Speaking in Tongues

Amity wrote,

**What’s wrong with people “invoking the Holy Spirit” to be able to speak in tongues?**

I am not familiar with the terminology ‘invoking the Holy Spirit’ being used in reference to speaking in tongues. The Bible teaches us to expect good things from God, particularly in regard to asking for the Holy Spirit. The Matthew version of Luke 11:13 below is about asking for ‘good things.’ In the Luke 11 version, we see that we are to expect good things when we ask the Father for the Holy Ghost.

10. For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11. If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12. Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13. If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

Many Christians pray to be filled with the Spirit and then they have an experience where the Spirit comes on them and they speak in tongues. Should we take a Gestapo approach and assume there is something evil going on? No, we should not be cynical because of the passage above, the fact that many Christians in the Bible spoke in tongues when the Spirit came on them, and the fact that I Corinthians 12 plainly teaches that speaking in tongues is one of the gifts the Spirit gives to the saints.

Also, there is a verse in I Corinthians 14 that shows that it is permissible, even commanded in a certain instance, for Christians to pray to have gifts of the Spirit. So we shouldn’t be paranoid that the Devil is giving fake gifts of the Spirit to sincere Christians praying for true gifts from God in faith.


**First, we’ll start with
1 John 4:1
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. (KJV)**

Sure we must try to the Spirits, and if someone claims to be exercising a gift of the Spirit but they are speaking against the person of the Lord Jesus and His Gospel, then we should not be fooled by such things. Gifts can be counterfeited, but the Bible does not teach us to have an attitude of suspicion toward people who exercise gifts of the Spirit.

**In other words, test out what you are hearing or seeing. If it ain’t Biblical, it ain’t the Holy Spirit. **

I Corinthians indicates that it is possible to use the Biblical gifts of tongues or prophecy in an unorderly manner. For example, someone who wpeaks in tongues in an assembly of saints could do so without interpretation. Someone prophesying could refuse to yield the floor to someone else who receives a revelation, for example.


**There is a misconception among charismatic denominations that this gibberish they are uttering is the Holy Spirit speaking through them. First of all, in the Bible, speaking in tongues was meant as a foreign language....not this blabbering you hear from people in some churches today.**

Many Pentecostals and Charismatics believe that speaking in tongues is speaking foreign languages. I am sure you could find some babble somewhere if you tried hard enough, but I sure have heard a lot of babble from pulpits spoken in the common language, and that doesn’t make the real gift of teaching any less valid.

** The Jews required a sign in order to believe things. In Acts Chapter 2, Jesus sent the Holy Spirit into the hearts of the Apostles and caused them to speak in tongues, or in languages they didn’t even know how to speak in, so that the people gathered around would hear them in their native language and understand the message of Jesus being Christ and Savior. **

DHK went around and around on the ‘sign for the Jews’ issue in the previous thread. He never did show that if one accepted his argument of tongues as a sign for the Jew could argue that tongues had ceased. The only way I can see that one can get from the ‘sign for the Jews’ idea to the ‘idea that tongues have ceased is if one holds to replacement theology, and argues that if tongues were a sign for the Jews, and God was finished with the Jews in 70 AD, that the sign would no longer be necessary. But if we are not replacement theologians, then we do not think God is done with the Jews. He isn’t according to the Bible. If tongues are a sign for the Jews, we can see that Jews are still around, so why would tongues cease? It just doesn’t make sense.

Furthermore, even if tongues were a sign for the Jews and the sign were no longer needed, that doesn’t mean tongues ceased. Because we can see that tongues had other purposes—the edify the speaker, and, with interpretation, to edify the assembly.

All this is assuming that tongues is a special sign for the Jews. Paul uses the passage from Isaiah in I Corinthians 14, and then says that tongues are a sign for unbelievers, not for Jews in particular. Sure, he used a passage about unbelieving Hebrews to make his point, but he does not limit ‘tongues for a sign’ to Jews only, but rather says they are a sign for unbelievers. We should accept the point Paul makes and not try to read our own ideas into the passage.

