Charismatic Theology

"Do not forbid to speak in tongues"
"1CO 14:39 Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues."
"An Apostolic directive. If the results of your teaching are that tongues are forbidden, then you are at odds with the Holy Spirit."

--Not at all. Study again 1 Cor. 13:8-13. Tongues have ceased. They had ceased by the end of the first century. This has already been adequately and Scripturally explained in other posts. Therefore this command is given only to first century Christians. Not every command in the Scripture is given to every Christian. Always read the context.

"Tongues are both known and unknown to man"
"1CO 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal."
"Paul here says that there are tongues of angels. He shows that it is possible for a man to speak in a language that is not one of earthly origin."

--Not so. Tongues always, always are known languages. To say otherwise is a contradiction of Scripture. In 1 Cor.13:1 Paul speaks hypothetically. He says "though," or "if." It is a supposition, that is saying, "if I could." But he knew he couldn't. And I've got bad news for you too. You're no angel! Neither can you speak in the language of an angel, especially since you don't know what language they speak. Again did you read the context?
In verse two Paul says: "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." Could he understand ALL mysteries? Only God can do that. Did he have ALL faith? Enough to remove mountains?
Verse three says, "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." Did he bestow all his goods to feed the poor? Did he give his body to be burned? It is not saying that he did these or even had the power to do these things. They were hypothetical statements saying that if he had the power to do these things and could do them, but still without love, they would be worthless.
Sorry, your language is not angelic. But you might look for its source elsewhere.

"Praying and singing in tongues"
"1Cor. 14:[14] For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. [15] So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind."
"Paul shows that praying and singing in tongues is acceptable."

--No, he is showing the contrary. Any time a Christian opens up his mind to allow something else to control it, he gives way to the devil, or perhaps even demon oppression of some kind. We are commanded constantly in verses like Phil.4:8 to use our mind. "Think on these things." Josh. 1:8 and Psalm 1 tells us to meditate on the Word of God. 2Tim.2:15 tells us to study. Paul tells Timothy to, Take heed to thyself and the doctrine. We are to use our minds. Paul says here in 1Cor.14:14 that when praying in a tongue, the mind is unfruitful. Therefore it is not good to pray in a tongue. It is unfruitful! (Unless that tongue or language is known to the others around you) Compare Scripture with Scripture.
Eph.5:18,19 "And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;"
Look at the result of being filled with the Spirit. It isn't speaking in tongues. It is singing in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs--all of which have meaning. They are not mysterious. The psalms, all 150 of them, for example, can be found in your Bible. You can sing them. There is nothing mysterious here.

"Paul shows the value he places on tongues."
"1CO 14:18 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you."
"Paul does give other directions relating to tongues, but those directions do not take away from these teachings that he taught."

--Yes, the value that he placed on tongues wasn't that much was it. It was placed last in the list of gifts given 1Cor.12:28. He says he speaks more than them all, because they abused the gift, and he didn't want them to use it. He would rather that they would prophesy, as he emphasized throughout the chapter. Your arguments are either from a twisting of Scripture, or a misunderstanding of Scripture, or from the silence of Scripture, which also is no argument at all. Biblical tongues has ceased. If you have the gift please tell me which languages you speak.
DHK

 

Qwerty, Sue, I would like to see your thoughts as to DHK's response regarding what tongues are; specifically, the paragraph where he addresses "if I speak in the tongue of angels and of men...."

There is a literary rule that is used in the Bible, as well as by authors of today. I don't know its exact term, but it's known as the rule of "first use." For instance, in a technical manual, when I define "LBE" as load bearing equipment, I then refer to it as "LBE" from that point forward, with no intent to define it again--because I already have.

In the Bible, we find many uses of this rule. When we read in the Old Testament that the people offered sacrifices to God, we find that those sacrifices were of animals. When we run across the same phrasing--say, in 1 Corinthians 8, 9, and 10--we still know that the sacrifices mentioned were of animals. We do not question this for some reason.

But for some reason, even though tongues are clearly defined in Acts 2, well before Paul became an apostle to the Gentiles, we run across one reference--and only one, in the entire Bible--to a "tongue of angels," which is used in the context of "IF," and we throw the rule of first use out the window and build a whole theological doctrine around one questionable reference.

