TONGUES false teaching.

[jb]

If you have attended as many Pentecostal church meetings as I have you will agree that what is seen in all of them is the habit of "SPEAKING" in Tongues.

It is a method of speaking in such a way that no one understands what is said.
No one interprets what is muttered.
Women it seems are the ones who do most of the "Tongues" noises.

Now, allow me to say that I have been there and done that. However as I grew older and actually READ what the Bible says it becmae very clear that what is seen today is NOT BIBLICAL tongues as recorded in the Bible.

So then, instead of just accepting what we have been told or doing what we WANT to do, shall we actually see what the Bible does it fact say??????

Acts 2:7-11............

"And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God." ​

Notice the phrase in Acts 2:11, "our tongues." The crowds heard the Apostles preach in their own native tongues, not some unknown heavenly jibber jabber. There was NEVER any heavenly languages spoken that no one understood and required an interpreter.

There is a drastic difference between Biblical tongues and the heretical speaking in tongues we see in churches today.

The "speaking in tongues" which the Pentecostals foolishly practice are UNKNOWN tongues, not anything found on earth. Supposedly, those unknown tongues can only be interpreted by ONE spirit-filled member of the congregation.

The Apostle Paul speaks common sense to us Corinthians 14:19...
"Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue."

Now before replying to this post from an "Emotional" response, and actually that is what speaking in tongues is, an EMOTIONAL event, take the time to do the work first.

Read 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14. Anyone can see that they are "Corrective" Chapters from Paul to the church and the CONTEXT is .....ready.....
Speaking in tongues".

Now that being the correct hermeneutical point then notice carefully chapter 14:34........
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. "

Literally....the CONTEXT demands that "women are not permitted to speak in TONGUES in church".

Without women speaking in tongues there is then in fact no tongues movement at all.

​

Complete and utter nonsense!

 

[echoChrist]

Or it could be real or it could be psychotic or some other undiagnosed brain malfunction or you could be wrong. How can you give Satan more credit than the Holy Spirit? Do you not think that anything Satan can do God can do better? What happened to the snakes that Pharaoh's magicians conjured up?

@echoChrist Speaking in tongues is a well known phenomena. Not only to Christians. It is perhaps most commonly in Paganism, Shamanism, and other mediumistic religious practices. In Japan, the God Light Association believed that glossolalia (speaking in tongues) could cause adherents to recall past lives. The Oracle's of Delphi allegedly spoke in tongues while under the influence of a type of fume or gas released by fermented mixture of fossil methane and magma, released thru a vent. That's where their temple was built.

It is far different that what occurred on the day of Pentacost. It was in known languages spoken by people who did not know the language that they were speaking.. When all else fails the most simple explanation is most often correct. It was supernatural.

It is believed to often be caused by the release of uncommon albeit natural stress hormones. But thats different like Prophecy vs. prophesy. one means predictions generally and the other means spiritual utterances. Which are one can only be supernatural and the other can either be natural or super natural.

Yes the utterances can be faked or natural but, they both can be supernatural. If a prophet makes a prophesy that dosn't come true, scripture demands the he be stoned to death. Simple prophetic utterances may simply just be a healthy way of releasing feelings that we can't explain.

King Saul was not a prophet or filled with the Holy Spirit until 1 Samuel 10:5 After that you will come to Gibeah of God, where the Philistines have an outpost. As you approach the city, you will meet a group of prophets coming down from the high place, preceded by harps, tambourines, flutes, and lyres, and they will be prophesying. 6 Then the Spirit of the LORD will rush upon you, and you will prophesy with them; and you will be transformed into a different person. BSB

I do believe in gift of tongues but I think some people fake it.

 

[echoChrist]

I do believe in gift of tongues but I think some people fake it.

Im gonna study this more tomorrow im hitting the sack.

 

[billabong]

Im gonna study this more tomorrow im hitting the sack.

I think Les Fieldick explains the subject fairly well.(16c) Is the gift of tongues for the Church today ?

 

[Blackpowderduelist]

Lol.
I'm not a cessationist.
I do however believe the gifts are not what Pentecostalism teaches they are, most certainly about speaking in tongues. Even the Bible say not all speaking in tongues, and also says seek that you would prophecy.