***Let me explain something further I just said about Jews requiring a sign. In the early days after Jesus’ resurrection, the Jews required signs to prove things (as they did in the Old Testament times as well), but the Gentiles believed by faith alone. Anyone that is not a Jew, is a Gentile. We are Gentiles. ***

I suspect you did not mean for the paragraph above to come off as it sounds, as positive toward Gentiles and negative toward Jews. In response I will quote from I Corinthians 1:
23. But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24. But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.


**There were two other places in Acts where the Apostles spoke in tongues. That would be in Chapters 10 and 19. These places, also, were foreign languages...their native tongue. **

Acts 19 does not specify where the apostle, Paul, joined in speaking in tongues. In Acs 19, a group of men in Ephesus spoke in tongues. Tongues are mentioned three times in Acts. Acts 2, Acts 10 (and 11), and Acts 19.

***The people in today’s churches that claim that to prove you have received Jesus into your heart, you have to be able to speak in “tongues”, are mistaken in another way as well. ***

I do not see any scriptural reason to believe you get saved by ‘asking Jesus into your heart’ but that is another issue, and a lot of Pentecostals and Charismatics repeat evangelical cliché’s like that just as much as other evangelicals.

The belief you are speaking of is rare. As far as I know, the only large group that teaches that tongues is required (or is an exclusive sign of) salvation are the Oneness Pentecostals. They also go by ‘Apostolic’ and are called ‘Jesus Only’s’ by some people. The United Pentecostal Chuch is probably the largest denomination that teaches this. You might be able to find some small groups of non-Oneness that believe this. Oneness Pentecostals deny the Trinity and believe that Jesus is the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

The vast majority of Pentecostals do not deny the trinity and do not believe that speaking in tongues is a necessary sign of salvation. The typical Pentecostal belief on this is that after salvation, one can experience ‘baptism of the Holy Ghost’ which is accompanied by speaking in tongues. Your typical Assemblies of God, Church of God (Cleveland), Pentecostal Holiness, etc. Pentecostal preacher would not deny that people can be saved without speaking in tongues, and would consider Baptists, etc. to be saved if they are born again. Most Pentecostals are evangelical in their beliefs on salvation. If you sat down and had a discussion with an educated Pentecostal preacher from one of these denominations, he would probably tell you that you get the Holy Spirit at salvation, but that baptism with the Holy Spirit is available as well.

Charismatics come in all types, since ‘Charismatic’ is also used to refer to people in denominational churches that believe in gifts of the Spirit, as well as to several movements that are fairly Pentecostal in their belief system. Some Charismatics do not believe in the ‘initial evidence’ doctrine, that tongues is the sign of being baptized with the Spirit, but many do.


****We learn of the Spirit gifts in 1 Corinthians, Chapters 12-14. If you read the very first several verses in Chapter 12, you will notice that the scriptures tell us that there are many gifts, but no one has all the gifts. All of us (Christians) make up one body....the body of Christ....Jesus is the head and chief cornerstone of the temple (body of Christ) and when you put all of us together, such as in a church congregation, you have enough parts of the body for each individual to contribute their own gifts given to them by God, to make the whole body of Christ work for God’s purpose. Now the problem I have with charismatic churches, is that they claim that ALL of their members must speak in tongues to “prove” that the Holy Spirit is dwelling in them. That’s hogwash, I say! And so does the Bible. Like I just said.....not everyone possesses the same Spirit gifts, so if someone tells you that everyone that is saved and has Jesus in their heart must have the gift of tongues, it just ain’t Biblical! ****


I also disagree with the ‘initial evidence’ doctrine. But remember that the doctrine is about evidence of being baptized with the Holy Ghost, and not salvation.

I would also add my agreement to your assertion that God distributes the gifts to His church, and if someone denies that, I say ‘Hogwash!’ So if someone says that speaking in tongues is not a gift that God gives to the church, I say ‘hogwash’ because that idea contradicts scripture.