Please think about it. Since I'm not nearly as smart as I'd like to think I am, I'd like to limit responses to me to this one subject. I'm humbly awaiting your responses about this particular thing alone. Private message me if you must. Thank you.

 

Sue,

No problem, as I said before take your time. As I have stated several times, I would much rather have a scripturally grounded answer to any question I ask. To do so does take some time to search the Word and I respect that.

I just caution anyone to remember to keep the verse within it's context. To take one verse and say "my belief is based on this" and ignore what is being said around it is dangerous.


DHK,

AMEN! You do have such a knowledge and way of answering these questions.


Qwerty,

I won't bother to repeat what DHK has said in my own words. He made some excellent points. I would like to respond to this one statement that you made.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Paul does give other directions relating to tongues, but those directions do not take away from these teachings that he taught.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The verses you listed were just that. They were a single verse or two taken out of context. They were not what Paul was "teaching".

You have just said that because Paul said "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels", that he taught about the tongues of angels. I see one statement here saying that if he spoke them and did not show love it would be worthless. No where does he ever "teach" about the tongues of angels. Please show me where Paul teaches about the tongues of angels in the Bible. Again I repeat, very dangerous to take one verse and base an entire doctrine on it.

You took one verse of scripture and made this statement.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
An Apostolic directive. If the results of your teaching are that tongues are forbidden, then you are at odds with the Holy Spirit<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So if a non-Christian enters the Church and begins to speak in tongues are we supposed to allow them to continue? Are you aware that MANY religions practice speaking in tongues and they are not empowered by the Holy Spirit? Mohamad even spoke in tongues! See how dangerous it can be to allow one verse to be the basis of an entire doctrine? You have just opened the Church up to many religions that defile the Word of God, because hey, the Bible clearly says not to forbid it! Keep it in context.

You can not take one verse out of context and call that a teaching.

~Lorelei

[ October 02, 2001: Message edited by: Lorelei ]

 

An interesting but defiantly not a surprising observation has been made.

DHK should be applauded for his scriptural well put together post that have a systematic approach and has not taken any verse out of context. Very well written as he has expounded upon the Word of God without any BIOS. Might I say to you, very good. And Lorelei who posted another well penned scriptural contextual post especially the one done at 2am.

Then comes qwerty who has zero answers and leads Sue to Jack Hayford one of the leading Charismatics who bases his entire doctrine on experience. In essence saying, Sue don’t believe those who are giving you all of those Scripture we have experiences! Here is a book written by a guy who also has experiences - trust in that. Don’t let anyone take away your experiences. Trust in your experience and have it confirmed by other peoples experiences. (Which is what Jack Hayford teaches). Then Sue comes back and embraces
the thought by expressing her interest in the book. I am not trying to be mean here. Just trying to point out that we can not trust in feelings, or experiences. What your doing is believing in experience and testimony of other peoples experience then desperately trying to find some kind of proof in the Scripture to validate it. Let the Scripture speak to you, don’t try to speak to the Scripture. And don’t base an
entire doctrine upon experiences.

Sue said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I have biblical answers for all and good ones to that pertain and in context. Its a bit overwhelming having several people asking different questions and trying to answer every person.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sue I certainly know and understand about not having time to get to everyone’s answers. In my line of work, time management is critical. I get frustrated when I read some of the post but my time is so limited to respond at times. (then wonder if anyone really read it or at least skimmed it.) And I try to never sacrifice my personal studies and time in the Word. Sue, you claim to have good biblical answers taken in context, but I also have noticed that you post your experience of tongues and have yet to post your good biblical answers. I also humbly submit to you with great love, that you admittedly don’t know where or what the Bible teaches on certain subjects. Could it be then, that
your foundation is not laid upon the Bible - for you don’t really know the Bible? A
person should always know why they believe in something and it should be grounded
deeply in nothing but in the Scripture. For example, I know I am a Christian not because I felt God at times or because I have received answers to prayers but because the Bible tells me so. Please take this observation to heart, knowing that it is written with care.

