Speaking in tongues

[Dino246]

Count me third.

Heb 13:
22I urge you, brothers, to bear with my word of exhortation, for I have only written you briefly.
23Be aware that our brother Timothy has been released. If he arrives soon, I will come with him to see you.
24Greet all your leaders and all the saints.
Those from Italy send you greetings.
25Grace be with all of you.

Who else was fond of mentioning their companions in the epistles?

I hope your belief rests on more evidence than that. Paul calls Timothy "my son" in several places, both in the first and third person, and not merely "our brother":
1 Corinthians 4:17 For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord.
Philippians 2:2 But you know that Timothy has proved himself, because as a son with his father he has served with me in the work of the gospel.
1 Timothy 1:2 To Timothy my true son in the faith: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

Peter and John also reference the other believers:
1 Peter 5:12 With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God.
3 John 12 Demetrius is well spoken of by everyone—and even by the truth itself. We also speak well of him, and you know that our testimony is true.

Paul was called to the Gentiles, not the Jews, while Peter was called to the Jews (Galatians 2:7-9; Romans 11:13 and 15:16; Ephesians 3:8).

 

[garee]

1. Were there people to translate? How did you all know it was different rational languages?
2. Was she telling the same story in different languages or just switching stories as she switched languages?
3. Did she understand what she was saying?

Does she has a recording to confirm different rational languages?

 

[CS1]

What a contradiction of doctrine.
How can one be Pentecostal and not speak in tongues therefore unable to pray in the Holy Spirit as commanded to?
Nor can one experience the refreshing and the joy of fervent prayer in the Spirit.
How can a Pentecostal disciple praise and worship our Lord and God and the Father but by praying in tongues?
You are denying a fundamental truth here. You are denying the Bible evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

then you don't know pentecostal Doctrine.

 

[notuptome]

It's interesting that I have been studying John 6 with my family for devotions the past two nights. Let's look at what Peter says as recorded in the passage:
John 6
68 But Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (NKJV)

Notice that Peter does not say anything at all about miracles. He doesn't say he followed Jesus 'not for miracles.' Maybe you just eisegete that idea into the passage like you do with the canon in I Corinthians 13. But I do not believe we should treat the Bible like that--reading our pet doctrine into it and then convincing ourselves the passage we read it into it really says it.

The miracle Jesus did with the fish after Peter had fished all night had already had an impact on Peter. If Peter actually believed because of the word He heard, Thomas refused to believe in the resurrection until He saw Jesus with His own eyes, insisting to put his finger into His hand and his hand into His side.

Jesus said,
In John 14, Jesus told His disciples:
11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves. (NKJV)

Jesus' works were not the enemy of His words. God working miracles is not the enemy of believing the word of God.

Very philosophic but we believe by faith not by sight. We believe because the word of God says so and the Holy Spirit confirms it in the heart. We do not believe because of miracles even though our belief could be considered a miracle. In John 6 we see the followers of Jesus leave because Jesus told them doctrine they did not like. Jesus knew they followed for the miracles and the food not for the right reasons.

You speak of pet doctrines and zealously guard your own that you might persist in unbiblical behavior. If Jesus was about miracles He might well have heeded the taunts of the religious leaders and come down off the cross. Jesus endured the cross for us not for Himself.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Noose]

I hope your belief rests on more evidence than that. Paul calls Timothy "my son" in several places, both in the first and third person, and not merely "our brother":
1 Corinthians 4:17 For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord.
Philippians 2:2 But you know that Timothy has proved himself, because as a son with his father he has served with me in the work of the gospel.
1 Timothy 1:2 To Timothy my true son in the faith: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

Peter and John also reference the other believers:
1 Peter 5:12 With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God.
3 John 12 Demetrius is well spoken of by everyone—and even by the truth itself. We also speak well of him, and you know that our testimony is true.

Paul was called to the Gentiles, not the Jews, while Peter was called to the Jews (Galatians 2:7-9; Romans 11:13 and 15:16; Ephesians 3:8).

Nope, it is not the only evidence but that Hebrews ending is packed with enough information to make someone conclude that it was Paul who wrote it. Let's have a look again:

Heb 13:
23I want you to know that our brother Timothy has been released. If he arrives soon, I will come with him to see you.
24Greet all your leaders and all the Lord’s people. Those from Italy send you their greetings.
25Grace be with you all.

1. The word Italy alone disqualifies Peter and many other apostles because it suggests that the letter was being written from Italy or by someone who is from Italy. He is sending regards from those from Italy, meaning that he is in Italy himself or from Italy. If Peter was an apostle to the Jews, what would he be doing in Italy?
Paul, as much as he was an apostle to the gentiles, preached the gospel in Jerusalem and outside Jerusalem into other nations- we all know that.