***These churches base their doctrine (belief) of speaking in tongues off of ONE verse in the Bible. That’s 1 Corinthians 14:2:
“For he that speaketh in an unknown tongues speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” (KJV) ***

That is not the only verse in the Bible Pentecostals use, even Oneness Pentecostals who consider tongues to be necessary for salvation. The smaller subset of Pentecostals, who hold to views traditionally considered heretical on the Trinity, are also fond of the verse in Romans 8 that says if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His. Since they think you have to speak in tongues to have the Spirit of Christ, then they believe you have to speak in tongues to be saved. Most Pentecostals consider born again believers to have the Spirit in some measure.

****First of all, anyone who bases an entire belief system on only ONE VERSE in the Bible, has some serious problems, in my humble opinion. But what these churches fail to realize, is that the Apostle Paul was writing this letter (1 Corinthians) to a misguided church who had gone astray. He was writing to them in this verse that the person speaking in these “tongues” (here it is that gibberish which you heard), are misguided. Notice that in this verse, the word “spirit” is not capitalized. Anytime God, Father, Jesus, Christ, or Holy Spirit is written in the Bible, the authors capitalized it out of respect for God that He is well deserving of. In this verse, it is not capitalized. Paul is making a point here that the spirit with which they are using is not the Holy Spirit, which is the third person of the trinity. (God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit). I am suggesting here that if it is not the Holy Spirit of God, then what “spirit” they are speaking with is a spirit of the devil.****

Your interpretation of the passage is clearly wrong. Galatians 6 tells the spiritual Christians to confront a brother overtaken in a fault in the ‘spirit of meekness.’ Are you suggesting that Paul told spiritual Christians to use a demon to confront an erring brother? That doesn’t make a lick of sense. If you get out a concordance and look at the way ‘spirit’ is used in the New Testament, you should come to the conclusion that ‘spirit’ must refer to a devil here is false. In fact, your interpretation doesn’t even fit with the rest of the passage. Why wouldn’t Paul forbid speaking with tongues if people were doing so by a devil? It doesn’t make sense.

From what I have read, the ‘s’ there in original Greek IS capitalized. And so are the rest of the letters around it. Greek was written in all capital letters with no spaces or punctuation. The smaller letters, spaces, and punctuation came along later.

Also, be careful with this line of argument. In Matthew 12, the Pharisees accused Jesus of casting out demons by the prince of devils when he was really doing so by the Spirit of God. He warned them about the unpardonable sin.


32. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

So be careful not to attribute the works of the Spirit to Satan. There is not much question that the genuine gifts of the Spirit mentioned in I Corinthians are from the Spirit.

It is truly sad that so many people have taken this verse out of context without properly understanding the meaning, because I have met some wonderfully kind people in charismatic churches who obviously love Jesus very much.....but they are indeed misguided. They are told by their pastors and elders that in order to receive the Holy Spirit it must be proved. Remember I said earlier....Jews required a sign....not us Gentiles. The Corinthians were misguided Gentiles, as are these new age churches that are following the same practice.

****Now on to the next verses: v.3 & 4
“But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.”

In these verses, “prophesies” is referring to teaching the Gospel message. Paul is telling the church at Corinth that all this gibberish they have gotten into doing is only pleasing to themselves personally....not the church.****

First of all, the bible makes a distinction between prophecy and teaching by listing them as separate gifts in Romans 12. I Corinthians 12 lists prophets and teachers separately, and Ephesians 4:11 also lists evangelists separately. So there is a distinction between preaching (evangelizing), teaching, and prophesying.

Prophesying is basically the same thing it was in the Old Testament. The Greek word for ‘prophesy’ is used to refer to what the Old Testaments did. What was prophesying in the Old Testament? Peter says that holy men of old spake as they were moved [carried along] by the Spirit. That is a good rule of thumb understanding of prophesying, speaking as moved by the Spirit. A typical OT prophesy started ‘Thus saith the Lord’ (‘the Lord says’) and went on to say what the Lord had to say. One of the prophecies in the New Testament started ‘Thus saith the Holy Ghost.’ Revelation is a part of prophetic ministry, as we see in I Corinthians 14:30

 

Amity wrote,

**What’s wrong with people “invoking the Holy Spirit” to be able to speak in tongues?**

I am not familiar with the terminology ‘invoking the Holy Spirit’ being used in reference to speaking in tongues. The Bible teaches us to expect good things from God, particularly in regard to asking for the Holy Spirit. The Matthew version of Luke 11:13 below is about asking for ‘good things.’ In the Luke 11 version, we see that we are to expect good things when we ask the Father for the Holy Ghost.

