A NON-CHARISMATIC UNDERSTANDING OF TONGUES
- Thread starter VCO
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
1 Corinthians 14:21-22 (NIV)
21 In the Law it is written: "Through men of strange tongues and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people [ISRAEL], but even then they will not listen to me," says the Lord.
22 Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers.
Do you not understand plain English?
Most Penetcostals and Charismatics want to call TONGUES a GIFT, and even think tongues is a really the same thing, but I do not see GIFT connected with TONGUES, and their tongues is actually an imatation of the real thing. YES, TONGUES, is a Spiritual THING, associated with the HOLY SPIRIT. BUT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL THE VERSES that associated with TONGUES to find out what their Purpose was and for WHOM THEY WERE TO BENEFIT. I showed you a NUMBER OF TIMES, but you continue to ignore it. That is your problem, not mine.
Perhaps my Faith is stronger than yours, because I DO NOT NEED TONGUES or your tongues to believe. I absolutely think that Pentecostals and Charismatics, have FALLEN for Counterfeit, making them even more susceptible to have their mouths while using their imitation tongues to be used by Satan, just like PETER, which makes it even more of a REASON WHY I WILL NEVER USE tongues. My LOVE for CHRIST IS AS INTENSE AS IT CAN GET. So we are done here, with this discussion.
John 5:24 (ESV)
24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
-
2
-
1
- Show all
You do know that the KJV was not TRANSLATION, but PARAPHRASE of Older English Bibles, don't you?
The Original 1611 Translators admitted in their Original 1611 Preface:
You have got to be kidding me? You really NEED to READ the Original Preface of the 1611 KJV, they admitted that they paraphrased lots of it from earlier English Versions. I think you will find you have put the KJV on WAY TOO HIGH OF A PEDISTAL. Here, I have pulled some excerpts out for you:
The Translators To The Reader
Zeale to promote the common good, whether it be by devising any thing our selves, or revising that which hath bene laboured by others, . . .
. . .
But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknowen tongue? . . . so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readinesse. . .
. . .
Yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to them, to take that which they found, (the same being for the greatest part true and sufficient) rather then by making a new, in that new world and greene age of the Church, to expose themselves to many exceptions and cavillations, as though they made a Translation to serve their owne turne, and therefore bearing witnesse to themselves, their witnesse not to be regarded. This may be supposed to bee some cause, why the Translation of the Seventie was allowed to passe for currant. . . . he holdeth the Authours thereof not onely for Interpreters, but also for Prophets in some respect: and Justinian the Emperour enjoyning the Jewes his subjects to use specially the Translation of the Seventie, rendreth this reason thereof, because they were as it were enlighted with propheticall grace. . . .
. . .
(and Saint Jerome affirmeth as much) that the Seventie were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to adde to the Originall, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sence thereof according to the trueth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greeke Translations of the old Testament. . . .
. . .
There were also within a few hundreth yeeres after CHRIST, translations many into the Latine tongue: for this tongue also was very fit to convey the Law and the Gospel by, because in those times very many Countreys of the West, yea of the South, East and North, spake or understood Latine, being made Provinces to the Romanes. But now the Latine Translations were too many to be all good, . . . Now the Church of Rome . . . Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the peoples understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confesse, that wee forced them to translate it into English against their wills. . . .
. . .
And to the same effect say wee, that we are so farre off from condemning any of their labours that traveiled before us in this kinde, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henries time, or King Edwards (if there were any translation, or correction of a translation in his time) or Queene Elizabeths of ever-renoumed memorie, that we acknowledge them to have beene raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posteritie in everlasting remembrance. . . .
. . .
Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfited at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen by their labours, doe endevour to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade our selves, if they were alive, would thanke us. . . .
. . .
to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this meanes it commeth to passe, that whatsoever is sound alreadie (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours farre better then their autentike vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also if any thing be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the originall, the same may bee corrected, and the trueth set in place. . . .
. . .
Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest { poorest } translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. . . .
. . .
Yet before we end, we must answere a third cavill and objection of theirs against us, for altering and amending our Taanslations [sic] so oft; wherein truely they deale hardly, and strangely with us. { The very same thing you do to MODERN Translations. } For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to goe over that which hee had done, and to amend it where he saw cause? . . .
. . .
