tongues

Hi Mike, Please ask any more questions you have. When you say nine manifestations are you refering to the "gifts" mentioned in 1 cor, Ephesians, as well as by Peter, or is there another doctrine in regards to the "nine" that I have never heard?

Mike, I have always wondered if there are more gifts then what the scripture mentions. I basically believe that the ones mentioned are the building block of "gifts" given by God and that we get more then one. Of course all are service gifts, used to lift up a given "assembly". When any gift is personalized, which tongues often are, then 1 cor. 12:7 becomes a problem. Also, what happens with tongues is that there is so much proof for true use of the gift that many tongue speakers now say there are two gifts. Carol, MEE, would say there is a gift and a seperate manifestation of the Holy Spirit resulting in tongues. The problem is that 1 cor. 12 ends with saying, Do all speak in tongues?, with an implied "no" answer, which shoots in the foot the idea that the Holy Spirit always manifests by the person speaking in tongues. One more related tid bit. At the end of 1 cor. 12 there is a scripture that in almost all Bibles is poorly translated. Some Bibles give the better rendering as an option, that being: "you are desiring the showy gifts, but I give you yet a better way" and then talk of LOVE goes from there. Look at that once and see how much better 1 cor 12 ends and 13 begins with that rendering of the verse. Take care Mike, btw, do you decorate for Christmas or are you a stuffy pentecostal

Merry Christmas, and peace on earth,
Brian

 

Briguy,

When I say the Nine Manifestations of the Spirits Presence I am talking about the Nine Giftings covered in 1 Corinthians.

After hearing the point, I think you made it, about a gift being 'permanently given', my verbiage may need some adaptation.

My heart is frustrated with my Pentecostal Heritage that seems to accentuate the 'Gifts' without either 'Holy' or 'Spirit'.

So, I am trying to express that the Gifts are the Spirit's manifestation through God's People.

I know this conflicts with some renderings. But, this is in process with me. As I said before it is very important to me to be sure God gets the Glory and I am not out of order.

As Paul said, I would rather speak five intelligent words than talk all day and confuse or mislead God's People.

When we start discussing such 'sensitive' topics between people who have been raised with a *very* different perspective it is invariable that things won't get communicated from the heart or correctly.

Especially, when either side is so adamant that we start framing our response before the 'ink' is dry on the others statement.

Incidently, when I mentioned that the OT was irrevocably... I meant in regards to Salavation.

Not all of God's Promises to Israel as a nation.

In fact, it's hard for us to concieve what Paul *really* meant when he made the statement that *ALL* Israel would be saved.

In it's most complete meaning, that owuld include even those that violently opposed the Gospel.

Much as Joel statement that God would pour out His Spirit on all Flesh. (Even people who are violently disposed against it like DHK )

{Fortunately, (for DHK) *I* am not in control of God's Timing... )

Lastly, it is unfortunately that an assumption was made that I believe in 'Replacement Theology' because I quoted one of *thier* favorite scriptures.

In fact I am *very* much aware that 'we' gentiles are 'wild olive shoots' grafted in to the natural root.

Again... Assumptions and quick responses can be very 'interesting'.

 

Briguy,

I like the 'Showy Gifts' thing and that has been my 'attitude' for some time.

Try giving a 'Word of Wisdom' or a 'Word of Knowledge' at the average Pentecostal Church!

No one wants to hear a quiet, "And, I think that I have the mind of Christ".

Not decorating this year as due to a 34% pay cut (thank God I am *still* employed) there won't be anything to put under a tree anyway.

Momma's (my wife) is a 'tree' person. Me, I'd rather set up a Nativity Scene.

A idea I had in the past, but, can't get momma to sign off on it, is to take a piece of Plywood and suspend it from the ceiling. Then, have white Christmas lights come down from a common point and branch out around the perimeter. The nativity would be in the center of the plywood.

Gifts could go underneath. *Below* Christ, as it were.


