Confused about Speaking in Tongues

If the Bible is your authority, then where does the Bible say that these spiritual gifts are not for all time? It doesn't.

The post that follows yours says it all--the person says "I believe..." and does not offer a shred of scriptural support for their belief. Human wisdom isn't the basis for doctrine, the Bible is. You have offered your opinion here, but no scriptural evidence to support it. The Bible does not teach that sign gifts would cease. The fact of the matter is that I have witnessed both authentic speaking in tongues, in line with the scripture's teaching, and divine faith healing. They have not ceased.

 

If you read my post carefully I quoted one verse directly and made reference to plenty of others indirectly. It was not just opinion. It is firmly backed by Scripture.
The gifts have ceased.
1. As explained above, there is no Scriptural or even empirical evidence that they are in operation today. If they are, please demonstrate how the gift of healing, as it was in the New Testament times is still in operation today.

2. Tongues is given as a sign to the unbelieving Jews. Check 1Cor.14:21,22.

3. Tongues is given as a sign to the Apostles to authenticate them and their message during the first message. Check Heb.2:3,4 and 2Cor.12:12

4. Tongues are real languages, not the gibberish spoken today. Check Acts 2:6

Acts 2:6 ...because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

5. The rules of 1Cor.14 are not followed today, thereby negating tongues of today.
a. Only two or three could speak in foreign langauges, and that one at a time. (14:27)

b. If there was no interpreter speaking in tongues was not permitted at all. (14:27,28)

c. Women were not permitted to speak in tongues at all. (14:34,35)

d. Paul inferred that speaking in tongues was not important. He said that he would rather speak five words with understanding than 10,000 words in tongues. (14:19); Ex. "Hi, my name is DHK" Those are five words that you can understand. That is better than 10,000 words in tongues that you cannot understand.

e. Nowhere in Scripture are we commanded or even suggested to seek after tongues or the interpretation thereof. In fact the Scripture dogmatically says that not everyone will have the gift.

1 Corinthians 12:29-30 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
--The answer to these rhetorical questions is a sound NO!! Not everyone has the same gift. Read earlier on in the chapter. Can everyone be a hand? a foot? a head? etc. No, we each have our own ability. God has set each one in the church different members with different gifts.

f. God has declared that tongues and the interpretation thereof is the least of all the gifts.

1 Corinthians 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
--These gifts have been set in order of importance. Notice the adverbs. They are important. They give rank to the gifts:
"First; secondarily; thirdly; after that; then...and last of all diversities of tongues, the least of all the gifts, the least important.

Tongues have ceased.
1 Corinthians 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.
--The only thing that will last forever is love. Tongues will or have ceased. They definitely ceased before charity which is the only gift which will last throughout eternity. What else do we know about the gifts and their timelines:

1 Corinthians 13:13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
--Charity or love is the greatest gifit--greter than hope and faith. Why? Because hope and faith will cease at the coming of Christ. We walk by faith and not by sight. When Christ comes we will not longer need faith, for we shall see him as he is. Faith will end at the Coming of Christ.
Likewise will hope end at the coming of Christ. See Romans 8:24,25 for a full explanation. We wait for what we hope for. When our hope (Jesus Christ) appears, we no longer need hope. Both faith and hope will disappear (end) at the Coming of Christ.
Paul is making a comparison of all of these gifts. This only leaves three more gifts that are mentioned here: prophecy, tongues and revelatory knowledge. They will cease before the coming of Christ, before faith and hope cease. If you study 1Cor.13:8-13 you find that they ended near the end of the first century when the Word of God was completed--when that which is perfect was come (the Bible).

To summarize:
We have the Bible today, therefore we don't need extra revelation by way of tongues and other forms of extra revelation through sign gifts. The gifts have ceased.
We don't have the Apostles with us today. It is the gospel (the Word of God itself) that authenticates our message. Therefore tongues (and other spiritual gifts have ceased. They are no longer needed.
Tongues were a sign to the unbelieving Jews of the first century. They did not believe that sign and were punished as a result of it. The prophecy of Isaiah 28:11,12 was fulfilled in 1Cor.14:21,22. Those Jews don't exist any longer today. Tongues (as well as other sign gifts have ceased.)
Those are the basic Scriptural reasons that tongues have ceased.