But the difference that appeareth betweene our Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing that wee are specially charged with; let us see therefore whether they themselves bee without fault this way, (if it be to be counted a fault, to correct) and whether they bee fit men to throw stones at us: But it is high time to leave them, and to shew in briefe what wee proposed to our selves, and what course we held in this our perusall and survay of the Bible. Truly (good Christian Reader) wee never thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, (for then the imputation of Sixtus had bene true in some sort, that our people had bene fed with gall of Dragons in stead of wine, with whey in stead of milke, but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeavour, that our marke. . . . { That makes it a PARAPHRASE and not an actual Translation from the original languages. }
http://www.kjvbibles.com/kjpreface.htm
Note the LINK ABOVE, no longer works. Here are a couple that do work:The Translators To The Reader
Zeale to promote the common good, whether it be by devising any thing our selves, or revising that which hath bene laboured by others, . . .
. . .
But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknowen tongue? . . . so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readinesse. . .
. . .
Yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to them, to take that which they found, (the same being for the greatest part true and sufficient) rather then by making a new, in that new world and greene age of the Church, to expose themselves to many exceptions and cavillations, as though they made a Translation to serve their owne turne, and therefore bearing witnesse to themselves, their witnesse not to be regarded. This may be supposed to bee some cause, why the Translation of the Seventie was allowed to passe for currant. . . . he holdeth the Authours thereof not onely for Interpreters, but also for Prophets in some respect: and Justinian the Emperour enjoyning the Jewes his subjects to use specially the Translation of the Seventie, rendreth this reason thereof, because they were as it were enlighted with propheticall grace. . . .
. . .
(and Saint Jerome affirmeth as much) that the Seventie were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to adde to the Originall, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sence thereof according to the trueth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greeke Translations of the old Testament. . . .
. . .
There were also within a few hundreth yeeres after CHRIST, translations many into the Latine tongue: for this tongue also was very fit to convey the Law and the Gospel by, because in those times very many Countreys of the West, yea of the South, East and North, spake or understood Latine, being made Provinces to the Romanes. But now the Latine Translations were too many to be all good, . . . Now the Church of Rome . . . Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the peoples understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confesse, that wee forced them to translate it into English against their wills. . . .
. . .
And to the same effect say wee, that we are so farre off from condemning any of their labours that traveiled before us in this kinde, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henries time, or King Edwards (if there were any translation, or correction of a translation in his time) or Queene Elizabeths of ever-renoumed memorie, that we acknowledge them to have beene raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posteritie in everlasting remembrance. . . .
. . .
Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfited at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen by their labours, doe endevour to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade our selves, if they were alive, would thanke us. . . .
. . .
to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this meanes it commeth to passe, that whatsoever is sound alreadie (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours farre better then their autentike vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also if any thing be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the originall, the same may bee corrected, and the trueth set in place. . . .
. . .
Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest { poorest } translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. . . .
. . .
Yet before we end, we must answere a third cavill and objection of theirs against us, for altering and amending our Taanslations [sic] so oft; wherein truely they deale hardly, and strangely with us. { The very same thing you do to MODERN Translations. } For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to goe over that which hee had done, and to amend it where he saw cause? . . .
. . .
But the difference that appeareth betweene our Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing that wee are specially charged with; let us see therefore whether they themselves bee without fault this way, (if it be to be counted a fault, to correct) and whether they bee fit men to throw stones at us: But it is high time to leave them, and to shew in briefe what wee proposed to our selves, and what course we held in this our perusall and survay of the Bible. Truly (good Christian Reader) wee never thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, (for then the imputation of Sixtus had bene true in some sort, that our people had bene fed with gall of Dragons in stead of wine, with whey in stead of milke, but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeavour, that our marke. . . . { That makes it a PARAPHRASE and not an actual Translation from the original languages. }
http://www.kjvbibles.com/kjpreface.htm
https://library.osu.edu/innovation-...bible/sidebars/the-translators-preface-to-the
http://www.ccel.org/bible/kjv/preface/pref1.htm
K
Brother your dogmatic view has made you blind. Your faith may indeed be stronger than mine but it has nothing to do with lack of tongues. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of tongues and their purpose.
1 Corinthians 14:2 2For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit.
Where does that speak of unbelieving Jews?
1 Corinthians 14:5 5I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified.
Again, no mention of unbelieving Jews.
1 Corinthians 14:26 26What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up.
Building up the church, it does not mention unbelieving Jews.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
VCO, I was thinking of making a thread on this topic just because of people's misunderstanding of tongues as it relates to edification and its use, individually and corporately. I wanted to respond here as well though, because often times people keep bringing up the same verses without really considering the entire context.