As for 'Gifts' to the church. There are so many lists it gets confusing at times. My background teaches that there are

Nine Gifts of the Spirit:
Prophecy
Tongues
Interpretation of Tongues
Word of Wisdom
Word of Knowledge
Discerning of Spirits
Miracles
Healing
Faith

Then in Ephesians: Five Ministry Gifts
Apostles
Prophets
Evangelists
Pastors
Teachers

The latter list in Corinthians 12 Contains a mixture of the previous lists.

Apostles
Prophets
Teachers
Miracles
Gifts of Healings
Helps
Governments
Diversities of Tongues.

All are given to edify the body and perfect the saints.

Generally, I don't have my notes with me at work, the two groups represent the Human Government and Spirit-Led aspects of the church.

You need both.

For the letter killeth but the Spirit giveth life.

And, the Corinthians are proof enough that all Spirit and no Governmrnt isn't a good thing either.

I find it interesting to note that the Corinthians lack of self-discipline in the Spirit resulted in a man taking his fathers wife...

Right out of the headlines of the present modern day televangelists...

 

I've seen no discussion on what I consider two very important issues in regard to "tongues." First, when did tongues stop being the known languages of Acts and start to become the ecstatic tongues in the Corinthian church? I’ve never seen anyone deal with this issue on a discussion board. We know that the gift in Acts were known languages of the day.

Acts 2:7-12 “Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. 7And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? 8And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? 9Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, 10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, 11Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. 12And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?”

But in 1 Corinthians the Apostle appears to be dealing with some kind of ecstatic or angelic tongues that are unintelligible. All of the believers I’ve known who speak in tongues speak an unintelligible gibberish (sorry, I just don’t know what else to call it). Where do we see this transition in the Scriptures.

Second. Much of what the apostle confronts in the Corinthian church are Satanic counterfeits, misrepresentations, or abuses of real spiritual gifts. A possibility I’ve not seen in this discussion is the possibility that the unintelligible tongues found among believers today is that they are a Satanic counterfeit meant to divert the believer’s attention from true worship and ministry.

 

Paul specifically deals with the issue at the top.

If there were not a potential for abuse or counterfeit then Paul would not have cautioned that someone might purport to speak by the Spirit of God, yet call Jesus accursed.

Sounds like something a Judaizer would do.

But, he also says that it is impossible to call Jesus Lord except by the Spirit of God.

I will belabor the point that only the Genuine of Value is Counterfeited. (Although, I must admit that for some there is value in deceiving others.)


As for the ecstatic tongues vs. the known languages. Interesting point/question.

I don't have an answer, yet. But, I would postulate that may have some influence on the debate about whether tongues were only a sign for the Jewish Unbeliever or not.

My first gut reaction is that, possibly, the tongues in 1 Corinthians were 'Believers Tongues' not 'Sign Tongues'. (I am brain-storming here... Ooooowwww messy! )

In Corinthians Paul mentions Praying in the Spirit, Singing in the Spirit, and Speaking in the Spirit. But, this is in a believers church scenario.

So, while a reference is made to unbelievers, it could be that the main thrust was to get the believers to think about how they were manifesting spiritual gifts?

In this vein of thinking that would make the Tongues on the day of Pentecost 'Sign Tongues' because they were manifested to 'prove' to the gathered Jews that Jesus had been elevated to God's Throne room and given a Name above every Name.

Tongues at the Centurion's House could be either or possibly both. In that the Jewish believers needed to have proof that God had accepted Gentiles.

(The only unbelievers I see in this story are the Gentiles. Which means if Tongues were *only* a sign for Jewish Unbelievers....)

And, as new Gentile Believers they need the comfort such a closeness with God would produce.

If this is so, then what 'class' of Tongues were manifested in Ephesians?

Interesting thought. Not sure where it will lead.

But, for me at least, it reconciles some of the confusion in the various ways tongues has been approached through the years.

