I know more than you do. That is not what AoG teaches, period. If you, and I mean if, you attended a church that was doing that then the pastor should and could have lost his licence. I have no vested interest in you or anyone else here. This is a discussion forum, nothing more. Stop being paranoid. No one is trying to "get" you. What we do here is discuss. That's it, you need to calm down.
I'm very calm, actually, so I think you are projecting your agitation on me. And obviously you don't know as much as you think you do. It is possible that the AoG org changed policy and began to suppress that, since my experience with it was in 1973. Do you know the history of the AoG and how they have changed their policies since then? But AoG is not the only culprit here, as all the denominations I listed have done the same. Even a few from the pulpit, although it's been many years ago I heard it.
Ask a stupid question, expect to be answered in kind.
I guess I should have been more specific.
There are about 10 million Pentecostals in the US. You say "many" are teaching false tongues. How many? How many were in the church you were in? I love how people come in here and have an experience with a handful of people they know and they judge everyone by the people they met. You're generalizing. So if every single person in your church was speaking in tongues falsely, so what? That puts them in error, not tongues themselves. smh
I'm not generalizing. I have been careful to say things like "all of what I've seen" and such as that. I'm aware that I have not seen everyone. But I have seen many in real life and many on youtube, and not one of them appear to me to be what was done in Acts 2.
And it appears to me that you continue to assume that modern P/C (Pentecostal and Charismatic) tongues is the same gift as Acts 2. I'm simply asking for it to be proven just once. From my 25 years experience among P/Cs, I just don't see it. What I do see is attempts at imitating Acts 2 and Paul's description in 1 Cor. 14. On the shallow surface it appears like it, but a closer examination shows otherwise.
Yep, already been said here. Your ideas are not new.
I never said they were. You're the one who brought this up, as if you think I think I'm being innovative. There is nothing new under the sun. But in this thread of now 62 pages, show me even one other poster who is asking for evidential proof as I am. But of course, you will refuse, as it appears to me you just want to argue about it.
Which people?! Based on what? What authority do they have to judge a persons heart and intent?!
Some in this thread of 62 pages, if you care to read it all. I'm merely saying that there are many people who have investigated tongues because it's so controversial, and saw evidence that it is counterfeit in nature.
But you are making the same mistake that many others do, in that you are taking it personally. No one that I can see (and I read all 62 pages of this thread) is judging anyone's heart and intent, except when it becomes obvious. They are judging the practice and the doctrine, which should be done, according to the NT.
Jesus' command not to judge means according to appearance only, or falsely. He actually commands us to judge rightly, and it is my intention to do so, as I ask for evidence of authenticity.
But when I ask questions that get to the heart of the matter, questions sometimes about intentions, they are questions, not judgments. If you take them as judgments, then you are wrongly taking it personally.
Yes, well clearly Youtube is the place to take your spiritual issues to. I'm beginning to see the problem.
The problem is that every video available to the public (for example youtube) shows counterfeit tongues. If you sincerely believe that authentic tongues is being practiced today, then why don't you do something about it, and start posting videos of them?
And the problem with many P/Cs is that they take their spiritual issues to people who don't know what they are talking about, and this is why we see so much error among them.
I had a friend like you who didn't believe in tongues. We never argued about the issue, but he flat out did not believe. He played guitar and we asked him to travel with us one morning in ministry. When we were singing someone spoke in tongues in the service and someone interpreted what was said. When the service was over and we were in eating at the restaurant we started to try to explain to him what had happened. He said," I know" We continued to explain and he said " No, you don't understand, I knew what the interpretation was before it was spoken". He was Baptist but he never again doubted tongues. This one thing I know, once I was blind, now I see.
I already read this from another post you did earlier. I don't care about someone else's testimony, since it is anecdotal evidence. I've had some real experiences myself, but I won't weary you with the details. But my point is that experiences don't have authoritative value when pitted against scripture. The tongues in 1 Cor. 14 is the same thing as it was in Acts 2. Do you agree or disagree?
Nor will you. You'll find what you're looking for based on your own bias.
As will you.
And it doesn't make it not so. No where in the Bible does it say tongues will cease on this day at this hour. If you don't believe Gods Word , I can't change your mind.
Here again you make wrong assumptions. I never said tongues will cease or has ceased. Can you show me where I said that? I did answer someone who asked for one verse, and I showed them Heb. 2:4 which has an implication for it, although implication doesn't prove it happened. I actually have been questioning modern day tongues as being the same thing in Acts 2, and have been saying all along that I think it's not, because I've yet to hear even one that is an actual language carrying meaning.
How is it that everyone that disagrees with your POV is taking you out of context?
Case in point is what I just said above. It's because of bias, misreading, misrepresentation, assumptions, and prejudices.
I don't need to prove anything, you do. And proving and debating is not the same thing.
You're the one who claims that your tongues is authentic, aren't you? Are you claiming this or not? Having something to prove is not the same thing as actually trying to prove something. Yet the whole point of debating is an attempt to prove something by reasoning. Is not an argument (a debate) put forth to prove something true or something else false? Of course it is.
But as far as who has to prove something, you have the burden of proof to show that your tongues is authentic (if indeed that is your claim). Are you claiming that your tongues is authentic? Are you claiming that it's the same gift they got in Acts 2?
A claim is just a claim. Anyone can claim they are a Christian, but if they are not living the life, their claim is invalid. Anyone can say "Jesus is Lord" as just parroting words, but if they aren't proving by their actions that Jesus is Lord of their life, then their claim to Christianity is not valid, even if they sincerely believe that saying it makes them a Christian.
Another analogy is, suppose someone is in a cult that denies the deity of Christ. We both would say they are not Christian. Yet, that person may sincerely believe they are a Christian, that they are right about their doctrine, and they use verses in the Bible to back up their doctrine. But according to how we read the Bible (both you and I), we would rightly judge them as not being a true Christian, and that the faith they are practicing is not Biblical. Would you concur with this?
Here is another analogy: suppose someone bows down to The Blessed Virgin Mary's statue and kisses her feet. We might call that idolatry. But they sincerely believe that their practice is right and good, and even quote verses of scripture and tradition to back up what they're doing. Would you concur that there is something wrong with that picture?
So my point is that it looks to me like there is something wrong with the picture that P/Cs are drawing. I'm just trying to get some evidence to show that authentic Acts 2 tongues is spoken today. But all I see is evidence of the contrary. I (and millions of other Christians) need more than claims. We need to see evidence.
You haven't gotten off step one. You haven't proved that tongues have stopped. Or are you saying the tongues in the NT were fake?
No, I'm saying I have yet to see one case of modern tongues that's like Acts 2. Can you help with evidence
(Cont'd in next post)