Tongues???

[zone]

"...Israel was a nation of people accustomed to signs (Matt 12:38, 1 Cor 1:20-22). Within the covenant contract they were given warning signs which would serve to indicate that the calamities which would befall them were indeed the judgements of God on them. One of the most often-seen signs was the loss of national freedom and self-rule (Deut 28:49). It is also referred to in similar context in Jer 5:15 and Isa 28:11.

In scripture after scripture, foreign tongues were a sign of covenant curse on Israel. Most often it was the language of the foreign occupiers of Israel, but at the dawn of the New Covenant it becomes especially poignant. All of this becomes relevant to the gift of tongues in the New Testament by the fact that Paul applies the sign of covenantal curse (Isa 28:11) to his explanation of the gift of tongues in 1 Cor 14:21-22. The fact that Paul lifted this scripture out of a passage dealing with covenantal curse is extremely significant! To grasp its impact you need to look at the reference Paul is quoting in his 1 Cor 14 discourse — Isa 28. In the very heart of God’s rebuke against Israel is the verse Paul quotes... the one that gives the sign of the curse (verse 11). Of course the Isaiah passage referred to the impending Assyrian invasion of Israel, but the Apostle Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, applies it further to the future and climactic judgement upon Israel subsequent to their rejection of Christ...."

"The Truth about the Gift of Tongues" by Robin Arnaud

 

[presidente]

The real problem is most of your people cannot tell the between the genuine gifts of the spirit, and the counterfeit gifts of the spirit. Popoff, is still taking in an average of $23,000,000.00 per year. It appears that almost NONE of the Charismatics can tell the difference between a real minister of GOD, and a religious con-artist.

You have the same problem, just on the other side of the spectrum, because you cannot recognize genuine spiritual gifts, or even acknowledge that certain of them exist. You think a commentator that labels the very spiritual gifts in the scriptures as pagan is on the mark.

I don't know whose giving the money to Popoff. They may not even be connected with a church, some of them. He was pretty fringe when I last heard of him, and I suspect even the preachers in the WOF movement would have him as a guest speaker.

[SUP]6 [/SUP] "I the LORD do not change.
So you, O descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed.

Words you would do well to listen to.

But I do not on a regular basis see anyone really checking these people out. I suspect that is out of fear, they will end up upsetting their own apple cart.

It's pretty vague who you are talking about. Did your apples spill out of your cart when you were looking up YouTube videos?

 

[stonesoffire]

My personal belief is that many things are tried out of presumption. Its the anointing that is said to break the yoke.

One can pray in tongues without anointing. I don't believe there are fake tongues given to any believer who is in his/her heart honestly asking for Holy Spirit to fill. But, one can have the love grow cold...grow apart...stop fellowshipping with Him.

Can one purposely try to imitate the gifts of Holy Spirit? And get away with it? Maybe for a time. But, why hath satan filled thy heart to do such a thing?

Some may know but doesn't say anything about it. We all need to stay close to the Lord then there won't be all this infighting in His body.

We must terribly grieve the Lord. Plus, we must have too much time on our hands.

 

[presidente]

"...Actually, Pentecostalism began in the nineteenth century. Two groups must be given credit here for the early occurrences, namely the Mormons of Joseph Smith and the Shakers. It will be remembered by the students of Mormonism that Joseph Smith believed in the gift of tongues along with visions, revelations, etc. To him tongues would accompany the reception of the Holy Spirit and would open the door for visionary understandings and revelations. After all, this is the way the Book of Mormon had come to him. Other historians of this movement, such as J. H. Kennedy and J. W. Gunnison, relate the unbelievable and weird episodes when this gift was claimed to have been enjoyed with the interpretations that followed. At the very best, one can only look upon this as the unbiblical braying of wide-eyed and hot-minded men. Something similar took place among the Shakers, especially with its founder, “Mother” Ann Lee who claimed that she could discourse in seventy-two languages. The gift of tongues was also accompanied by times of unspeakable joy and dancing during which many of the hymns of this movement were composed, although made up of unintelligible and unheard of words.

Pentecostalism itself cannot be dated much earlier than 1900. Some did live before that time who claimed “Pentecostal Holiness,” and “Pentecostal Fullness,” while others engaged in “Tarrying and Speaking” meetings. However, very few of these things occurred before 1900....."

