Speaking in Tongues

[The Princess Bride]

Well GOOD NEWS!!. We have a free hand out with no strings attached.

Quite Cool!

What I meant by "no strings attached" was how a lot of people become saved, but they dont work on their relationship with Christ.

They say. "OK, I'm saved, now fix my life"..but things dont work that ways.

We can only expect to truly be changed and our life and situations changed if we are willing to sacrifice what we want, by spending time praying, spending time in God's word, and building our life around Him.

That's what I was getting at.

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

Quite Cool!

What I meant by "no strings attached" was how a lot of people become saved, but they dont work on their relationship with Christ.

They say. "OK, I'm saved, now fix my life"..but things dont work that ways.

We can only expect to truly be changed and our life and situations changed if we are willing to sacrifice what we want, by spending time praying, spending time in God's word, and building our life around Him.

That's what I was getting at.

If a person spends time on themselves and not God then how can they grow?

If we spend time exploiting "prosperity" (WoF) ministries for our own purposes, gifts for the edification of ourselves instead of the church (I Corinthians 14:12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church), "Name it and claim it" for personal gain (thinking God is a cornucopia of goodies for our every desire), personal healing ministries showing how much faith "I" have, Etc.Etc.

Let me stop here and ask: Why did you really come to this forum? What are you looking for? What has the Spirit (counselor) put on your heart? Are you searching for answers that you havn't found yet?

Why not take the "I" out of the equation and put God back in.

The people you mentioned above don't have room for "Him" because they are full of "I".

We are new creatures wanting to be filled with "new wine". We don't have to strive for

"We can only expect to truly be changed and our life and situations changed if we are willing to sacrifice what we want, by spending time praying, spending time in God's word, and building our life around Him"

since He is in us. We don't need to get his attention anymore because the Spirit in us will do the striving. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

2 Corinthians 5:16-19 (King James Version)

16Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.

17Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
18And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 19To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

 

[LilLamb219]

We don't need to get his attention anymore because the Spirit in us will do the striving.

Great post!

 

[Jim47]

Great post!

I second that!

 

[JFox1]

I agree that speaking in tongues is a spiritual gift, but I don't think it's encouraged in my particular church. I have never heard anyone there speak in tongues. Most people in my church associate it with the Pentecostals and other charismatics.

 

[Simon_Templar]

Ac 2:1 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Ac 2:2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting.
Ac 2:3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them.
Ac 2:4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.
Ac 2:5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven.
Ac 2:6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language.
Ac 2:7 Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans?
Ac 2:8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language?


What many people fail to read or understand is the verses above that are in bold/underlined. The believers assembled at Pentecost were not just babbling some odd sounds, they were actually speaking in other languages. Is that what you folks do? Do you speak in German, French, Russian or some other language?

I am not trying to find fault here, I would just really like to know the truth.

Actually, there is another way of looking at that. If you look at the different ethnic groups present in that event, there is something like 14 different ethnic groups there.

People often assume that the apostles were simply speaking other known languages (like one maybe was speaking egyptian etc) but to many of the people present what the apostles were doing DID sound like gibberish. We know this because many of the people present accused the apostles of being drunk, and started laughing at them. This is what prompted Peter to get up and give his famous sermon.

So, what the apostles were doing did sound like gibberish to many of those assembled. To many others it sounded like their own native languages. I do not think that one was speaking egyptian and another arabian, and another latin, and another greek etc.. Many people in that time especially those who were educated, or had any experience traveling were multi-lingual, thus it is unlikely that, even if they didn't fluently speak another known language, that they wouldn't recognize the sound of it at least vaguely, especially given Jerusalem was an international city which every major feast gathered a huge crowd of Jews from ever corner of the empire. Rather I think they spoke in supernatural tongues (tongues of angels etc) and the people simply heard them in their own langauge.

Also, Paul makes it very clear in his epistles to the corinthians that some tongues at least are unknown to all present including the person speaking them.

However, he also makes it clear that such isntances are meant as a personal devotion or spiritual discipline, not for corperate worship. (which many of the charismatic and pentecostals miss and go way over board on).

the practice of tongues is mentioned in the early church as well as a form of worship, up to about the time of Augustine who makes refrence to it. I'm not sure about later refrences.

