Charismatics. What is thier doctrine anyhow?

May I join in?

The Gifts

All right – tongues – easy if you take the Bible as it stands and understand how God deals with Israel as a nation. Most make issue of prayer languages, interpreter or not and never cover what tongues are really for. Let’s get down to the basics. Remember, God deals with Israel as a nation differently than he deals with the body of Christ today.

According to the Bible tongues are for a sign (1 Cor 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign,…). The verse didn’t say tongues were for your personal edification, prayer time, public worship service, etc. Tongues are for a sign. Now, who require signs in the Bible? The Jews require a sign (1 Cor 1:22 For the Jews require a sign,….). Why did the Jews require a sign? It was a part of their history. When God and Moses had their conversation at the burning bush Moses said (and I paraphrase), “They are not going to believe me.” The Lord said, “I will give you some signs to authenticate your ministry.” Moses went to them and did signs and wonders and they believed. When the Lord came to Israel in the gospels he came with signs to authenticate his ministry and some believed. In fact the Pharisees came seeking a sign - Mat 12:38 “Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.” After Christ arose he gave the apostles the signs to authenticate their ministries they went about doing signs and wonders.

Next, tongues were not for believers but for unbelievers – “not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: - I Cor. 14:22. This is the clincher. Moses went to Jews who were unbelievers of his ministry. Jesus went to an unbelieving Israel with signs. Paul went to unbelieving Israel with signs. Also, the Jews were “unbelievers” in the sense that they did not believe that God would not bless the Gentiles. In Acts 2 where the signs and wonders took place Peter preached to thousands of “unbelieving Jews” and they believed after the message with signs and wonders (Acts 2:43).

Today tongues are used in churches for believers – in other words done for the edification of the speaker or hearer, which is contrary to I Cor. 1:22 and 14:22 (note both verses are 22 – can’t beat the book!)

Now, when you use your “tongues” in your church service are there any unbelieving Jews there? Maybe and maybe not but most likely not. When you are using “tongues” in your private prayer closet are there any unbelieving Jews there?

Let’s wrap it up – When God deals with Israel as a nation he uses signs and wonders as authentication. God is not dealing with Israel as a nation today – God is dealing with individuals. Tongues are for a sign and to unbelievers, not believers. Tongues are a sign of judgment to the unbelieving Jews. Also, unbelievers are “believing “ Jews in Acts who were didn’t believe the Gentiles could get in on the blessings.

Tongue speakers are not following this today one bit. I really don’t care about how good tongues feel to you and how excited you get when you utter your “tongues”. When you pray and speak in tongues are you doing it as a sign to unbelieving Jews? I don’t care if you saw millions at once speaking in tongues. What you saw were millions of deceived people led by an unclean spirit. They may be nice, polite, Bible-quoting people but they were deceived while they were nice, polite and quoting scripture.

I know you have a lot of verses you get from I Cor 14 but remember Paul is rebuking a carnal church of a misuse of a doctrine to the point where he calls them children in malice. Why you think you can find anything positive there to support your tongues beats the fire out of me.

Don’t judge tongues by your experience – judge your experience by the Bible. Anybody can think they speak in tongues. I’ve even seen people “practicing” their tongues so they wouldn’t lose them! Please, people! The great men of God of old wouldn’t and didn’t mess with that stuff for a minute and God used any one of them more then 10,000 tongue speakers today.
But you say, “Yes, but I still know what I know and I speak in tongues and others do so that proves it!” Fine, base your doctrine on feelings and experience and ignore the plain teaching of scripture.

Again, one last time with feeling – UNTILL YOU UNDERSTAND THAT GOD DEALS WITH ISRAEL AS A NATION DIFFERENTLY THAN HE DOES WITH THE BODY OF CHRIST TODAY THEN YOU CAN FORGET UNDERSTANDING THE GIFTS!

May God bless

 

I believe the gifts of the Holy Spirit are still here today. Almost every successful faithful church has those who are gifted with financial ability, musicians, teachers, those who have the time, money, and ability to perform public service, and, of course, at least one called to be a pastor. These seem to be everyday things until one looks at the individuals involved. The organist at one local SB church said she'd had piano lessons while a girl and had married & raised three children w/o once touching a piano...But one day, while browsing in a furniture store, saw a Hammond organ set up for demonstrations, sat down, and applied her piano lessons, and found herself playing passably well. Soon, she purchased an organ and became proficient in less than a month. At that time, the church's organist was retiring, and this lady asked him to teach her the "nuts-n-bolts" of playing at a service, and she became the church's regular organist, and has been for the last 12 years. I believe the Holy Spirit filled her and led her to do what she did.