10. For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11. If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12. Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13. If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

Many Christians pray to be filled with the Spirit and then they have an experience where the Spirit comes on them and they speak in tongues. Should we take a Gestapo approach and assume there is something evil going on? No, we should not be cynical because of the passage above, the fact that many Christians in the Bible spoke in tongues when the Spirit came on them, and the fact that I Corinthians 12 plainly teaches that speaking in tongues is one of the gifts the Spirit gives to the saints.

Also, there is a verse in I Corinthians 14 that shows that it is permissible, even commanded in a certain instance, for Christians to pray to have gifts of the Spirit. So we shouldn’t be paranoid that the Devil is giving fake gifts of the Spirit to sincere Christians praying for true gifts from God in faith.


**First, we’ll start with
1 John 4:1
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. (KJV)**

Sure we must try to the Spirits, and if someone claims to be exercising a gift of the Spirit but they are speaking against the person of the Lord Jesus and His Gospel, then we should not be fooled by such things. Gifts can be counterfeited, but the Bible does not teach us to have an attitude of suspicion toward people who exercise gifts of the Spirit.

**In other words, test out what you are hearing or seeing. If it ain’t Biblical, it ain’t the Holy Spirit. **

I Corinthians indicates that it is possible to use the Biblical gifts of tongues or prophecy in an unorderly manner. For example, someone who wpeaks in tongues in an assembly of saints could do so without interpretation. Someone prophesying could refuse to yield the floor to someone else who receives a revelation, for example.


**There is a misconception among charismatic denominations that this gibberish they are uttering is the Holy Spirit speaking through them. First of all, in the Bible, speaking in tongues was meant as a foreign language....not this blabbering you hear from people in some churches today.**

Many Pentecostals and Charismatics believe that speaking in tongues is speaking foreign languages. I am sure you could find some babble somewhere if you tried hard enough, but I sure have heard a lot of babble from pulpits spoken in the common language, and that doesn’t make the real gift of teaching any less valid.

** The Jews required a sign in order to believe things. In Acts Chapter 2, Jesus sent the Holy Spirit into the hearts of the Apostles and caused them to speak in tongues, or in languages they didn’t even know how to speak in, so that the people gathered around would hear them in their native language and understand the message of Jesus being Christ and Savior. **

DHK went around and around on the ‘sign for the Jews’ issue in the previous thread. He never did show that if one accepted his argument of tongues as a sign for the Jew could argue that tongues had ceased. The only way I can see that one can get from the ‘sign for the Jews’ idea to the ‘idea that tongues have ceased is if one holds to replacement theology, and argues that if tongues were a sign for the Jews, and God was finished with the Jews in 70 AD, that the sign would no longer be necessary. But if we are not replacement theologians, then we do not think God is done with the Jews. He isn’t according to the Bible. If tongues are a sign for the Jews, we can see that Jews are still around, so why would tongues cease? It just doesn’t make sense.

Furthermore, even if tongues were a sign for the Jews and the sign were no longer needed, that doesn’t mean tongues ceased. Because we can see that tongues had other purposes—the edify the speaker, and, with interpretation, to edify the assembly.

All this is assuming that tongues is a special sign for the Jews. Paul uses the passage from Isaiah in I Corinthians 14, and then says that tongues are a sign for unbelievers, not for Jews in particular. Sure, he used a passage about unbelieving Hebrews to make his point, but he does not limit ‘tongues for a sign’ to Jews only, but rather says they are a sign for unbelievers. We should accept the point Paul makes and not try to read our own ideas into the passage.