 

[Jim47]

Actually, there is another way of looking at that. If you look at the different ethnic groups present in that event, there is something like 14 different ethnic groups there.

People often assume that the apostles were simply speaking other known languages (like one maybe was speaking egyptian etc) but to many of the people present what the apostles were doing DID sound like gibberish. We know this because many of the people present accused the apostles of being drunk, and started laughing at them. This is what prompted Peter to get up and give his famous sermon.

So, what the apostles were doing did sound like gibberish to many of those assembled. To many others it sounded like their own native languages. I do not think that one was speaking egyptian and another arabian, and another latin, and another greek etc.. Many people in that time especially those who were educated, or had any experience traveling were multi-lingual, thus it is unlikely that, even if they didn't fluently speak another known language, that they wouldn't recognize the sound of it at least vaguely, especially given Jerusalem was an international city which every major feast gathered a huge crowd of Jews from ever corner of the empire. Rather I think they spoke in supernatural tongues (tongues of angels etc) and the people simply heard them in their own langauge.

Also, Paul makes it very clear in his epistles to the corinthians that some tongues at least are unknown to all present including the person speaking them.

However, he also makes it clear that such isntances are meant as a personal devotion or spiritual discipline, not for corperate worship. (which many of the charismatic and pentecostals miss and go way over board on).

the practice of tongues is mentioned in the early church as well as a form of worship, up to about the time of Augustine who makes refrence to it. I'm not sure about later refrences.

Thanks for exressing your views, but I know of no Lutherans that believe this, but I prefer to have others state this themselves.

You may want to read "God's Word" version of the bible, it clearly states they were speaking in another lnguage not in a tongue, this version is taken dicrectly from manuscripts, not a cross translation as many are.

 

[Simon_Templar]

Thanks for exressing your views, but I know of no Lutherans that believe this, but I prefer to have others state this themselves.

You may want to read "God's Word" version of the bible, it clearly states they were speaking in another lnguage not in a tongue, this version is taken dicrectly from manuscripts, not a cross translation as many are.

The greek simply means "to speak with other tongues"

of course no one denies that tongues are languages, the only question is are they necessarily known human languages? or can they be as Paul later states "tongues of angels"

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

The greek simply means "to speak with other tongues"

of course no one denies that tongues are languages, the only question is are they necessarily known human languages? or can they be as Paul later states "tongues of angels"

Well if you are refering to the Bible verses that Jim posted then you should look up the Koine Greek and it's translation. It does not refer to "speak with other tongues". It states in Acts 2:8: own [2398] [SIZE=-1]idios[/SIZE] tongue, [1258][SIZE=-1]

dialektos[/SIZE]

Also in Acts 2:6:
in his own [2398][SIZE=-1]

idios[/SIZE]
language. [1258][SIZE=-1]

dialektos[/SIZE]

and Acts 2:11
in our [2251][SIZE=-1]

hemeteros[/SIZE] tongues
[1100][SIZE=-1]

glossa[/SIZE]

 

[The Princess Bride]

Maybe it is both though....

Perhaps there are times when people who speak are really speaking in a foreign language...and then at other times "with the tongues of angels"....

It may not always be one or the other...perhaps as God see's fit?

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

All I can do is give you the Greek translation of the verses Jim quoted. Translatons give you the original intent and translation of the author. Not speculation

 

[Simon_Templar]

Well if you are refering to the Bible verses that Jim posted then you should look up the Koine Greek and it's translation. It does not refer to "speak with other tongues". It states in Acts 2:8: own [2398] [SIZE=-1]idios[/SIZE] tongue, [1258][SIZE=-1]

dialektos[/SIZE]

Also in Acts 2:6:
in his own [2398][SIZE=-1]

idios[/SIZE]
language. [1258][SIZE=-1]

dialektos[/SIZE]

and Acts 2:11
in our [2251][SIZE=-1]

hemeteros[/SIZE] tongues
[1100][SIZE=-1]

glossa[/SIZE]

That, I think, would actually support my view because we were discussing acts 2:4 which says "speak with other tongues" (heteros glossa) describing what the apostles did.