Tongues indeed are a sign to unbelievers, but the gift of tongues is not meant to be a sign (only), but a tool of edification just as the other gifts of the Spirit (for the Body of Christ, the Church, your brothers and sisters in Christ). Read for yourself 1 Corinthians 12. Among the manifestations mentioned for use amongst the members of the Body is tongues. How then do you say that tongues is only for the Israelites or the unbeliever? It is to be used for the edification of the Church. Case in point...
1 Corinthians 14:5 King James Version (KJV)
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.
The whole point of 1 Corinthians 14 is the edification of the Body of Christ. Here tongues is even put on par with prophecy if interpreted (that the church may receive edifying). To say that tongues is only for unbelievers, or even just a sign, one would have to be willingly ignorant of the many verses that say that it is for the edification of the Church (believers).
Tongues is not just a sign to unbelievers or some evangelistic tool whereby a person speaks in a tongue unknown to them (though it can serve that purpose at the Lord's discretion) but is multifaceted. It serves multiple purposes. You can pray in the Spirit, sing in the Spirit, and minister in the Spirit. 1 Corinthians 14:28 even implies that though the tongue speaker ought to keep silent in the church without an interpreter, he should speak to himself and to God (in tongues). Not to mention 1 Corinthians 14:15-19, where the apostle Paul makes mention of praying and singing in tongues, even suggesting he speaks in tongues outside of the church ("yet in the church").
1 Corinthians 14, and even 12, make it clear that tongues is not just a sign to unbelievers or to Israel. It is a tool used to edify others, and even self. To minister corporately, and even privately in fellowship with God.
1 Corinthians 14:39 King James Version (KJV)
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
Tongues indeed are a sign to unbelievers, but the gift of tongues is not meant to be a sign (only), but a tool of edification just as the other gifts of the Spirit (for the Body of Christ, the Church, your brothers and sisters in Christ). Read for yourself 1 Corinthians 12. Among the manifestations mentioned for use amongst the members of the Body is tongues. How then do you say that tongues is only for the Israelites or the unbeliever? It is to be used for the edification of the Church. Case in point...
1 Corinthians 14:5 King James Version (KJV)
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.
The whole point of 1 Corinthians 14 is the edification of the Body of Christ. Here tongues is even put on par with prophecy if interpreted (that the church may receive edifying). To say that tongues is only for unbelievers, or even just a sign, one would have to be willingly ignorant of the many verses that say that it is for the edification of the Church (believers).
Tongues is not just a sign to unbelievers or some evangelistic tool whereby a person speaks in a tongue unknown to them (though it can serve that purpose at the Lord's discretion) but is multifaceted. It serves multiple purposes. You can pray in the Spirit, sing in the Spirit, and minister in the Spirit. 1 Corinthians 14:28 even implies that though the tongue speaker ought to keep silent in the church without an interpreter, he should speak to himself and to God (in tongues). Not to mention 1 Corinthians 14:15-19, where the apostle Paul makes mention of praying and singing in tongues, even suggesting he speaks in tongues outside of the church ("yet in the church").
1 Corinthians 14, and even 12, make it clear that tongues is not just a sign to unbelievers or to Israel. It is a tool used to edify others, and even self. To minister corporately, and even privately in fellowship with God.
1 Corinthians 14:39 King James Version (KJV)
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
-
2
- Show all
Every single time the Apostles spoke in TONGUES unbelieving JEWS unbelieving JEWS heard in there OWN dialectos. That includes at Cornelius' house. The unbelieving Jews were the JEWISH CHRISTIANS THAT CAME ALONG WITH PETER. THEY DID NOT BELIEVE GOD CAN SAVE GENTILES LIKE HE DID THE JEWISH BELIEVERS.
GOOD BYE.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Who would disagree? Yet, how do you reconcile the use of tongues within the Body of Christ, with the gift of interpretation? How do you reconcile that one can pray, a private matter, in tongues? This isn't just for evangelistic matters. It is even for worship.
1 Corinthians 14:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
Do you see? You are only representing one aspect of tongues, and not the other uses.
1 Corinthians 14:4 King James Version (KJV)
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
How is it that the tongue speaker edifies himself, and yet it is only an evangelistic tool to witness to the unbeliever? There is a contradiction that bangs against your whole notion friend. It not only was used to minister to the Jew, but also the believer, the gentile (for the church is made up of both Jew and Gentile, one new man).
1 Corinthians 14:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
Do you see? You are only representing one aspect of tongues, and not the other uses.
