Speaking in tongues

You're adding to the word of God here (the bolded part). Again I ask you: why are you taking the verse about serving two masters out of context and applying it to speaking in tongues? That verse is about God and money!

The "sign gifts" issue has been explained to you more than once, but you refuse to accept it.

Sentences there are not? You much Yoda.

Please Garee, take a basic writing course at your local college, or at least seek to emulate the sentence structure in the KJV. For all its flaws it does have excellent grammar.

We should clarify that point. (bold emphasis mine) But perhaps you meant it as stated.

Private tongues used TO ADDRESS a public assembly are not considered edifying.
That would be edifying to me personally, but the Apostle was seeking to correct the
over-the-top abuse of it by the Corinthian church.

The reason it would be edifying to me is that I would know that the Spirit was moving
in the worship service. And that the Spirit was interceding on our behalf. There would not
be any revelation for us to ponder, but it would still be edifying to me.

We should also apply this to these other instances of tongues speaking. These are not evangelistic tongues.

Acts 8:14-17
When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. 15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

Acts 10:45-46
The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. ...

Acts 19:6
When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.

We should talk about the NT pattern of two baptisms.
1) Water baptism
2) The baptism with the Holy Spirit

Here below is one key text.
How is it that these "new believers" in Samaria had not yet received the Holy Spirit?
And how is it that "they received the Holy Spirit" when the Apostle placed their hands on them?

Acts 8:14-17
When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. 15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

Yes, We plant the seed He causes the living growth or building up. but that has nothing to do with the tongues doctrine

I would not call it unknown .According to Mathew 6 God knows the thoughts of our heart before we make a sound . If we would repetitiously in vain with the vain being making a sound (babbling )that does not clearly acknowledge our father in heaven and the vain not the frequency.

We are to cry out in prayer and supplication to our "father" in heaven a sound that spell out the literal word father which some said it is to cry out like a baby in a living hope to be clothed in the righteousness of Christ. I think our cries do go up that way to our father unseen in heaven and yes he understands the groaning of our bodies of death, groaning in expectation of our new incorruptible bodies. It again is why I believe we do cry out to our father in His holy unseen place with words of understanding knowing he has heard us giving us a desire to do his will as he does work in us to both will and perform his good purpose. We should do so without murmuring according to the passage in Philipian2.

The vain repetition would be the chanting or sound making that has no meaning to the hearer. Noise like a child banging wood spoons on a kettle but offer no desire in accomplishing something.

God I would think desire repetitions that are not vain but form words for others to understand. His word does not return void and the same would apply to us if we are walking by faith..

Matthew 6;6-9 King James Version (KJV)But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

There may be six or seven thousand languages in the world. How many are in Google translate? How many have writing systems? What about dead languages?

I Corinthians chapter 12 comes after Revelation 22 in which way??

The work of converting is a work in process. Dead languages are dead. Some use them to give the illusion of mysticism like the sign of tongues it show they refuse to hear prophecy but enjoy wonderment .

Well should one wish to SIT, one may still pray for this gift. It doesn't mean God will give it to you though yes. But many who have prayed for it. And have been prayed over for it. Have had it given unto them. I should know. I'm one of them.

No sign gift. We walk by faith. The eternal not seen.

The laying on of hands parable represents a desire from the person performing it that God might possibly be part of the ceremony. It is not a way of moving God to do the will of one laying his hand on a animal or person .

Water Baptism has it foundation in the Old testament. It like tongues does not have a new testemtment foundation . Water can get a person wet but it dries and disappears.

Refuted from Scripture. Your repetition of error grows tiresome.

Over the currently 190 pages of this thread, garee's posts have been refuted repeatedly. He takes Biblical phrases and seems to be interpreting--if we can understand his odd use of religious terminology right--them in a way that contradicts the chapter he is discussing. Refute him and clearly show he's off, and he keeps repeating the same stuff over and over again.

One church I attended did allow private tongues to be used by small groups (2 to 5) within a larger assembly... but it was to remain within that group. They also had several other rules to maintain order. Like, if you thought you were being led to prophesy, then you were to contact leadership. If another person then contacted leadership feeling they were being led to interpret, then the two would be given the ok to speak. But they were very strict and addressed inappropriate uses immediately. With this kind of structure I think it is ok. But unfortunately far too many congregations become a free-for-all circus. And that's why we have 1 Cor 14, and mis-informed people like kavik and cv5.

I am using the quote to tag you.

I can't find the post, but I mentioned speaking in tongues in known languages. You said that was xenoglossia. I realize linguists use that term for the idea of speaking a foreign language one does not know. You said there were no documented cases of it.

That's not true. I did a bit of digging in a college library in the early 1990's as a student, and I came across a couple of articles on these topics. There was some kind of paranormal studies journal, probably from the '70's or '80's about some sort of occultic-sounding experience where a woman spoke in a language, maybe Swedish, while in a trance. That case seemed potentially demonic to me. The article did pass whatever peer review standards (presumably) it took to get in that journal. I don't know the ranking of the journal.

