For those who speak in tongues...

Let me get this straight Dk&h
"For By Doctrine are you saved through adhering to fundamentalism and that not of yourself you must be indoctrinaterd by and approved by a fundamentalist legalist?"

 

DHK,

Huh???

I have never been a part of any charismatic/pentecostal fellowship that did not preach doctrine, preach the word boldly, and explain the gospel message.

They all do all of those things.

Just like at charismatic and pentecostal meetings.

That is no proof that tongues are not legitimate if they occur when the gospel is preached. See Cornelius and his household.

Charismatics/pentecostals are in complete agreement with that.

In charismatic/pentecostal fellowships they are more than able to "tell them what to do" to be saved.

Its utterly absurd to say or think (or to imply, as you seem to be doing) that what the poster meant when it was said that "salvation is the most important thing" is that "we must must never teach doctrine, or preach the gospel, because salvation is the most important thing."

What you are claiming now might be one of the largest strawmen I have ever witnessed in attempting to prove your side of the argument.

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

DHK,

I tried to send you a PM but your mailbox is full.

 

sorry had a post here wrong forum

[ November 21, 2005, 04:24 PM: Message edited by: Rev. Lowery ]

 

DHK, Without SALVATION a person will die and go to hell! Yes they need to hear the gospel of Jesus and yes thats when the Holy Ghost takes over and does the rest. Which brings us back to speaking in tongues. Without someone giving the interpretation to someone who doesn’t speak my language or if I not knowing how to speak a foreign language..... how would I tell a lost person about the wonderful salvation that Jesus offers us? I would pray and ask God to send an interpreter or that He teach me and help me learn the language (I won't say how fast this can happen because then you'd just get all over me again ) this way I can preach to them the gospel with love about the Love of God that he sent His only begotten Son so that we should not parish, but through Him we can have everlasting life.

 

Hi all, seems we got off topic here. M4H, you hit on how tongues were really used in the early church. If a foreigner (person of a different language) was in a gathered assembly then the tongues speakers would speak to the foreigner in his language (there were many languages in a small area back then so this was common). This was a supernatural ability given to the tongues speaker. This was so the "service" would not be a waste to that person. While the tongues speaker was speaking the whole rest of the assembly would be just sitting there doing nothing so God gifted some to be able to interpret foreign languages, supernaturally. the interpreter would tell the assembly what the tongues speaker was saying to the foreigner, thus all in the assembly would be edified, which is required when a spiritual gift is used (1 Cor. 12:7). That is the only way I can see tongues working in the gathered assembly and all being edified. Paul knew that the use of a spirit given gift without the assembly ("body") being edified was a perversion of the spiritual gift. The miraculous gifts, maybe all the gifts, had a purpose to serve. Anyway, the miraculous nature of tongue speaking was the "sign" to the people of Isreal. If the gift wasn't totally supernatural then why would Isreal, or anybody, pay attention to it as a sign? Tongues today do not have a supernatural quality. I have never heard a tongue speaker purposely speak to a group of people in a language they did not know. Like DHK standing up and given a message in French, though he had never spoken french before. If that happened it would be a "miracle" and would make sense as a special "sign". But that does not happen and modern tongues do not bring with them a supernatural quality.

Also, I thought we were going to run through what Peter said about Joel but the conversation stopped after I posted hmmmmmm I wonder why?
(ha ha)

Happy Thanksgiving!!!
-Brian

 

Briguy

I'd like to comment on something you wrote way back. You suggested that 'pray with my spirit' means 'pray under my breath'-- or something like that.

If I remember correctly the word for 'spirit' (pneuma) means 'wind.' It is the word for 'soul' that means breath. Paul prayed with his spirit. He does not say he prayed with his psyche.

And if 'glossalalia' refers to real languages in one verse and fake languages in another, the readers of the epistle would not have known what Paul was talking about.

 

Unless you were there or at least have documented evidence ,how can you make a distinction between what you call modern day tongues and Biblical tongues.
The pat answer you give assumes that people agree with you. Dkh may agree with you but I humbly disagee.
Happy Thanksgiving to you also,

ATESTRING

 

Don't have to be there; just compare Scripture with Scripture. Take a careful look at Acts 2.

They spoke with other tongues (languages). The miracle was in the speaking. The Bible says it was right here. They spoke in languages that they hitherto never had learned beforehand. That was the miracle.

Yet in spite of that, these many people that had gathered from approximately 13 different language groups that were present said:

"How hear we every man in our own language?"
The disciples spoke in different languages. The others heard them speak in their own language. They heard different ones speak in their own langauge. There was the miracle that took place.