1 Corinthians 14:4 King James Version (KJV)
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
How is it that the tongue speaker edifies himself, and yet it is only an evangelistic tool to witness to the unbeliever? There is a contradiction that bangs against your whole notion friend. It not only was used to minister to the Jew, but also the believer, the gentile (for the church is made up of both Jew and Gentile, one new man).
-
1
- Show all
E
Sigh, Your doing like so many people. And taking a phrase or word and trying to make it out to be some magical physical whatever you think it is and not taking the words as they are spoken to see what is going on
Again, When the Holy Spirit came, Diverse languages came as fire on all the people. And everyone heard the m speak the word to them in their native language. Nothing more nothing less
This AGAIN is most likely what happened in ALL cases of tongues mentioned, This was used as a SIGN to show this NEW covenant which was being preached. To give it credability that it is not just 12 people trying to make up something new, but it is from God.
So God can not use a gift of tongues to make sure a person hears the word of God and can come to salvation?
Sorry brother, I can not agree with you.
Again, When the Holy Spirit came, Diverse languages came as fire on all the people. And everyone heard the m speak the word to them in their native language. Nothing more nothing less
This AGAIN is most likely what happened in ALL cases of tongues mentioned, This was used as a SIGN to show this NEW covenant which was being preached. To give it credability that it is not just 12 people trying to make up something new, but it is from God.
So God can not use a gift of tongues to make sure a person hears the word of God and can come to salvation?
Sorry brother, I can not agree with you.
G
Hmmmm..... I'm no scholar, but I would like to interject something here just as an observation from personal experience. I wholeheartedly believe in the infallible, eternal, will, wisdom and unlimited power of God. I also believe that God is not arbitrary and doesn't do anything without purpose. I once attended a non-charismatic service where someone in the back of the church interrupted the sermon "in tongues" and then someone else across the room gave an interpretation. At the time the hair on the back of my neck stood up and I was highly impressed. But today I can't even remember what the sermon was about or what that message was. I've also attended highly charismatic services where people were babbling, wailing, and falling out all over the place. But then I only left the services with a question, "What purpose did that serve?" I think it's useless to debate the Biblical validity of spiritual gifts.... But, as Christians, if we cannot discern the purpose of those gifts then we should certainly question their use.
K
Hey brother,long time no see!!
You made the point I was trying to make more clearly. In the verses I provided it shows that tongues have more than one use,not just to unbelievers.Any time we take one verse and make a doctrine out of it we are making a mistake. Everything must be in context. Thanks for posting.-
1
- Show all
K
No,that is untrue. I posted verses to prove that there were places that tongues were used and there were no unbelieving Jews there. So either the Bible is right or you are. And I take His Word over any man's word. You are wrong but won't admit it. It's sad when people are so stubborn they refuse to see when they have made a mistake and would rather be in error than admit they are wrong.
K
The people that interrupted the sermon were out of order, Acts makes clear the order in which tongues are to be used. Just because people are arrogant and misuse this gift doesn't make it false. As in the testimony I gave where the man heard the way to salvation in his own language and became saved, tongues has a purpose. Misuse of it is on the person doing so, it doesn't discredit the ones doing so correctly and in order.
-
2
- Show all
VCO won't see this, but for the rest of you, the idea that tongues are for Jews who don't believe that Gentiles can be saved is fundamentally different than the idea that tongues are for Jews who don't believe the gospel at all.
Acts 10 completely undermines VCO's argument. Instead of acknowledging that fact, he has made up a fantasy to avoid dealing with it.
Acts 10 completely undermines VCO's argument. Instead of acknowledging that fact, he has made up a fantasy to avoid dealing with it.
-
2
- Show all
K
So we will share it so VCO does see it!
Acts 10
There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of what was called the Italian [a]Regiment, 2 a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave [b]alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always. 3 About [c]the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God coming in and saying to him, “Cornelius!”
4 And when he observed him, he was afraid, and said, “What is it, lord?”
So he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have come up for a memorial before God. 5 Now send men to Joppa, and send for Simon whose surname is Peter. 6 He is lodging with Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the sea. He will tell you what you must do.”
Skipping to verse 9
9 The next day, as they went on their journey and drew near the city, Peter went up on the housetop to pray, about [e]the sixth hour. 10 Then he became very hungry and wanted to eat; but while they made ready, he fell into a trance 11 and saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth. 12 In it were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. 13 And a voice came to him, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.”
14 But Peter said, “Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean.”
15 And a voice spoke to him again the second time, “What God has [f]cleansed you must not call common.” 16 This was done three times. And the object was taken up into heaven again.