A few questions to ponder. Philip though being filled with the Holy Spirit and out preaching and making disciples, did not confer the gifts to anyone, but rather it wasn't until Peter and John came and layed hands on some that the gifts were them passed to the disciples of Philip, also you see that this isn't written about as part of the encounter with the Ethiopian.
Also you don't see it written about in the pastoral Epistles anything directive continuing the practice. Not even concerning healing, but rather you see a different instruction given to Timothy. He is told that of there are sick among you bring them to the elders of the church who will annoint them with oil and the prayer of faith will save the sick.
Now I have a question concerning this practice, why does no one, practice this as per the instructions in the bible? Even the so called spirit filled churches do not do it this way.
You see a lot of stuff more resembling the benny hinn type of practice, which is not written of in the text at all.

 

[JaumeJ]

Our God does not change. His children may not be perfect but they do not change so much either.

The giftss will be here as long as we are in this age.

 

[notuptome]

Our God does not change. His children may not be perfect but they do not change so much either.

The giftss will be here as long as we are in this age.

God said they would end. Are saying God was mistaken? Tongues ended per 1 Cor 13:8. The other gifts continue but for the rebels against God that is not enough.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

Complete and utter nonsense!

If you are speaking of tongues you are right. If you are speaking of praying in tongues you are right.

Men do not pray in tongues and there are no angelic tongues for men to speak.

Mankind is under Gods judgment. Babel is Gods judgment upon mankind for claiming themselves to be equal to God.

Mankind is being judged for Spiritual adultery.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[JaumeJ]

In the epistles it is written they will pass out of usaged but as long as we are in this age they remian.

They will be no longer necessary come the Kingdom.

This is my understanding from all the versions of the Word I have studied.

This may surprise a lot of people, but, I COULD BE WRONG.

Nonetheless, this is how I have been given to understand these teachings. God never lies, and He is never mistaken, so I must believe how I understand with His permission. Let me know how wrong I am if it is truly necessary.

 

[Absolutely]

I think Les Fieldick explains the subject fairly well.(16c) Is the gift of tongues for the Church today ?

That's like asking a plumber advice on your ac.

He is cessationist.

All cessationists are speculators.

Baptism in the Holy Spirit is first.
Ssd peaking inbtongues wells up from that massive invasion of the Spirit.
It is a flow that is heaven touching heaven.


The one that spoke in tongues more than anyone else wrote half the NT.

He got the baptism in the Holy Spirit first.

The upper room.

Jesus- "dont even think of doing anything till you get the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Press in and get b 4 you do anything"

Yes sir
I did
Thank you for that wonderful order.
I will never forget it.

THANK YOU JESUS !!!!!!!!!

 

[Absolutely]

If you are speaking of tongues you are right. If you are speaking of praying in tongues you are right.

Men do not pray in tongues and there are no angelic tongues for men to speak.

Mankind is under Gods judgment. Babel is Gods judgment upon mankind for claiming themselves to be equal to God.

Mankind is being judged for Spiritual adultery.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Actually men are judged,even Christian's for attributing the works of the Holy Spirit (God's power) to the devil.

.....and no red flags.

Yikes.

But it definately reveals the hardness and recklessness of what has happened to cessationists.

....and they are oblivious.


Jesus said " I suggest you go and buy gold refined in fire ..."

The 5 foolish virgins went and did it. But it was too late.

At least they tried but in their case 2 factors were off.
1 even though they could have recieved the Holy Spirit from the wise,they were refused.
2 They were found out of whack. No intimacy then no marriage chamber/rapture.

But it is interesting that most of the time the baptism in the Holy Spirit is recieved via the laying on of Hands.
Which the foolish knew.

 

[notuptome]

All cessationists are speculators.

You have the truth reversed. Believe what the bible teaches and you will know truth.

Speculators and those given to fantasy go Pentecostal charismatic teaching.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

Actually men are judged,even Christian's for attributing the works of the Holy Spirit (God's power) to the devil.

.....and no red flags.

Yikes.

But it definately reveals the hardness and recklessness of what has happened to cessationists.

....and they are oblivious.


Jesus said " I suggest you go and buy gold refined in fire ..."

The 5 foolish virgins went and did it. But it was too late.

At least they tried but in their case 2 factors were off.
1 even though they could have recieved the Holy Spirit from the wise,they were refused.
2 They were found out of whack. No intimacy then no marriage chamber/rapture.

But it is interesting that most of the time the baptism in the Holy Spirit is recieved via the laying on of Hands.
Which the foolish knew.

You are deceived. So much of scripture cries out against your heresy. So much of what is in evidence testifies against you. God have mercy.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Magenta]

There was NEVER any heavenly languages spoken that no one understood and required an interpreter.

Perhaps reading 1 Corinthians 14 would help

 

[Scribe]

If you have attended as many Pentecostal church meetings as I have you will agree that what is seen in all of them is the habit of "SPEAKING" in Tongues.