2. Only Paul would be aware of the happenings in Italian prisons because he was also held there at one moment and surprise surprise, Philippians was written by Paul and Timothy in an Italian prison as suggested here:

Philippians 1:
1Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus,
To all God’s holy people in Christ Jesus at Philippi, together with the overseers and deacons a :
2Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ......
7It is right for me to feel this way about all of you, since I have you in my heart and, whether I am in chains or defending and confirming the gospel, all of you share in God’s grace with me. .....
12Now I want you to know, brothers and sisters, b that what has happened to me has actually served to advance the gospel. 13As a result, it has become clear throughout the whole palace guard c and to everyone else that I am in chains for Christ. 14And because of my chains, most of the brothers and sisters have become confident in the Lord and dare all the more to proclaim the gospel without fear.

 

[presidente]

Count me third.

Heb 13:
22I urge you, brothers, to bear with my word of exhortation, for I have only written you briefly.
23Be aware that our brother Timothy has been released. If he arrives soon, I will come with him to see you.
24Greet all your leaders and all the saints.
Those from Italy send you greetings.
25Grace be with all of you.e

Who else was fond of mentioning their companions in the epistles?

Could be someone else who knew Timothy. Paul called Timothy his son in at least one of his epistles. I have read that it is written in a high polished style of Greek that Paul did not use in other epistles. Candidates suggested have been Luke, Apollos, Clement, and Barnabas.

 

[presidente]

2. Only Paul would be aware of the happenings in Italian prisons because he was also held there at one moment and surprise surprise, Philippians was written by Paul and Timothy in an Italian prison as suggested here:

If Paul was the only person held in an Italian prison, why would there need to be more than one? Isn't it possible some other Christian could have been in prison?

 

[Noose]

Could be someone else who knew Timothy. Paul called Timothy his son in at least one of his epistles. I have read that it is written in a high polished style of Greek that Paul did not use in other epistles. Candidates suggested have been Luke, Apollos, Clement, and Barnabas.

Heb 13:
23I want you to know that our brother Timothy has been released. If he arrives soon, I will come with him to see you.
24Greet all your leaders and all the Lord’s people. Those from Italy send you their greetings.
25Grace be with you all.

The person who wrote Hebrews wrote it from Italy or was from Italy for them to send regards from those in Italy as shown above.
Based on this alone, there's one strong candidate, stronger than Luke, Apollos, Clement, and Barnabas. His name is Paul.

 

[presidente]

Very philosophic but we believe by faith not by sight. We believe because the word of God says so and the Holy Spirit confirms it in the heart. We do not believe because of miracles even though our belief could be considered a miracle.

Your philosophy here is not in line with the scriptures I showed you. The scriptures I referred you to are true whether you believe them or not.

In John 6 we see the followers of Jesus leave because Jesus told them doctrine they did not like. Jesus knew they followed for the miracles and the food not for the right reasons.

Again, you got it wrong. Jesus said they sought Him not because they saw the miracles, but because they ate of the loaves and were filled. It is right there in the passage.

You speak of pet doctrines and zealously guard your own that you might persist in unbiblical behavior.

I backed up what I said with the Bible. You are claiming things that the passage you refer to contradicts.

If Jesus was about miracles He might well have heeded the taunts of the religious leaders and come down off the cross. Jesus endured the cross for us not for Himself.

What do you mean 'If Jesus was about miracles'? That's rather vague. Jesus did what He saw the Father doing. The Father did the works. He did miracles because it was the Father's will. Jesus doing miracles was a good thing. There is no reason to be opposed to God doing miracles. It is not a case of choosing between miracles or the preaching of the word. Jesus did both. The twelve apostles did both. Philip did both. Paul did both. Paul said follow me as I follow Christ. Doing miracles is not some inherently bad thing we are supposed to be against.

 

[Noose]

Doing miracles is not some inherently bad thing we are supposed to be against.

But it is something we ought to be careful about because guess who else does miracles?

2 Thess 2:9The coming of the lawless one will beaccompanied by the working of Satan, with every kind of power, sign, and FALSE wonder, 10and with every wicked deception directed against those who are perishing, because they refused the love of the truth that would have saved them.

Matthew 24:24
For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders that would deceive even the elect, if that were possible.

Revelation 13:14
Because of the signs it was given to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived those who dwell on the earth, telling them to make an image to the beast that had been wounded by the sword and yet had lived.