With love,
Chet

 

Sue,

This page is the bio on Jack Hayford.
http://www.livingway.org/about_the_ministry/fr_jack%20bio.htm

DR. JACK W. HAYFORD
Those called to the ministry today face challenges unimagined by predecessors just a generation ago. Many serve God in societal environments not anticipated by traditional seminary training. Helping equip pastors – of many denominations, serving diverse communities around the world – to effectively lead their congregations in dynamic, Christ-centered ministry is the current focus of Dr. Jack W. Hayford.
A prolific and best-selling author, Pastor Hayford has penned more than three dozen books, 600 hymns and choruses, including the internationally known and widely recorded "Majesty," and hundreds of teaching cassettes distributed worldwide. He is perhaps best known, however, as founding pastor of The Church on the Way (TCOTW), the First Foursquare Church of Van Nuys, California. His service to TCOTW, which began as a temporary assignment to pastor 18 people in 1969, continued fruitfully for more than three decades as the congregation grew to more than 10,000 active members.

Jack Hayford is one of the more challenging figures to those who believe the Holy Spirit stopped much of His activity at the end of the first century. His consistent life as a believer, and his leadership as a pastor, have given him credibility with many. But definitely not with cessationists.

He has written many books, and hundreds of hymns, and as mentioned above, the song "Majesty".

His book, "The Beauty of Spiritual Language - Unveiling the Mystery of Speaking in Tongues" is, in my opinion, the best I have seen for a basic understanding of the usage of tongues.

 

Follow the link: http://www.biblebb.com/mac.htm
and then scroll down, until you see the section on Charismatics. He has most of his book posted there with a wealth of information, all documented.

 

"In reading 1 Cor. 13:8-13 I have to strongly disagree that this scripture teaches that tongues have ceased. It says they will cease but it NEVER says they have already."

This has been explained before, in fact more than once, but I will explain it again for you.
1Cor.13:8 "Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away."
--From this verse we see that these three sign gifts: prophecies, tongues, and revelatory knowledge shall cease; they shall vanish away. The question is, when? For that answer we must look into the next verses, and also have some understanding of how the Corinthians were understanding what Paul was saying when he was writing this. In other words, what the Greek language says, in which New Testament was written, is also important. Then, after having done that, we must check and see if lines up with other Scripture. So our third step is to compare Scripture with Scripture.

Verse 9 "For we know in part, and we prophesy in part."
--Remember the context. Paul is writing to the Corinthians at a time when they did not have the New Testament, or all the Word of God. They "knew in part," that is they had the Old Testament, and possibly one or two of the earlier New Testament books. But that is all the revelation that they had. The Lord made it possible for them to have other revelation, similar to what we have in our New Testament, through these miraculous sign gifts. They were given because the New Testament had not been completed, or made perfect. That is why Paul said in this verse "we prophesy in part," and that is why in chapter 14 he puts a much greater emphasis on prophecy than tongues. It was far more beneficial to the church. Through the prophetic ministry the church was being taught the essential truths of the Word of God.

Verse 10 "But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away."
--Here is where some knowledge of the Greek becomes useful. The question, what is "that which is perfect," needs to be answered. The word "that" in the Greek is a neuter pronoun. In English we are accustomed to describe things in just two genders, but in Greek there are three, the third one being neuter. Because the word "that" is neuter it cannot refer to Jesus Christ. It also has a meaning or sense of completion. "When that which is complete is come." It thus refers to the Word of God which was completed near the end of the first century when John completed the last book of the Bible, the Book of Revelation, written about 98 A.D.
Does this match up with other Scripture.
James 1:25 "But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed."
--The perfect law of liberty is the completed Word of God.
Psalm 19:7 "The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple."
--God's Word is perfect.

So, taken in the context in which they are written, yes it does say that they have ceased already. Especially adding to this passage all of the arguments set forth in 1Cor.14, particularly verses 21 and 22, where it explains to us that tongues are a sign to the unbelieving Jew. Have there been any unbelieving Jews present when you speak in tongues, Sue?
DHK

 

Hmmm...no responses from Qwerty or Sue.

Oh, well.