It is a method of speaking in such a way that no one understands what is said.
No one interprets what is muttered.
Women it seems are the ones who do most of the "Tongues" noises.

Now, allow me to say that I have been there and done that. However as I grew older and actually READ what the Bible says it becmae very clear that what is seen today is NOT BIBLICAL tongues as recorded in the Bible.

So then, instead of just accepting what we have been told or doing what we WANT to do, shall we actually see what the Bible does it fact say??????

Acts 2:7-11............

"And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God." ​

Notice the phrase in Acts 2:11, "our tongues." The crowds heard the Apostles preach in their own native tongues, not some unknown heavenly jibber jabber. There was NEVER any heavenly languages spoken that no one understood and required an interpreter.

There is a drastic difference between Biblical tongues and the heretical speaking in tongues we see in churches today.

The "speaking in tongues" which the Pentecostals foolishly practice are UNKNOWN tongues, not anything found on earth. Supposedly, those unknown tongues can only be interpreted by ONE spirit-filled member of the congregation.

The Apostle Paul speaks common sense to us Corinthians 14:19...
"Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue."

Now before replying to this post from an "Emotional" response, and actually that is what speaking in tongues is, an EMOTIONAL event, take the time to do the work first.

Read 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14. Anyone can see that they are "Corrective" Chapters from Paul to the church and the CONTEXT is .....ready.....
Speaking in tongues".

Now that being the correct hermeneutical point then notice carefully chapter 14:34........
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. "

Literally....the CONTEXT demands that "women are not permitted to speak in TONGUES in church".

Without women speaking in tongues there is then in fact no tongues movement at all.

​

Using the rule of immediate context in hermeneutics it is obvious that the women were asking questions out of order;

34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

And since you butchered that with your own private interpretation that they were being forbidden to speak in tongues, your entire argument is an intellectual dishonest attempt at changing the scriptures intended meaning.

You have not presented anything here but more of the same bad hermeneutics we have all heard before.

Since Paul had been speaking in tongues for 20 years before he makes the statement that when he prays in tongues his understanding is unfruitful it would seem obvious that it could not be a known language, for certainly someone would have been able to tell him, or he would have been able to identify this after 20 years. It is much more likely that it was very much like what you have seen in a pentecostal church.

But just like there were abuses and misuses in the church at Corinth there will be today. These chapters are in the bible not to forbid to speak in tongues but for correction in doing it decently and in order. There are hundreds of thousands of churches that do it correctly. Just because you think you have not seen one does not mean they are not there. Your world view of your own experience is a small basis for establishing facts.

Your experience does not trump the 500 million Pentecostals/Charismatics so take a backseat and let God sort it out. You make yourself to be fighting against God if it is from the Lord and you are wrong.

And what possible business is it of yours to interfere with a persons own experiences with the Holy Spirit or gifts thereof?

If you want to dispute a heretic you should learn what heresy is. Argue with a backslidden alcoholic reformist who believes they are still going to heaven in a drunken stupor and leave the Holy rollers alone.

 

[notuptome]

Using the rule of immediate context in hermeneutics it is obvious that the women were asking questions out of order;

34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

And since you butchered that with your own private interpretation that they were being forbidden to speak in tongues, your entire argument is an intellectual dishonest attempt at changing the scriptures intended meaning.

You have not presented anything here but more of the same bad hermeneutics we have all heard before.

Since Paul had been speaking in tongues for 20 years before he makes the statement that when he prays in tongues his understanding is unfruitful it would seem obvious that it could not be a known language, for certainly someone would have been able to tell him, or he would have been able to identify this after 20 years. It is much more likely that it was very much like what you have seen in a pentecostal church.

But just like there were abuses and misuses in the church at Corinth there will be today. These chapters are in the bible not to forbid to speak in tongues but for correction in doing it decently and in order. There are hundreds of thousands of churches that do it correctly. Just because you think you have not seen one does not mean they are not there. Your world view of your own experience is a small basis for establishing facts.

Your experience does not trump the 500 million Pentecostals/Charismatics so take a backseat and let God sort it out. You make yourself to be fighting against God if it is from the Lord and you are wrong.

And what possible business is it of yours to interfere with a persons own experiences with the Holy Spirit or gifts thereof?

If you want to dispute a heretic you should learn what heresy is. Argue with a backslidden alcoholic reformist who believes they are still going to heaven in a drunken stupor and leave the Holy rollers alone.

Still your heart is hard against the truth of scripture.

Why would one judge the scriptural authority of a group based on their size? Do you that the Muslims number above a billion? Are you going to suggest that they we should adopt their Christ-less religion based on their superior numbers?