And I agree that Scripture says tongues in a church service are for unbelievers. Paul gave us God's instructions for the correct use of tongues, including keeping silent unless there was an interpreter present. I do NOT believe God wants anyone to make a showcase outta tongues.

 

Talents and abilities are not gifts of the Spirit. We have a 9 year old from our city who is so gifted at the piano that he travels and is able to play with various symphonies--the Toronto Symphony Orchestra, the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra, etc. He is not saved. Where did he get this ability, this talent from? Was it from God? Yes, of course. But it was not a gift of the Holy Spirit!

Bill Gates is a very talented man. There are many successful CEO's that have marvellous aministrative talents. These are not gifts of the Spirit. Your pastor or some others in the church may be good at administration, but that does not mean that it is a gift of the Holy Spirit. That is a ludicrous assumption. The unsaved have the same gifts (abilities), and in many cases a greater display of them.

All the gifts of the Spirit (now passed) were supernatural in nature. They were supernatural gifts. They were miraculous in nature. They demonstrated themselves to be beyond the natural and in the realm of the miraculous. We don't know exactly the nature of some of the lesser known gifts such as that of administration and helps, but they were somehow different than that of today.

I take up my challenge again. Show me a person who can walk through the corridors of the hospital healing all that there. No one can do that today. The Apostles had such power. The gift of healing, as well as the other gifts have ceased. These were miraculous gifts. We don't see that today. Look at some Scripture:

Acts 5:16 There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one.

Acts 28:8-9 And it came to pass, that the father of Publius lay sick of a fever and of a bloody flux: to whom Paul entered in, and prayed, and laid his hands on him, and healed him. So when this was done, others also, which had diseases in the island, came, and were healed:

The purpose of the sign gifts were to authenticate the message of the apostles.

Acts 2:43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.

Acts 5:12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch.

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

Hebrews 2:3-4 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?
--Here in this last verse the author of the Book of Hebrews seems to indicate that not only were signs and wonders the marks of an apostle but the gifts of the Holy Spirit as well. That being the case, the gifts of the Holy Spirit would have ceased at the end of the Apostolic age.
DHK

 

Why would it be impossible?

Liz </font>[/QUOTE]1. It is a sign only to the unbelieving Jews. This is the primary reason that has already been explained (1Cor.14:21,22).

2. Women are not permitted to speak in tongues. (1Cor.14:34,35)
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak;"

3. The most that could speak was two or three and every one of them had to have an interpreter. Without an interpreter they were not permitted to speak. (1Cor.14:27.28)

4. Speaking in tongues was not a selfish gift to be used for one's own edification, i.e., prayer or singing. It was a gift for the entire church. If you did not have the opportunity to speak in tongues with an interpreter for the edification of the entire church you were to sit down and keep quiet. (1Cor.14:28)

5. Paul never said he spoke with the tongues of angels (1Cor.13:1-3). To say so is to say that he gave his body to be burned which also is not true. The statements there are conjectural. They all start with the word "though," or "if," making them conditional. He never said that he spoke with the tongues of angels, and he never did.

6. Paul said that he would rather speak with 5 words of understanding ("Hello, my name is Paul." 5 words) then 10,000 words in an unknown language. Understanding was the key.

7. Tongues in Biblical times were a real language. That is what the word means. "How hear we every man in our own tongue (language)? The words are interchangeable. They still are today. What is your mother tongue? But the so-called gift of tongues today is gibberish that only started at the beginning of the 20th century and before that was unknown.
DHK

 

That is, to say the least, a very debateable point. It depends on a particular dispensational viewpoint for a start.

You are on VERY dodgy ground here. Some churches use that verse to say that women cannot participate audibly in church at all, not even in the prayer meeting or to give a testimony. Some take it as referring to chit chat. The one thing that is certain is that women DID speak in tongues on the day of Pentecost. So that rather seems to kill your argument here.

I spent years in a charismatic church and never saw tongues done any other way than this. Therefore clearly there ARE some churches that take this part seriously.

Agreed, when in church it is to be used for edification of everyone.

It may have been rhetorical, it may not. We don't know. The mention of it suggests to me that it is indeed possible even if Paul didn't do it.

To be absolutely certain of that, you would have to know every language in the world, or at least you would have to be a linugist with sufficient skill to determine whether or not what is being spoked could be a language. Furthermore you would have to have heard every tongues speaker in the world.

Now i do not believe I have ever heard Biblical tongues. That does not mean they don't exist somewhere.

Liz

 

That is, to say the least, a very debateable point. It depends on a particular dispensational viewpoint for a start.</font>[/QUOTE]This is no debate here at all. It is a sign to the unbelieving Jews. The quote is from Isaiah 28:11,12. The sign of tongues came. The Jews refused the sign, and refused to believe. Judgement came in the form of the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple. What more is to say. Even if you didn't believe that much you still have to believe that it is a sign to the unbelieving Jew. It is clear on that much. If you don't have unbelieving Jews in your church, then tongues is unScriptural. Whatever way you look at it, it is an unScriptural practice by this verse alone.