Add to that: all the other reasons that I have given you: tongues tosay is not a language. It is only gibberish--nonsensical syllables today. It is a cheap imitation of the real thing. The restrictions put forth in 1Cor.14 are not followed. These in itself show that the tongues of Bible times were different than today; and today's tongues are fraudulent. They are not of God.
DHK

 

#1. Read 1Cor 14 carefully ESPECIALLY the RULE used for those speaking in tongues (it must be understood by the group - it is for edifying not "feeling good", and the ORDER must be maintained but NOT like the order for actual INSPIRATION in the 1Cor 14 rule for those with an ACTUAL message from God).

#2. It is clear from Acts 2 that it is known languages.

#3. It is one of the REAL 1Cor 12 spiritual gifts.

#4. Charismatic groups NOT ONLY speak in "a kind" of tongues - possibly of their own making - but they ALSO COMBINE that with a very intense passionate prayer format. Often the confusion on this issue is really the fact that a more spirit-filled active enthusiastic prayer format is much more enriching than the dry, stale, formal praying done as "ritual" in many other settings.

What you may be finding is that although you benefit from the more active "expectant" prayer format that seeks to enter into the very presence of God - and often claims Bible promises in prayer for very specific situations - you then confuse that with "I gibberished and then felt good about it" at some point in that time of prayer.

IF it were true (as in the scenario you gave above) that in the gibberish what we really have is "a moment of direct divine inspiriation" THEN the rule for tongues HAS to be the SAME as the rule for prophecy -- since THAT definition would make BOTH a direct act of the Holy Spirit AT THE MOMENT -- and WHO has the right to tell the Holy Spirit to be quiet - sit down and wait His turn??!!!

That alone should tell you that tongues IS NOT a form of inspired communication!!

SEE the different rule that 1Cor 14 uses for it's practice vs prophecy??

And in seeing that - you will see the flaw in the "popular definition" of what many think the gift of Tongues is!

In Christ,

Bob

 

The problem with this idea is that the Bible doesn't teach it. The Bible does teach that God 'bore witness' with signs and wonders, but it shows that many who were not apostles did these signs, and it does not teach that 'special gifts' ceased with the apostolic age.

And for those of us who have seen and experienced some of these gifts, arguing that they ceased by claiming they don't exist, as DHK does is a rather empty argument.

If I've never seen an entire hospital cleared out, that doesn't mean that the gift of healing doesn't exist, for example.

 

Brian

Maybe the problem is you shouldn't be listening to teachers who just confuse you, or reading their articles. Maybe you could spend more time studying the Bible and seeking God for insight.

If you know some tongues are real, why would fake tongues cause you to doubt that the gift is real? I see the same thing you do sometimes. I went to a whole church where everyone was saying 'bababa' or 'badabadabada' at the same time. Now, theoretically, i suppose 'babababa' could be a real language, since it's a universal word for 'father.' There are probably hundreds of languages where that is a real word. But I suspect something sociological or psychological was going on. People were told to not to think anything and say whatever came to them while they were surrounded by people saying 'bababa.' You don't have to get filled with the Holy Spirit to say 'babababa' under those circumcstances. So, yes, there are some flaky practices.

But I've also heard tongues that do sound like real languages. I've studied 7 or 8 languages depending on whether you count Anglo-Saxon as a separate language from Modern English, and I've got a degree in Linguistics. I live in Indonesia and speak Indonesian fluently and sometimes here other languages. So I've had exposure to other languages and I've studied a little bit about phonology and other related fields. And to my ear, some tongues do sound like real languages, and others don't.

Of course, Paul mentions the possibility of 'tongues of angels.' People interpret that different ways. And it's possible some people are repeating a phrase over and over in a genuine language. but I still suspect there are 'psychological tongues.' On the other hand, there are reports of people understanding 'tongues' without the gift of interpretation, like in Acts 2. Charles Greenoway, AOG missionary (is he still alive?) had an anecdote about that he used to tell. Don Basham wrote about this occuring with the Maori in New Zealand, and I've heard another account like this as well.

Anyway, that being said, maybe you can pick up on false tongues because of a gift of the Spirit, or maybe your just wrong. I don't know.

Real tongues and real prophecies are a blessing from the Lord, and it is a good thing God has given these gifts to His church. The fact that pagans have false tongues and prophecies are in no way a challenge to our faith or to the reality of the true gifts.

I notice that cessationist arguments are usually rather lengthy and convoluted. The plain meaning of the text isn't good enough. Rejecting commands of scripture like 'despise not prophesyings' or 'covet to prophesy and forbid not to speak with tongues' based on some shakey, long, out-on-a-limb argument about 70 AD and tongues being a sign for the Jews--wich doesn't match Paul's argument in I Corinthians-- is a pretty unwise thing to do. Theological arguments versus the direct commands of scripture...

 

DHK wrote

Your argument doesn't make sense. If it did, the verse wouldn't need to exist anyway.

If the fact that people use tongues out of order means the gift of tongues is not real, then why does 14:27 exist? Why did Paul have to tell them the order in which to speak in tongues unless they could do it wrong? Apparently, they were using the real gift of tongues out of order.

Therefore, it is possible to use the real gift of tongues out of order.

Therefore if people use the gift of tongues out of order today, it doesn't mean their gift is not real.

It just means they need to use it the way the Bible teaches. You know, most Baptist churches I've been to don't obey these passages any better than Pentecostal churches, and at least a lot of Pentecostal churches at least try to obey these passages. For example, a lot of Assembies of God churches insist on an interpretation for tongues and limit the number of messages to three in a meeting (not that I agree with limiting the number in a meeting to three as the proper interpretation of the passage.)

How many Baptist churches allow tongues with interpretation? How many allow for multiple people to teach in a meeting, or for everyone to prophesy? Not that Pentecostal churches usually do this, but it would seem that the Azusa Street revival's format may have allowed this for a while.

Those of us who actually read this verse see the inaccuracy of your statement. Paul said that the speaker in tongues was to keep silence IN THE CHURCH and speak to himself and to God.

Again, there is no way to squeeze that out of the passage. The passage allows for speaking in tongues 'not in the church' as we see in verse 28. I know you don't accept that, or didn't in the past, but it's right there in black and white in any standard translation for all to see, so there is no use to argue against it.

 

:type:

Brian,

Well, now that you have asked this question on this board, are you any less confused?

I think Link is right. The problem is listening to "too many teachers".

Why not just pray and seek God and see what He says? FYI, there are other churches where you can get credentials without speaking in tongues. Have you considered any of them?

I'm talking full gospel, Spirit filled places.

Selah,

Tam

 

Keep studying God's word. God's word is all sufficient (II Tim 3:16:17). If it is the only revelation I need, then why would other revelations from God be required?

If "the faith" was once delievered for all time (Jude 3), then wouldn't it be a violation of scripture to keep receiving his message. The once delivered message is recorded for us as the bible.

I see there are two possibilities with tongues, either it is a new message from God, or it is the same message that we already have. Let's look at the two possibilities.

1) If the message delivered to one in a tongue were a new message, it should be ignored and discredited, because anyone teaching anything new is to be accursed (Gal 1:8).

2) If the message delivered to one in a tongue were the same message as what is in the bible, then why would I need that? God's word thoroughly furnishes me (II Tim 3:16-17). When you have the complete word of God, you don't need the partial gift of tongues, which were used when the church was in its infancy, however, when it matured, it put away the childish things (I Cor 13).

I am not questioning anyone's sincerity, don't get me wrong. I positively believe that some people think they speak in tongues and are 100% convinced that they do.

What is puzzling to me, I have never met or talked to anyone who thinks they can speak in tongues that have ever been able to actually use this gift to spread the gospel. That is certainly what it was used for in the first century. Has anyone here who speaks in tongues been able to share the gospel with someone who speaks a language that you have not learned? Wouldn't that be kin to someone who claims to be able to heal people without ever actually having healed anyone?

If God were to give you a special cell phone, capable of letting you communicate with anyone in this world, and you never made any calls to anyone, what good would it be to have it? If you flip it open and punch a bunch of buttons and sincerly think you are communicating with God with a special code that even you don't understand, yet never use it to make an actual call, of what value is that cell phone or how do you even know if it really works? Cell phones are used to make calls to other people with phones. Language is used to communicate with other folks. Of what good are miraculous gifts today such as "tongues" that are never used to communicate with others, and "healers" that never heal, or prophets that never prophesy to people, and teachers never teach others, and so on?

Furthermore, if someone can speak in tongues, would it be too difficult to "type" in tongues or at least record it and have someone analyze it? That would be an easy way to determine what language one was speaking in.

 

All you've done here is apply your own biases to a few passages of scripture that do not teach that tongues have ceased. The assumption that having the Bible completed precluded the need for tongues isn't a scriptural teaching either. What you've done here in your assumption and opinion is replace the Holy SPirit as the third person of the Trinity with the Bible.

I've been in places where revelation from God, specific messages in fact, were delivered through a tongues experience, a language that was identifiable and intelligible, spoken by a person who had no prior knowledge of it. I've also seen divine healing in several cases. God is sovereign and he can do what he wants to do, without our permission or our inclination to think that our own doctrine is right and that of others is wrong.

 

I have given you Scripture; you have given me opinion. I trust Scripture.
You say: "I've been in places were revelation from God, specific messages in fact, were delivered through a tongues experience."
--This is heresy. There is no more revelation outside of God's Word. The canon of Scripture is closed. All that we need to know about God is contained in His Word. To add to God's Word is heresy. What is your standard? Do you include the Book of Mormon as well? The writings of Ellen G. White? Charles Taze Russel? All the writings of all Charismatics all over the wrold everywhere? If so, who is going to go and collect them all, and collate them so that we may have a completed revelation. Your position is ludicrous.
God has spoken to us through His Word. There is no further revelation outside the Word of God. When the Word of God was completed, these revelatory sign gifts ceased. There was no more need for them. Check 1Cor.13:8-13.

The test of a prophet, those who receive and give revelation were two-fold:
1. His prophecy must always be centered around Jehovah (Christ), not contradicting the Bible, and
2. It must be 100% accurate, 100% of the time. If your prophecy fails but one time in a thousand you are a false prophet.
When Benny Hinn told his followers that their loved ones would rise from the dead on a certain day, and they didn't, he proved himself to be a false prophet. Hinn provides us with many examples of false prophecies. He is a fraud.

You said: "God is sovereign and can do what he wants to do."
No he cannot. God cannot do anything contrary to his nature--like tell lies.
Nor can he do anything contrary to his Word.

Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
DHK

 

#1. Read 1Cor 14 carefully ESPECIALLY the RULE used for those speaking in tongues (it must be understood by the group - it is for edifying not "feeling good", and the ORDER must be maintained but NOT like the order for actual INSPIRATION in the 1Cor 14 rule for those with an ACTUAL message from God).

#2. It is clear from Acts 2 that it is known languages.

#3. It is one of the REAL 1Cor 12 spiritual gifts.

#4. Charismatic groups NOT ONLY speak in "a kind" of tongues - possibly of their own making - but they ALSO COMBINE that with a very intense passionate prayer format. Often the confusion on this issue is really the fact that a more spirit-filled active enthusiastic prayer format is much more enriching than the dry, stale, formal praying done as "ritual" in many other settings.

What you may be finding is that although you benefit from the more active "expectant" prayer format that seeks to enter into the very presence of God - and often claims Bible promises in prayer for very specific situations - you then confuse that with "I gibberished and then felt good about it" at some point in that time of prayer.

IF it were true (as in the scenario you gave above) that in the gibberish what we really have is "a moment of direct divine inspiriation" THEN the rule for tongues HAS to be the SAME as the rule for prophecy -- since THAT definition would make BOTH a direct act of the Holy Spirit AT THE MOMENT -- and WHO has the right to tell the Holy Spirit to be quiet - sit down and wait His turn??!!!

That alone should tell you that tongues IS NOT a form of inspired communication!!

SEE the different rule that 1Cor 14 uses for it's practice vs prophecy??

And in seeing that - you will see the flaw in the "popular definition" of what many think the gift of Tongues is!

 

Where does the Bible teach that there is no more revelation from God outside of the canon?

The scripture you have pasted together, with your theories inserted to strongarm your own biases, do not teach that the sign gifts of the spirit have ceased. They point to specific circumstances in which they were used, but they do not indicate in any way shape or form that these gifts would end when the canon of scripture was complete. You are wrong and off base in your interpretation of scripture, and you are violating the instruction of the Apostle Paul in I Cor. 14:39-40. Nowhere does the Bible even speak about the "canon" of scripture, much less teach that anything contained within the scripture would be affected by its completion.

I've seen nothing in either the tongues experiences I've witnessed or in the divine healings, that are either the way you describe them or are inconsistent with the principles of scripture.