If you argue against a simple reading of scripture you are taking counsel against God. One error does not excuse a million more. It is the glory of kings to search out a matter. Berean Christians tested what was said against the scriptures. If what was said was true they were to obey what was taught.

For the cause of Chrisst
Roger

 

[kaylagrl]

If you have attended as many Pentecostal church meetings as I have you will agree that what is seen in all of them is the habit of "SPEAKING" in Tongues.

I don't know how many "meetings" you have attended. But many other churches speak in tongues, other than Pentecostal.

"It is a method of speaking in such a way that no one understands what is said.
No one interprets what is muttered.

You're making a blanket statement. No one has interpreted in the meetings you attended.

Women it seems are the ones who do most of the "Tongues" noises.

In the handful of meetings you attended...

Now, allow me to say that I have been there and done that. However as I grew older and actually READ what the Bible says it becmae very clear that what is seen today is NOT BIBLICAL tongues as recorded in the Bible.

Good for you, then don't attend the meetings, problem solved.

So then, instead of just accepting what we have been told or doing what we WANT to do, shall we actually see what the Bible does it fact say??????

Or maybe you live by what you believe and keep your nose out of what others believe. Or are you a Bible scholar?

Now before replying to this post from an "Emotional" response, and actually that is what speaking in tongues is, an EMOTIONAL event, take the time to do the work first.

It's not an emotional event. It's common place. If you don't believe it, stay out of it. People get "emotional" when you have the stones to tell them they're demon possessed, which we hear allll the time. If it's not for you then fine. Mind your own business and let others believe what they believe.

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. "

Ahhhh one of those people!! Got it now. All makes sense.

Without women speaking in tongues there is then in fact no tongues movement at all./QUOTE]

Wow, just when I think I've heard the most moronic comment on here, someone jumps up and proves me wrong with more baloney. Stunning. They almost take it as a challenge. rofl.

 

[Tararose]

If you have attended as many Pentecostal church meetings as I have you will agree that what is seen in all of them is the habit of "SPEAKING" in Tongues.

It is a method of speaking in such a way that no one understands what is said.
No one interprets what is muttered.
Women it seems are the ones who do most of the "Tongues" noises.

Now, allow me to say that I have been there and done that. However as I grew older and actually READ what the Bible says it becmae very clear that what is seen
Acts 2:7-11............

"And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God." ​

“Notice the phrase in Acts 2:11, "our tongues." The crowds heard the Apostles preach in their own native tongues, not some unknown heavenly jibber jabber. There was NEVER any heavenly languages spoken that no one understood and required an interpreter.“


I cor 14
1Earnestly pursue love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. 2For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men, but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries in the Spirit.

27If anyone speaks in a tongue, two, or at most three, should speak in turn, and someone must interpret. 28But if there is no interpreter, he should remain silent in the church and speak only to himself and God.

Interpretation Is required or the speaker needs to remain silent. Whatever you believe about what language it is, in a church context as appears to the unique situation at Pentecost, an interpretation is always necessary and required When tongues is spoken in church.

Goodness me, while I agree wholeheartedly the entire church should not be talking in tongues at the same time I do think you may have it in for women.

The silent in churches refers to asking questions during meetings, not to praying or prophesying. (The only occurrence of the head covering teaching clarifies this issue.)
​

1 cor 11 v But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

​

 

[Scribe]

Still your heart is hard against the truth of scripture.

Why would one judge the scriptural authority of a group based on their size? Do you that the Muslims number above a billion? Are you going to suggest that they we should adopt their Christ-less religion based on their superior numbers?

If you argue against a simple reading of scripture you are taking counsel against God. One error does not excuse a million more. It is the glory of kings to search out a matter. Berean Christians tested what was said against the scriptures. If what was said was true they were to obey what was taught.

For the cause of Chrisst
Roger

I present the following information to help someone who is seeking truth on this topic.

The heremeneutics of the Pentecostals is superior to the ceasationist and that is why it continues to spread. Pentecostals do study the bible and decide that these gifts are available, they ask and receive.

I have been studying the subject from the bible for 40 years. I was studying all of the scriptures on the subject in 1981 when I asked for and received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and the gift of tongues. I have been studying it since.

I have discovered brilliant theologians like Roger Stronstad, William Menzies, Robert Menzies, Gordon Fee, Stanely Horton, and many others who make anti tongue teachers like John MacArthur sound like amateurs.

If people will read some of these authors on the subject which do go through every single verse on the subject unlike John MacArthur who skips around using only the ones that appear to sound negative and ignores the majority positive verses, they will soon realize that they have not read as much on subject as they think they have. Too many times people have not studied the subject like the Bereans they mention and have a horrible hermeneutic based on selective readings.

