigh to God by faith and not by feelings. We believe that we are close to God because His word says "in Him we move and have our being". And we can be at that place without feeling a thing!

yet Jesus did not do this.


lol. this is funny....you guys will really stretch it to fit your theology

Click to expand...

My statement is not a theological statement. The Gospels do not say that Jesus spoke any other language than Hebrew or Aramaic. In fact, we don't know what Jesus said when He was in the private place with His Father. In fact, we are not meant to know.

hmm...Christ Himself did not need them, and never taught about them...hmmm....

Click to expand...

It was not the right time to teach about those things. Notice that much of the Pauline revelation about our justification and standing with God in Christ was not taught by Jesus either, so does that make Paul false? The ministry of Jesus on earth was to the lost sheep of Israel (His words). Even if He taught those things, including tongues, people would not understand what He was talking about. They hardly understood what He was teaching anyway, and that is why He taught a lot through parables.

hey, didn't Jesus teach us how to pray? were ecstatic/charismatic tongues mentioned there?

Click to expand...

My previous remarks explain it sufficiently. There were some things that would have more relevant after the Day of Pentecost. Jesus did say that there were more things that needed to be taught but they would not be able to bear them at that time. Once the Day of Pentecost arrived, then the further teaching, including tongues, became more relevant to the emerging church. The gift of tongues is one of the gifts of the Spirit for the building up and strengthening of Christian believers in the church. Because the church did not exist in the time of Jesus, what would be the point of teaching stuff prematurely. It would have been a waste of time, because the listeners to Jesus were not yet Christian, nor were they filled with the Spirit. Most of them were unsaved Jews!

tongues=languages....so, sure they are important to communicate with God..

Click to expand...

I have no argument with that.

true...I can speak only English and come to God...one tongue....not tongues plural...

Click to expand...

Obviously that is the level of your faith. Nothing wrong with that. The problem is when you dictate to others what their faith should be concerning the gifts of the Spirit.

if I heard a sermon in french, I would not even know when to say Amen,

Click to expand...

That's what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 14... No problems with that.

unles it was interpreted for me by someone that spoke both french and English tongues

Click to expand...

Absolutely! That's why Paul strong advocated that if people wanted to speak in tongues in a personal way to God without interpretation, they should do it in private with God.

huh???
what has this to do with tongues?

Click to expand...

The question was that does tongues make us better Christians? My answer was my way of saying "no". Using a spanner does not make a mechanic better or worse. It is his basic training and experience that determines how good he is. Actually there is no such thing as a bad, good, or better Christian. There is only one level. We are all debtors to grace and no one has been born again better than anyone else. Distinctions between the quality of Christians is a fleshly man thought up idea based on some thinking they are better than the common herd and who think they have the right to judge others.

either could I...
but I don't know why anyone
would want to mumble ecstatic charismatic prayer to God either...
seeing He understands English and all tongues.

but you guys can leave it to chance if ya wanna

Click to expand...

My view about your last comment is that if God has not given you the revelation about the usefulness and purpose of the gift of tongues, then God is with holding from you. He is not meaning for you to have it. It is not one of the spiritual tools that He is providing you. I don't have any problem with that

Actually, it is the same when we try to witness to a sinner and they show no interest in our message. It is because God has bypassed that person and is going to leave the person to face judgement and condemnation. It probably means that God has not elected that person for salvation anyway. The invitation goes out to all mankind, but only those whom God has elected will actually be saved.

So, if you don't believe in Pentecostal/Charismatic theology, then it means that God is not wanting you to enter into that type of Christianity. It is a matter of living and working within God's will for our lives. This does not mean though that we can dictate to all Christians that the Pentecostal way is wrong in general. There are many thousands of Christians where it is correct and in God's will for them to express their Christian faith in that way. And who is qualified to judge them negatively?

Just to change the subject a little: I have noticed that one or two are criticising you in a negative way for your views. My view is that what is said on this thread is fair debate, and personal issues should not enter into it. You have the right to have your own brand of faith and maintain your own position about what you believe and practice.

So I think that you can safely ignore the implication that you may not be right with God because you have a contrary view to some. I don't share that judgment of you.