yes I think it really is, this is what matters I just don't think speaking in tongues is for me or everyone just some that's all
The Purpose of Speaking in Tongues
- Thread starter KelbyofGod
- 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.
yes I think it really is, this is what matters I just don't think speaking in tongues is for me or everyone just some that's all
When Jesus spoke, he was speaking things into existence. This is similar to how the prophets functioned.
There were many promises spoken into the world even thousands of years before we see the manifestation of those promises. Joel's prophecy is an example. It was the word of God as soon as it was spoken, and it was spoken regarding everyone no matter who was in the audience at the time. Also, it had to wait for certain events before it could be in full effect. So it is with Mark 16:17 and also what Jesus said to the woman at the well, saying "they that worship him must worship in Spirit and in truth". These promises (the same promise, really) had to wait for the outpouring of the Holy Ghost to be fulfilled.
And even though a promise has been spoken into existence that doesn't mean that people can say "I've already got the manifestation of that promise". They have to wait for the manifestation, as Jesus said.
(That probably wasn't the clearest explanation. )
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Yes, so to confirm, with the words I bolded, you believe that no matter what Jesus spoke in the 4 gospels, it was also directed to everyone, Jews and Gentiles?
Even though you encounter verses like Matthew 10:5 and Matthew 15:24, you still hold on to that view?
I would offer seeing we are to know no man after the flesh we have the understanding God is no respecter of corrupted flesh and blood and neither is he served by it. The way of the gentiles in that parable is the "way of the flesh". Those with no faith that comes from Christ working in them to both will and do his good pleasure . Cities represents sects or denominations.
These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Mathew 5:5-6
Going rather to the lost sheep those who need to hear the gospel, men in all nations. Our Father renamed his bride Israel a more befitting name. Christian, word with no other meaning meaning "residents of the city of Christ" prepared as the bride made up of all nations. Named after it founder Christ.
The parable in Luke 9 sheds some light on it, I believe. Its the last of a series of parables when Christ hid the gospel understanding to teach the apostles how to walk by faith the unseen eternal.
The apostles acted in the "way of the gentiles" desiring that God bring down fire and not the gospel rather destroy them .Out of sight out of mind ( the foundation of paganism) You could say the same kind of false hope Jonas had ,God moved both apostles new and old testament to work to will and do his god pleasure. It seems they were kicking against the pricks . Ouch.
Philippians 2:12-13 says to believe without murmuring. he informed them they knew not what manner of spirit they were of (the way of the gentiles.)
51 And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem,
52 And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him.
53 And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem.
54 And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?
55 But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.
In shortest answer "Yes" but I'm not sure what I said earlier was clear enough to convey the meaning I'd intended.
Until the perfect sacrifice (of Jesus) was made for all men, the Gentiles were (for the most part) excluded from the promises. The promises had already been made but we're inaccessible until the sacrifice was complete.
The woman whose situation Jesus was addressing in Matthew 15:24 was a Gentile. Jesus was clarifying his current purpose (and was possibly also testing her faith+resolve) but shouldn't be taken to completely exclude Gentiles. His words appeared to exclude her from receiving his help, but her faith (accurate belief and trust) was that there was indeed a way past the obstacles. If she was wrong and Jesus' service could ONLY be for those who already were qualified (the Jews), then she would have been sent away without relief.
But even though Jesus' words were spoken and were truth, the truth did indeed include an avenue for those who were at first excluded... (Gentiles, like herself) ... which was proven to be a correct concept when Jesus (who said he was only sent to the lost sheep of the house of Isreal) provided service to her, a Gentile.
I think it is brilliant presentation that the idea of "Jesus promises CAN'T be for the Gentiles" didn't make it past the very first Gentile already standing in his presence at the time he spoke of this first/primary purpose. Plus, it was the Jew's rejection of Jesus purpose that opened it up even further to the Gentiles. So cool.