So, I guess we have a new question (let's leave the when or if they ceased dormant for the moment?) does scripture support the concept of two different manifestation 'classes' of Tongues?

For want of a better set of names: 'Sign Tongues' and 'Believers Tongues'.

 

I know it's been sometime since you posted this, but I'm not sure I agree with the above statement. Regardless of one's position on tongues or other spiritual gifts, I'm not sure the above principle is necessarily valid.

I use the following verses for consideration:

Mar 6:4 But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.
Mar 6:5 And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them.
Mar 6:6 And he marvelled because of their unbelief. And he went round about the villages, teaching.

I would imagine that if anyone could do a might work it would be Jesus, but He did not exercise that ability at all times, as the above verses indicate. I'm not going to get into the reasons (although unbelief seems implied). Suffice it to say that there were times (at least this one) where Jesus did not exercise His power.

Additionally, there is the following:

2Ki 4:27 And when she came to the man of God to the hill, she caught him by the feet: but Gehazi came near to thrust her away. And the man of God said, Let her alone; for her soul is vexed within her: and the LORD hath hid it from me, and hath not told me.

In this passage, God, for whatever reason, withheld from Elisha the reason for the Shunammite woman's grief.

As I said, this has no bearing on the doctrinal position of whether the spiritual gifts are for today. But, I think they do indicate that the idea such gifts, if for today, could be used to clean out the hospitals at will is a mistaken conclusion.

Having said that, I do appreciate the spirit and politeness of your post. I just disagree on this one point

 

SpiritualMadMan: "I therefore respectfully submit
that a direct quote ‘trumps’ an exegetical ‘inference’.

"And, that the issue of whether Tongues are a sign
for only Jewish unbelievers is mute ."

ANd i submit that one grammar error wipes out a dozen trumps.

MUTE - non-speaking
MOOT - no longer logically significant

 

NIC, Thanks for your comments. What Jesus did in some ways helps to make my point. He purposely CHOSE not to do many miracles because of the attitude of the people around him. That same power of when and where to use our gifts is what I was eluding to. Jesus had the choice and exercises it as to what he felt best. He now gives gifts to us and we have that same freedom. He just doesn't give Healing, Miracles, Tongues or Interpretations anymore. They were for a different purpose. We know they are gone by simple logic. Tongues, as we have seen on this thread, has plenty of scriptual support for being gone.

NIC, the point I always try to make is that the gift of "helps" is the same asany other gift in terms of who gave it and how we use it. Gifts are just simply in us and a part of us and never seperate from us or beyond our power to use.

Mike, sorry to hear of your financial hardships. I will pray your Christmas will be a special blessing in ways that only God can put forth. We use the same decorations every year basically. I would encourage you to get out any decoratons you may have, just to brighten your home

Couple of things I wanted to point out:
Gifts:
knowledge - special ability to understand God's Word (Bible)
Wisdom - special ability to apply God's Word.
Prophecy - "to speak before" a speaking gift used to build up believers. (not a future telling gift) (the "before" represents in front of others not a before it happens kind of thing).

Mike, those are simplified explanations of those gifts but I fear your church teaching would have somewhat different ways to look at these 3 and I wanted to let you know how I see the gifts) I have seen 700 "word of knowledge" things on 700 club and it makes my skin crawl. I have never heard them use a real name of someone, certainly God would know names. Anyway Take care and Merry Christmas to all

In Christian Love,
Brian

 

Thank you! I've been looking for that word! Just couldn't seem to get my mind to 'recover it'.

 

Briguy:

Ticks me off, too!

Yes. Agreed. Though as a Pentecostal I would add that, at least in my case, it is the supernatural impartation of knowledge/information for which either no earthly manner of knowing exists, or, which no traceable knowledge of having learned it can be found.

But, just because one is given knowledge supernaturally does not mean, automatically, it is of God.

We are pointedly told to try the spirits to see if they are of God or not.