***Let me explain something further I just said about Jews requiring a sign. In the early days after Jesus’ resurrection, the Jews required signs to prove things (as they did in the Old Testament times as well), but the Gentiles believed by faith alone. Anyone that is not a Jew, is a Gentile. We are Gentiles. ***

I suspect you did not mean for the paragraph above to come off as it sounds, as positive toward Gentiles and negative toward Jews. In response I will quote from I Corinthians 1:
23. But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24. But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.


**There were two other places in Acts where the Apostles spoke in tongues. That would be in Chapters 10 and 19. These places, also, were foreign languages...their native tongue. **

Acts 19 does not specify where the apostle, Paul, joined in speaking in tongues. In Acs 19, a group of men in Ephesus spoke in tongues. Tongues are mentioned three times in Acts. Acts 2, Acts 10 (and 11), and Acts 19.

***The people in today’s churches that claim that to prove you have received Jesus into your heart, you have to be able to speak in “tongues”, are mistaken in another way as well. ***

I do not see any scriptural reason to believe you get saved by ‘asking Jesus into your heart’ but that is another issue, and a lot of Pentecostals and Charismatics repeat evangelical cliché’s like that just as much as other evangelicals.

The belief you are speaking of is rare. As far as I know, the only large group that teaches that tongues is required (or is an exclusive sign of) salvation are the Oneness Pentecostals. They also go by ‘Apostolic’ and are called ‘Jesus Only’s’ by some people. The United Pentecostal Chuch is probably the largest denomination that teaches this. You might be able to find some small groups of non-Oneness that believe this. Oneness Pentecostals deny the Trinity and believe that Jesus is the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

The vast majority of Pentecostals do not deny the trinity and do not believe that speaking in tongues is a necessary sign of salvation. The typical Pentecostal belief on this is that after salvation, one can experience ‘baptism of the Holy Ghost’ which is accompanied by speaking in tongues. Your typical Assemblies of God, Church of God (Cleveland), Pentecostal Holiness, etc. Pentecostal preacher would not deny that people can be saved without speaking in tongues, and would consider Baptists, etc. to be saved if they are born again. Most Pentecostals are evangelical in their beliefs on salvation. If you sat down and had a discussion with an educated Pentecostal preacher from one of these denominations, he would probably tell you that you get the Holy Spirit at salvation, but that baptism with the Holy Spirit is available as well.

Charismatics come in all types, since ‘Charismatic’ is also used to refer to people in denominational churches that believe in gifts of the Spirit, as well as to several movements that are fairly Pentecostal in their belief system. Some Charismatics do not believe in the ‘initial evidence’ doctrine, that tongues is the sign of being baptized with the Spirit, but many do.


****We learn of the Spirit gifts in 1 Corinthians, Chapters 12-14. If you read the very first several verses in Chapter 12, you will notice that the scriptures tell us that there are many gifts, but no one has all the gifts. All of us (Christians) make up one body....the body of Christ....Jesus is the head and chief cornerstone of the temple (body of Christ) and when you put all of us together, such as in a church congregation, you have enough parts of the body for each individual to contribute their own gifts given to them by God, to make the whole body of Christ work for God’s purpose. Now the problem I have with charismatic churches, is that they claim that ALL of their members must speak in tongues to “prove” that the Holy Spirit is dwelling in them. That’s hogwash, I say! And so does the Bible. Like I just said.....not everyone possesses the same Spirit gifts, so if someone tells you that everyone that is saved and has Jesus in their heart must have the gift of tongues, it just ain’t Biblical! ****


I also disagree with the ‘initial evidence’ doctrine. But remember that the doctrine is about evidence of being baptized with the Holy Ghost, and not salvation.

I would also add my agreement to your assertion that God distributes the gifts to His church, and if someone denies that, I say ‘Hogwash!’ So if someone says that speaking in tongues is not a gift that God gives to the church, I say ‘hogwash’ because that idea contradicts scripture.

***These churches base their doctrine (belief) of speaking in tongues off of ONE verse in the Bible. That’s 1 Corinthians 14:2:
“For he that speaketh in an unknown tongues speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” (KJV) ***

That is not the only verse in the Bible Pentecostals use, even Oneness Pentecostals who consider tongues to be necessary for salvation. The smaller subset of Pentecostals, who hold to views traditionally considered heretical on the Trinity, are also fond of the verse in Romans 8 that says if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His. Since they think you have to speak in tongues to have the Spirit of Christ, then they believe you have to speak in tongues to be saved. Most Pentecostals consider born again believers to have the Spirit in some measure.

