Speaking in Tongues Continued

That they spoke different languages is true.
However, they were all Jews. That is why they came to the Jewish feast of Pentecost, the feast of first-fruits at the time of harvest. It was a Jewish feast. The feasts could only be held at the Temple. So the Jews, previously scattered throughout all the known world came from all over to the Temple located in Jerusalem (similar to how Muslims today come from all over the world to the Ka'aba in Mecca). They did all speak different languages. But they were all taught in synagogues which they established where ever they went in order to raise their children and worship. The synagogues were primarily teaching institutions, not just places of worship. It was there that they learned the Torah, and other subjects. They learned Hebrew, their sacred language--all of them. They were Jews. They knew Hebrew. That was their national language. How could they not know it?
Secondly, they knew Greek. Everyone knew Greek. It was the lingua franca of the day. It was the universal language of the time. It was the very reason that our New Testament was written in Greek, so that all would be able to understand the Word of God. It is called Koine Greek, common Greek, the Greek of the common person.
These two languages all the Jews knew. They lived in an empire that had formerly been conquered by Alexander the Great, who had given it the Greek culture. They now lived under Roman rule and thus had to understand Latin. They were raised in the Jewish synagogues and learned their own language of Hebrew. They also learned the mother tongue of the language in which they lived. These are the languages that were spoken by the 120, fulfilling the prophecy in Isaiah 28:11,12. God wasn't speaking to these Jews in their sacred language of Hebrew. He was speaking to them in "the language that they were born."

Acts 2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

Coming for the Jewish feasts was a regular thing for these Jews. They no doubt came to all of them, several times a year, especially the Passover, and the Day of Atonement. What language do you suppose would be spoken when they all gathered on these occasions? It would be Hebrew--their national language. That is why they were so surprised that actual foreign Gentile languages that they were familiar with were being spoken.
The message of God was being spoken with in Gentile languages just as God had prophesied 700 years previous to this time through the writings of Isaiah.
DHK

 

It is really bad when you stoop so low as to call God names Ray. I told you to stop with the personal attacks, and attacking God is blasphemous.

Here is what God, the author of our Bible, said:

1 Corinthians 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.

"This people" is the nation of Israel, the same people that Paul refers back to in Isaiah 28:11,12. The teaching is plain. Tongues are for a sign. With men of other languages (the gentiles), and other lips (those that speak other languages) will I speak to the nation of Israel ("this People"), and yet for all that they will not hear me saith the Lord.
--It was a prophecy that Paul quoted that came true. The rejected Christ. They crucified him. Now they were rejecting the message of the Apostles. (How longsuffering God had been with this nation!). Judgment was imminent. That is what the sign of speaking in tongues was for. It was for the Jews, as this verse plainly indicates. The Jews knew this. And judgment came soon after in 70 A.D. when Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed.

Now when God speaks in 1Cor.14:21, don't call him names Ray. It is God's teaching here, and not God's fault that you don't study the Bible.

This is a complete red herring. What does Romans 11:29 have to do with 1Cor.14:21? The answer is nothing. Let's put both passages in their basic contexts. Romans chapters 9-11 are speaking of God's dealing with the Israelites. 1Cor.12-14 are chapters that deal with the gifts of the Holy Spirit as they pertain to the early church. The one has nothing to do with the other. I am sorry that the word "gift" confuses you, but it has more than just one context.

The gifts do not last until the second coming of Christ. They have ceased already. Context shows that they have. Their purpose has been realized, and has come to an end. There is no more reason for them to exist.

There you go taking Scripture out of context again. Let us consdider what it really says:

1 Corinthians 12:10-11 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: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

Who, today, has the gift of working of miracles? Like healing, who today can go up and down corridors of hospitals and work miracles of healings touching people with serious illnesses and making them whole with their gift of miracles. Who do you know that can do that, Ray? If this gift is still in existence you should be able to point to someone who can exercise it on a regular basis. But you can't, can you? It doesn't exist. It was one of the sign gifts that has now ceased to exist. It ceased by the end of the first century, for the Bible says that signs and wonders, and miracles were the marks of an apostle. We don't have apostles today; we don't have these gifts today. The answer is simple. (2Cor.12:12; Heb.2:3,4). But press on in spite of what the Word of God says. God is the author of Scripture. He said that signs and wonders were the marks of an Apostle, not I. They are a sign. The sign has been taken away. It has outlived its usefulness. We don't have apostles today. Whatever exists therefore in the form of tongues is fraudulent. It isn't of God.