I wonder what your criteria is for documentation. I spoke with a historian who it might be argued founded the field of Pentecostal history as an academic discipline over his dinner table. He told me that Agnes Ozman's speaking in Chinese was identified by a Chinese person who worked in a Chinese laundry. There was documentation for it. I'd wondered if they'd just thought it 'sounded like' Chinese. I'd wondered if there were any Chinese there. If it weren't something supernatural, historians would accept the same kind of testimony for documented accounts of xenoglossia. I've got a biographical type book on my shelf that tells of another account of it. This is documentation.

If xenoglossia shows up in an academic journal of another field, and there are historical source materials to back it up, it's is false to say there are no documented cases of it. You might say there is no documentation of it ___that you know of___ in a narrow stream of literature that you are familiar with. But there are many other disciplines. Your comments, to me, seem unscientific. I don't know what your training is. My bachelors was in linguistics, and my masters and PhD are in another field. So I don't know much about the approaches to research methodology in Linguistics. They don't cover much of that at the undergraduate level. But from my own training, we were told we had to be careful about claiming research didn't exists. It's like claiming to have 'proven' something using statistics. The central limit theorum is a theorum not a proof. Science doesn't 'prove' much of anything. Social science certainly doesn't 'prove' much of anything. There would be limited areas where we might use the word 'proof.' Mathematicians use words like 'proof' in their field.

Another message follows.

Kavik,

I also wanted to point out that I did indeed show you where Paul indicated that speaking in tongues does not use the understanding. Paul said he would rather speak 5 words with his understanding/mind that he may instruct others than 10,000 words with an unknown tongue. You read that and apparently stuck with your loose interpretation (eisegesis) that his issue was with not knowing the other languages as well (if I understood you write.)

I asked you earlier and I don't think you responded, but I want to know if naturalistic, non-supernatural type interpretations appeal to you in general? The diglossia interpretation seems to be an naturalistic, non-supernatural interpretation. I, of course, reject that because it goes against the plain sense and runs contrary to what I have read of the historical context, and makes assumptions about the historical context that cannot be supported. But it does fit with the mold of a naturalistic type interpretation.

So I am trying to see where you are coming from. Do you tend to see other passages as about naturalistic rather than supernatural events? Do you think Israel walked across the Red Sea on dry ground, or do you think there was just some unusually low tide in the Gulf of Aqabah or something along those lines? Are there other miraculous events recorded that you do not believe happened as they are described in the Bible? Do you think Lazarus was in a coma, for example?

Still waiting for the verse that says; "Signs the temporal as what the eyes see are gifts". Was is the gift of seeing what is in front and no need for faith.?

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.


Signs are designed for those who rebel and will not hear prophecy alone as the source of Christ's faith that works in us to both will and do His good pleasure. The unseen "sign" of prophecy (no sign)is that men can "believe God" not seen.

Exodus 7:3And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.

As a sign against them like the Pharaoh confirming those who refuse to hear prophecy, the Bible .Some of the Jews were waiting for the four hundred year time of testing to fulfill prophecy of Abraham.. They did not need a sign to confirm their unbelief as if they were not trusting prophecy . They believed as the sign of faith working in them

God's word does not say that signs as that seen the temporal are gifts we are to search for the hidden eternal treasures there we will find our new softened heart . Signs gifts is not a biblical teaching.

While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal2 Corinthians4:18

Signs point towards those who refuse to believe prophecy .Those who have no faith that alone comes from hearing God. They walk by sight after the natural course of this world.

Christ said it is a evil generation natural unconverted man that walk by sight after a sign . You coulld say as in idol worship.

Because the kingdom of God is not of this world we walk by the unseen eternal.

Because the Egyptian knew not God Christ brought sign and wonder as sores or curses upon them. Signs represent those who know not God .Prophecy for those who do know God.

Deuteronomy 6:22 And the Lord shewed signs and wonders, great and sore, upon Egypt, upon Pharaoh, and upon all his household, before our eyes:

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Luke 11:29 And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.

1 Corinthians 14:21-22 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. 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.

Jesus is walking the countryside, from town to town to town. Most have heard of Him, welcome Him, and He does miraculous things there. But He walks into one town and the greeting is different...

"Yeah, we heard of ya, but we're a gonna need more proof than these so call eye witnesses. Why just the healing stuff alone, do you have doctors reports, xrays and that kinda stuff? We're gonna need to see that, and check to see if you're in-network, before we're going to let you loose".

And He could not do many miracles there.

The reason many don't see miracles, like tongues, is because they seek human proof, when all God offers is faith.

Acts 2:4-13

The people that mocked them said they were full of new wine, or drunk not much different from people mocking others today and saying they make it up themselves or labelling it some fancy name like glossalia.

In fact it is not about experience but about sound doctrine. Sound doctrine is biblical doctrine not one man's experience.

The bible speaks of death and we all get to experience one. Is that good? Only if you have experienced the second birth. Sound doctrine teaches the one must have the second birth to inherit heaven.

For the cause of Christ
Roger