These things are happening in the church and no other place because they are targeted at the elect.

There are no genuine miracles, not a single one.

 

[presidente]

But it is something we ought to be careful about because guess who else does miracles?

2 Thess 2:9The coming of the lawless one will beaccompanied by the working of Satan, with every kind of power, sign, and FALSE wonder, 10and with every wicked deception directed against those who are perishing, because they refused the love of the truth that would have saved them.

Matthew 24:24
For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders that would deceive even the elect, if that were possible.

Revelation 13:14
Because of the signs it was given to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived those who dwell on the earth, telling them to make an image to the beast that had been wounded by the sword and yet had lived.

These things are happening in the church and no other place because they are targeted at the elect.

There are no genuine miracles, not a single one.

Of course we are to be discerning. Jesus warned against false prophets, but He also said He was sending prophets, wise men, and scribes. He says We will know false prophets by their fruits.

He doesn't say that all prophets will be false.

But don't ou believe all those verses with those warnings are for the past and aren't valid for today?

 

[Noose]

Of course we are to be discerning. Jesus warned against false prophets, but He also said He was sending prophets, wise men, and scribes. He says We will know false prophets by their fruits.

He doesn't say that all prophets will be false.

But don't ou believe all those verses with those warnings are for the past and aren't valid for today?

Those verses are for today and not the past because they are about end of age.
The promise about sending prophets and wise men was before this:

Heb 1:1On many past occasions and in many different ways, God spoke to our fathers through the prophets. 2But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things,and through whom He made the universe

 

[garee]

In my experience, you have a very, very narrow view of what the prophecy from Isaiah means, interpretting it differently from how Paul applies it in the passage. Your interpretation does not seem to allow for the exercise of the gift the way Paul describes in the passage. One speaks in tongues--a language the speaker (generally) does not understand (v. 19)--and another interprets what he says (v.27). This edifies the body. Paul writes this long passage to lead up to instructions (commandments of the Lord v.37) on how to have an orderly church meeting.

The gift is God... who is not served by human hand as He brings new prophecy in all the langue's needed for them to hear Him and no longer after the Hebrew alone. The positive sign (not seen) is that a person has heard prophecy is that they have believed God not seen. Describing those who walk by faith the unseen gift of God that works in the heart of man to both will and do his good pleasure.

God speaks by putting His thoughts as words on the tongue of the prophets, giving the interpretation of the Holy Spirit to the prophet and the hearer. as one Mutually work both the speaker is giving the interpretation as well as given ears to the other to hear. No private interpretations . We warns of those who say we need man to teach us what he says . If other do not hear the interpretation in their own tongue them the speaker should by silent and mediate on the word his own self. No secret ta language needed to believe prophecy . Parables that hide the spiritual understanding as a signified language that Christ spoke not without is as close to that kind of secret language as possible it reveals the mysteries of God


According to the prophecy the law is not subject to change as to what it as a sign confirms and who the sign of God mocking is against. it is what Paul applies to the passage.

There are also instructions related to prophets speaking, and instructions under which 'ye may all prophesy' (v.30). Prophesying in this context is revelatory in nature (v. 29.)

All prophecy supernaturally reveals the thoughts of God as he alone interprets them to men.

Paul quotes Isaiah in the midst of a discourse in which he explains that, not only do uninterpreted tongues not edify the congregation, unbelievers also respond with unbelief, not hearing God who said that '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.'

Paul quotes Isaiah as to identify who the sign of God mocking those is against ,Yet for all that they still refuses to believe prophecy but rather that which came for their own mouths as oral traditions of men. Therefore making the word of God prophecy without effect .

You developed your own interpretation of this verse from Isaiah that does not match or intersect with Paul's whole argument in the passage.

I think it matches. What do you think the sign men seek after outwardly reveals as to how and what it confirms ?

 

[CS1]

Very philosophic but we believe by faith not by sight. We believe because the word of God says so and the Holy Spirit confirms it in the heart. We do not believe because of miracles even though our belief could be considered a miracle. In John 6 we see the followers of Jesus leave because Jesus told them doctrine they did not like. Jesus knew they followed for the miracles and the food not for the right reasons.

You speak of pet doctrines and zealously guard your own that you might persist in unbiblical behavior. If Jesus was about miracles He might well have heeded the taunts of the religious leaders and come down off the cross. Jesus endured the cross for us not for Himself.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I AGREE I don't believe because of miracles. It is the Holy Spirit who reproves the world of sin. And it is the gospel of Jesus Christ that saves and that ONLY. it from the word of God, I believe God still does miracles and HE still is gifting His body with spiritual gifts AS 1cor chapter 12 says. When Jesus said these sign shall follow them that believe, I believe that too and those signs do follow. When the word of God says the confirming of His word is with signs and wonders I believe that too.