God has spoken to us through his Word. You might want to check out the first chapter of John just to see what the Word of God really is. I John 4 says to test the spirits and the test of those spirits is the testimony that Jesus is the Christ. The Book of Mormon denies that, as do the works of Charles Taze Russell, and most of the other stuff you mentioned. The tongues and interpretations that I have heard have affirmed, not denied, that fact. You weren't there, you don't know and you are not in a position to judge. Your position takes the Holy Spirit out of the Trinity and replaces it with the Bible. Sorry, but you have not proven anything except that you can plop down a few verses that don't support what you say. The scriptures are not speaking here, you are.

 

Jack:
All the gifts of the Spirit were given to the local church. That is who Paul was writing to, the Church at Corinth. Tongues is actually a mis-nomer. The word, in every case, means language, and refers to an actual foreign language, just as they spoke on the Day of Pentecost: "How hear we every man in our own language?"
Now: Concerning the experience that you spoke of:
Did the person speaking in tongues edify the entire congregation--all of the local church. If not, it wasn't biblical.
Did the one speaking, speak in a foreign language? If so, which language was it, and how do you know?
Was it translated? By who? Did he know from what language he was translating, and what language did he translate into?
How do you know that he had an accurate translation?
Was there anyone else there that could verify his translation?

If you don't know what is being said, how can you be sure it is from God?
Perhaps it is from a demon and you don't know it.
That is what I believe happened in 1Cor.12:1-4. They were calling Christ accursed by another spirit.
Demonstrate to those on this board that your experience of speaking in so-called tongues was of God, and not of demons.
DHK

 

Revelation

The idea that all revelation is found in scripture:

1. Violates the principle of sola scriptura
2. Is not found in scripture.

Since the Bible does not teach that lal revelation is found in the Bible, this doctrine violates the principle that all doctrine must come from scripture.

The Bible shows us that God gave plenty of revelation not found in scripture. We know that Saul prophesied when the Spirit of God came upon him, but the Bible does not tell us what he said. We don't know what the other prophets who were with him said either. The Bible refers to the book of Iddo the seer, but that book is not in scripture. The Bible tells us that there was a company of prophets with Elijah, but we don't know what they prophesied, for the most part. Micaiah had made some previous prophecies before the one he made to the king that is recorded in scripture, but we don't know what they were.

John recieved a revelation that sounded like a thunder clap, but he was not allowed to write down what it said. Paul wrote of a man who went into the third heaven and heard unspeakable things, things Paul did not record in scripture.

The Bible teaches us that Jesus is the Word of God. Jesus is the ultimate Revelation of God to man. His every act revealed the Father. But the end of the book of John shows us that not all that Jesus did was recorded, and if it had been, John supposed the world could not contain the books. So we know all His acts and all that he said is not recordedin scripture.

So why is it that some people argue that if someone gets a prophecy today or a tongue and interpretation today, it must be added to scripture? Not all of the prophecies and tongues of the first century were added to scripture. Why would modern expressions of these things be a threat to the canon? They are not.

Denying these gifts challenges the canon, since the canon teaches that these gifts are real.

 

I never said it was my experience of speaking in tongues. I can give you two pieces of scriptural evidence that it was from God, and not from demons.

1. It was consistent with the guidelines given by the Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 14. It was in a small group of people. The person who spoke in tongues wasn't babbling gibberish, they were speaking in a language that was later identified by those in the room as Greek. There was an interpretation with a message to the people who were gathered in that group. It was something that no one in the group knew collectively.

2. I John 4 says to test the spirits. The standard for a Spirit being "of God" is the testimony of Jesus as the Christ. Demons cannot do this. The interpreter of this message very clearly testified to Jesus as the Son of the Living God, the lamb that was slain before the foundation of the earth as the sacrifice for our sins. It passed the test.

Both of these elements are consistent with the teaching of scripture related to tongues.

 

1CORINTHIANS 12
1 Now concerning spiritual gifts , brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

How do you know that this person/s called Jesus accursed while speaking in tongues? How do you come up with that? The context here is spiritual gifts, not just the gift of tongues. They could have been standing up to prophecy in their own language, calling Jesus accursed.

From your previous post:

You just cannot prove this to be so.

 

:type:

Brian,

You asked."What exactly do you mean by "credentials"?

I mean that you can receive ordination through other places. You can get a ministers license. You would be licensed to preach.

Of course you do have to prove to them that you know the bible, and correct doctrine, etc. Which of course you do need to know if you want to preach and teach others the Gospel.

Peace,

Tam