Church History and the Tongues Movement by George W. Dollar

Speaking in tongues goes back to the apostles, and there are references to it hear and there in history. There are lots of references to prophecies, visions, healing, miracles, etc. The works from St. Patrick that historians would accept as genuine tell of a vision and a supernatural voice that rescued him from Ireland and sent him back as a missionary. Of course, numerous healings and miracles are attributed to him, including raising the dead.

I came across a reference to speaking in tongues at a Methodist meeting in 1801 near the University of Georgia in a book called 'The New Charismatic II.' That was pre-Mormon. There was also a movement, I think around the 1830's, in the UK and Europe, a movement that had speaking in tongues and interpretation that turned very liturgical. Pentecostalism in the US historically had roots in the Holiness Movement, not Mormonism. There were three or four Pentecostal movements in different countries that started about the same time, the US, India, and South America. Also, the UK if you count the Welsh Revival. A Pentecostal denomination grew out of that. I believe I have also read of Lutheran pietists speaking in tongues, and also among what became the evangelical free church among Scandanavians.

Modern church movements have their histories, but spiritual gifts date back to Biblical times.

 

[zone]

....I believe partial knowledge was replaced with something complete/perfect/mature .. the completed canon (bible). .

maybe this belongs in "replacement theology" thread...haha

 

[zone]

5) Tongues had a particular relevance to Jewish unbelief in light of the New Covenant. In Acts 2 the Jews in particular were called to attention (verse 12), after which they were charged with having slain the Lord of Glory (v 22-24). The two-edged sword of covenant curse fell hard upon these men, with the result that many were cut to the heart and repented (Acts 2:37) to follow Christ.

"The Truth about the Gift of Tongues" by Robin Arnaud

 

[zone]

Speaking in tongues goes back to the apostles, and there are references to it hear and there in history. There are lots of references to prophecies, visions, healing, miracles, etc. The works from St. Patrick that historians would accept as genuine tell of a vision and a supernatural voice that rescued him from Ireland and sent him back as a missionary. Of course, numerous healings and miracles are attributed to him, including raising the dead.

I came across a reference to speaking in tongues at a Methodist meeting in 1801 near the University of Georgia in a book called 'The New Charismatic II.' That was pre-Mormon. There was also a movement, I think around the 1830's, in the UK and Europe, a movement that had speaking in tongues and interpretation that turned very liturgical. Pentecostalism in the US historically had roots in the Holiness Movement, not Mormonism. There were three or four Pentecostal movements in different countries that started about the same time, the US, India, and South America. Also, the UK if you count the Welsh Revival. A Pentecostal denomination grew out of that. I believe I have also read of Lutheran pietists speaking in tongues, and also among what became the evangelical free church among Scandanavians.

Modern church movements have their histories, but spiritual gifts date back to Biblical times.

yes, the ecstatic burbling has been around all along.
what's your point? you simply made mine.

 

[Cee]

Great question my friend.

Love has come, but we do not fully know love yet.

This verse in 1 Co 13 explain what Paul means:

1 Co 13:12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

The same idea is presented here:

1 Co 8:3 But the one who loves God is known by God.

And here:

2 Co 3:18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into His image with intensifying glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

1 Co 13:1-8 (all about love)
1 Co 14:1- (all about love)

Yet you're trying to say that Paul snuck in this one verse in a very UNCLEAR manner to destroy the foundation for spiritual gifts? This is horrific Bible interpretation.







There is absolutely nothing in 1 Co 12-14 that talks about Scripture being completed. It's absolutely loaded with explanations about love. This interpretation doesn't fit the context at all.

Not to mention - we don't make a theology on ONE Scripture. That's just not proper Bible exegesis.

To think that in one verse Paul is going to destroy the foundation of spiritual giftings, right before he spends an entire chapter explaining their use (1 Co 14) makes no sense at all.

Some people today focus on this one verse (which doesn't say what they think) to ignore entire chapters of Scripture that were spoken by Jesus and Paul.

The perfect being described here is obviously love.

1 Co 13 - all about love.
1 Co 14:1 Pursue love... earnestly desire gifts...

Paul is explaining to go after love not gifts in 1 Co 12-14.

He's not saying gifts will cease when the New Testament is completed this is completely ignoring the context.

Of faith, love, and hope - the greatest is love.

That's why you follow love - not gifts.
That's why you desire prophesy in church over all the other gifts (because of love).

If you are correct Cee, I ask you. Has love not come yet ? Even perfect love ? Is this answer to this question determined individually according to ones own understanding and acceptance of it ? When that which is perfect comes, the partial will pass away. What is the "in part or partial" (that will pass away) other than that which is imperfect or incomplete ? Who was Paul speaking to .. contextually ? I'll get back to you later presidente. Lots of snow to deal with here.

