Speaking In Tounges...

[Bella Vita]

Wait so hisdisciple is a pentecostal?

 

[His_disciple3]

Who are you talking to? His_disciple3? The Pentecostal I just pwned, who just had his unbiblical argument so demolished that he took it personally? The one who just said "I left the Baptist Church" but his here promoting anti-Baptist theology? Or myself, who is defending the Baptist position?

Yeah, His_disciple3, Hammster has a message for you. You've admitted your not in the baptist church. You shouldn't be arguing in these forums.

I said I left but I never said I didn't return, I am currently at a southern Baptist church been there since nov, of last year , am not a member though , but this SB church also believes in the spiritual gifts as I do. I am not pentecostal for I believe once saved always saved, I just got reported for calling the baptist today's scribes and pharisees and I take offence of being called pentecostal esp in the way you meant it, so I might report you, Not! just kidding on the reporting part. call me what you want I know who I am and what you say won't change that I am I child of God!!! I am not promoting anti- baptist doctrine there are baptist all around that are starting to receive the spiritual gifts!!!

 

[His_disciple3]

Wait so hisdisciple is a pentecostal?

no I am not pentecostal, but will say I feel more welcomed in most pentecostal churches and am allowed to preach in more pentecostal churches than baptist, but that ain't saying a whole lot for a southern baptist won't even let an independant baptist preach in their Church. I have been called bapticostal, our pastor of the southern baptist church where i now attend referrs to His Church as Charismatic baptist. so you guys will just have to accept me, for who i am , after all ain't that the Christian thing to do???? maybe we need a new room/group of charismatic Baptist,

 

[Bella Vita]

no I am not pentecostal, but will say I feel more welcomed in most pentecostal churches and am allowed to preach in more pentecostal churches than baptist, but that ain't saying a whole lot for a southern baptist won't even let an independant baptist preach in their Church. I have been called bapticostal, our pastor of the southern baptist church where i now attend referrs to His Church as Charismatic baptist. so you guys will just have to accept me, for who i am , after all ain't that the Christian thing to do???? maybe we need a new room/group of charismatic Baptist,

hey I wasn't attacking you at all I was just asking a question...you can follow whatever denomination you feel like. Just keep in mind not all of them are sound in there doctrine.

 

[His_disciple3]

hey I wasn't attacking you at all I was just asking a question...you can follow whatever denomination you feel like. Just keep in mind not all of them are sound in there doctrine.

well thanks for that. but I like to phrase it that they all miss the mark somewhere in scriptures, but sssshhhh don't tell some of the Baptist that, i might get reported again, lol
actually the Gospel is really the only thing we should split over, if we believe that some of all denominations will be in heaven then we believe that we are of the same Body, and really should be working together to build the kingdom of God Up, not tearing one another down. I have friends on both sides of the camp; baptist and pentecostal and I get really sick how they put each other down and make fun of the other's doctrine. more on one side than the other but I can't say which one in here. but how should i expect baptist to work with pentecostal, we have 14 or so different types of baptist and most can't even work with other baptist. how do we ever expect to live together in heaven????? how can you say that you love the Father whom ye have not seen and can't love the brother whom ye have seen? and this is not addressed strictly to you Bella

 

[NvxiaLee]

this SB church also believes in the spiritual gifts as I do. I am not pentecostal for I believe once saved always saved,

"Once save always saved" has nothing to do with whether you're a Pentecostal or not. You are a Pentacostal and I suspect your church will soon be on its way out of the Southern Baptist Convention.

You are promoting doctrine contrary to the SBC. The SBC believes that tongues in the Bible were languages spoken by human populations. And, that glossolalia (the random noises you call tongues) should not be part of your conviction or practice (if it is, you will be prohibited from representing the SBC in certain capacities).

 

[His_disciple3]

"Once save always saved" has nothing to do with whether you're a Pentecostal or not. You are a Pentacostal and I suspect your church will soon be on its way out of the Southern Baptist Convention.

You are promoting doctrine contrary to the SBC. The SBC believes that tongues in the Bible were languages spoken by human populations. And, that glossolalia (the random noises you call tongues) should not be part of your conviction or practice (if it is, you will be prohibited from representing the SBC in certain capacities).

this could be changing in the very near future, however this is all I can say about it at this time. may God bless you and I love you in Christ.

 

[NvxiaLee]

this could be changing in the very near future, however this is all I can say about it at this time. may God bless you and I love you in Christ.