 

Sue,

I understand that things can be quite overwhelming. I think where the confusion and impatience comes in, is in some of your statements.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by myreflection26:
I have biblical answers for all and good ones to that pertain and in context. Its a bit overwhelming having several people asking different questions and trying to answer every person.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes it is overwhelming, but if you have the evidence already there then show us.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by myreflection26:
Chet,

Please refere back to my posts again. Obviously you missed the page full of scripture only. Pleas read these posts before you make your conconclusions.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


He did not "obviously" miss it or jump to conclusions. Chet not only read your post with all the scripture, he took quite a lot of time in preparing his response to you and all you did was tear it down and still have offered no evidence to your claims against him.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by myreflection26:
Chet,

I don't have time right now to post scripture and proof at this moment, but I have seen some serious flaws in your interpretation of these particular verses and will point it out either tomarrow or in the next fews days here. Its definatly not personal so please don't consider it that way. I just noticed in cross reference that some things don't match up to what you are interpreting here. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you are accusing him of taking things out of context or having references that don't match up then please show him where!

Please do not accuse someone of being wrong and not offering any evidence as to why. I know you are overwhelmed, but save the "accusation" until you are prepared to answer it correctly.

Then you fall back into the same argument as always.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by myreflection26:

Plus, something to keep in mind, I think this is actually a good thing to have experience in and why the experience of the gift of tongues is good to have in these discussions. Have you ever spoken in tongues? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course he hasn't spoken in tongues, or doesn't anymore if he ever did. Everyone who reads his posts knows how he feels about tongues. He has probably spoken other languages (that he may have learned), but not the tongues that you practice.

When you stumble on scripture you keep turning back to your experience.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by myreflection26:
I'm not sure at this point how to get my point across to you that I simply do not agree with your interpretation of these scriptures as I see something very differently. You can explain 30 more times and the fact still remains I don't agree with the interpretation.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is our point. You keep taking 2 or 3 verses out of one chapter and saying that your way is right but you ignore the rest of what Paul has to say. We are just trying to show you what those mean in context. Look here, you actually agree with me on this verse, yet you still ignore it two verses later. Please answer this question. Do you pray for interpretation every time you speak in tongues? From some of the statements that you have made, I do not think that you do. Here is what you said:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by myreflection26:
Verse 13 For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.

When you speak in a tongue, pray and ask God for the interpretation so you can know what it means.

Verse 14..For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.

When you pray in a tongue you have no idea what you are saying (unless you are given interpretation) so your spirit is praying mysteries but your mind isn't being fruitful during this time.

Verse 15.. So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.

Paul is saying, well how can we do this? How about if we pray in a tongue (with my spirit) and also pray with my mind (pray as normal) I'll sing in a tongue (with my spirit) but I'll also sing as I normally would.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You agree in verse 13 that it means to pray to interpret, but in v 15 you say that praying with the mind is "praying as normal".

Again, do you pray for an interpretation every time? If not, then you are going against your own interpretation of the these scriptures.

I know you are overwhelmed with questions Sue, but if you have the answers already, then we ask that you share them. If you are truly seeking what God's Word says in this matter, then we shall all be patient. By your posts it appears that you are still disagreeing, but offering no evidence as to why. You either have strong evidence of your belief that you are not sharing, or you are uncertain of your evidence and standing on your experience. Please share with us which it is.

Please do not take this personally, I will challenge anyone in the same manner. As I have stated before I will not believe man but God and therefore I expect a belief to be grounded in scripture. You are right, we are about to the point of where we are just going to "disagree", but remember that disagreement is not based upon scripture. You still have not shown us where it "teaches" us how to use tongues for self-edification. You have not shared with us what language (tongue) you are speaking. If it is the tongues of angels, you need to show us where it teaches about that as well. You have also not stated about how you interpret your own tongues, if you do at all. So don't be so ready to say you just disagree with our interpretation, when you have not given any evidence or interpretation to disagree upon. All we have is your word and your experience. (the 2 or 3 verses you use out of context do not even touch these issues)


~Lorelei

[ October 03, 2001: Message edited by: Lorelei ]

 

“I'm not sure at this point how to get my point across to you that I simply do not agree with your interpretation of these scriptures as I see something very differently. You can explain 30 more times and the fact still remains I don't agree with the interpretation.”