No, that is not what it says. It says it is now not complete (during his time of writing), but when it will be completed then those things that are temporary (tongues, prophecy, revelatory knowledge, etc.) will cease, pass away. And that is what happened when the Bible was completed by the end of the first century.
Your opinion doesn't even make sense. Common, or even "spiritual" knowledge, will never cease, no, not even in heaven. When I get to heaven I plan to sit at the feet of Jesus and learn from him. I will be constantly learning even in heaven. There will never come a moment in my life when I will be omniscient. To declare such would be to claim deity. I could never do that. Spiritual knowledge will never cease. Paul is speaking of the special revelatory knowledge that was given them during the first century when the New Testament was not complete. They needed it then. When the Bible was completed they no longer needed that gift. We now have the completed Word of God; we need no other form of revelation. It is all contained in the 66 books of the Bible. God places a curse on those who add unto that which is written in the Bible.

If there will be no more need of knowledge, will God erase everything from our minds and make us all zombies?? There will always be knowledge; always! The gift of revelatory knowlege has already ceased, along with the other sign gifts. They ceased over 2,000 years ago.
You are so obviously denying God's Word here.
Look at it this way:
God says (1Cor.13:8) Prophecy, tongues and (revelatory) knowledge will cease.
Ray says: Prophecy, tongues and (revelatory) knowledge will continue.
Who shall we believe? God or Ray?

Yes the Word of God is like a glass, a mirror, as James says it is in chapter one of his epistle. And as we look into the completed New Testament we see ourselves more clearly than we have ever been able to see ourselves before (by just using the Old Testament) Paul is saying.

He knew in part because he had only part of the Bible--the Old Testament. He looked forward to the day that he would have all the Bible; but unfortunately that day did not come for him. He was martyred before the New Testament was completed.

Where does the passage say that we shall see Jesus? It doesn't say anything about seeing Jesus. It says that we shall see ourselves more clearly, and that is exactly what happens when you look into the New Testament as compared to the Old.
DHK

 

I am consistent Ray. I did not call you a blasphemer. That in itself is a false accusation. Note carefully what I said:

Attacking God is blasphemous. The doctrrne you expressed is blasphemous. I didn't call you personally a blasphemeer. I directed my remarks at what you said, the doctrine you were expressing. There is a difference.
DHK

 

You have proved my point exactly Mike.
Paul explains this same thing in 1Cor.12:1-3.
These Gentile believers had come out of a pagan background, as Paul points out in verse two. They had spoken in tongues as pagans, just as Satanists do. Now they were reverting back to their old ways, and in doing so calling Jesus accursed. That is why Paul says that no man can call Jesus Lord but by the Holy Spirit. They were being controlled by another spirit; not the Holy Spirit. The very fact that ecstatic utterances (gibberish) is used by pagans and other cults and false religions is proof enough to show that it is not of God. It is of the devil, and always was.
Biblical speaking in tongues is always speaking in a foreign langauge--always. It was a God-given gift to speak miraculously in a language that was foreign to the one speaking it, but not to the one hearing it. "How hear we every man in our own language?" This makes it very clear that these were not ecstatic utterances but foreign languages that were being spoken. The gift never changed in nature. There is no proof that it did.
DHK

 

Yes he did. He had need of them more than them all because of his missionary journeys. The Corinthians were abusing the gift, and were using it in an egotistical pseudo-spiritual way, musch as people try to imitate the gift today.

Does this sound like a deep love for Jesus, or a disrespect for the Lord, the author of 1Cor.14:21, who teaches the very thing that you are attacking in this statement:

God is not a quasit-theologian. To say such is blasphemy. God is the author of the Bible. The doctrine which you attack is straight from the Bible. I have shown that to you. When you have an argument with God, you shouldn't call him names.

I have learned the truth long ago. Have you? By calling Benny Hinn a spiritual Christian, it is apparent that you have not. Hinn is a heretic. Do a search on the web about Hinn and his doctrine.

I have shown you Biblically, from Scripture, how and why the gift of speaking in foreign languages has ceased.
Your argument is "God is blessing the Assembly of God churches, therefore the gifts have not ceased." God seems to blessing the J.W.'s, Mormons, and other cults as well. In fact the fastest growing religion in the world is Islam. Their "pirs" (Muslim mystics) speak in tongues. Thus it is a gift of the Holy Spirit right? It is from God right? You base things on experience not on Scripture. Because a movement is growing you say that God is blessing it; not because it is based on the Bible.
The Bible says these gifts will cease, and they have.
Ray says they will oontinue.
I would rather believe the Bible.

