Poll: Tongues

You may disagree all you wish Ed, but note that I said that tongues from the Greek always means languages. I did not say tongues from the KJV. There is a big difference. Here are some of the same verses translated from the WEB

1 Corinthians 14:2 For he who speaks in another language speaks not to men, but to God; for no one understands; but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries.

1 Corinthians 14:4 He who speaks in another language edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the assembly.

1 Corinthians 14:5 Now I desire to have you all speak with other languages, but rather that you would prophesy. For he is greater who prophesies than he who speaks with other languages, unless he interprets, that the assembly may be built up.

1 Corinthians 14:6 But now, brothers, if I come to you speaking with other languages, what would I profit you, unless I speak to you either by way of revelation, or of knowledge, or of prophesying, or of teaching?

1 Corinthians 14:39 Therefore, brothers, desire earnestly to prophesy, and don't forbid speaking with other languages.

Here is Strong's definition of the word for tongues:
 glossa gloce-sah'
the tongue; by implication, a language (specially, one naturally unacquired):--tongue. <

DHK

 

Hi The Word of God has said that not all that call me Lord Lord will Enter The Kingdom God
I do hope for all are saks that we are all right wHene the( LORD RETERNS) IF NOT Then Boy are we going to be hot

 

Because I'm busy going to school getting my 1st Responders/EMT certification.

 

Exsactly where was this poll taken? Here on the BB or was it a nationally given poll to all churches? If it was taken on a Pentacostal board it would have been way different results. You think?

 

BTW, anyone like to tell me how I can look up in the archives the thread about the word "perfect" (What does the word perfect mean? 1 Cor.13:10)( I think it was somthing like that? ) I started it last year (maybe around November?) andyhow DHK knows what thread it was. Because I'm just one of those that can't be put in a tongue talking catagory. I won't force tongues on anyone thats the work of the Holy Spirit and the Lord's buisness. But I sometimes wonder if there are diffrent denominations because one didn't understand a certian principal in the bible so omited it because they wern't given that insight? I don't know if that makes since but thats how my little brain works sometimes. I also notice that Paul speaks of the different parts of the body of Christ. Some are feet, some are the mouth , some do other operations but every one works together and become one body. (Some days I'm the brain...somedays I'm a toe.)
But seriously how can it be if someone has true salvation, but can be decived by the devil because they believe that tongues are for today? Do they lose their right to salvation because of it? Whoa! on the OSAS folks...

 

teleios tel'-i-os

from 5056; complete (in various applications of labor, growth, mental and moral character, etc.); neuter (as noun, with 3588) completeness:--of full age, man, perfect.

The Old English word "perfect" means complete, also brought to full maturity.

Thus,
Matthew 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Jesus would never give us a command that we could not obey. The word "perfect" does not mean absoulte perfection in the sense of sinlessness. That would be an impossibility. It means complete or brought to full maturity. Be complete in Christ. Be mature in Christ. That is the meanintg in this verse--not perfection as in the sense of sinlessness.

Thus in 1Cor.13:10, the Word of God was brought to completion or "perfection"
DHK

 

I am not sure about the baptistboard but Southern Baptist studies have been done and the number of SBC members that have Charismtatic leanings is arond 20% and growing.
it is also estimated that 50 % of Southern Baptst foreign missionaries would fall into this category.

 

1st Cor 14-2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

How could no man understand him if the greek always meant another language??? If that were the case, then there would always be somebody somewhere that would know what he said!

If I'm not mistaken, no matter what version of the bible was used to post 1 Cor 14-2,that phrase is always in there. (no man understandeth him)

The operative phrase is NO MAN UNDERSTANDETH HIM!!

also, how can you be doing something that is wrong if you are speaking by the Spirit of God? "howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries."

Does anybody else see that?

BTW Ed, thanks for stepping in. Your post was most informative.

Selah,

Tam

 

Aman Sister Tamborine Lady!!!
I see it!

 

Hey guys,

I am the same guy that was posting under the screen name "Ramdu" earlier in this thread (for reasons which are to difficult to explain here). But, Diane straightened me out and the rest of my posts will be under my original screen name, which is drspinko. Sorry for any confusion.

 

Before getting my head to swell to bursting
hear me out.