****First of all, anyone who bases an entire belief system on only ONE VERSE in the Bible, has some serious problems, in my humble opinion. But what these churches fail to realize, is that the Apostle Paul was writing this letter (1 Corinthians) to a misguided church who had gone astray. He was writing to them in this verse that the person speaking in these “tongues” (here it is that gibberish which you heard), are misguided. Notice that in this verse, the word “spirit” is not capitalized. Anytime God, Father, Jesus, Christ, or Holy Spirit is written in the Bible, the authors capitalized it out of respect for God that He is well deserving of. In this verse, it is not capitalized. Paul is making a point here that the spirit with which they are using is not the Holy Spirit, which is the third person of the trinity. (God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit). I am suggesting here that if it is not the Holy Spirit of God, then what “spirit” they are speaking with is a spirit of the devil.****

Your interpretation of the passage is clearly wrong. Galatians 6 tells the spiritual Christians to confront a brother overtaken in a fault in the ‘spirit of meekness.’ Are you suggesting that Paul told spiritual Christians to use a demon to confront an erring brother? That doesn’t make a lick of sense. If you get out a concordance and look at the way ‘spirit’ is used in the New Testament, you should come to the conclusion that ‘spirit’ must refer to a devil here is false. In fact, your interpretation doesn’t even fit with the rest of the passage. Why wouldn’t Paul forbid speaking with tongues if people were doing so by a devil? It doesn’t make sense.

From what I have read, the ‘s’ there in original Greek IS capitalized. And so are the rest of the letters around it. Greek was written in all capital letters with no spaces or punctuation. The smaller letters, spaces, and punctuation came along later.

Also, be careful with this line of argument. In Matthew 12, the Pharisees accused Jesus of casting out demons by the prince of devils when he was really doing so by the Spirit of God. He warned them about the unpardonable sin.


32. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

So be careful not to attribute the works of the Spirit to Satan. There is not much question that the genuine gifts of the Spirit mentioned in I Corinthians are from the Spirit.

It is truly sad that so many people have taken this verse out of context without properly understanding the meaning, because I have met some wonderfully kind people in charismatic churches who obviously love Jesus very much.....but they are indeed misguided. They are told by their pastors and elders that in order to receive the Holy Spirit it must be proved. Remember I said earlier....Jews required a sign....not us Gentiles. The Corinthians were misguided Gentiles, as are these new age churches that are following the same practice.

****Now on to the next verses: v.3 & 4
“But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.”

In these verses, “prophesies” is referring to teaching the Gospel message. Paul is telling the church at Corinth that all this gibberish they have gotten into doing is only pleasing to themselves personally....not the church.****

First of all, the bible makes a distinction between prophecy and teaching by listing them as separate gifts in Romans 12. I Corinthians 12 lists prophets and teachers separately, and Ephesians 4:11 also lists evangelists separately. So there is a distinction between preaching (evangelizing), teaching, and prophesying.

Prophesying is basically the same thing it was in the Old Testament. The Greek word for ‘prophesy’ is used to refer to what the Old Testaments did. What was prophesying in the Old Testament? Peter says that holy men of old spake as they were moved [carried along] by the Spirit. That is a good rule of thumb understanding of prophesying, speaking as moved by the Spirit. A typical OT prophesy started ‘Thus saith the Lord’ (‘the Lord says’) and went on to say what the Lord had to say. One of the prophecies in the New Testament started ‘Thus saith the Holy Ghost.’ Revelation is a part of prophetic ministry, as we see in I Corinthians 14:30

 

confession of sins to a priest.

tranasubstatation ( Hope I spelled that right).

Idolitry.

Praying to mary and Dead saints.

Speaking in tongues?

sure why not

 

about the time Constantine turned it into a mockery.