Whatever way you wish to apply that verse to a contemporary setting is up to you. That doesn't matter. What does matter is that on the issue of tongues women are commanded to be silent. That is the issue here. The context is tongues. Women are to be silent. That is all that matters here. There is no need to bring in other rabbit trails. Stick to the issue of tongues. In the matter of tongues women are to be silent. That is a command.

It wasn't possible and never will be until you reach heaven. Study what the tongues of angels are. Angels are able come down to earth and speak to any man, in any language, any where. They can speak in any language perfectly, without mistake, in perfect grammar, in all languages. That is the languages of angels. And it is not possible for you to speak in them. You do not have that ability.

Not so. That is a false assumption you make.
Besides English, I have studied five languages, and am fluent in one them. Greek and Hebrew are two of them which I have studied in college. I live in a multi-cultural society where there are scores of different languages spoken. Most languages that I hear are easily recognizable as specific languages, and many of them I can identify as to which exact one they are. That is no problem for me.
I also have been in meetings where tongues have been spoken. The speaking in tongues of today is vastly different from any language. There is no structure, no grammar, no syntax, no real vocabulary of any kind. They are simply the same syllables repeated over and over again. They are not real languages. Professional linguists have attested to the same thing.
On another note there has been, on occasion, people that have spoken in real languages. However these people have shown signs of demon possession. One person in the Vancouver area was witnessed by a visitor from Greece to be saying in Greek "I love the devil" over and over again. Was he filled with the Holy Spirit, or a demonic spirit? You choose.
If this movement is from God, why do Mormons, Hindus, and even Haitans that practice Voodooism all speak in tongues?
DHK

 

I am simply saying that I would not be the first one to speak if I was the one quoting Scripture in the original language. I would wait until somebody else had spoken and somebody else had interpreted. From that moment on, the floor is open, metaphorically speaking. In other words, they themselves have left themselves open to be tested by the Word of God itself, for they proclaim what they are doing is from God.

An additional word of prophecy that would be made in response to an obscure passage from the OT Hebrew? No, there is not reasonable defence for God mistaking His own Word and offering up a replacement for it. Like you say, tongues plus interpretation equals prophecy is what they teach, thus, if I disclose your interpretation is that far off the mark, then your interpretation of the prophecy is clearly off the wall. That's why I'd choose to quote a piece of a genealogy or something that might be a rebuke to them like Isa.28.

Then that becomes a judgment against them.

Liz, this is an EXCELLENT point! Just a couple hours ago, I was at a Christian coffeehouse in the area studying. At the next table, a group of Word of Faith persons was having a discussion on tithing. One of them made the comment that "We should be able to heal all the sick, raise the dead, et.al., and that the reason was that our faith isn't strong enough." I found this extremely distressing. I all but turned to her and said, "Dear Sister, it's not about your faith, it's about God's will. Maybe we're not healing the sick and raising the dead because God has not decreed all sick people be healed or the dead raised. In short, it's not about your ability or your faith, it's about the One that raises the dead and heals the sick." I later had to leave, btw, because they sat there for two hours talking about tithing and their experiences, and everything that was being said was "Holy Ghost this and Holy Ghost that," but not one time did anybody ever mention any exegetical basis for anything they said. One of them even said we are "god-men" walking on the earth." I was trying to study through John 6. I had to get up and leave before I found myself speaking to them sharply.

 

That is not the only possible interpretation. The fact that I had never even heard it, in 30 years of regular church attendance in several different churches, until 2001, is proof enough for me that not every Bible believer thinks like that.

Are you saying the rules were changed after Pentecost?

Again i have been in Bible believing churches that believe that this is precisely what most tongues ARE. Yours is not the only possible interpretation of scripture in this matter.

None of this is relevant unless you have been to every single church that has tongues speaking. The fact that 999999 churches out of a million get it wrong does not, in itself, make it impossible that somewhere there is a church that has it right. it may make the odds against it rather high, but it does not make it impossible. At the end of the day, the ONLY issue is whether or not the Bible says tongues have ceased, and on this, clearly, there is disagreement.

I do not claim it is from God. I am an EX Charismatic and i do not like the Charismatic movement at all. I am saying that I can see no good reason from the scriptures to claim that it CANNOT happen.

Liz

 

The reason for the question wasn't because I didn't understand what the Bible says about tongues. I do understand, and agree 100% that tongues were a known language, and not gibberish.