Then in the verses which you list it is describing what the foreigners heard, in their own "dialektos". Interesting comparison.

However, the fact that in 2:11 it uses glossa again for "our own tongue" would tend to indicate that this is all largely a semantic debate and the words are used interchangably.

The point remains, though, that it is a false distinction to say "tongues" as opposed to "languages". Even those of us who practice speaking in tongues today believe they are languages. The issue, again is wether the have to be known human languages, or wether they can also be unknown divine language.

Paul's comment in corinthians pretty clearly indicate that they not only can be, but usually are unknown.

 

[Jim47]

Acts 2:8 directly from God's Word Bible

"Why do we hear them speaking in our native dialects?"

No mention of tongues. Yes there are versions that support your beliefs, but this is taken from manuscripts.

 

[Simon_Templar]

Acts 2:8 directly from God's Word Bible

"Why do we hear them speaking in our native dialects?"

No mention of tongues. Yes there are versions that support your beliefs, but this is taken from manuscripts.

the point I was trying to get at, is that even as you state it, it doesn't contradict my belief. Its only your assumption about what that means which contradicts my belief.

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

I don't see anything supporting your premiss. It's pretty obvious from our quotes that it is know dialect. Paul only mentioned that the "tongues" that they were speaking were not totally understood by the people present because not evey "know" language was represented with a person present.

I think you might be missing the whole point. The Holy Spirit in us and the fruits of the Spirit and the fruit that we bare is the essential part of the edification of God and Church. If it isn't done with Love and Charity it doesn't mean a thing. An empty gong as you are want to quote in I Cr 13 about tongues of angels.
V. 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. V. 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, and have not charity, I am nothing. V. 3. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

There is too much emphasis on gifts of the Spirit. Even Paul said that they should cease and then recanted and said that they should at least slow down. The jews needed signs and wonders becasue of their hard hearts and the gifts served a purpose. If unbelievers were to hear tongues Paul even said that it would be a bad witness.

1CO 14:23 So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind?

 

[Simon_Templar]

I don't see anything supporting your premiss. It's pretty obvious from our quotes that it is know dialect. Paul only mentioned that the "tongues" that they were speaking were not totally understood by the people present because not evey "know" language was represented with a person present.

I think you might be missing the whole point. The Holy Spirit in us and the fruits of the Spirit and the fruit that we bare is the essential part of the edification of God and Church. If it isn't done with Love and Charity it doesn't mean a thing. An empty gong as you are want to quote in I Cr 13 about tongues of angels.
V. 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. V. 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, and have not charity, I am nothing. V. 3. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

There is too much emphasis on gifts of the Spirit. Even Paul said that they should cease and then recanted and said that they should at least slow down. The jews needed signs and wonders becasue of their hard hearts and the gifts served a purpose. If unbelievers were to hear tongues Paul even said that it would be a bad witness.

1CO 14:23 So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind?

just like a few years ago, I didn't see anything in the same scriptures which supported your premise

Anyway, I'm not missing the point. Its just a matter of perspective. When I'm in the charismatic forums here, I frequently argue the verses you quoted above, and argue that charismatics are misusing the idea of tongues. Because we do.

However, In the context of what you guys are saying here, your going to the opposite extreme. You're looking at what abuses have been made of tongues, and saying as a result 'lets not have anything to do with it'.

There is no indication in Paul's writings that the manifestation of the gifts should slow down or cease UNTIL that which is perfect has come. This is not a refrence to the church, or the bible, it is a refrence to our completion in Christ when we have received the hope of glory.
As long as the church exists in this age of the world, she needs the gifts, because we need the gifts.

The denial of the gifts is almost entirely based on fear of the abuse of the more "flashy" gifts. Think about what you are denying when you say that the gifts need to slow down.. wisdom, knowledge, discernment, faith, healing, prophecy (which is merely God speaking a message into a given situation, it doesn't mean fortelling the future)
Are you really ready to start having those things slow down, or cease? Do you really think the church has out grown them?

I agree 100% that all of these things are useless if they do not serve the church, and do not serve to build up the body of Christ in love.