And to refer it back to the OP of this thread... it was speaking in tongues at the outpouring of the Holy Ghost to the Gentiles in Acts 10:44 that proved (Acts 10:45-46) Jesus words (in Matthew 10:5 and 15:24) also allowed (a soon to be manifest) full deliverance to the Gentiles as a whole ... (both remission of sins through baptism in water, and inclusion into the kingdom of God through baptism in the Holy Ghost). The words and promises were already in place but, again, the sacrifice still needed to be made before manifestation of the inclusion of Gentiles could occur (would be shown and known).
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Fair enough I can understand where you are coming from
So those who have different point of view with you regarding this issue, they distinguished between the gospel to Israel, and the gospel to the body of Christ
Differences pre-sacrifice or differences after Jesus' sacrifice? (I think only for clarification, not argument, but I might inquire further.)
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Some believe the body of Christ began when Jesus came, as you do.
Some believe It was after the cross
Some believe at acts 2
Some believe after Paul was saved.
Many that walk by sight after the temporal things seen .And do not view it as a demonstration of a work that has been finished as the lamb slain from before the foundation of the world.
The flesh of the demonstration did not profit for salvation . There will be no more demonstrations .One is all that was promises.
Abel like us today had the Spirit of Christ working in him to both will and do the good pleasure of God. Abel is the first mentioned member of the bride of Christ. The first prophet sent as a apostle and first listed martyr.
A demonstration of the unseen Spirit and of power:
The woman was used to help us understand what "lost sheep of the house of Israel" means. It is not in respect to a outward Jew born of the flesh, the temporal. But a inward Jew born again of the Spirit the eternal .
The faith of Christ that she had in her earthly body of death moved he to both will and do the good pleasure. Jesus said O woman, great is thy faith
not of herself)"lost sheep of the house of Israel" used in that parable. It represents natural unconverted mankind. Or you could say the doctor (Christ) was sent to those who need a doctor .Not those who think they have no need. Those who heal themselves by comparing themselves by themselves (no faith) .The lost sheep of the house of Israel"
2 Corinthians 10:12 For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise.
I've been thinking about this post for a while... and I think you should move me into the Acts 2 category ( if I am understanding the intent of your question correctly).
TECHNICALLY (and according to how "I " would be defining the "body of Christ") I should be in the first category because I would be including Jesus' physical body in my definition"... Kind of like I include the Holy Ghost itself/himself when I get technical about "spiritual gifts" (as opposed to the looser definition most people use, which only includes the ancillary spiritual gifts like diversities of tongues, prophecy, etc).
BUT, I'm guessing you mean "When do the disciples, followers, and believers get to be included in the phrase 'the body of Christ?'" (using a definition that excludes Jesus himself from the definition). And with that definition, I would/should be moved into the Acts 2 category because it is the Acts 2 (Pentecostal) event that puts the Holy Ghost into the body of the believer, making the believer become the BODY [the physical container] OF [containing] CHRIST [the anointed and his anointing]. <-- I hope you read everything after the "because" again a few times... first only with the underlined, and then only with the [bracketed].
Until that point each believer, follower, wonderer, seeker, person or disciple is simply just a believer, follower, wonderer, seeker, person or disciple that ought to be being taught and encouraged to wait, tarry, seek & pray until they too receive the promise of the Holy Ghost, which is a promise to ALL that God calls (per Acts 2:38,39) as well as them being taught to "Arise and be baptized, washing away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord".
That particular doctrine passes all the tests presented by the examples given in the book of Acts without needing to say "Well, the book of Acts (the word of God) was just a transitionary phase and doesn't apply today".
NOTE: That was kind of a heavy post and you are welcome to think about it a while before responding. You'll notice I sometimes take days before answering. That isn't to be considered weakness. It's part of "Be swift to hear, SLOW to speak".
It gives more time for prayer and pondering.Love in Jesus,
Kelby
That seems well-said.
Some branches may have been natural, some grafted in, but it's all one vine.
Some children may be through natural birthright, some through adoption, but we're all joint-heirs after that.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
I've been thinking about this post for a while... and I think you should move me into the Acts 2 category ( if I am understanding the intent of your question correctly).
TECHNICALLY (and according to how "I " would be defining the "body of Christ") I should be in the first category because I would be including Jesus' physical body in my definition"... Kind of like I include the Holy Ghost itself/himself when I get technical about "spiritual gifts" (as opposed to the looser definition most people use, which only includes the ancillary spiritual gifts like diversities of tongues, prophecy, etc).
BUT, I'm guessing you mean "When do the disciples, followers, and believers get to be included in the phrase 'the body of Christ?'" (using a definition that excludes Jesus himself from the definition). And with that definition, I would/should be moved into the Acts 2 category because it is the Acts 2 (Pentecostal) event that puts the Holy Ghost into the body of the believer, making the believer become the BODY [the physical container] OF [containing] CHRIST [the anointed and his anointing]. <-- I hope you read everything after the "because" again a few times... first only with the underlined, and then only with the [bracketed].
Until that point each believer, follower, wonderer, seeker, person or disciple is simply just a believer, follower, wonderer, seeker, person or disciple that ought to be being taught and encouraged to wait, tarry, seek & pray until they too receive the promise of the Holy Ghost, which is a promise to ALL that God calls (per Acts 2:38,39) as well as them being taught to "Arise and be baptized, washing away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord".
That particular doctrine passes all the tests presented by the examples given in the book of Acts without needing to say "Well, the book of Acts (the word of God) was just a transitionary phase and doesn't apply today".
NOTE: That was kind of a heavy post and you are welcome to think about it a while before responding. You'll notice I sometimes take days before answering. That isn't to be considered weakness. It's part of "Be swift to hear, SLOW to speak".
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Yep, most Christians I know either take Acts 2 or immediately when the veil at the temple was torn.
That is how they resolve, in their minds, verses like Matthew 10:5 and Matthew 15:24. That was pre-cross, so yes they agree that Gentiles were excluded from Jesus's earthly commands to the Jews.
But after that, everything else applies, including this topic, tongues.
They would exempt themselves from Acts 4:32 though, saying that only when the Lord specifically tells you to do it, then it applies.
My first thought was "What is in Acts 4 that a Christian would run from?". So thanks for coming up with something new to me.Yep, most Christians I know either take Acts 2 or immediately when the veil at the temple was torn.
That is how they resolve, in their minds, verses like Matthew 10:5 and Matthew 15:24. That was pre-cross, so yes they agree that Gentiles were excluded from Jesus's earthly commands to the Jews.
But after that, everything else applies, including this topic, tongues.
They would exempt themselves from Acts 4:32 though, saying that only when the Lord specifically tells you to do it, then it applies.
I see two things about Acts 4:32,34-35. (Well 3 things now that I reviewed it again.)
- Acts 4:32 was a voluntary action, not a commandment.
- To whom would they (now) give the collective offering? (because that was ALL Christians wide, not just one group). And a much more important question to me would be...
- Why aren't they/we aligning ourselves with Acts 4:31? (Especially those who claim to love God.) God hasn't banned prayer. And Luke 11:13 is still in effect.
And don't be hasty to claim you know because you should expect to be asked for a VERY clear explanation if you do.
I'll go even further by stating that most 'Christians' don't even know how to tell who even HAS the Holy Ghost in their own congregation even though the Romans 8:9 says "if any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his"! They should want to know this also for 3 reasons:
- To know who still needs to become a Christian (so they can be praying for them).
- Who is and isn't in the body of Christ (so they don't get deceived). And perhaps most importantly...
- So they know for sure whether they themselves are actually Christians. And again, if a person doesn't know how they in Jerusalem knew that the Samaritans had NOT yet received the Holy Ghost in Acts 8:14-16 (without it being specifically spelled out) then they likely don't actually know how to recognize the Holy Ghost (or lack of the Holy Ghost) in themselves.
I guess on a last review of Acts 4:31-35 it seems that Acts 4:31 is fulfilling the first most important commandment of "Love God" and Acts 4:32,34-45 is fulfilling the 2nd "Love thy neighbor as thyself".
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
My first thought was "What is in Acts 4 that a Christian would run from?". So thanks for coming up with something new to me.
I see two things about Acts 4:32,34-35. (Well 3 things now that I reviewed it again.)
It appears to me that Acts 4:32-35 were natural outcomes of fulfillment of Acts 4:31 and/or the first part of 32. But most 'Christians' don't even know what is meant by the phrase "being FILLED with the Holy Ghost" as opposed to the initial infilling/outpouring/baptism of.
- Acts 4:32 was a voluntary action, not a commandment.
- To whom would they (now) give the collective offering? (because that was ALL Christians wide, not just one group). And a much more important question to me would be...
- Why aren't they/we aligning ourselves with Acts 4:31? (Especially those who claim to love God.) God hasn't banned prayer. And Luke 11:13 is still in effect.
And don't be hasty to claim you know because you should expect to be asked for a VERY clear explanation if you do.
I'll go even further by stating that most 'Christians' don't even know how to tell who even HAS the Holy Ghost in their own congregation even though the Romans 8:9 says "if any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his"! They should want to know this also for 3 reasons:
I was going to ask what your thoughts are on who is to be included in the body of Christ, and when, but this post is long enough and I'm concerned that some will think this post was somehow a distraction tactic or that I was offended by your question. (neither are true). So it might be best to answer that in a separate reply. Either way, thanks for the questions and replies.
- To know who still needs to become a Christian (so they can be praying for them).
- Who is and isn't in the body of Christ (so they don't get deceived). And perhaps most importantly...
- So they know for sure whether they themselves are actually Christians. And again, if a person doesn't know how they in Jerusalem knew that the Samaritans had NOT yet received the Holy Ghost in Acts 8:14-16 (without it being specifically spelled out) then they likely don't actually know how to recognize the Holy Ghost (or lack of the Holy Ghost) in themselves.
I guess on a last review of Acts 4:31-35 it seems that Acts 4:31 is fulfilling the first most important commandment of "Love God" and Acts 4:32,34-45 is fulfilling the 2nd "Love thy neighbor as thyself".
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
I would think every time we do not harden our hearts in unbelief .But rather mix the unseen eternal things with those seen the temporal we have heard the gospel
Hebrews 4 King James Version (KJV) Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
We do rest in Christ as he works in us with us to do the good will .(the filling of the Spirit).
When we try and divide the filling an assume he gives remnants of it we do despite to the filling. It is a one time filling at our new birth and the fullness of the spirit that works in us each time. Empowering us so we can love our neighbor.
Sort of.
I would have expanded the spiritual category into 2 more branches. But What you said here is still the jist of my understanding. Thank you for summarizing all that for me
Hi Garee,
As I read your posts, I can see spirit influence but I haven't been able (yet) to know exactly which one(s), so I keep praying for you. I do know God loves you and it seems to me you have a deep love for God but aren't clear on exactly how to use it.
You are not alone in not KNOWING what it means to be filled with the Holy Ghost. Most professing Christians don't, and neither do their leaders. And I don't know why people are afraid to acknowledge and admit ignorance, like they could and did in Acts 19:2.
If that Acts 19 account is anything to go by, it means that deliverance and the Holy Ghost is available to those who can admit their blindness, (rather than receiving condemnation). I think people, ESPECIALLY Christians, are so afraid to admit they don't know some basic things that they decide to pretend lest they be accused of unbelief.
God has taught me that humility and honesty are the gates that we MUST pass through if we want to truly know much of anything. That's kind of why I started the thread about "Are We Willing to Be Blind?"
My prayer for you is that you will seek God diligently in love ...but in some ways AGAINST your current thoughts...until God makes Himself known to you. What I mean by "against your current thoughts" is that I know you have quick and strong thoughts that come to your mind on many topics...and they suggest strongly what the truth should be, but don't give you peace about it. And I'm guessing you would like peaceful knowledge and understanding.
Meanwhile, know that I am praying for you both in spirit and in truth, and am wishing you well in Jesus name and according to his will.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
You've got to know that you've sparked my curiosity.
Are you willing to share those two branches I failed to mention?
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Of course. I will mention only the spiritual types of tongues in this comment.
