Some truth about speaking in tongues, the Holy Ghost, spiritual gifts and 1 Corinthians 14

I'm sorry for putting a red X on your post. If you tell me where it is I'll remove it.

WHO says Wigglesworth is bulletproof? Why are YOU doubting my gift of discernment? I have to believe YOUR gift or others that say they have tongues. Why aren't I accorded the same belief?

I have read BOTH sides about Wigglesworth and have discerned that he is not operating under the H.S.

Since I have to believe about tongues and other gifts, why aren't you believing mine? Or MUST I also be 100% accurate?

Who knows maybe the experience I shared is but a very small piece in a large tapestry that God is using to illustrate this biblical truth.

May God bless you in your pursuit of the truth.

There is no way you have read wigglesworth.

Men are not God.
Like i said,your starting place is off.
Thats the only way you can form that boggus opinion of wigglesworth.
Only a shunned and fired brat like costi would even attempt to malign such a pure warrior as wigglesworth.
Your investment in a boggus smear job is embarrassing.
I even sent you a link.
Telling....that you missed that one so badly

I didn't say I have read ALL of Wigglesworth. A dear brother in our men's group is a Wigglesworth fan. I have read some about him and what he said, and I have heard others talk about him in a positive manner.

But I would be remiss not to "test the spirits" by reading the whole story. And I'm telling you there is NO place in Scripture where Jesus or His Apostles physically assault someone to heal them. Wigglesworth did. And in some instances made their condition worse.

THAT is NOT from the H. S.

I told you I went to that website, and couldn't find the Name of Jesus on the entire home page. But I DID find a link to buy a bunch of his stuff. Still milking the poor even after death!

Answer 1-4 No.
I am sorry, i dont want lay in your mouth what you have not said.
If you claim, that the proof for to baptised with the Holy Spirit, ore be filled with the Holy Spirit is the gift of speaking in tongues, then the conclusion is that somebody is not filled with the Holy Spirit ore baptised with the Holy Spirit if he has not the gift of speaking in tongues. I dont know any churchfather ore reformator who claimed and taught this.
I took the churchfathers and reformators as example because they influenced and foundet a big part of the theological directions we have today. Non of them taught the doctrine we find since 1901 first thrugh the pentecostal and later the charismatic movements.
If you know some, please let me know.

I come from lutheren background. Nowhere Luther taught this!!
So please more detail info.
Show me where the reformators taught this. You cant! Because the did not.

what I am saying is the Bible in the Book of Acts shows those who were empowered with the Holy Spirit did when one was filled or baptized in the Holy Spirit, 1. spoke in tongues 2. prophesied. That is what the book of Acts shows. 1901 assertion of teaching is moot. the influence of theological direction does not make it authoritative and in addition just because they never addressed everything in doctrine does not make what is seen in the Book of Acts null and void.
You did not answer my questions :

I have a few questions for you. If you choose to answer.

1. are you suggesting that Doctrine only comes from the reformed Founders and church fathers?
2. are the doctrines of the reformed and church fathers authoritative
3. If they are where did they get them from?
4. do we have the ability today to verify church fathers doctrine and the reformed founders?

I see you said "1-4 no"

1. so there is doctrine today that comes from other than church fathers
2. and you do not see the doctrines of the church fathers as authoritative
3. answer was no.

4. we do not have the ability to verify the church fathers or reformed founders doctrines? What is the word of God for? Can we not look at the Book of Acts and achieve doctrinal confirmation along with all the word of God?

I said: 1- 4 No

I saw that.

QUOTE="CS1, post: 3919062, member: 126684"]I saw that.[/QUOTE]
So is my answer sufficient?

So is my answer sufficient?[/QUOTE]
it is your answer and I respect it.

Just as long as you know, when you stated this below:

"no church father ore reformator was empowered ore filled with the Holy Spirit because none of them claimed this for himself ore taught this, that speaking in tongues is the proof to be filled with the Holy Spirit. "

remember that you have never seen or heard any of the church fathers or reformed founders teach on what is known as the initial evidence of one being baptized in the Holy Spirit (doctrine) is no longer a valid argument you can use anymore. because they are not authoritative as you have stated.

You said no to all my question 1 to 4

which were:

1. are you suggesting that Doctrine only comes from the reformed Founders and church fathers?
2. are the doctrines of the reformed and church fathers authoritative
3. If they are where did they get them from?
4. do we have the ability today to verify church fathers doctrine and the reformed founders?

