Gifts/Tongues – Once Good? Now Evil?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by qwerty, Dec 10, 2003.

  1. qwerty

    qwerty
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Were the gifts/tongues ever good? (1 Cor. 12:7-11)
    Do we know of any valid use of the gifts after Pentecost?

    Questions:
    1. How can we be sure that the gifts were ever good?
    Do we have any documentation (scripture) that lets us know of a valid use of a gift after Pentecost?

    2. If they were good, when did they become evil (“of the devil”)?
    That is, was it within one person’s lifetime that a gift was good, and then became “of the devil”? The reference here is to those who say that anyone who speaks in tongues today is “of the devil”.

    3. Is there anything else that God has given to the church since Pentecost that once was thought to be good, but now is “of the devil”?
     
  2. TC

    TC
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    10
    Acts 2:1-12
    And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?

    Acts 10:46
    For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

    1 Cor 12:10
    To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another [divers] kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

    1 Cor 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.

    1 Cor 12:30
    Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

    1 Cor 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.

    1 Cor 14:5-6
    I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater [is] he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?

    1 Cor 14:18
    I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:

    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.

    1 Cor 14:22-23
    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. 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?

    1 Cor 14:39
    Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

    Tongues was a gift of the Holy Spirit. They were a sign for the unbelieving Jew. Tongues were/are good for the purpose that they were given for. However, they were abused by the people - and still are. The Bible doesn't allow me to say that they stopped 100%. But, the Bible does say that they will stop at some point. I'll leave that for the theologians to fight over. I think the charismatics have gone way too far in what they teach about them. They are not signs that we are saved or filled with the Holy Spirit, and they are not for everybody.
     
  3. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am certainly not a speaker of tongues but it's hard to completely dismiss them as Paul seems to at least acknowledge them as occurring in worship. In addition, the verse about tongue's ceasing (1 Cor 13:8) really refers to all of our limited human expressions of worship. One day we won't be limited to just these expressions. For now we see through a glass darkly.... In the end charity is the greatest because in heaven our hope will have been realized and our faith will be sight! Thus it's hard to say that this is our justification for a complete cessationist view. The fact that he mentions them with knowledge and prophecy is an acknowledgment that they were practiced.

    That being said however I think we can infer from Paul's list of the fruits of the Spirit in Galatians (which does not include tongues) and from his further thoughts on tongues in chapter 14 that tongue-speaking is certainly not a marker of a person's indwelling of the Spirit nor is it an essential feature of worship. [​IMG]
     
  4. Mark Osgatharp

    Mark Osgatharp
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    0
    The gift of tongues was nothing more than the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages. It served the purpose of validating the New Testament era and it ceased, along with all other miraculous abilities, with the apostolic era, leaving faith, hope, and love as the three remaining spiritual gifts (I Cor. 13).

    The "tongues" practiced by modern day charismatics and Pentecostals is a farce. It has no spiritual reality whatsoever. It bears no resemblance to anything taught in the Scriptures. It is direct violation of many Scriptural principles.

    It is bogus. It is fake. It is phony. It cannot be condemned in too strong terms. It is of the devil. It's use manifests a complete lack of spiritual understanding on the part of it's user.

    Comparing the tongues of the Scriptures and the modern day tongues movement is like comparing apples and oranges. There is no comparison. The two have nothing in common.

    Mark Osgatharp
     
  5. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree that TODAY'S tongue-speaking (taken as a whole) is pretty bogus; okay it's really bogus!! For charismatics to teach that this is a necessary feature of worship is incorrect. That itself does not make tongue-speaking in itself automatically evil. Paul certainly did not think so. If we were not confronted with this type of large scale tongue-speaking thing (which is neither biblical nor practiced biblically) would we have such a negative view of glossolalia? Perhaps not! Although it probably wouldn't be seen much! Certainly the apostolic age was characterized by some things we don't see today - but I think a biblical mandate for cessation is something that we just don't have (unless one wants to take 1 Cor 13:8 out of context), whether we like it or not. ;)
     
  6. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Biblical tongues were necessary. Think of Acts 2 and how Peter could preach and people from 15+ nations heard him in their own language (tongue).

    Why? To get the message out PRE-BIBLE. Once the biblical books began to be spread, you see something amazing happen.

    There is NO MORE MENTION of tongues. Ever. Not needed.

    Agree that the modern "tongues" is a sham and NOT biblical languages.
     
  7. Artimaeus

    Artimaeus
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2002
    Messages:
    3,133
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gifts/Tongues – Once Good? Now Evil?

    Once good, now non-existent.
     
  8. Sularis

    Sularis
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tongues - half the story

    Once Good - now the other half forgotten
    Interpretation

    Tongues exist
    I spoke in Cebuano - after hearing Cebuano as English

    Tongues not just foreign languages - tongues also heavenly communication - BUT BUT BUT that communication MUST ALWAYS - EVERY SINGLE TIME - EVERY SINGLE WORD - be accompanied by interpretation - if it is not - then it is wrong
     
  9. Tractster

    Tractster
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    You brave soul, you. [​IMG]

    Roscoe
     
  10. TC

    TC
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    10
    I don't totally discount tongues, but I think that they are greatly abused today.

    1 Cor 13:8-13
    Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.
    When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.
    And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

    There are those that think this refers to the completion of the canon and that tongues have totally ceased. Others think that reading that with the face to face part say that it refers to the second comming of Jesus. Therefore, tongues will keep happening until then. I don't think that either side has made a compelling case.
     
  11. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought this was funny:

    Vern Poythress (WTS theologian, very smart and quite witty) cited a study done in which Pentecostals were recorded speaking in "angelic languages". In the other arm of the study a group of random adults was asked to speak gibberish. Several Pentecostals were asked which was the authentic angelic language. The majority picked the gibberish! Oops! [​IMG]

    I think the Bible does not give a clear "NO" on the use of tongues today. The very fact that Paul did not say more hints that they should not be given a whole lot of importance! ;)
     
  12. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    For your own interest just look up glossa and under that look up glossolalia sometime in TDNT Vol. 1, pages 722-726 and any other good Bible dictionary and they will refer to tongues as ecstatic utterance.

    If it were not ecstatic utterance then why 1 Cor 14:2, "For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries."

    This would seem to indicate that it is some kind of utterance to God and nothing that man can understand. It is an unintelligible utterance that requires an interpretation.

    BAGD says that it is "an utterance outside of the normal patern of intelligible speech and therefore requiring special interpretation, ecstatic language, ecstatic speech, tongue. There is no doubt about the thing referred to, namely the strange speech of persons in religious exstacy."

    I believe that Paul says that apeaking in tongues is one among many manifestations of the Holy Spirit. To set up sepeaking in tongues as the only way to be spiritual is wrong. Yet to say that any other gift makes one more spiritual as well is wrong. To abuse any spiritual gift to cause another to stumble or cause division is wrong.

    There are many manifestations of the Spirit and tongues is not the only legitimate one.

    Paul gave the guidelines for exercising the gift. As with any other gift there are guidelines in exercising the gift. Paul gives guidelines for the exercise of two gifts in 1 Cor 14:27-29.

    1 Cor. 14:27-29, "If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God. Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment."
     
  13. Butterflies4mami

    Butterflies4mami
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Messages:
    137
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tongues was a gift that was given to Christians of the New Testament because the Bible was not complete... to be a sign that those that Preached Christ were speaking truth. I am not sure, but studying this subject I felt that the hearers were blessed with the gift as much as the Speakers. Were they speaking in languages unknown to them, or were the hearer's ears opened to thier language? More than likely the gift was a matter of both being equally blessed.
    Today's tongues movement is bogus. #1 It is not to edify the believers to a " higher communication" w/ God. But for the Lost to come to repentance. # 2 Every thing is chaos in the Churches that exercize tongues... not 1 or 2. Better are a few words rightly spoken than many without meaning! ( summed up). #3 Because the Bible is complete, there is no need for tongues, we can measure what a man preaches to us by the Bible!
    Although, my Uncle said he had an experience at his church. ( Usually if someone says based on an experience they had they believe something, I get worried... I'd rather base what I believe on what the Bible teaches) but, anyway, he said a little girl with some kind of medical problem.. unable to speak to where people could understand.. even her parents, came foreward in a service and went to the alter to pray. My Uncle said he can't explain how or why, but he was able to understand the little girl and lead her to the saving grace of Christ! Now, if tongues is used at all today.. it would probably be in rare instances as this. Don't you think?
    In Christ,
    Peggy
    Is. 6:8
     
  14. David Mark

    David Mark
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    0
    I examine carefuly anything that seems to cause division with the bretheren.

    Lately, that means I very carefuly examine a lot of things.

    Cheers,

    Dave
     
  15. ChurchBoy

    ChurchBoy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2003
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm with you on this one Dave.

    I was saved in a church where people spoke in tounges. I have witnessed perhaps thousands of people supposedly "speak in tongues" in the five years that I accepted Christ into my life. In that time I have NEVER witnessed one person speak any known human language. I have witnessed only ONE instance where there was an interpretation. As I grew in my faith I began to have doubts of the legitimacy of the modern "speaking in tongues". I studied the Bible and did a lot of research and came to the conclusion that most of what I've witnessed is just jibberish and not the Biblical gift of tongues. I am open to the possiblility that God may give the gift of tongues for a specific reason but I must admit I highly doubt it. I believe that Scripture is quite clear on this issue but I know many brothers and sisters in Christ that disagree with me. I don't argue with them because it serves no purpose and because they will not change their minds.
     
  16. Mark Osgatharp

    Mark Osgatharp
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Bible" dictionaries are not authentic dictionaries. They are interpretive theologies disguised as lexical works. They may be correct and they may be incorrect, but they are not authoritative.

    Verse 2 means the same thing as verse 9:

    "So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air."

    Paul's point in both verses is that if a man speaks in a language foreign to his audience, only he and God knows what is being said. Or, more sarcastically, he "speaks into the air."

    With these words Paul condemned the misuse of the authentic gifts of tongues. How much more do his words condemn the ludicrous nonsense of so called "ecstatic tongues" which never had any reality in the first place, but are just so much contrived gibber jabber.

    Mark Osgatharp
     
  17. David Mark

    David Mark
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well said and full of insight.

    Dave
     
  18. Ben W

    Ben W
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,868
    Likes Received:
    0
    All Spiritual Gifts are valid for the church today including tounges.

    Many people like Jimmy Bakker have preached Christianity, but themselves been doing the wrong thing. Their behaviour does not rule the Message of the Gospel to be wrong though.

    Sure Tounges have been Abused in churches. That does not make it grounds for that Spiritual Gift to be no longer valid anymore.

    Interestingly the churches that are known to be heavily into Spiritual Gifts like the Assemblies of God are the ones getting the most people saved, which can only show that God is using them for His glory. As Jesus says in Luke 9:50 "DO not forbade him, for he who is not against us is on our side.

    Here are two excellent Baptist Denominations that openly practice speaking in tounges.

    The Pentecostal Freewill Baptist,
    http://www.pfwb.org/

    The Full Gospel Baptist,
    http://www.fullgospelbaptist.org/
     
  19. Mike McK

    Mike McK
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2001
    Messages:
    6,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do believe that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are still in existance today (including tongues), but I have serious problems with the way they're commonly practiced in the church.
     
  20. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    "Bible" dictionaries are not authentic dictionaries. They are interpretive theologies disguised as lexical works. They may be correct and they may be incorrect, but they are not authoritative.

    Verse 2 means the same thing as verse 9:

    "So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air."

    Paul's point in both verses is that if a man speaks in a language foreign to his audience, only he and God knows what is being said. Or, more sarcastically, he "speaks into the air."

    With these words Paul condemned the misuse of the authentic gifts of tongues. How much more do his words condemn the ludicrous nonsense of so called "ecstatic tongues" which never had any reality in the first place, but are just so much contrived gibber jabber.

    Mark Osgatharp
    </font>[/QUOTE]I do believe that there are a number of contrived cases and others that are not. Just as there are God controlled preachers and other who are not. That does not invalidate preaching. Even non-believers have been known to do preaching and yet God’s word does not return void.

    So you say Bible dictionaries they are not authentic dictionaries. Did you look up what BAGD said about tongues? Any Greek-English Lexicon is an interpretation. If you read a translation you are also reading an interpretation. Any translation is an interpretation. If you have done any translation work in any language you would know that translation cannot be done without interpretation. Sometime ask a Spanish speaking friend to directly translate, como estas and come esta. The translation will be the same but they have very different meanings depending on context. If used incorrectly can mean you insulted the person. If used another way you might get some strange looks.

    The TDNT is a theological dictionary. BAGD is a Greek-English Lexicon. Did you look up any of the refernces I gave you especialy in the TDNT and BAGD.. Also, I think if you will look up the background of the Corinthian church you will find what they were practicing was not foreign languages.

    I cannot find one lexicon that will talk about tongues being only a foreign language only. Can you? If you can I would like you to give me the reference so I can look it up for myself. .

    I would be especially interested to know what you thought about what BAGD said after you read it.

    I own several lexicon covering a time period of before the NT and for sometime after. Along with numerous The ISBE, the ABD, Interpreter's Dictionary, the dictionary by Louw and Nida published by the ABS, Unger's, Wycliffe, TDNT, TDOT, Greek-English Lexicon by Liddell and Scott, A Patristic Greek Lexicon by G.W.H. Lampe, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament by Moulton and Milligan and many others. Not in any of those can I find any evidence that they even suggest that tongues is exclusively a foreign language but rather does include ecstatic utterance.

    Could you find me one example where a lexicon or dictionary restricts tongues to a foreign language? I am unable to, so could you find me one example?
     

Share This Page

Loading...