When some guy prances around on a stage shouting in tongues.. its useless, and in many cases its disobedient, its flesh, not Spirit. Thats not what I'm talking about.

The kind of tongues most often used, and described by Paul as unknown, "your spirit speaking mysteries to God". Is a personal devotion. You can say "well then it doesn't build up the body" and thats exactly why Paul said not to do it in church. My response would be, do you only worship in Church? do you only commune with God in church.. do you only ever talk to God when it has to do with building up the church.. or do you come to him personally as well?

Tongues is a valuable manifestation of the Spirit, in which a person practices devotion through opening themselves to the Spirit and allowing him to pray through them.

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

Anytime you read "unknow" tongue in the NT it has been added as emphasis. It was not in the original manuscripts. KJV usually has in in paranthesis. A lot of the newer translations have misstakingly added it.

In the following verse it is implied that the Spirit is not a continuing experience and is not allways with a person. Peter says that it came again as it had the first time. To me this stresses that it was an experience for the apostolic church.

Acts 11:15 (King James Version)
15And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.


The tongues were actual known dialects. Acts 2:6, 8 uses the Greek word, dialekto -- dative case, which v. 8 affirms was their own native language.

The whole "gifts of the Spirit" is something that is not diametricly opposed in the Lutheran Church but is considered something to be approached cautiously.

Our salvation is through God's Grace alone and not something we have helped bring about. Then emphasis on tongues or gifts focuses more on what we can do than on what God has done for us. Anytime we put ourselves and what we can do in the middle of our lives and replace God as the center then we have to avoid that as much as possible.

What has been truly handed down to you as far as praying in the Spirit or speaking in tongues? Do you seriously believe that God has given you that gift? Would you swear before God that you believe he has given it to you and what, how, why or when did you receive it and is there an instruction manual that says how to use it or what it sounds like?

Certain things happened when the Spirit of the Lord descended on people. Have you seen the tongues of flame on people in churches? Have you seen these same people that spaek in tongues talk to foreigners in ther own language?

I've been to churches were everyone is speaking in tongues. The Bible states that certain people receive certain gifts. How can everyone receive the same gift? They can't, at least according to the Bible.

Do you consider a differance between speaking in tongues and praying in the Spirit? When/if you pray in the Spirit how do you knowe that that is what you are doing or are you just uttering nonsense sylables? WHat is praying in the Spirit really? You can say you pray in the Spirit and pray in tongues but can you really?

 

[Studeclunker]

Missouri Synod.

This has been a facinating read! Thank you all for participating.

Now if I might be allowed to put my foot in my mouth, I mean, two cents worth in.:o

Simon, you make a good case. Unfortuneately you base it on a fragement of scripture instead of the full quotation. I think this may be what Radidio is trying to point out to you. We must be careful to consider the whole of what a writer had put down. Otherwise it can lead to error. This is what led the ELCA to stray into error.

One of the reasons Paul used greek as his language of choice for his writings was it's inherent clairity. For instance the word love. The Greeks used four words for this one. C.S.Lewis wrote a whole book on just this one example. The Four Loves I strongly recommend it, though not as a part of this discussion, it's just a really good book. I believe the Holy Spirit forsaw this problem two thousand years ago and lead Paul to use the clearest language available at the time. Proper translation of Greek leaves little room for mis-translation. Hebrew and Aramaiac do.

Radidio had properly translated the intent and meaning of the text. The followers upon whom the Holy Spirit had decended were speaking known and understood languages at the time the event occured. Paul deals with gifts and their mis-use in Corinthians (one and two). He deals particularly with toungues. "But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God."

As a Luthern I am still able to acknowledge that the gifts are still present in the catholic church (no, not Roman Catholic! Small c here as in all combined). Take note here though. The Apostle Paul is of the opinion that these 'toungues' can be translated. This supports the wording that indicates a known understandable language. Paul goes on to say, "Therefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak with tongues. Let all things be done decently and in order." He stressed order and decency. "For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints." This loud gabbling I've been whitness to in Charasmatic churches is not orderly, translated, or edifying. Therefore according to the Great Apostle, it should be done away with.