I read once where the human mind has a part
that kicks out syllables, another part that
is a sensor, a third part that tells the
mouth how to form. All three are needed
in working order for normal speech. In
unknown tongues speech, obviously the censor
portion is suppressed. In those with stuttering
problems, the censor can't 'make up it's mind'.
I have no idea whether or not it is more
holy suppressing the mind's censor. However,
i do note that when I'm having a depressive
occasion, that it isn't as bad if I'll
'speak in unknown tongues' to myself. Evidently
the censor is NOT as subject to chemical
depression of the mind as is the other
parts of the brain (like the speech throat
controller or the part that fires off syllables).

Is it the duty of the church to teach depression
suppressing techniques? I've never heard it
mentioned by any tongue talker.

 

If you ARE an active Baptist, does your Baptist church allow 'tongues' in their services or teach that tongues are for today? </font>[/QUOTE]I am an active participant in my church which is a non-traditional baptist church. We (my wife, children, and I) have been attending for about eight months now. We have not yet officially joined, but will probably do so in the near future.

I have been baptized (when I was eight) in the same tradition of the baptists. I also have a Bachelor of Arts degree in Christian Studies from Mississippi College, which is a well-established and respected 180 year old Southern Baptist Universilty (if that counts for anything).

I have not heard anyone speak in tongues in any church services, so no it is not practiced publically. I have not heard the pastor teach anything about spiritual gifts in my short time there. I did have lunch with him a few months ago and he said he does believe that all of the biblically listed gifts are relevant for today, but he does not speak in tongues himself.

 

DHK we have discussed this before and I still say this is one of those pivitol scriptures that depending on a person's beleif or denomination it could go either way. How are you so sure that in that scripture it is neuter? Because some man said so? I have always believed we won't be nor things won't be perfect until Jesus comes back because that is when perfect is completly final.

 

Actually, the onus is on you to prove scripturally that they are not for today, since tongues and the other gifts were in active use during the time when the scriptures were written. Despite all of your various arguments, listed scrptures (none of which clearly say that tongues would cease when the scriptures were complete), references to Greek and Old English, and your own brand of logic, you have not demonstrated a scripturally sound case against tongues for today's church.

My best friend from college who grew up in the SBC and is now a PCA pastor is a cessationist like yourself. He uses many of the same arguments you use to defend his position, yet he acknowledges that it is not as clear cut scripturally as you seem to think it is. In fact many seminary trained theologians who are devoted to the inerrancy of scripture know this.

You belive that tongues are not for today, and so you interpret 1CO 13:10 to mean the canon of scripture. But it doesn't say what you want it to say. So all you can do is suppose. And that's fine and you should acknowledge that. It will make your argument more convincing because then it will be a more honest argument.

Now, brother, I would also caution you as does Gershom that you should be careful what you label as the work of Satan, especially when it is dealing with what was at minimum a past (and possibly a current) gift of the Holy Spirit. It's not as if we are discussing idolatry or some Ten Commandment issue. Just pray about it.

You know, I am also frustrated by alot of the "showy" nature of what goes on in many charismatic churches today. But if we're honest, "showiness" is pretty prevalent in all of our churches, whether it is demonstrated as supposed spiritual gifts, big fancy buildings, slick anecdotal preaching, or just in the way we dress and put on our plastic church smiley faces every sunday .

So really we are witnessing (and practicing) all kinds of works of the flesh on a regular basis. It's just that we are sometimes more offended by one form of fleshliness than by other forms that we are more comfortable with. By God's grace we will neither be offended nor give ground to anything that is not of God's Spirit when we are gathered together in His name.

Randy

 

1. That is true: The operative phrase is that no man understands him. The gift of tongues was a gift (like all other gifts, given to the entire local church,) so that it would edify the entire local church, and not just one person. It is a useless gift if no man understands him. That indeed is the operative phrase. Paul is saying don't speak in tongues because no one can understand you. Later on he clarifies this point even further by putting another restriction on tongues, and that is, that they cannot be spoken without an interpreter. Why? Because they have no understanding without an interpreter.

2. Tongues means languages no matter which we you look at it. Look in the lexicons, the Greek dictionaries, commentaries, Bible encyclopediea,etc. It means langauges. It has no other meanings except when it refers to the actual organ of the tongue. You do have a "mother tongue" don't you?

3. He is speaking to the congregation at Corinth. Many of them had the gift of tongues and were abusing them. They would speak in a foreign language when it was not needed. For example they would speak in German when no one in the congregation would be there that would understand German, and therefore no man would understand them, and they would be speaking mysteries. Only God wouuld understand for God alone is omniscient.
also, how can you be doing something that is wrong

Mysteries are not good to speak in, are they? No one can understand mysteries. This was a rebuke. Don't speak in mysteries, speak plainly so that all can understand. That is what Paul is saying here.