The question was for the one's that beleive it is relevant in the church today. What is the purpose for someone to speak in tongues and then another to interpret it and speak what I can read for myself in the Bible? They aren't telling us anything that we can't find out ourselves by opeing the Bible.

 

Then you learn something new everyday.
If you don't believe me, then you tell me what 1Cor.14:21,22 means. It's a passage of Scripture Charismatic conveniently like to avoid.

It is not a matter of "rules changing." Read Acts 2 carefully. Peter says that it is a fulfillment of the prophecy given in Joel chapter 2. What happened in Acts 2 was a historical event that will never happen again. It was a fulfillment of prophecy. But read the chapter carefully. Not everything was fulfilled. Some of it is still to come.

Acts 2:16-21 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Have you seen the wonders in heaven yet: the sun turned to darkness, the moon to blood? These are yet to come.

I hate to burst your bubble, but that is a lie. It is a lie because man is fallible, and not perfect. He mistakes. His grammar is not perfect. Look at the first sentence that you wrote above. You didn't even capitalize your "i." Again, they could speak perfectly in any language in the world, without mistake in grammar or in any other area of speech. No man can do that. Plus the fact you just need to get over the Greek construction of the passage that it is a conditional phrase never meant to take as a possibility that man could speak in tongues of angels at all. He can't. Paul never had the intention of burning his body, likewise. Put things in their proper context.

Any excuse will do, will it? There is no valid proof that people speak in valid Biblical tongues today. Answer, why do missionaries still have to learn foreign languages today? If the gift of tongues was operable today, why would not God make them available to foreign missionaries.

Tongues is only one gift. Why not take up my challenge concerning healing, another sign gift. Have you yet to find a healer who can walk up and down the corridors of a hospital and heal all that are there? Please do answer.

I believe that a proper exegesis of 1Cor.13:8-13 shows that tongues have ceased. Verse 8 tells us that tongues WILL cease. Then it tells us that when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. The perfect refers to the Word of God, and the part refers to the sign gifts--tongues, prophecy and revelatory knowledge.

In addition to that your strongest argument to the fact that tongues have ceased is that the primary purpose of tongues was that it was a sign to the unbelieving Jews (1Cor.14:21,22). The verses are self-explanatory. Compare them with Isaiah 28:11,12. They are a sign to the Jews (verse 21); and a sign to them that believe not (verse 22). Put together in context they are a sign to the unbelieving Jew.
DHK

 

DHK... you stated...
"I believe that a proper exegesis of 1Cor.13:8-13 shows that tongues have ceased. Verse 8 tells us that tongues WILL cease. Then it tells us that when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. The perfect refers to the Word of God, and the part refers to the sign gifts--tongues, prophecy and revelatory knowledge."

quite incorrect mate.. unless of course...
"perfect" didn't come until ~1973... when a young
Chamorro lad prayed in a language he didnt' know..
and a sailor that did know it got saved...

cheers,
mark

 

That, of course, is the crux of the issue. the short answer is, not a lot really, unless perhaps it is specific application of scripture to some local issue.

Liz

 

It means that tongues are a sign for unbelievers. it does not specify that they HAVE to be Jewish unbelievers.

It is not a matter of "rules changing." Read Acts 2 carefully. Peter says that it is a fulfillment of the prophecy given in Joel chapter 2. What happened in Acts 2 was a historical event that will never happen again. It was a fulfillment of prophecy.[/QUOTE]

But you said women are forbidden from speaking in tongues. if that is so, why were they speaking in tongues on the day of Pentecost?

As an aside, perhaps you could tell me, as a woman, what other parts of 1 Corinthians do not apply to me, sicne you seem to think that the first 33 verses of chapter 14 don't.

That, of course, depends on your eschatology, and the fact that Peter clearly thought it was fulfilled is, frankly, alarmingly good news for the Preterists. However, I don't really see that it helps your case. It cannot be denied that the bit about both men and women prophesying WAS fulfilled, that's why Peter used that scripture and said "this is that"

Thank you so much.

Where does the Bible say THAT? Don't you think colloquial Egyptian or Ethiopian or whatever would have been sufficient of a miracle? No-one uses perfect language in speech, it would sound very odd if they did.

Are you also going to take the line that Paul never spoke in the tongues of men?

How should I know? I have already told you i am not a Charismatic. I have heard of two cases of tongues from sources i believe to be reliable which WOULD have fitted your criteria. that is enough for me to say that i don't think it totally impossible. I don't think i have ever seen it or done it either.

Why would I want to defend the charismatic movement?

That of course depends on one accepting that what is referred to IS the word of God and not, for example, heaven itself. or do you yet claim to know even as you are known, or to see God face to face?

liz

 

excellent summary Bill.. thank you.

mark

 

What do you think 1 Corinthians 1:1-4 means?