First I quoted to you 1Cor.14:21, not verse 22, however if you would like to discuss verse 22, I would be more than happy to. You see in the original Greek their were no punctuation marks. Verse 22 is connected with verse 21 by the word "Wherefore." The two verses contain the same thought. The unbelievers referred to are those in verse 21. The context is unbelieving Jews, the Jews mentioned in verse 21. Wherefore tongues are for a sign to those that believe not (i.e., the unbelieving Jews.) Everything has a context. Read the context.

I have been quoting Scripture after Scripture to you. Your argument: "God has blessed the Assembly of God church, therefore the gifts must be for today"--hardly a Scriptural argument.

No, I don't get your point. You are pulling a Scripture that deals specifically with Israel and using the word "gifts" to speak of the "spiritual gifts" when they don't have anything in common with each other. That is about the same parallel as
"And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth" (Gen.9:2), has to do with the beasts mentioned in Revelation 13. Right?
Beast in one place in Scripture does not correspond to beast in the other. The same is true with "gift."

Paul didn't say that. You are deliberately adding to the Scripture to support your own slanted interpretation. Here is what Paul said:

1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
--There is not "with the fulness that God knows us." You have deliberately added that in, misquoting and perverting the Word of God.

That is one man's opinion. It doesn't make him right. The Bible says that the gifts will cease. It does not say that they will continue. A sign does not continue "unto the heavenly sphere." Chafer is obviously wrong. A sign is temporary. A sign points to an event. When the event is over the sign is taken away. These signs were removed at the end of the first centuries when they were no longer needed. Signs don't last forever. They don't even last for 21 centuries.

Show me where I have personally attacked you as a blasphemer. This is a false accusation. I have not. I have shown you that your words against the Lord are blasphemous. There is a difference.
DHK

 

We both believe that God is the final authority. I believe that God is the final authority as revealed in His Word, thus it is the Word of God that becomes the final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. Anything more than that is another authority, and would be akin to the Mormons with their book of Mormon. If speaking in tongues or prophesying or having a word of knowledge is authoritative, then you have a subjective experience, not inspired of God, possibly not of God Himself, that one thinks is inspired. That is heresy.

Contrary; we, as well as Briguy, have brought up valid points from the Scripture that none of you have been able to refute. Thus it becomes you that fails to believe the Word of God. The Word of God does not contradict itself. The Charsimatics take it out of context to try and fit their experiences. Experience becomes their foundation instead of the Word of God.

You give some Scripture, largely out of context. When shown that it is out of context, you simply deny it, and like a J.W. go on to a different topic saying "But, what about...."

The power of God has nothing to do with the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Can you demonstrate that it does? There is a command in Eph.5:18 that we should be filled with the Holy Spirit, and that I agree with, but that has nothing to do with tongues. Check out Acts 4:31.

It only demonstrates the reluctance of Charismatics to accept the clear teaching of the Word of God.

I live my life in accordance with the Word of God, not by the experience of other. I fear God alone. I also fear sincere Christians going astray because they are caught up in a movement that will lead them further and further away from the truth of God's Word.
DHK

 

No one claimed that the act of baptism was a gift of the Holy Spirit. But all Charismatics claim that speaking in tongues is a gift of the Holy Spirit. Does a Satanist or a Muslim speak in tongues by the power of the Holy Spirit?

Context! Forbid not to speak in tongues (in the first century). Since those gifts ceased near the end of the first century it is obvious he was speaking to the Corinthian Church, and it was applicable only to first century believers.

What is your point here Ed? I fail to see it. If someone spoke in a foreign language without anyone understanding it:
1. he would seem like a barbarian to them. It would be foolish because no one would understand him.
2. He would not be edifying anyone. Therefore he would be going contrary to Scripture.
3. The stipulation was always that someone speaking in a foreign language had to have an interpreter so that all could understand what was being said. It was for the benefit of all the church.
4. If there was no interpreter he could pray for the gift of interpretation himself.
5. If God didn't give him the gift of interpretation he was to sit down and shut up. "Let him keep silence in the church."
6. Tongues was always a foreign language. Always!
DHK

 

Acts 18:1 After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth;

Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.