That's a fine application of Proverbs 15:1

The number of Pentecostal churches in the SBC has been on the decline since the 1970s.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

In this passage tongues was simply used so that each person could hear the message in their own language:


Act 2:4-11
(4) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
(5) And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
(6) Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
(7) And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
(8) And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
(9) Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
(10) Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
(11) Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

So it is clear to me from the Bible that tongues was simply a gift used to speak the gospel message in such a way that persons from all languages could understand you. What they heard was you speaking their own language.

Obviously, then, tongues is not the nonsensical jibber-jabber that certain Christians say it is. It is actual language that people understand.

You had better get a pair of scissors and cut 1 Corinthians 14 out of your Bible. You are better off without it, because you obviously don't believe what it says.

If you did happen to read the chapter closely, you will see that it is Paul teaching the wayward Corinthians the correct way to use the gift of tongues and prophecy. He did not have to teach the other churches because they were already using these gifts in the correct manner. But the Corinthians had a few problems with tongues and prophecy, so Paul had to put them right. This means that Paul's teaching about tongues and prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14 is the bench mark for the use of tongues in the churches, including today's church (if it is God's church that is, and not a dead monument).

Notice that it says that the person who speaks in an unknown tongues speaks directly to God because no person is able to understand them.

He also says that if a person wants to speak in tongues in church, make sure there is an interpreter, otherwise do his speaking to himself and to God and not out loud so that other people can hear and misunderstand it to be a message to the group. This means that there is a private use for tongues where the speaker is alone with God and that God hears and understands the language.

So what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14 contradicts your view that it has to be an understandable language every time. Corinthians support that the gift is a public and private one, fulfilling two different purposes.

If you think that tongues is jibber jabber, you want to hear two Indian or Chinese people talking together. It all sounds like gobbledygook to me, yet they are speaking intelligible languages. I have interviewed many ethnic people, using an interpreter and it always amazes me how that the jibber jabber they speak translates into very intelligent and insightful English.

I think you need to do a bit more honest talking with God about it, and then stick around and spend a bit of time with Him allowing Him to open your mind about it, instead of you just repeating parrot fashion what other anti-tongues people are saying. It's no point finding out more about something from others who are untaught as well. Your first step is to learn that "tongues" is spelled that way, and not "tounges". Once you have got that right, you are halfway there!

You have to use your common sense. If you want to find out more about, say restaurant cooking, you wouldn't go and learn from someone who can't cook. You would consult someone who has experience in that field.

So if you want to know more about the gifts of the Spirit, including tongues and prophecy, wouldn't you go and find a Pentecostal or Charismatic Christian whom you trust to be a good solid person who would not give you any hype or baloney, but would give you a sound, Scriptural account of it? That would make sense to me. I got my MA in English by being taught by those who had PhDs in English. I got my teacher's diploma through qualified teachers. I had a fool of a teacher when I learned violin (I taught myself), and although I can play respectably, I could have done a lot better having a qualified and experienced violin teacher.

 

[Bella Vita]

well thanks for that. but I like to phrase it that they all miss the mark somewhere in scriptures, but sssshhhh don't tell some of the Baptist that, i might get reported again, lol
actually the Gospel is really the only thing we should split over, if we believe that some of all denominations will be in heaven then we believe that we are of the same Body, and really should be working together to build the kingdom of God Up, not tearing one another down. I have friends on both sides of the camp; baptist and pentecostal and I get really sick how they put each other down and make fun of the other's doctrine. more on one side than the other but I can't say which one in here. but how should i expect baptist to work with pentecostal, we have 14 or so different types of baptist and most can't even work with other baptist. how do we ever expect to live together in heaven????? how can you say that you love the Father whom ye have not seen and can't love the brother whom ye have seen? and this is not addressed strictly to you Bella

Ok but serious question... since you seem to have more experience with tongues speaking churches than I do pentecostal or otherwise....when you have been speaking tongues in those church settings is there a translator present as the scripture says there should be??

 

[His_disciple3]

Ok but serious question... since you seem to have more experience with tongues speaking churches than I do pentecostal or otherwise....when you have been speaking tongues in those church settings is there a translator present as the scripture says there should be??