Another point to consider. Paul points out further that the gifts are provided for the weak in faith. As also, more to the point, did the Lord himself, "Blessed are those who do not see and yet believe." He got rather testy on more than one occasion when asked for signs and wonders.

My own pastor pointed out one time that the gifts were so prevalent in the early church because they didn't have the New Testament. We have the complete books of the Old and New Testament. That is a great advantage. Therefore, since the Lord has already provided you with the tools you need, why should he add in signs and wonders?

Here's another book recommendation. This one is fictional. It's a good read though, The Falcon And The Serpent. I don't remember the author's name, sorry to say. Still, one should be able to find it easily in any Christian book store. One of the central characters in the story is a Knight. He's one of those big buff bad dudes (with a good heart devoted to God) that has always been able to do his job with strength and the sword. In otherwords he's been the one doing the action. Towards the end of the book, Mennon (God) asks him to stand aside and let the one he would rather protect do the fighting. He is asked to step aside and wait in faith. Another time he struggles with the conversion of a pagan priest who sees and speaks prophecy. This converted pagan sees visions and the knight does not. This really disturbs him. Later on Mennon comes to him in a dream and explains that the Knight didn't recieve these signs and wonders because he didn't need them. Do you?

 

[TheCosmicGospel]

I am jumping in without a full read of the story here. I would like to look at it from a different view if I may.

1) When Jesus healed anyone, He usually added something beyond it being just a physical healing. "Your faith has made you well." "Go and sin no more." "Your sins are forgiven." There was always a word spoken to suggest to me anyways that the healing was only secondary in nature and that the real healing was spiritual.

2) Today it seems that we always want to do the very opposite. We make the word secondary and want the physical side and even make it prominent when possible. "I speak in tongues." This is a very subjective thing since even false religions use tongues and anyone excited by the devil could utter them as well. They can be faked.

3) The Lutheran position is not one so much against "tongues" but against a subjectifying as opposed to the objective nature of true faith. It is not of ourselves. Even more important, is that the WORD is the field of the operating Spirit.

4) If the Spirit moves apart from the Word giving ecstatic utterances, how will anyone know who's who and where is first base? Paul gives real guidelines so this would not happen. Either use them for yourselves or, with interpretation. How many follow this? Not many I would imagine. Subjective and without test. Its what brings Santa Claus, not Christ.

Peace and Joy,
Cosmic

 

[The Princess Bride]

I am jumping in without a full read of the story here. I would like to look at it from a different view if I may.

1) When Jesus healed anyone, He usually added something beyond it being just a physical healing. "Your faith has made you well." "Go and sin no more." "Your sins are forgiven." There was always a word spoken to suggest to me anyways that the healing was only secondary in nature and that the real healing was spiritual.

2) Today it seems that we always want to do the very opposite. We make the word secondary and want the physical side and even make it prominent when possible. "I speak in tongues." This is a very subjective thing since even false religions use tongues and anyone excited by the devil could utter them as well. They can be faked.

3) The Lutheran position is not one so much against "tongues" but against a subjectifying as opposed to the objective nature of true faith. It is not of ourselves. Even more important, is that the WORD is the field of the operating Spirit.

4) If the Spirit moves apart from the Word giving ecstatic utterances, how will anyone know who's who and where is first base? Paul gives real guidelines so this would not happen. Either use them for yourselves or, with interpretation. How many follow this? Not many I would imagine. Subjective and without test. Its what brings Santa Claus, not Christ.

Peace and Joy,
Cosmic

I find your points very intriguing, so I will keep my reply short.

Paul said we do not understand things of the spirit, because they are spiritually discerned.

Yet, we try to "define" something like "speaking in tongues" based on our knowledge and what few and rather limited (on details) accounts of speaking in tongues in the Bible.

This is how I see it: If it's of God, it WILL have an interpretation to be edifying for all; if it doesn't, then it was just gibberish.

I believe that God is pouring out His spirit in these days in ways we are not used to, may find unexpected, or just may not even like, but if signs, wonders, healings, prophecies, and miracles are still occuring, then I believe speaking in tongues is along for the ride.


*hopes off soapbox*