1.you said no to all of them. doctrine does not come from only the church fathers and reformers
2. they doctrine they have are not authoritative
3. answer no to three
4. we no way to verify the doctrine of the church fathers or the reformers. I disagree with your answer to #4. The word of God can.

44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
John 6:

Perhaps a link to what Church Fathers belief on tongues is found here:

http://www.francisgumerlock.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/Tongues in the Church Fathers.pdf

The church fathers were only witnesses then I would think.

it is your answer and I respect it.

Just as long as you know, when you stated this below:

"no church father ore reformator was empowered ore filled with the Holy Spirit because none of them claimed this for himself ore taught this, that speaking in tongues is the proof to be filled with the Holy Spirit. "

remember that you have never seen or heard any of the church fathers or reformed founders teach on what is known as the initial evidence of one being baptized in the Holy Spirit (doctrine) is no longer a valid argument you can use anymore. because they are not authoritative as you have stated.

You said no to all my question 1 to 4

which were:

1. are you suggesting that Doctrine only comes from the reformed Founders and church fathers?
2. are the doctrines of the reformed and church fathers authoritative
3. If they are where did they get them from?
4. do we have the ability today to verify church fathers doctrine and the reformed founders?

1.you said no to all of them. doctrine does not come from only the church fathers and reformers
2. they doctrine they have are not authoritative
3. answer no to three
4. we no way to verify the doctrine of the church fathers or the reformers. I disagree with your answer to #4. The word of God can. [/QUOTE]

At first, i have to apologize, of course point 4 is yes.
The Word of God is over all man Made Doctrine. And no churchfather ore reformator was 100% right in there teaching.

Second, according your Definition: that speaking in tongues is the Proof that someone is filled ore baptised with the Holy Spirit, I gave only the conclusion for your claim.
And because no churchfather ore reformator taught this, they was according your view not filled ore baptised with the Holy Spirit.

You may accept it ore not. It is History that this teaching startet in 1901 with Topeka. The beginning of the pentecostal movement.

If, i am wrong then Show me where and from whom in the churchhistory this was taught.

If your teaching is correct, then is there an 1800 Years gap. Where no christian had taught and practiced this what you claimed.

At first, i have to apologize, of course point 4 is yes.
The Word of God is over all man Made Doctrine. And no churchfather ore reformator was 100% right in there teaching.

Second, according your Definition: that speaking in tongues is the Proof that someone is filled ore baptised with the Holy Spirit, I gave only the conclusion for your claim.
And because no churchfather ore reformator taught this, they was according your view not filled ore baptised with the Holy Spirit.

You may accept it ore not. It is History that this teaching startet in 1901 with Topeka. The beginning of the pentecostal movement.

If, i am wrong then Show me where and from whom in the churchhistory this was taught.

If your teaching is correct, then is there an 1800 Years gap. Where no christian had taught and practiced this what you claimed.[/QUOTE]
I have to add: and it is not taught in the bible! And this is the most important fact.

Francis Gumerlock is not a church father. no is the authority of Biblical application.

I mean the author has dissertation on the belief of the church fathers... you may read it if you choose to...

At first, i have to apologize, of course point 4 is yes.
The Word of God is over all man Made Doctrine. And no churchfather ore reformator was 100% right in there teaching.

Second, according your Definition: that speaking in tongues is the Proof that someone is filled ore baptised with the Holy Spirit, I gave only the conclusion for your claim.
And because no churchfather ore reformator taught this, they was according your view not filled ore baptised with the Holy Spirit.

You may accept it ore not. It is History that this teaching startet in 1901 with Topeka. The beginning of the pentecostal movement.

If, i am wrong then Show me where and from whom in the churchhistory this was taught.

If your teaching is correct, then is there an 1800 Years gap. Where no Christian had taught and practiced this what you claimed.[/QUOTE]


Again it is not my definition that speaking in tongues is proof that someone is filled or baptized with the Holy Spirit. Again you state

"because no churchfather ore reformator taught this, they was according your view not filled ore baptised with the Holy Spirit."

I have never said that you keep injecting that false narrative.
and if you knew Church History the gifts of the Holy Spirit started in the Book of Acts, not in Topeka. due to the fact that you do not hold the teaching of the church father as authoritative, it does not matter if they ever mentioned the teaching of initial evidence.

what we do know is many of the church fathers taught and spoke on the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
Justin Martyr (approx. AD 100-165)
Irenaeus (approx. AD 120-202)
Novatian (approx. AD 210-280)
Gregory Neocaesarea (AD 213-270)

The Montanists
Reformation Era
Luther and Calvin Later leaders in the Reform tradition added the concept of the Illumination of the Spirit: