The truth about tongues: a DIVISIVE force in Christianity today

[garee]

More irrelevant incoherence.

Of course anything that is not a wonder is more irrelevant incoherence. What does the sign represent
? I did it?

Will you look at the foundation of law in Isaiah 28 revisited in 1 Corinthians 14:21-22?

Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. 1 Corinthians 14:22

Tongues are for a sign for those who believe not prophecy. You would have to be blind to miss that. What do you think the sign represents for the 100th time? We know who it does not represent "them that believe" ? Or more irrelevant incoherence, and we should seek after wonderments signs that provide no understanding.

But they would not listen to him. So the Lord’s words( Tongues) will be senseless sounds to them:

“Saw lasaw saw lasaw.
Qaw laqaw qaw laqaw.
Ze’er sham ze’er sham.”

When the people try to walk, they will fall backwards. They will be defeated, trapped, and captured. Isaiah 28

 

[Dino246]

Of course anything that is not a wonder is more irrelevant incoherence. What does the sign represent
? I did it?
...
Tongues are for a sign for those who believe not prophecy.

Still more incoherent irrelevance.

You say, "Tongues are for a sign for those who believe not prophecy."

However, you also say, "Tongues is the prophecy of God spoken in many languages." (post 321)

So what you are claiming is that 'Prophecy is for those who don't believe prophecy'. That's ridiculous.

Until you can get your own ideas sorted out coherently, you have no business trying to teach anyone.

Please, just stop.

 

[KJV1611]

Neither of these supports your slander.


As I think your ideas about both tongues and the foundation of relationship with God are wacky, I see no reason to entertain this line of discussion.


You really aren't getting this concept. YOU supply the evidence, not directions to find it.

Neither of these supports your slander.


As I think your ideas about both tongues and the foundation of relationship with God are wacky, I see no reason to entertain this line of discussion.


You really aren't getting this concept. YOU supply the evidence, not directions to find it.

Im ignoring you.

 

[garee]

Still more incoherent irrelevance.

You say, "Tongues are for a sign for those who believe not prophecy."

However, you also say, "Tongues is the prophecy of God spoken in many languages." (post 321)

So what you are claiming is that 'Prophecy is for those who don't believe prophecy'. That's ridiculous.

Until you can get your own ideas sorted out coherently, you have no business trying to teach anyone.

Please, just stop.

I have not started yet.

Are purposely ignoring the fact that prophecy in any langue is the answer of mockers under the spirit of judgment. A sign against them . They are not mocking the new languages spoken to all the nations . But any and all prophecy. A sign of unbelief to the whole word . Tongue prophecy in any language.

We can with our new tongue plant the seed of God word and water it but if any do believe .Its because they have been born again Jesus the one that give a new spirit that will not die. He said marvel not. Why wonder rather than believe? Is it good to serve our imagination or are we not to serve that kind of teaching master

its like the parable of two masters. as teaching authorities. The man in the parable desired to walk after the wonderments of necromancy and desires that God send them to his house. and show of the illusion to his brothers. Jesus said if they hear not the tongue of God prophecy written in the law and the prophets that neither will they believe the gospel if he arose from the dead . Faith does not come by looking at the temporal corrupted.

Luke 16:12-14 King James Version (KJV) And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man's, who shall give you that which is your own? No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

The same one, the sign points to.. . No prophecy in any language . They have their own kind of law of wonderments. It usurps prophecy the tongue of God . No man can serve two teaching Masters

Luke 16:30-31 King James Version (KJV) And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Still more incoherent irrelevance?

 

[SoulWeaver]

No one is eliminating gifts. No such thing as a sign gift as a wonderment. The spiritual gift of preaching our new tongue the gospel. yes.

Mocking the spirit of judgment is not a gift. Its mocking the spirit of judgment.

The weekly self edifying fill-up. Must be running of fumes today with the Pandemic.

Sorry man, not with you on this one.
People starting threads like these, arguing against spiritual gifts, are the real divisive force in church. The Gospel is not a new "tongue" and there is no solid basis in Scripture to support this interpretation, it is conjecture.

The gifts shall cease when "we know as we are known", whenever the Father becomes all in all, as we were told in the Bible, and people disliking it won't change that fact. Used to be a big sceptic about tongues myself, because people do misuse it a lot, but God has shown me I was wrong. Word of knowledge and other gifts like discerning of spirits also do still exist. There are even some Christian monks from my country known for the gift of word of knowledge, per example. They will know things about the believer that were not told them. Per example when people can't conceive, and they sometimes come to a monastery to pray and inquire prayer intercession from the monks. Then a monk will sometimes reveal to the person, why do you do this and that (speaking of some sin that the unknown person does), this is why you guys cannot have a child. And when they stop with this sin, they conceive a child and God is glorified. This is the gift of the Word of knowledge (knowing things that one didn't learn by natural means, often a sin that only the bearer knows) and Word of wisdom at the same time (divine solution, knowing exactly from God what to do to solve the problem), and that's just one example of things that happen on regular basis. I am a Protestant, not Orthodox, but have witnessed it. God will reveal things for His purposes to His servants and they still operate in spiritual gifts. I personally know some who have spoken Hebrew without previously learning it. People can argue until they are blue in the face, but they will not convince those who have witnessed supernatural occurrences like that which brought glory to God.

 

[notuptome]

I don't think you can get that from what I said. However if you did, I agree with you that is not how it works.

Now as to the benefit Paul saw in praying in an unknown tongue when his spirit prayed but his understanding was unfruitful.

I don't think any of us can clearly explain the mystery behind prayer. Why we are asked to pray when God already knows what we need. We don't have to understand why we just do it because it is God's method and plan that we do it. We do not fully know what happens when we pray in the spirit but our understanding is unfruitful but we do it anyway.

If it is NOT because we are praying about things we do not understand needs to be prayed for, then it is for some other reason, that we do not understand. For one thing we can be certain of is that our understanding is unfruitful. Howbeit we do it anyway.
1 Cor 14: 14For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. 15What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also:

Also, for the benefit of those who respect non pentecostal theologians like F.F. Bruce enough to have an open ear to hear what Paul was talking about please see the below excerpt from F.F. Bruce commentary on Romans 8.

26. The Spirit himself intercedes for us. He is called the disciples’ ‘advocate’ (paraklētos) in John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7 (see also note on verse 34, below). Cf. Ephesians 6:18, ‘Pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication.’ When believers pray ‘in the Spirit’, the Spirit himself intercedes on their behalf. (See p. 57.) With sighs too deep for words. ‘Through our inarticulate groans’ (NEB). The noun stenagmos, like the verb stenazō (used in verse 23), may denote either sighing or groaning. Speaking to God in the Spirit with ‘tongues’ (1 Cor. 14:2) may be included in this expression, but it covers those longings and aspirations which well up from the depths of the spirit and cannot be imprisoned within the confines of everyday words. In such prayer it is the indwelling Spirit who prays, and his mind is immediately read by the Father to whom the prayer is addressed (verse 27). Moreover, these ‘inarticulate groans’ cannot be dissociated from the groaning of verse 23, with which believers (together with all creation) express their longing for the coming resurrection-glory, which will consummate the answer to all their prayers. (See p. 58 with n. 77.)

Bruce, F. F.. Romans (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries) (p. 175). InterVarsity Press. Kindle Edition.

So as you can see in the sentences in red that Bruce sees a connection between what Paul was referring to in praying in tongues and that separate subject of the groanings which cannot be uttered. They are not the same but the REASON might be the same. That just as the Spirit prays through us with groaning that cannot be uttered which in that context specifically says "because we know not what we should pray for as we ought" Bruce is saying that this praying in tongues that Paul did where his understanding was unfruitful was probably also for the same kind of purpose. Now many non pentecostals will agree with F. F. Bruce and I wanted to point out that he is intellectually honest about his interpretation of scripture even though he was not a pentecostal. He was far better at hermeneutics and interpretation of scriptures than anyone on these forumns including myself.

There is much benefit to praying in tongues and interceding in tongues. As a matter of fact all those who have recieved this gift and have prayed in tongues in private for thirty minutes have testimonies of experiencing a spiritual charging, and that when they get immediately into the study of the Word of God after such an intercession time they experience illumination that is beyond their normal bible study experience without praying in tongues for 30 minutes. It is obvious to those who experience these benefits that something awesome happens from praying in tongues that enables them to have understanding in the scriptures, a concentration, a quick recall of other scriptures that contribute to a sudden illumination of a theological concept that they realize was there all along but they had passed over it many times without the light turning on. Their heart burns within them as the see JESUS revealed in Old Testament scriptures and they KNOW it is a direct result of praying 30 minutes in tongues before they started their study.

I hesitate to share these precious benefits in a forum like this because afterwards I cringe at some of the statements that people will make as they proceed to trample on these precious pearls. Please don't be that guy.

Well I don't know FF Bruce but I do know that nothing is accomplished if I pray in French or German over my native English. I do understand the Holy Spirit making groanings for me that cannot be uttered but I do not see that you are making that claim.

Ro 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

These groanings are not tongues in any sense. They are literally feelings that cannot be spoken.

Paul in 1 Cor 14 is not advocating prayer in unknown tongues but rather showing the folly of such endeavor. Jesus demonstrated prayer and great labor in prayer to the disciples yet never even one time do we see anything like prayer tongues. Prayer tongues are a construct of the modern Pentecostals and charismatics.

Imaginary prayers are no substitute for fervent effectual prayer which is prayer in the Holy Spirit.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Dino246]

Im ignoring you.

Yay! I can refute your spectacularly unbiblical ideas in peace.

 

[Dino246]

Still more incoherent irrelevance?

Yes... exactly. You're starting to understand.

 

[KJV1611]

Here’s a worldly message of speaking in an unknown tongue. A hidden message is being conveyed to those that have ears to hear. Almost all pop and rock songs are written in an unknown tongue, and this is why those lyrics make no sense to those who don’t have ears to hear.

If there's a bustle in your hedgerow
Don't be alarmed now
It's just a spring clean for the May queen
Yes, there are two paths you can go by
But in the long run
There's still time to change the road you're on
And it makes me wonder
Your head is humming and it won't go
In case you don't know
The piper's calling you to join him
Dear lady, can you hear the wind blow?
And did you know
Your stairway lies on the whispering wind?
And as we wind on down the road
Our shadows taller than our soul
There walks a lady we all know
Who shines white light and wants to show
How everything still turns to gold
And if you listen very hard
The tune will come to you at last
When all are one and one is all
To be a rock and not to roll
And she's buying a stairway to Heaven

The Bible is written in this same unknown tongue so that only those who have ears to hear can receive the message.

 

[Scribe]

Well I don't know FF Bruce but I do know that nothing is accomplished if I pray in French or German over my native English. I do understand the Holy Spirit making groanings for me that cannot be uttered but I do not see that you are making that claim.

Ro 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

These groanings are not tongues in any sense. They are literally feelings that cannot be spoken.

Paul in 1 Cor 14 is not advocating prayer in unknown tongues but rather showing the folly of such endeavor. Jesus demonstrated prayer and great labor in prayer to the disciples yet never even one time do we see anything like prayer tongues. Prayer tongues are a construct of the modern Pentecostals and charismatics.

Imaginary prayers are no substitute for fervent effectual prayer which is prayer in the Holy Spirit.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

One thing I noticed in 1 Cor 14 that is not talked about very often is how he said, "but he that ignores these things, let him be ignored." And that is what I have had to do with several in this forum so far. Their intellectual dishonesty in making statements that I did not say and their willful beligerence in inventing hermeneutics that not even their own favorite protestant cessationist disagree with demonstrates that they will oppose themselves no matter what sound hermeneutic is presented and when people begin to expose themselves by inventing their own interpretations that do not exist in any commentary known to man it is time to shake off the dust and ignore them.

 

[stonesoffire]

This response of yours made me wonder what you meant by him intervening on my behalf but then I wondered if maybe it was those times when I am just being with him and suddenly sense someone out there is in deep pain sadness and brokeness, They don't happen that often but when they do it is as if I feel what their feel and I am drowining in tears praying to him with all my heart and soul to go them and embrace them I always called this a deep level of empathy or intercession but is that also perhaps tongues?

Blain, you may have the gift of healing. I’ve read that it’s accompanied by just what you described. If it happens when you are around someone; particularly in a meeting and one has asked for prayer, be the one to pray. Or add yourself to those who are. If questioned? Just say the anointing is all over me.

 

[Scribe]

One thing I noticed in 1 Cor 14 that is not talked about very often is how he said, "but he that ignores these things, let him be ignored." And that is what I have had to do with several in this forum so far. Their intellectual dishonesty in making statements that I did not say and their willful beligerence in inventing hermeneutics that not even their own favorite protestant cessationist disagree with demonstrates that they will oppose themselves no matter what sound hermeneutic is presented and when people begin to expose themselves by inventing their own interpretations that do not exist in any commentary known to man it is time to shake off the dust and ignore them.

Correction: inventing hermeneutics that not even their own favorite protestant cessationist scholars and preachers would agree with

 

[Washed]

Well I don't know FF Bruce but I do know that nothing is accomplished if I pray in French or German over my native English.

But things can be accomplished if you were to speak in tongues. You would be speaking the wonderful works of God (Acts 2:11), magnifying God (Acts 10:46), speaking divine secrets to God (1 Cor 14:2), giving thanks well (1 Cor 14:17), edifying yourself (1 Cor 14:4; Jude 20), and more.

I do understand the Holy Spirit making groanings for me that cannot be uttered but I do not see that you are making that claim.

Ro 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

These groanings are not tongues in any sense. They are literally feelings that cannot be spoken.

You are right about Rom 8:26. It is not talking about speaking in tongues. Tongues can certainly be uttered.

Paul in 1 Cor 14 is not advocating prayer in unknown tongues but rather showing the folly of such endeavor.

You could not be more wrong.

1 Cor 14:5) 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.

1 Cor 14:18) I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:

1 Cor 14:15) What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

Jesus demonstrated prayer and great labor in prayer to the disciples yet never even one time do we see anything like prayer tongues.

Of course Jesus did not speak in tongues. It was not possible to do so before the day of Pentecost.

Prayer tongues are a construct of the modern Pentecostals and charismatics.

Not according to Paul. Praying in the spirit is speaking in tongues Read 1 Cor 14:14-15 without your cessationist blinders on.

Imaginary prayers are no substitute for fervent effectual prayer which is prayer in the Holy Spirit.

Speaking in tongues is not imaginary prayer. Praying in the Holy Spirit IS speaking in tongues.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Ignorance is never for the cause of Christ, Roger. You are ignorant about speaking in tongues. You teach against something you do not understand.

 

[Angela53510]

With regard to so called 'early church fathers', it is not correct to state there is no record of any of them speaking in unknown languages.


A.D. 100 - Eusebius (Church Historian):
Writing to the preaching evangelists who were yet living, Eusebius says: "Of those that flourished in these times, Quadratus is said to have been distinguished for his prophetical gifts. There were many others, also, noted in these times who held rank in the apostolic succession... the Holy Spirit also wrought many wonders as yet through them, so that as the Gospel was heard, men in crowds voluntarily and eagerly embraced the true faith with their whole minds."

A.D. 115-202 - Irenaeus:
Irenaeus was a pupil of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John. He wrote in his book "Against Heresies", Book V, vi.: "In like manner do we also hear many brethren in the church who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light, for the general benefit, the hidden things of men and declare the mysteries of God, who also the apostles term spiritual."

A.D. 300 - The Early Martyrs:
The early martyrs enjoyed these gifts. Dean Ferrar, in his book "Darkness to Dawn" states: "Even for the minutest allusions and particulars I have contemporary authority." He refers to the persecuted Christians in Rome singing and speaking in unknown tongues.

A.D. 390 - Chrysostom of Constantinople:
Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, writes: "Whoever was baptised in apostolic days, he straightway spoke with tongues, for since on their coming over from idols, without any clear knowledge or training in the Scriptures, they at once received the Spirit, not that they saw the Spirit, for He is invisible, but God's grace bestowed some sensible proof of His energy, and one straightway spoke in the Persian language, another in the Roman, another in the Indian, another in some other tongues, and this made manifest to them that were without that it was the Spirit in the very person speaking. Wherefore the apostle calls it the manifestation of the Spirit which is given to every man to profit withal."

A.D. 400 - Augustine of Hippo:
Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, one of the four great fathers of the Latin Church and considered the greatest of them all: "We still do what the apostles did when they laid hands on the Samaritans and called down the Holy Spirit on them in the laying-on of hands. It is expected that converts should speak with new tongues."

I know I am late to this post and someone may have asked this already, but if you are going to list the early church fathers and their writings, you need to post a link showing where you got this. If it is from a scholarly book, please cite the book and pages where these quotes were found. If the book is a Pentecostal book, I would appreciate you making a note of that. I've studied a lot about the early church fathers, and never run across these quotes, which is why I want to verify it.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Scribe]

I know I am late to this post and someone may have asked this already, but if you are going to list the early church fathers and their writings, you need to post a link showing where you got this. If it is from a scholarly book, please cite the book and pages where these quotes were found. If the book is a Pentecostal book, I would appreciate you making a note of that. I've studied a lot about the early church fathers, and never run across these quotes, which is why I want to verify it.

Thanks in advance.

I would just clip the quote and google it. You should be able to find the exact writings in online libraries.

 

[Angela53510]

I would just clip the quote and google it. You should be able to find the exact writings in online libraries.

That is not my responsibility, to look up a bunch of quotes. It is always incumbent upon the one sharing the quotes to properly share the source.