I have only seen tongues spoken in church 3 times, and yes there was an interpreter everytime. once the tongues were given in 3 parts and I was the first interpreter with two others interpreting the other two parts. but now i have heard alot of prayer language/praying in tongues used in Churches. i have only spoken in tongues in church once myself and i was the interpreter also, and 2 of these times it was in a pentecostal church and one was the Christian Church that I pastored for awhile

 

[NvxiaLee]

You had better get a pair of scissors and cut 1 Corinthians 14 out of your Bible. You are better off without it, because you obviously don't believe what it says.... Notice that it says that the person who speaks in an unknown tongues speaks directly to God because no person is able to understand them.

When you point that finger and accuse someone of not believing what it says, you should be pointing to yourself.

1Cor14:2 starts "For one who speaks in a unknown tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands." 1) This refers to real tongues, not someone making random noises. 2) IT'S A CRITICISM OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES.

It's very true that if you speak in a language no one understand, only God understands. It's also very true that if you've lost your car keys, only God knows where they are. That's not an invitation to lose your car keys. Just the opposite, don't lose your keys because then only God will know where they are, and you'll still be stuck.

V9 is a parallel verse, "So also you, unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air." Do you think Paul is telling people to speak into the air? If you answer "no", go to the head of the class.

V13, "Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret."

Keep your mouth shut unless someone knows what you're saying.

So what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14 contradicts your view that it has to be an understandable language every time. Corinthians support that the gift is a public and private one, fulfilling two different purposes.

If one prays in an unknown tongue, the spirit prays, but to mind is unfruitful. Like the previous example of talking to God, this is not an instruction to pray in tongues. It's just again pointing out the uselessness of speaking a language no one understands. And, again, this assumes real tongues, not the random noises found in Pentecostal churches.

 

[His_disciple3]

When you point that finger and accuse someone of not believing what it says, you should be pointing to yourself.

1Cor14:2 starts "For one who speaks in a unknown tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands." 1) This refers to real tongues, not someone making random noises. 2) IT'S A CRITICISM OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES.

It's very true that if you speak in a language no one understand, only God understands. It's also very true that if you've lost your car keys, only God knows where they are. That's not an invitation to lose your car keys. Just the opposite, don't lose your keys because then only God will know where they are, and you'll still be stuck.

V9 is a parallel verse, "So also you, unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air." Do you think Paul is telling people to speak into the air? If you answer "no", go to the head of the class.

V13, "Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret."

Keep your mouth shut unless someone knows what you're saying.



If one prays in an unknown tongue, the spirit prays, but to mind is unfruitful. Like the previous example of talking to God, this is not an instruction to pray in tongues. It's just again pointing out the uselessness of speaking a language no one understands. And, again, this assumes real tongues, not the random noises found in Pentecostal churches.

1 Corinthians 14:38-39
38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
KJV

if 1 cor. 14:39 does not apply to today's Church how do we know
John 3: 16 does??

Luke 4:4
4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
KJV

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

but his here promoting anti-Baptist theology? Or myself, who is defending the Baptist position?

Are you saying that speaking in tongues is anti-Baptist theology? Many Baptists here in New Zealand would disagree with you. If Paul took a whole chapter in 1 Corinthians to teach on the correct use of tongues, then it cannot be anti-Baptist theology because I know that in Baptist theology, the written Word of God is spoken of as the basis of faith.

I would say that any theology that says that the written New Testament, including the whole of 1 Corinthians, is not true, has to be anti-Baptist.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

"Once save always saved" has nothing to do with whether you're a Pentecostal or not. You are a Pentacostal and I suspect your church will soon be on its way out of the Southern Baptist Convention.

You are promoting doctrine contrary to the SBC. The SBC believes that tongues in the Bible were languages spoken by human populations. And, that glossolalia (the random noises you call tongues) should not be part of your conviction or practice (if it is, you will be prohibited from representing the SBC in certain capacities).

Therefore, get a pair of scissors and cut 1 Corinthians 14 out of your Bible because you don't believe that Paul was giving true teaching in that chapter.

What about SBC pastors who fail to protect victims of domestic violence, like Saddleback who promoted a wife batterer to lead the choir on Sunday mornings. Perhaps Saddleback needs to be ejected from the SBC because of that. What do you think? Which is the greater evil then?

 

[OzSpen]

Oscarr,

Are you saying that speaking in tongues is anti-Baptist theology? Many Baptists here in New Zealand would disagree with you. If Paul took a whole chapter in 1 Corinthians to teach on the correct use of tongues, then it cannot be anti-Baptist theology because I know that in Baptist theology, the written Word of God is spoken of as the basis of faith.