On to verse 21
21 Then Peter went down to the men [h]who had been sent to him from Cornelius, and said, “Yes, I am he whom you seek. For what reason have you come?”
22 And they said, “Cornelius the centurion, a just man, one who fears God and has a good reputation among all the nation of the Jews, was divinely instructed by a holy angel to summon you to his house, and to hear words from you.” 23 Then he invited them in and lodged them.
On the next day Peter went away with them, and some brethren from Joppa accompanied him.
Verse 25
25 As Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying, “Stand up; I myself am also a man.” 27 And as he talked with him, he went in and found many who had come together. 28 Then he said to them, “You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean. 29 Therefore I came without objection as soon as I was sent for. I ask, then, for what reason have you sent for me?”
30 So Cornelius said, [i]“Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing, 31 and said, ‘Cornelius, your prayer has been heard, and your [j]alms are remembered in the sight of God. 32 Send therefore to Joppa and call Simon here, whose surname is Peter. He is lodging in the house of Simon, a tanner, by the sea. [k]When he comes, he will speak to you.’ 33 So I sent to you immediately, and you have done well to come. Now therefore, we are all present before God, to hear all the things commanded you by God.”
Verse 44
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.
Then Peter answered, 47 “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
VCO no where in this Chapter does it speak of unbelieving Jews. These are Gentiles who believe in God and through Peter receive the gift of tongues. What was the purpose of tongues in this situation? It tells us it was to magnify God. No unbelieving Jews in sight. You must take all of the Word in context,you don't make doctrine from one verse.
-
1
- Show all
E
don’t take this wrong sis.
I agree with you and the rest, These are not unbelieving jews.
However, even though they believed and feared God. Peter gave them the gospel and they were all SAVED, As when this happened, they were given the HS who sealed them, And also gifted them.
The gifts were more for Peters and the “circumcized” benefit. Not the benefit of the new gentile believers. However, I am sure it did edify them also.
I agree with you and the rest, These are not unbelieving jews.
However, even though they believed and feared God. Peter gave them the gospel and they were all SAVED, As when this happened, they were given the HS who sealed them, And also gifted them.
The gifts were more for Peters and the “circumcized” benefit. Not the benefit of the new gentile believers. However, I am sure it did edify them also.
I'll repeat my oft told story about Vicki.
While praying PRIVATELY in the Spirit, I received a vision of her under attack from satan and his minions. So I prayed (still in the Spirit) that the demons be bound and silenced, and that angels be sent to her to take her to a place of safety. This was a period of time in prayer, not just a quick sentence). Later on, when we crossed paths a coupe weeks later, not knowing anything about my prayer, she told how she had been in dire straits at that exact same time, and was just about to start cutting her wrists (again) when something, according to her words, took her by the arm, dragged her down to her car, where she drove to a beach. At the beach she came to a bench with a Bible left on it, and as she was reading it, she was met by people who ministered to her.
So here's the test:
1. I was praying privately in tongues as the Bible prescribes.
2. I received knowledge/wisdom/revelation (whatever you want to cal it).
3. I prayed (still in tongues) a response to that information.
4. The subject of the prayer was removed from the danger and taken to a place where she was ministered to and told about redemption in Christ.
I'm pretty sure satan wouldn't have sent her to be ministered about Christ.
So, now, anyone care to say this use of tongues was inspired by demons???
While praying PRIVATELY in the Spirit, I received a vision of her under attack from satan and his minions. So I prayed (still in the Spirit) that the demons be bound and silenced, and that angels be sent to her to take her to a place of safety. This was a period of time in prayer, not just a quick sentence). Later on, when we crossed paths a coupe weeks later, not knowing anything about my prayer, she told how she had been in dire straits at that exact same time, and was just about to start cutting her wrists (again) when something, according to her words, took her by the arm, dragged her down to her car, where she drove to a beach. At the beach she came to a bench with a Bible left on it, and as she was reading it, she was met by people who ministered to her.
So here's the test:
1. I was praying privately in tongues as the Bible prescribes.
2. I received knowledge/wisdom/revelation (whatever you want to cal it).
3. I prayed (still in tongues) a response to that information.
4. The subject of the prayer was removed from the danger and taken to a place where she was ministered to and told about redemption in Christ.
I'm pretty sure satan wouldn't have sent her to be ministered about Christ.
So, now, anyone care to say this use of tongues was inspired by demons???
-
3
- Show all