 

hey, don't leave me out!!!!
You know that when someone comes up with ridicolous stpries about chineese laundrymen or so called scholars from Vacouver that remain nameless that I will question the source of these ridiculous arguments.

 

Then quit harping on them. Leave them out of your thinking. Don't let them bother you anymore. And simply answer all the Biblical arguments presented.
DHK

 

Then quit harping on them. Leave them out of your thinking. Don't let them bother you anymore. And simply answer all the Biblical arguments presented.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]........simply answer all the Biblical arguments presented.

If I'm not mistaken, "Link" took you to the woodshed a few times, on this topic. Want him to take you again?

Hi atestring!

MEE

 

No, he didn't.
You have been the one, MEE, that has refused to answer (no matter how many times asked) the simple questions that I ask of you. Can you demonstrate the plan of salvation without using the Book of Acts? If so do it. If not admit it.
DHK

 

Yes he did, and you know it! **snicker**

I did answer you, you just wouldn't accept it!

MEE

 

Yes he did, and you know it! **snicker**

I did answer you, you just wouldn't accept it!

MEE </font>[/QUOTE]No MEE, you have never given a clear answer. If you have, then give it again, or show where you have given it at the very least. A simple yes or no answer you can't give, even here?? Something is wrong.
DHK

 

quote by: Amity
__________________________________________________
Lemme just say one thing. I wrote this study when a youth in my old church came back from a charismatic youth camp with a friend, and the adults there told her that she was not truly saved unless she "showed" them by allowing the "holy spirit" to give her the gift of tongues. If any of you can tell me that this teen's salvation should have been questioned because she refused to do this "babbling" they wanted to hear, then I say for shame.
__________________________________________________

I will agree that the charismatic adults you spoke of where in the wrong. You don't have to speak in tongues to be saved. The way I read 1Cor.12....tongues is a gift.... not a requirement for salvation.

Quote by: ChurchBoy

__________________________________________________
2) A fight over the definiton of "perfect".
__________________________________________________

See the Poll on "What do you think the word "perfect" means in 1Cor. 13:10?" and you'll see that so far (as of todays date) that according to the percentage rating the 2nd Comming is in the lead.... ergo.... thus far as I understand it tounges won't cease until the 2nd Comming.

Music4Him

 

This passage is unfulfilled prophecy, it does not concern Israel in Jeremiah's time, rather Israel in the last days.

Verse 2 - is the Antichrist who is the "one who is powerful and strong."

Verse 3 - the trampling of Israel "underfoot" is the the Gentiles trampling the holy city for 1,260 days (Rev. 11:2).

Verse 5 - is the Millennium

Verse 15 - is the 7 year covenant (Dn. 9:27).

Verse 22 - is the time of Jacob's trouble

Israel refused to listen to Him and His messenger, Jeremiah. They mocked him like he were an adult "lecturing" a little child. A little here, a little there was a method used in teaching children, inculcating a little at a time. In other words they were refusing to take Isaiah's words seriously. They wanted nothing to do with his message or his ministry.

If they would not listen to Jeremiah in their native language then God would speak to them "in foreign lips and strange tongues" that would deliver the message of judgment on them. This judgment is none other than Jacob's trouble, the Great Tribulation. People from many nations will be warning them of coming judgement, but just like back in Jeremiah's time they will not take seriously these warnings.

 

That's correct! The gift of "divers kinds of tongues" isn't required for salvation.

MEE

 

Is there a difference between "the gift of tongues" and "speaking in tongues?"

 

Why repeat it? You wouldn't accept it under this topic either!

If you want to read it again...say please and I might reconsider your request.

MEE

 

At my great-grandmother's funeral they were speaking in tongues. It scared me half to death as a child.

 

please

 

Look everyone, DHK just said, "Please" to MEE. ROFL

Now, DHK, go to "Which denoms are Christian enough.." and read pages 7,8,& 9! That is mostly for the ones that can get the whole story.

DHK, said "please." ~I must be dreaming~

MEE

 

Then quit harping on them. Leave them out of your thinking. Don't let them bother you anymore. And simply answer all the Biblical arguments presented.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]How about substantiating these stories!