Sue,
My opinions and “interpretations” don’t mean two cents. In God’s eyes they don’t’ count. The question that you must consider is what does the Bible say on this, or any other particular matter. There is only one interpretation—God’s interpretation. God is not the author of confusion. If the “Holy Spirit” leads you to believe contrary to what the Bible teaches then you are being led by the wrong spirit. Many well intentioned people have different view points on controversial subjects, but the fact remains there is but one interpretation. You have failed to address 1Cor.14:21,22, which I mentioned a number of times, saying only that you do not agree with it. You do not have an answer. Your position is wrong, but your pride will not allow you to admit it. As for 1Cor.14:21,22, I will explain it now in greater detail that you may understand it more fully and have another chance to answer this objection that the Apostle Paul brings to speaking in tongues.

1 Cor.14:21 In 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.
22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
--In verse 21 Paul quotes from the Old Testament, “in the law it is written.” This is an Old Testament passage that he is quoting from Isaiah 28:11,12. He then says “With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak to this people.” Who does “this people” refer to? Remember this is an Old Testament passage. It is directed to the Jews. “This people” refers to the Jews, the Israelites. It has nothing to do with Christians.
Then in verse 22, he goes on and says “wherefore.” The word, “wherefore,” indicates a concluding statement taken from what is previously said. “Tongues are a sign , not to them that believe, but to them that believe not!” In other words tongues are a sign to the unbelieving Jew. The Lord said He would speak to the Jews in tongues. This event took place in the first century and was fulfilled in the first century with the gift of tongues. But the Jews did not believe just as Isaiah prophesied they would not. This is a literal interpretation of Scripture. It is the only meaning of these verses that you can exegete out of them. If I am wrong, show me through Scripture where I am wrong. If I am right then obey the Word of God and change your views. Are there any unbelieving Jews present when you speak in tongues?
DHK

[ October 03, 2001: Message edited by: DHK ]

 

Sue,
It fun to watch the interaction.

IS SO!!
IS NOT!!
IS SO!!
IS NOT!!

I agree with you that tongues is for believers today.

This may go on for awhile. Good practice in defending our beliefs and practice.

verse 28..If there is no interpreter the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

I really like this scripture. It clearly shows that a person can speak in tongues in chruch, even without an interpreter present. Instead of speaking to people, you are speaking to God. Wonderful!!

 

Deal with the question at hand Sue. Don't avoid issues. What is the meaning of 1 Corinthians 14:21,22?

 

DHK,
Paul is making a point in verses 21 and 22. God will speak to a disobedient people in a strange language, and even then they won't listen.

And according to verse 28, they will have to be able to read minds, also.

Because Paul says that if you don't have interpreter present, the one speaking in tongues should keep quiet, and just speak to God.

I'm glad you brought up the point. I was never aware that these disobedient people might be mind-readers also.

 

You both need to back to a previous post where I expounded the entire chapter for you, showing you that throughout the chapter Paul is giving a list of conditions to be kept when speaking in tongues.
You seem to think that if you can keep but one of these conditions than it is alright to speak in tongues. No, you must keep all the conditions that Paul has set forth. Tongues is a gift given to the church, not the individual. It is a specific real, known language. It is given as a sign for the unbelieving Jew. And yes, there must always be an interpreter in the church (something Charismatic churches conveniently avoid). Women are not permitted to speak in tongues (including ones named Sue). There are no more than two, at the most three allowed to speak in tongues in one service, and each one must have an interpreter, and they have to speak in turn--not all at once. We determined that one of the functions of speaking in tongues was to give revelation to the church, as the New Testament canon was not yet complete (1 Cor. 13:8-10). The other reason is plainly given--a sign to the unbelieving Jews. These are not difficult concepts. If you can fulfill all of these conditions keeping in mind that tongues (languages) are real and genuine foreign languages, then perhaps you can say you are speaking in Biblical tongues.
DHK

 

DHK,
OK. Help me with this.

1CO 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. [27] If anyone speaks in a tongue, two--or at the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. [28] If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

Paul is giving instructions here, also.

What do you do with verse 28? I agree there are other instructions in this chapter, but is this instruction not valid, also?

Paul is saying, in my opinion, very clearly, that if there is not an interpreter present, the person can speak in tongues to God.

I also like what Paul said:

1CO 14:39 Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. [40] But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

Don't forbid to speak in tongues. I agree with this.