This is a major failing among Pentecostals in that they fail to see that once they are open to the Spiritual Realm they can be compromised, deceived and subverted. (Consider Edgar Cayce as an example.)

The failure to know God thoroughly through His Written Word is, IMHO, the cause of much of the stupidity I see on TV. They are simply running on an emotional feeling and not constantly checking to see if they are *still* in the faith or not.

(Seems Armenians would do that!??? Why they don't I haven't a clue.)

Again, I agree.

And, again , as a Pentecostal I will add that when given 'raw knowledge' one must vouch-safe it until God also gives wisdom to use it in a timely and correct manner.

This again is a failing of my Pentecostal Brethren. If they sense God is moving a certain way or in a certain direction... They assume 'right now'.

Agreed, in general.

Though Agabus did foretell the famine in Judea/Jerusalem. The question could be, though, what he exercising the Gift of Prophecy, or, was he a Prophet, or is there a difference.

Prophecy is the single most mis-used gift in today's Pentecostal Churches. Period.

There is a book titled, "Thus Saith The Lord?" by John Bevere that deals with this problem. Unfortunately, he also has some books on authority in the church I strongly disagree with.

I think in it's simplest form/definition Prophecy means to forthtell or tell forth. Under which definition a Gifted Preacher delivering a powerful sermon 'could' be called Prophecy.

This is how I see the Gift of Prophecy. Not in the showmanship trumpeted today.

But, in the quiet expression of just the right Truth from God's Word at just the right time.

This I have done several times. And, the resulting altar calls have been life changing for those that received.

If I may, I think the biggest problem 'we' Pentecostals have is our propensity to be showy. To think that everything God does has to be big, loud, and explosive.

Never realizing that there *IS* a still small voice. That He *still* speaks with. That some of the biggest miracles are the small ones that no one sees.

A marriage healed. A child reconciled to it's parents. Nothing (except seeing someone Born-Again) is better than seeing the light go on in someones eyes and know that they 'got it' and Jesus can take over.

Sorry, for being so long-winded.

 

Perhaps I've been speed reading and missed it, but has anyone addressed Paul's command, "Forbid not to speak in tongues."?

If someone has already touched on this, please forgive me for asking. If not, I'd like to know why such a command would be given if Paul knew they should cease.

BTW, God bless each of you for the kind and respectful manner in which you're having this discussion. Don't think I've ever seen such consideration shown on an issue where there's lots of disagreement. You guys and gals make this discussion fun to read.

Roscoe

 

Hi Roscoe, This topic can get good people upset. I am very immpressed by Mike (SMM) as he has shown much kindness and Christ-like behavior.

Thanks Mike, you really do have a great attitude.

It's actually kind of funny that Christians acting like Christians is seen as refreshing

Roscoe, Paul wrote 1 cor. in 50ish AD. God's judgement came and Jerusalem fell in 70AD. Paul would have understood the significance in the "men of foreign tongues" being a warning and would have wanted that warning to go forth. His later writings do not discuss tongues at all. Hope that helps a little. 20 years is a long time even if it is small compared to 2000 years.

Mike, I am glad we agree on the meaning of those gifts. I have never thought of "knowledge" outside of the Bible. I will give that some thought. Thanks for getting me thinking.

In Christ,
Brian

 

Briguy,

It's no so much to 'have to' as the possibility.

I once had a very unusual experience when I was in the Navy.

I was in the maintenance bay. I *knew* I was all alone.

I had been 'shooting' a bug for the better part of the shift and was getting, shall we say, 'flustered'.

When, I heard, and I still am not sure to this day if it was audible or not, "change A3 Q4" (a transistor on a printed circuit module/board).

Well, I spun around with raised voice, suddenly lowered with chagrin, saying, "But, that's not even in the circuit!", as I realized I was very much by myself.

After mumbling to myself for a while I decided to replace the part. After all I didn't really have anything to lose.