 

[notuptome]

Your philosophy here is not in line with the scriptures I showed you. The scriptures I referred you to are true whether you believe them or not.

I believe the scripture I just don't believe your biased understanding of the scriptures.

Again, you got it wrong. Jesus said they sought Him not because they saw the miracles, but because they ate of the loaves and were filled. It is right there in the passage.

Hello that was the miracle.

I backed up what I said with the Bible. You are claiming things that the passage you refer to contradicts.

Your understanding contradicts what those scriptures are teaching.

What do you mean 'If Jesus was about miracles'? That's rather vague. Jesus did what He saw the Father doing. The Father did the works. He did miracles because it was the Father's will. Jesus doing miracles was a good thing. There is no reason to be opposed to God doing miracles. It is not a case of choosing between miracles or the preaching of the word. Jesus did both. The twelve apostles did both. Philip did both. Paul did both. Paul said follow me as I follow Christ. Doing miracles is not some inherently bad thing we are supposed to be against.

Today it is. Miracles detract form the preaching of the gospel. We have scripture in it's full content. The Holy Spirit uses the word of God and not miracles to convert men's souls. See the problem here and in the modern church is the lack of belief that God is going to do what God desires to do the way He has declared He will do it. You and many others want to help God work in the hearts and minds of unsaved men with miracles and signs.

Isa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Dino246]

The gift is God... who is not served by human hand as He brings new prophecy in all the langue's needed for them to hear Him and no longer after the Hebrew alone. The positive sign (not seen) is that a person has heard prophecy is that they have believed God not seen. Describing those who walk by faith the unseen gift of God that works in the heart of man to both will and do his good pleasure.

God speaks by putting His thoughts as words on the tongue of the prophets, giving the interpretation of the Holy Spirit to the prophet and the hearer. as one Mutually work both the speaker is giving the interpretation as well as given ears to the other to hear. No private interpretations . We warns of those who say we need man to teach us what he says . If other do not hear the interpretation in their own tongue them the speaker should by silent and mediate on the word his own self. No secret ta language needed to believe prophecy . Parables that hide the spiritual understanding as a signified language that Christ spoke not without is as close to that kind of secret language as possible it reveals the mysteries of God


According to the prophecy the law is not subject to change as to what it as a sign confirms and who the sign of God mocking is against. it is what Paul applies to the passage.




All prophecy supernaturally reveals the thoughts of God as he alone interprets them to men.



Paul quotes Isaiah as to identify who the sign of God mocking those is against ,Yet for all that they still refuses to believe prophecy but rather that which came for their own mouths as oral traditions of men. Therefore making the word of God prophecy without effect .




I think it matches. What do you think the sign men seek after outwardly reveals as to how and what it confirms ?

You may not believe in speaking in tongues, but you sure do write in a strange language.

 

[Dino246]

Today it is. Miracles detract form the preaching of the gospel. We have scripture in it's full content. The Holy Spirit uses the word of God and not miracles to convert men's souls. See the problem here and in the modern church is the lack of belief that God is going to do what God desires to do the way He has declared He will do it. You and many others want to help God work in the hearts and minds of unsaved men with miracles and signs.

And you limit God to what your understanding of His word allows. God is able to do far more than we can ask or imagine. He is not limited to using words to reach someone with the gospel, and He is not limited to using words only in the lives of His children.

If you haven't seen God at work in miraculous ways, that's your loss. If you think that He doesn't work in miraculous ways today, that's your error.

 

[Endoscopy]

Keep in mind that the speaking in tongues was the disciples speaking to foreign visiters to Judah in their language.

 

[Dino246]

Keep in mind that the speaking in tongues was the disciples speaking to foreign visiters to Judah in their language.

In Acts 2, yes. In Acts 10 and 19, and in 1 Corinthians, no.

 

[notuptome]

And you limit God to what your understanding of His word allows. God is able to do far more than we can ask or imagine. He is not limited to using words to reach someone with the gospel, and He is not limited to using words only in the lives of His children.

If you haven't seen God at work in miraculous ways, that's your loss. If you think that He doesn't work in miraculous ways today, that's your error.

Yet time and time again that is what God has said He will do. God has chosen how the gospel will be declared throughout the world. Thomas believed because he saw but Jesus said blessed are those who not seeing believe.

Joh 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

For the cause of Christ
Roger