The word for "tongue" in the Bible always means "language." It has no other meaning. Therefore the modern tongue movement is not of God, for they do not speak in foreign tongues as the first century Christians did. They speak in a type of gibberish--something that is not a language; unknown to anyone. Brian already explained how Biblical tongues (foreign languages) were used in a church where those with a different linguistic background may have been present.
DHK

 

DHK said:quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by music4Him:
Amen ~Tam! Your right salvation is the most important thing!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Salvation is not the most important thing; it never has. Take a look at Peter's sermon in Acts chapter 2.

````````````````````````````````````````

Would you like to explain this statement in light of all the rebuttels you have gotten about your post of November 21, 2005 02:48 AM ??

Selah,

Tam

 

It appears I did prove my point--through Scripture presented to you. Your response indicates that I did.

 

A careful reading of Acts 2--
Reinforces a point previously made: the miracle was in the hearing not the speaking; each person hearing the gospel in his own dialect--with only one person speaking. Sure sounds like a divine translation--in real time. A similar, non-miraculous translation takes place in the U.N. assembly. Regardless of the tongue of the speaker, each hearer hears in his native tongue or whatever tongue he chooses. That is man-made high-tech translation which was not available on the Day of Pentecost.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

Salvation is not the most important thing in the Bible; it never has been. It is a very important thing, I agree. All throughout the Bible, God demands but one thing--obedience: both for the saved and the unsaved. If the unsaved will obey him he will get saved. If the saved will obey they will live a sanctified life. Obedience to God is the key throughout the Bible.

If Charismatics were obedient to God they wouldn't be speaking in tongues. They would study objectively the passages that deal with tongues, especially 1Cor.14, and see that they are not for today. They were primarily a sign given to the unbelieving Jew which is now no more needed. They were also a sign given to authenticate an Apostle and his message, also now no more needed.

2 Corinthians 12:9-10 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.

2 Corinthians 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

Note that verse 12 says that the signs of an apostle were signs and wonders and mighty deeds. These supernatural events that accompanied the apostles authenticated them as apostles and verified their message as being from God. Heb.2:3,4 teaches the same thing.

But notice that Paul doesn't put a lot of stock in miracles and the supernatural. That is not where he got his power from.

Paul said, "when I am weak, then I am strong."
He said: "Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.
He said: the power of God came upon him through his sicknesses, infirmities, etc. He wasn't looking for a miracle. And he knew that God used him more when he was sick and weak in body, then when he was healthy. Why? He had to depend on the Lord more. He had to rely on him more. He wasn't looking for miracles, just the power of God in his life--apart from the supernatural-type miracles that Charsimatics are persistently seeking for.
Jesus said: "An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, but there shall no sign be given unto them..."
DHK

 

The problem wth this interpretation is that the
bible says, that they SPOKE in other tongues. If i speak and you hear me speak, my speaking has as much to do with what i say as ones hearing does.

 

In I Corinthians, Pual does not talk about someone being present who understands the language. In fact, he says of the one who speaks in tongues 'no one understandeth him.' The gift of interpretation is a spiritual gift. Even the one who speaks in tongues is instructed to 'pray that he may interpret.'

This is different from the Acts 2 case, even if the spaking in tongues is about the same. The situation is differet.

 

A Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family also~
Brian, now you know me….that was part 1 now here is part 2. Here is the way I read and understand this passage on speaking in tongues. (BTW, I tried to post this earlier but either the board was messed up or AOL was either way I didn’t see it as I read the board just now.

1Cor. 14:2-6
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.
3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
5 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.
6 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?

v.2 the man speaks in tongues he isn't speaking in a language that men know but he is speaking to God....he is speaking in the spirit (or his spirit is speaking)

v.3 it tells what he does when he prophesieth and the reason for prophecy....edification, and exhortation, and comfort. (Now this is where I believe that while this man is speaking in the spirit... God answers and then the interpretation is given therefore he prophesieth edification, and exhortation, and comfort)

v.4 If he speaks in unknown tongues he edifies (or builds himself up) and he keeps it to himself (if there is no interpretation), BUT on the other hand if he gets an interpreter then he can prophecy and edify, and exhort, and comfort the rest who are around when he prophesieth.

v.5 thats why I believe that Paul said that he'd rather all spoke in tongues but rather that he prophesy so that others could be edified, exhorted and comforted. One thing if you speak in tongues your just building yourself up when you ought to edify, and exhort, and comfort the rest who are around you.

v.6 so when your speaking with tongues, it won't be of no profit to you unless it is spoken and is to you either a revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine.

 

If the Scripture that I have presented to you didn't support what I say, then you would have something to say about it. But you don't. Your only rebuttal is: "I am not convinced." So what.
So you are not convinced. Does it matter that you are not convinced. Neither are skeptics, agnostics, and unbelievers of all kinds.
"A man convinced agaist his will is of the same opinion still." But you don't even fall into that category. Hundreds of people read this and they see that Atestring is not convinced. So what!

If you had anything convincingly to say you would take the Scriptures and give a rebuttal to what I have said through the Scriptures to you. But you cannot do that. Your only answer is a lame: "I am not convinced."
DHK

 

Jude 1:18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
Jude 1:19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
Jude 1:20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,