To my surprise it fixed the problem. I never did figure out the interaction that allowed a transistor, obviously not in the circuit, to cause the bug I was struggling to fix.

But, I felt at the time, and still do, that if nothing else it proves God, the Holy Spirit, knows more about Electronics than I do.

And, He is vitally interested in *even* our 'secular' lives.

Unfortunately, it hasn't happened again. And, I've got the lost hair to prove it.

They say Speech is the most Brain Extensive Process we humans do. So, even if tongues has ceased (I maintain they didn't ), Electronics and Computers should be no problem at all for God.

Right down to the names 'we' give the components.

Now, that's omniscience!

 

For the sake of argument, if tongues are for today, I would agree that there are those who woefully misuse it. Although I've not stated my position on the gifts of the Spirit, I will say that I was (past tense) in the Charismatic and Word of Faith movements (they aren't necessarily the same thing) for 20+ years. The purported uses of the gifts varies wildly. I've seen it turned into the chaotic show that has become the stereotype. This bold-faced disobedience to the Scriptures really turned me off, and it was real distraction to ministry.

On the other hand, when I was in college, I went to a church that acknowledged the gifts of the Spirit that refused to let any member of the church speak out in the service. If anyone felt the Lord giving them a "Word", that person had to go to an usher and tell the usher his intentions. That usher would then take that person to one of the assistant pastors, who would listen to what that person wanted to say. If approved, the pastor would pause the service and have that person come to the microphone and give whatever message was on his heart. Needless to say, all was done decently and in order, and no more than two or three ever said anything.

 

I haven't ever seen that control level in a 'gifted' church. Not sure how scriptural it is based on the heavy emphasis on personal responsibility Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians.

In fact the only 'specific' judging of a 'Word' was a Word of Prophecy, after being given, by other prophets.

An associate pastor may or may not have the gift of Prophecy.

So, you can see where I am leaning on this?

However, if the leadership was of a bi-laterally submissive type (doesn't sound like it, though) where the leadership esteem the 'laity' as better than themselves instead of something to be controlled...

Then, a *real* Word from the Lord would survive both the Scrutiny and Delay. I could handle it.

But, unfortunately, many (if not most) of the current crop of modern Charismatic and WoF churches (we won't even talk about main-line Pentecostal Denoms ) are control-freaks.

Some by design... Some by insecurity... Some by 'panic impatience'.

Now, while I said this, above

I don't want anyone to get the wrong impression. If I as a pastor, elder or other leader in the church hear something out of order, whether it is Prophecy or not, it is going to be addressed.

That's part of being in a position of leadership. You protect God's Flock.

In some cases an immediate public 'correction' or 'rebuke' would be required. In others a 'little talk' after service will do. Depending upon content and potential effect on the church.

Some might suggest that it would be better to 'prevent' any chance of error being broadcast publicly. That is to pre-empt such a Word prior to it's even being given.

But, that has, at least, the appearance of being Controlling.

It prevents people who are stirring up the gift that is with-in them from even trying at all.

And, it precludes any possibility of 'outside' correction being given to the leadership.

And, while they may not 'hear it'... At least some in the church will and be warned.

Mighty thin tight-rope here... Ain't it.

 

Appropriate cautionary comments. In the experience I discussed previously, I do not know if the pastor who listened to the one who had the *word* was regarded as having any specific gift. I just assumed such was the case. I have no idea how many were turned away, but I never got the impression this "preview" process was overly controlling. I always saw it as an attempt to circumvent the multitudes of "thus saith the Lord" outbursts that have become stereotypical of Charismatic churches and implement some level of order and accountability.

Anyway, just food for consideration, I guess.

 

1 Corinthians 12:1-3 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant. 2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

I believe that there were ecstatic tongues spoken in the Corinthian church, as well as an abuse of the actual gift of tongues. In the above passage he deals with the ecstatic tongues which has its origin in paganism, even in demonism. It is very likely that there were some unsaved individuals in the church that were demon-possessed speaking in tongues ecstatically. This is the problem that Paul addresses here. In chapter 14 he addresses the actual gift of tongues.