And there are simple reasons for this. Say I take the time to look these quotes up. I am suspicious of the sources. Then, I have to research the sources as well.

Then another person comes along, also wondering what the sources are. They research it, then find something questionable. The dialogue meanwhile was stopped by the original poster of the quotes, for failing to do due diligence. Then a third, fourth up to 10 or 20 or more people start looking up the sources. What a terrible duplication of time and effort, which would have been easily stopped by properly showing sources for these quotes. Again, maybe person 13 found something very seriously wrong with the sources. Where are they supposed to share this, when the person who quoted them never wrote down their sources, which might have been different from person 13, 16, & 19?

What you have is chaos. That's why the original person who posted the quotes needs to quote their sources. Anything less is unacceptable.

 

[Blain]

Blain, you may have the gift of healing. I’ve read that it’s accompanied by just what you described. If it happens when you are around someone; particularly in a meeting and one has asked for prayer, be the one to pray. Or add yourself to those who are. If questioned? Just say the anointing is all over me.

It never happens if I am around someone but when he and I are alone and being with each other it just sometimes comes out of nowhere, I have always believed in the power of prayer and when I do go into this state in my minds eye it is as if I see two things his hand gently mending with care and angel wings rushing off to them.
I have never had the gift of physical healing as far as i know but I am also far more concerned with the inner wounds and pain of others and maybe that is why he uses me in this way

 

[Angela53510]

So, to save anyone else from looking up these supposed quotes of the early church fathers from page 2, there is no reputable source. Every single one came from a forum like CC, including CC, and a few Pentecostal websites.

Not one of these comes from a source which is a reputable scholar or book, or a reputable scholarly website. Plus, I would have to see the original Greek quoted before I would believe any of these quotes were translated correctly.

I tried various other searches, and several admitted the quotes had not been checked against the original language.

I did find one book review on google books which clearly says that Irenaenus was talking about what happened in the book of Acts, and had never himself heard anyone speak in tongues.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=i3...hUKEwiFndzf2pnqAhVvFjQIHbtkC0YQ6AEwCnoECAMQAQ

Of course, I have not looked up the other quotes, but I am certain something similar would be found. Unfortunately, most Pentecostals (Gordon Fee would be a major exception!) do not read Greek, and I am convinced would twist things to make it look like the early church fathers did speak in tongues.

The lack of a source immediately tipped me off that the post wasn't valid, and digging deep certainly showed my hunch was correct.

 

[Blain]

That is not my responsibility, to look up a bunch of quotes. It is always incumbent upon the one sharing the quotes to properly share the source.

And there are simple reasons for this. Say I take the time to look these quotes up. I am suspicious of the sources. Then, I have to research the sources as well.

Then another person comes along, also wondering what the sources are. They research it, then find something questionable. The dialogue meanwhile was stopped by the original poster of the quotes, for failing to do due diligence. Then a third, fourth up to 10 or 20 or more people start looking up the sources. What a terrible duplication of time and effort, which would have been easily stopped by properly showing sources for these quotes. Again, maybe person 13 found something very seriously wrong with the sources. Where are they supposed to share this, when the person who quoted them never wrote down their sources, which might have been different from person 13, 16, & 19?

What you have is chaos. That's why the original person who posted the quotes needs to quote their sources. Anything less is unacceptable.

Angela I would love to hear what your opinion on tongues is, not the random babble but actual tongues.

 

[iamsoandso]

So, to save anyone else from looking up these supposed quotes of the early church fathers from page 2, there is no reputable source. Every single one came from a forum like CC, including CC, and a few Pentecostal websites.

Not one of these comes from a source which is a reputable scholar or book, or a reputable scholarly website. Plus, I would have to see the original Greek quoted before I would believe any of these quotes were translated correctly.

I tried various other searches, and several admitted the quotes had not been checked against the original language.

I did find one book review on google books which clearly says that Irenaenus was talking about what happened in the book of Acts, and had never himself heard anyone speak in tongues.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=i3...hUKEwiFndzf2pnqAhVvFjQIHbtkC0YQ6AEwCnoECAMQAQ

Of course, I have not looked up the other quotes, but I am certain something similar would be found. Unfortunately, most Pentecostals (Gordon Fee would be a major exception!) do not read Greek, and I am convinced would twist things to make it look like the early church fathers did speak in tongues.

The lack of a source immediately tipped me off that the post wasn't valid, and digging deep certainly showed my hunch was correct.

And Eusebius was born in 265ad and died in 339ad so how could he be at the beginning of the list as "ad100 Eusebius(Church historian)"?