We all know of the tongues spoken by the disciples at Pentecost (Acts 2). Luke described this event as "tongues of fire". Although there is no indication in the Bible that the "tongues of fire" would be repeated, some people today say it happens today and call it "tongues for evangelism", you called it "diversities of tongues". This event in Acts 2 is a contrast to the tower of Babel (Gen 11). The Tower of Babel was erected in the self-exaltation of the people. So God scattered them and confused their languages. But in Acts 2, the apostles gathered and "waited for what the Father had promised", exalting God through their obedience, and God did the exact opposite of what He did in Gen 11. He unified the languages/let everyone hear what they were saying in their native tongue, because they were exalting God and no themselves.
The second kind if tongues is also well known
We all know of the tongues spoken by the disciples at Pentecost (Acts 2). Luke described this event as "tongues of fire". Although there is no indication in the Bible that the "tongues of fire" would be repeated, some people say it happens today and call it "tongues for evangelism", you called it "diversities of tongues". That's fine, I don't have an opinion about this one. This event in Acts 2 is a contrast to the tower of Babel (Gen 11). The Tower of Babel was erected in the self-exaltation of the people. So God scattered them and confused their languages. But in Acts 2, the disciples gathered and "waited for what the Father had promised", exalting God through their obedience, so God did the exact opposite of what He did in Gen 11. He brought unity to the languages/let everyone hear what they were saying in their native tongue because they were exalting God and not themselves.
The second kind is tongues for the edification of the body-When we assemble (1 Cor 14:5, 26) (these must be interpreted).
The third kind is tounges for deeper intercession (1 Cor 14:15; Eph 6:18) This allows for a more acceptable and perfect prayer, or when we don't know what to pray, because "we do not know how we ought to pray. The Spirit Himself intercedes with groaning too deep for understanding
The fourth kind is tongues for personal edification (1 Cor 14:2, 4) Some consider this to be the same as "tongues for deeper intercession". I don't have a problem with people who say that. But the construction of the Greek in 1 Cor 14 is structured in a way that categorizes them as different subjects. So it would be more true to the text to treat is as a separate category.
We all know of the tongues spoken by the disciples at Pentecost (Acts 2). Luke described this event as "tongues of fire". Although there is no indication in the Bible that the "tongues of fire" would be repeated, some people today say it happens today and call it "tongues for evangelism", you called it "diversities of tongues". This event in Acts 2 is a contrast to the tower of Babel (Gen 11). The Tower of Babel was erected in the self-exaltation of the people. So God scattered them and confused their languages. But in Acts 2, the apostles gathered and "waited for what the Father had promised", exalting God through their obedience, and God did the exact opposite of what He did in Gen 11. He unified the languages/let everyone hear what they were saying in their native tongue, because they were exalting God and no themselves.
The second kind if tongues is also well known
Of course. I will mention only the spiritual types of tongues in this comment.
We all know of the tongues spoken by the disciples at Pentecost (Acts 2). Luke described this event as "tongues of fire". Although there is no indication in the Bible that the "tongues of fire" would be repeated, some people say it happens today and call it "tongues for evangelism", you called it "diversities of tongues". That's fine, I don't have an opinion about this one. This event in Acts 2 is a contrast to the tower of Babel (Gen 11). The Tower of Babel was erected in the self-exaltation of the people. So God scattered them and confused their languages. But in Acts 2, the disciples gathered and "waited for what the Father had promised", exalting God through their obedience, so God did the exact opposite of what He did in Gen 11. He brought unity to the languages/let everyone hear what they were saying in their native tongue because they were exalting God and not themselves.
The second kind is tongues for the edification of the body-When we assemble (1 Cor 14:5, 26) (these must be interpreted).
The third kind is tounges for deeper intercession (1 Cor 14:15; Eph 6:18) This allows for a more acceptable and perfect prayer, or when we don't know what to pray, because "we do not know how we ought to pray. The Spirit Himself intercedes with groaning too deep for understanding
The fourth kind is tongues for personal edification (1 Cor 14:2, 4) Some consider this to be the same as "tongues for deeper intercession". I don't have a problem with people who say that. But the construction of the Greek in 1 Cor 14 is structured in a way that categorizes them as different subjects. So it would be more true to the text to treat is as a separate category.