I would say that any theology that says that the written New Testament, including the whole of 1 Corinthians, is not true, has to be anti-Baptist.

Thank you for your affirmation that the NT gift of the Spirit, tongues, is consistent with Baptist theology. Here in SE Queensland (Australia), I know of a number of charismatic Baptist churches that affirm the gift of tongues and its accompanying gift of interpretation of tongues as consistent with Baptist theology.

However, I must also say that there are many Baptist churches here in Australia that are cessationist in their theology regarding the gifts of the Spirit. I am a charismatic by biblical persuasion and have written an article, "Can cessationism be supported by Scripture and church history?"

In Christ, Oz

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

When you point that finger and accuse someone of not believing what it says, you should be pointing to yourself.

1Cor14:2 starts "For one who speaks in a unknown tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands." 1) This refers to real tongues, not someone making random noises. 2) IT'S A CRITICISM OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES.

Paul is not criticising speaking in tongues, only that it is being done out loud in their church services.

It's very true that if you speak in a language no one understand, only God understands. It's also very true that if you've lost your car keys, only God knows where they are. That's not an invitation to lose your car keys. Just the opposite, don't lose your keys because then only God will know where they are, and you'll still be stuck.

When a person is filled with the Holy Spirit and prays to God in his private prayer time with God, He is the only person who understands it. That is what Paul is saying. I don't understand how your story about car keys is relevant to Paul's teaching on the gift of tongues.

V9 is a parallel verse, "So also you, unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air." Do you think Paul is telling people to speak into the air? If you answer "no", go to the head of the class.

Paul is referring to those Corinthian believers who were speaking in tongues out loud in church services. Rather like going to a Latin Mass when no one in the church understands Latin. Or if I tried to preach an English sermon in a church in India where everyone understands only the Hindi language. I would then be speaking into the air, as it were.

But when a person is praying to God in private, believing that the language he is speaking is understood by God, who is there to say that the Holy Spirit is not inspiring the language, or that God does not understand it? Paul says that God does understand the language when a person speaks in tongues to himself and to God. Was Paul mistaken, or lying when he said that? And how can you prove that?

V13, "Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret."

Keep your mouth shut unless someone knows what you're saying.

Paul is teaching about speaking in church services, not in people's private prayer times. Actually Paul did not say "keep your mouth shut", he said, "rather that you may prophesy". There is a difference. He taught that using the gift of prophecy is more relevant and important than speaking in tongues during church services. What are your views about the gift of prophecy in your services then, seeing that Paul teaches that prophecy is an important part of church services in God's church.

If one prays in an unknown tongue, the spirit prays, but to mind is unfruitful. Like the previous example of talking to God, this is not an instruction to pray in tongues. It's just again pointing out the uselessness of speaking a language no one understands. And, again, this assumes real tongues, not the random noises found in Pentecostal churches.

Paul is talking about praying in tongues. The operative word is "praying". Personal prayer happens in private and not in the public services. Jesus taught that only hypocritical pharisees prayed long prayers in public. He taught that people should go into their private "closets" to pray where as they prayed in secret, God would reward them openly. Therefore the choice to pray in tongues is for the believer to decide to do and to do it secretly with God. Therefore tongues is not useless when used in that context.

The point I would like to make is on the basis of Romans 12, where it says that a person uses particular giftings as he has been given the portion of faith from the Holy Spirit. Therefore, if you cannot see the use of tongues, then God has not given you that measure of faith to receive the relevation of it and the ability to use the gift. But it is obvious that God has given the measure of faith to others to see the point of tongues and the ability to use it in the correct manner. If God has done this, do you think it is right to criticise Him for giving others the measure of faith and not you?

 

[Serendipity..]

I would like to speak in tongues. It might be a pleasant experience.

 

[OzSpen]

Serendipity,

I would like to speak in tongues. It might be a pleasant experience.

I want to encourage you not to "earnestly desire" the gift of tongues for "a pleasant experience". Paul said that this is our focus with the gift of tongues:

For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit (1 Cor. 14:2, ESV).

In Christ, Oz

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Serendipity,

I want to encourage you not to "earnestly desire" the gift of tongues for "a pleasant experience". Paul said that this is our focus with the gift of tongues:

In Christ, Oz

I enjoyed your article. You can find my article on Cessationism on IS THE CESSATIONIST VIEW CORRECT