1 Corinthians 13:9-13

9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways.12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.
13 So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

 

[zone]

[video=youtube;O83BV5z2ls8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O83BV5z2ls8[/video]

Published on May 12, 2013

Doc Yeager and his wife Kathleen operating In the gift of tongues and interpretation!

...

2 min 39
dunno what to say.
even when there's an interpreter, what he says doesn't add up to much

 

[presidente]

The Truth about the Gift of Tongues

"The Truth about the Gift of Tongues" by Robin Arnaud

I skimmed your link here. I noticed he said Paul knew the slave that followed him around wasn't prophesying genuinely because no apostle had imparted the gift to her. Hmmm. Talk about taking a theory and making a doctrine out of it.

The article later says,
[FONT=&quot] "ONLY the Apostles had the authority and ability to impart the gift to others through the laying on of hands or prayer."
[/FONT]
Zone, in the past 30 hours or so, you pointed out to me yourself that Timothy had a gift in him that he received through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders. It was already well established in the Old Testaments that prophets could prophesy without the apostles laying hands on them. If Thomas and Philip had a time machine and went back in time and laid hands on Moses, it certainly isn't recorded in the text.

The Bible does show that one way spiritual gifts can be imparted is through the laying on of hands of the apostles. But Saul and Barnabas were sent out on a mission, not by the laying on of hands of the apostles, but with the laying on of hands of prophets and teachers. Timothy had a gift in him that came through the laying on of Paul's hands. He had a gift in him imparted through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders. We also see in Acts 10 that men could speak in tongues presumably without Peter touching them. The spoke in tongues while he was preaching. God didn't even wait for him to baptize these people before pouring his Spirit out on them.

The Bible teaches that spiritual gifts are given as the Spirit wills. The laying on of hands of the apostles is just one means through which spiritual gifts are imparted in scripture.

And we should keep in mind that Paul said that the other apostles added nothing to him. Ananias, a disciple, laid hands on him. Ananias had come to him that he might receive his sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost. Ananias laid hands on him, not one of the twelve. Paul operated in gifts of the Spirit and imparted them to others.

 

[zone]

president,
laying on of hands didn't transmit something as if it were a virus.
lol

 

[trofimus]

[video=youtube;O83BV5z2ls8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O83BV5z2ls8[/video]

Published on May 12, 2013

Doc Yeager and his wife Kathleen operating In the gift of tongues and interpretation!

...

2 min 39
dunno what to say.
even when there's an interpreter, what he says doesn't add up to much

she says 3 sentences and he "interprets" it very freely like 15 or more...

 

[Cee]

Are you saying they are out of their minds, zone?

1 Co 14:23If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?

Acts 2:15 For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day.

It appears people in Paul's day thought the same thing about believers that many do today, hmm.

[video=youtube;O83BV5z2ls8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O83BV5z2ls8[/video]

Published on May 12, 2013

Doc Yeager and his wife Kathleen operating In the gift of tongues and interpretation!

...

2 min 39
dunno what to say.
even when there's an interpreter, what he says doesn't add up to much

 

[Cee]

president,
laying on of hands didn't transmit something as if it were a virus.
lol

No? Then what does impartation mean, zone?

 

[Demi777]

well lol there is a difference between interpreting and translating..

she says 3 sentences and he "interprets" it very freely like 15 or more...

 

[trofimus]

well lol there is a difference between interpreting and translating..

Should not be. There is no gift of "interpretation" in the bible. But "translation".

For what the "translator" is doing in the video, the woman does not have to speak at all. He will talk what he wants.

 

[88]

The gift of interpretation of tongues is not a word for word translation---it is revealing the heart of God---it is equal to the gift of prophecy...

 

[trofimus]

The gift of interpretation of tongues is not a word for word translation---it is revealing the heart of God---it is equal to the gift of prophecy...

In that case nobody had to speak in tongues before the one with "prophecy".

 

[Cee]

1 Co 1:20 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in various tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.

Should not be. There is no gift of "interpretation" in the bible. But "translation".

For what the "translator" is doing in the video, the woman does not have to speak at all. He will talk what he wants.

 

[Cee]

In that case nobody had to speak in tongues before the one with "prophecy".

Tongues is speaking to God not people. Prophesy is speaking to people. That's why Paul would rather speak prophesy in church. And no one understands tongues, but God.