When you see how thoroughly the subject is handled by Stronstad or Menzies you will fall on your face in repentance for the way you have disparaged the holy gifts of God and repent in dust and ashes.

Of course one can just read the bible, but unfortunately people say they do that, but if you get into a bible study on tongues you soon learn they don't know half the scriptures on the subject. So even though it is true theoretically that you can just read the bible and learn about the subject of tongues, most don't do it. That is why I suggest reading Roger Stronstad or William Menzies, or even Gordon Fee, which are respected theologians even among non pentecostal theologians who have persuaded non pentecostal theologians that their hermeneutcs were superior and have changed the minds of Greek speaking non penetecostal bible college professors that their interpretation was correct and conceded on the subject, turned from ceasationist to continuationists in their interpretation of scripure.

So before you claim that the pentecostal is not studying his bible you should look at one of these authors works that has convinced those who know more of the scripture and original languages than you and be open to the idea that maybe you could still learn something you did not know about this topic.

If these writers presentation of hermeneutics on the topic have persuaded Greek Speaking Seminary professors who were ceasationists to change their beliefs to continuationist don't you think they might be worth reading?

People ask me to read or listen to John MacArthur's views on the topic and I have. Then I try to get them to listen or read one of these authors and I don't think they ever do. Why? If they did they would suddenly see how pitiful John MacArthurs presentations on the topic are. These men are giants, MacArthur sounds like a dishonest manipulater on this topic in comparison to these authors thorough work on the topic. If they were to read them they would discover how poorly MacArthur handles the subject.

 

[notuptome]

I present the following information to help someone who is seeking truth on this topic.

The heremeneutics of the Pentecostals is superior to the ceasationist and that is why it continues to spread. Pentecostals do study the bible and decide that these gifts are available, they ask and receive.

I have been studying the subject from the bible for 40 years. I was studying all of the scriptures on the subject in 1981 when I asked for and received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and the gift of tongues. I have been studying it since.

I have discovered brilliant theologians like Roger Stronstad, William Menzies, Robert Menzies, Gordon Fee, Stanely Horton, and many others who make anti tongue teachers like John MacArthur sound like amateurs.

If people will read some of these authors on the subject which do go through every single verse on the subject unlike John MacArthur who skips around using only the ones that appear to sound negative and ignores the majority positive verses, they will soon realize that they have not read as much on subject as they think they have. Too many times people have not studied the subject like the Bereans they mention and have a horrible hermeneutic based on selective readings.

When you see how thoroughly the subject is handled by Stronstad or Menzies you will fall on your face in repentance for the way you have disparaged the holy gifts of God and repent in dust and ashes.

Of course one can just read the bible, but unfortunately people say they do that, but if you get into a bible study on tongues you soon learn they don't know half the scriptures on the subject. So even though it is true theoretically that you can just read the bible and learn about the subject of tongues, most don't do it. That is why I suggest reading Roger Stronstad or William Menzies, or even Gordon Fee, which are respected theologians even among non pentecostal theologians who have persuaded non pentecostal theologians that their hermeneutcs were superior and have changed the minds of Greek speaking non penetecostal bible college professors that their interpretation was correct and conceded on the subject, turned from ceasationist to continuationists in their interpretation of scripure.

So before you claim that the pentecostal is not studying his bible you should look at one of these authors works that has convinced those who know more of the scripture and original languages than you and be open to the idea that maybe you could still learn something you did not know about this topic.

If these writers presentation of hermeneutics on the topic have persuaded Greek Speaking Seminary professors who were ceasationists to change their beliefs to continuationist don't you think they might be worth reading?

People ask me to read or listen to John MacArthur's views on the topic and I have. Then I try to get them to listen or read one of these authors and I don't think they ever do. Why? If they did they would suddenly see how pitiful John MacArthurs presentations on the topic are. These men are giants, MacArthur sounds like a dishonest manipulater on this topic in comparison to these authors thorough work on the topic. If they were to read them they would discover how poorly MacArthur handles the subject.

Yes read your bible. If you must read MacAuthor or the other scholars so called on your list. Just know are guard yourself from accepting what they teach that is not sound doctrine. Yes test what they say against the word of God. I assure you that every man you claim to be a giant has flaws and errors in their doctrine.

The length of time you have been studying is not nearly as important as the quality of your study. Claiming a false gift is not a good thing.

Professing themselves to be wise God revealed them to be foolish.

For the cause of Christ
Roger