Featured Clear up confusion about tongues!

Do you have an example of Jesus speaking in tongues?

 

And millions of Christians have not received this gift even though they have been open to it because this gift is not given to every Christian, and nowhere in th Bible does it say that it is for every Christian. In fact, it says quite the opposite.

And why also this emphasis on tongues, as if it was the most important gift? According to Paul, it is not. And yet I don't see an equal emphasis given to prophecy, which Paul says is a greater gift. Why is tongues made the litmus test of some "higher" or "fuller" spiritual experience, and not prophecy? Or what about love, which Paul says is the supreme gift? I see a lot of inconsistency and unscriptural teaching in the Pentecostal/Charismatic view of the gifts.

 

Because it is.

It is usually that too.

It is quite irrational. Paul said it was. "Will they not say, ye are mad."

It can lead to that unfortunately. And it can lead to much, much worse.

I use Scripture, my knowledge of it, and what I have seen already through 35 years of full time ministry. I don't believe I am wrong.

The United Pentecostal or Oneness movement certainly do. In fact so do the Mormons.

The best decision one can make is to stay away from the Charismatic movement like the plague. Their teachings have done more harm to the the teachings of Biblical Christianity then any other movement that claims to be Christian.

 

Your view is one extreme, and "awaken's" is the opposite extreme. I avoid both.

 

You don't avoid the Charismatic movement. You welcome it. At least that is what your website says.

 

You never get tired of telling lies about me, do you?

Here is what is said in our Principles: "The CAC believes in all the gifts of the Spirit, while not holding to a Pentecostal or Charismatic interpretation of them."

It's difficult to have an honest conversation with someone who is fundamentally dishonest.

 

The Charismatic movement encompasses a wide umbrella. It includes those like the United Pentecostal who believe that speaking in tongues is evidence that you have been saved to the FGA. Even under the FGA there is a variety. Some are conservative enough that the only place where tongues would be spoken would be in their own homes.

You believe in the gifts of the Spirit; hence you believe in the gift of tongues. That makes you a Charismatic. End of discussion.

 

Hah, you'd like it to be the end. Believing in the gifts of the Spirit does not make one a Charismatic. So, do you deny the gifts of the Spirit -- really? All of them? So, you don't believe the Bible, huh?

Tell me, was Paul a "Charismatic"?

 

The gifts of the Spirit are delineated for us twice in the 1Cor.12.
They have different purposes.
1. Some are revelatory, specifically those mentioned in 13:8, as well as a couple of others.
2. They are a sign to the Jews (esp. tongues) 14:21,22.
3. They are a sign to authenticate the apostles to verify them as apostles and their message that it is from God (2Cor.12:12; Heb.2:3,4)

Those are the three main reason for the gifts of the Spirit.
1. The NT is complete. We no longer need revelatory gifts.
2. All of the apostles died by the end of the first century. There is no need for any of the spiritual gifts.
3. There are no first century Jews here. They heard the sign, saw it, repented not, and judgment came in 70 A.D. The Temple was destroyed and the nation was scattered and never became a nation again until 1948.

The gifts of the Spirit have ceased, and there is no evidence that they are operational today. In fact it is a new phenomena that started in 1905. For 1900 years history remains silent concerning tongues, with the exception of cults and false religions. Now with the advent of the Azuza movement and the Kansas City Prophets, a new movement sprang, a fraudulent imitation of what was genuinely practiced 1900 years before that time.

 

I gave Scripture for each and every point. It is you who opines on this thread, and board.

 

Paul refused to speak in tongues within the church (1 Cor. 14:19) and gave Biblical and rational reasons why he refused to do so.

He told his readers to grow up and gave the SCRIPTURE whereby they could use the gift of tongues more maturely.

1 Cor. 14:20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
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.

he quotes the Biblical purpose for the gift of Tongues. He is quoting Isaiah 28:11-12 where Isaiah predicts that God would give a sign to "this people" the jews which they would not believe - "yet for all that they will not hear me, saith the Lord." The JEWISH PEOPLE. The Jewish people were not "unlearned" unbelievers but knew the scriptures in spite of their unbelief and refusal to believe in Christ. However, gentiles were not merely unbelievers but "unlearned" and they would see tongues only as a sign of crazy or "mad" people:

23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

Can you see that he first states who are the proper recipient of tongues "this people" the Jews who knew the scriptures and who the gift was not for "unlearned" type of unbeleivers (gentiles). One was learned in the scriptures and would see tongues as a sign of the promised rest but the other would see it was sign that you were mad?


Thus Paul concludes that tongues are not a sign "to them that beleive, but to them that believe not." Paul spoke in tongues more than all of them because he used it Biblically as a "sign" to the Jews that the promised "rest" (Isaiah 28:12) had come - Jesus Christ. He refused to use it in the church becauase it was not a sign for believers and the church is an assembly of believers. However he did not forbid the use of tongues under certain restrictions.

Where then did he speak in tongues more than all the church combined? He was a missionary and his practice was always to go to the Jews first and then to the gentiles. He used it OUTSIDE the church for the express Biblical purpose God designed it for as a "sign" to "this People" or Israel.