Try to keep everything in its proper context Tam. It will work a lot better for you.
DHK

 

And how is this accomplished Ed? Without any studying on your own does the Holy Spirit just suddenly give you some language such as Cree, Hindi, Norwegian, Danish, Punjabi, Baluchi, etc. What "unknown languages" do you speak to yourself ih? Please explain. For every "unknown language in Biblical times were real foreign languages, unknown to the speaker but known to someone in the audience. They were unknown to the speaker but given to him in a supernatural way. That is why it was a gift. Nowadays missionaries have to go to language school and study the langauge of the mission field that they are going to. If the gift of tongues were still in effect, then why are language schools still operative?
DHK

 

I am sure of the Scripture because I say so. That may sound pompous and arrogant to you, but it is not meant to be. It really is very elementary. I come from Canada, as you can see. Our national language(s) are both English and French. I studied French from grade 7 through 12. I know a little bit of the language. I studied Greek and Hebrew when in college. I can speak fluently in two mid-eastern languages where I served as a missionary. I know a little bit about languages. Let me give you an example from French that should suffice.

The word "la maison" means "the house."
It is a feminine noun preceded by a feminine modifier "the" or "la" La is always feminine. Le is always masculine. Les is always plural. The house in French is always the feminine "la maison"
Both words are femimine. That is very basic.
Just as you can easily tell a feminine modifier in French you can do the same in Greek. It does not take a great deal of intelligence. I am not following somebody else's teaching. I can read it for myself. It is not that difficult.

Again, the word is not perfect. That is an Old English translation. A better translation is "complete." Thus when the Word of God was completed, the temporary gifts were done away with.
DHK

 

DHK: //For every "unknown language in Biblical times were real foreign languages, unknown to the speaker but known to someone in the audience. They were unknown to the speaker but given to him in a supernatural way. That is why it was a gift.//

DHK: //Nowadays missionaries have to go to language school and study the langauge of the mission field that they are going to. If the gift of tongues were still in effect, then why are language schools still operative?//

Your retorical question disproves your hypothesis.
Gifts of the Spirit are given AS THE SPIRIT WILLS. Maybe the
Spirit wants to prove the Missionarys commitment -- one who will
do all it takes to master a language has a great commitment
to the enterprise at hand.

DHK: // What "unknown languages" do you speak to yourself ih? Please explain.//

Look up 'unknown', compare with the definition of 'explain' -- you
have a hard, unanswerable question. Seems strange, when i'm giving
points on YOUR SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT. Please read the following argument
carefully before you attack it. Thank you.

Back in '73 I was in an Assembly of God Church. The
Preacher had been given by God three points, each starting with the
same diphong (two letters denoting one constant in this case).
Well, i could tell the message was from God, cause it was just the
right message i needed at this time. After the invitation and a little
everybody praising God (which seems alright to me, for it lasted a few
minutes before the pastor called for order), the pastor's wife started
speaking in tongues. The pastor interperted - the message from God
was the same three points the pastor had just preached.

 

1. That is true: The operative phrase is that no man understands him. The gift of tongues was a gift (like all other gifts, given to the entire local church,) so that it would edify the entire local church, and not just one person. It is a useless gift if no man understands him. That indeed is the operative phrase. Paul is saying don't speak in tongues because no one can understand you. Later on he clarifies this point even further by putting another restriction on tongues, and that is, that they cannot be spoken without an interpreter. Why? Because they have no understanding without an interpreter.

2. Tongues means languages no matter which we you look at it. Look in the lexicons, the Greek dictionaries, commentaries, Bible encyclopediea,etc. It means langauges. It has no other meanings except when it refers to the actual organ of the tongue. You do have a "mother tongue" don't you?

3. He is speaking to the congregation at Corinth. Many of them had the gift of tongues and were abusing them. They would speak in a foreign language when it was not needed. For example they would speak in German when no one in the congregation would be there that would understand German, and therefore no man would understand them, and they would be speaking mysteries. Only God wouuld understand for God alone is omniscient.
also, how can you be doing something that is wrong

Mysteries are not good to speak in, are they? No one can understand mysteries. This was a rebuke. Don't speak in mysteries, speak plainly so that all can understand. That is what Paul is saying here.

Try to keep everything in its proper context Tam. It will work a lot better for you.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]I have it in context Mr."Because I said so" DHK.

You are the one that qoutes things out of context so they will say what you have been taught

Selah,

Tam

 

Just because we are taught something at Bible Seminary, doesn't mean it always true!!

Peace,

Tam