First he starts off by saying that he doesn't want you to be ignorant of spiritual gifts. It is important to be knowledgeable about spiritual gifts. Don't be ignorant about them.
Secondly he reminds them of their pagan past, how they worshipped idols. Behind every idol is a demon. Consider:

1 Corinthians 10:20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

That which the Gentiles sacrifice (to their own idols) they sacrifice to demons, and not to God. There is a demon behind every idol.

Then Paul says that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
First, no saved person would ever be calling Jesus Christ accursed.
Secondly, "No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." This statement means more than just as it reads superficially. Many Christians are very naive when it comes to this passage. Any person can say that Jesus Christ is Lord, saved or unsaved. Jesus says in Mat.7:2,23
Matthew 7:22-23 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Many will have called Jesus Lord, but Jesus will say I never knew you, and the consequences will be terrible for those individuals. Is this then a contradiction of Scripture?

No, it is a matter of context. Anyone can say the phrase: "Jesus is Lord." We have seen it through "easy believism." Many false professions have been made. There are many nominal Christians in the world. Many who think they are Christians and are not. You can even get a pagan to recite those words for you. That was not Paul's meaning.

The context, as verse one indicates, is spiritual gifts, and the abuse thereof. The spiritual gift of which there was the greatest misuse was tongues.
No one, speaking by the Holy Spirit (in tongues) would ever call Jesus accursed.
However there were some speaking by another spirit (a demonic spirit) that apparently were in the Corinthian church, that did call Jesus accursed. We have seen this phenomena today in the midst of ecstatic tongues-speakers. One person in B.C. in a Charismatic church, was speaking in tongues, apparently in perfect Greek, saying over and over again: "I love the devil, I love the devil." This was observed by two pastors, one of whom was from Greece. Most of the others were speakig "gibberish," or ecstatically. The same situation must have been present among a certain number of those present in the Corinthian Church. There were some that were in some way, calling Christ accursed. And it certainly wasn't by the power of the Holy Spirit that that was happening.

On the other hand, there were some who had the genuine gift. They spoke in the power of the Holy Spirit. In contrast they would testify to the deity of Christ while speaking in tongues.
This is the meaning of the passage. I believe that ecstatic tongues, and demonic tongues have their origin right here (as far as the churches are concerned). As far as paganism is concerned, other religions have been speaking in tongues ecstatically for many years before Christ was born. It is not an uncommon phenomena among those religions which are closely connected to the occult in some way.
DHK

 

DHK,

While I still disagree with your views on Tongues ceasing...

The above was the most balanced thing you've posted to date.

And, I *do* appreciate the cautionary tone concerning the (potential) origin of (some of the) 'ecstatic' tongues in modern times.

We are 'poles' apart on this subject. But, you are starting to sound like a brother. I like it!

 

Please someone provide me with some scriptures that says that the gift of tongues was an "ecstatic" language, because I can sure provide scripture where it was defined as an understandable language. It is this point where most ALL churches that believe that tongues are still viable today go wrong. Those in the hearing of the Apostles heard them(apostles) speaking to them(audience) each in his own language.

 

I respectfully disagree.
Why would Paul say a translator is needed,
if someone can hear it in thier own
language? Why is it called "unknown language"
if somebody knows what it is?

1Co 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.

1Co 14:4 -
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

1Co 14:13
Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.

1Co 14:14
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

1Co 14:19
Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.

1Co 14:27
If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

If somone is speaking known languages and
there are a dozen differnet languages present,
would not the Spirit move to speak
all these known langagues, in turn?
I think so. Therefore the limit of three
(usually only two) refers to ecstatic language.

Doesn't sound like a known language to me
(in the King James Version (KJV1769)).