55 replies to this topic

[rockytopva]

The Apostle Paul said let all things be done decently and in order. There is a time in which it is appropriate to let the Spirit of God speak. Here is a Congregational Holiness Church service where a message is given out in tongues. But as not to interrupt the service or the message. These are the kind of services I like to attend.

Edited by rockytopva, 25 September 2011 - 09:00 PM.

[UHCAIan]

There is a time and place for tongues they need to be implemented in decency and order. We are similar to this church most of the time though our pastors and preachers try to refrain from speaking in tongues while they are preaching. Just to make sure that the word goes forth and that all are edified. Sometimes though the Holy Spirit will move upon the preacher and others in their Heavenly Language. I try not to determine and decide what the Holy Spirit will do.

[rockytopva]

Well spoken Mr Alan in which the scripture says...

Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counsellor hath taught him? - Isaiah 40

[n2thelight]

We know of a man who was raised in Africa, the son of missionary parents, who decided—rather cynically perhaps—to test the interpretation of tongues. At the appropriate moment, he rose and spoke the Lord's prayer in the African dialect he had learned in his youth. When he sat down, an interpreter of tongues at once offered the meaning of what he said. He interpreted it as a message of the imminent second coming of Christ. (Kildahl, op. cit., pages 62,63)

[whirlwind]

We know of a man who was raised in Africa, the son of missionary parents, who decided—rather cynically perhaps—to test the interpretation of tongues. At the appropriate moment, he rose and spoke the Lord's prayer in the African dialect he had learned in his youth. When he sat down, an interpreter of tongues at once offered the meaning of what he said. He interpreted it as a message of the imminent second coming of Christ. (Kildahl, op. cit., pages 62,63)

So much truth stated in such a short paragraph and without any condemnation. Good job!


.

[MR ROSENBERGER]

I think it's a load of rubbish that some one would speak gibberish or another language they don't know as i think that would only be the work of the Devil and total utter rubbish.
The only thing i would give as to speaking such a thing would be one talking ones own known language but it may not be understood by all or some then an other explains what you were talking about and all know.

Now some can teach something there way and others will not pick up on it, but another can come and put it another way and all pick up the conveyed message.

[Lively Stone]

We know of a man who was raised in Africa, the son of missionary parents, who decided—rather cynically perhaps—to test the interpretation of tongues. At the appropriate moment, he rose and spoke the Lord's prayer in the African dialect he had learned in his youth. When he sat down, an interpreter of tongues at once offered the meaning of what he said. He interpreted it as a message of the imminent second coming of Christ. (Kildahl, op. cit., pages 62,63)

I have a hard time thinking that the cynicism in his behaviour would ever bring forth a true interpretation by God. Perhaps God was turning the tables on him for his manipulation and misuse for the purposes of judging of a holy gift. That gift is for God's use and not ours.

[Foreigner]

I think it's a load of rubbish that some one would speak gibberish or another language they don't know as i think that would only be the work of the Devil and total utter rubbish.

-- That of course would be the position of a person willfully ignoring what the Bible says on the subject.

[Phillip]

I hold the Word of God dear to my heart above all things. By it, I know Love and truth and righteousness. I know how to go out and come in before the Gates of the City as the Word lights my path.

When I first began attending a 'pentecostal' church, I was amazed at this...

A man said that a woman was speaking an amazing Word of the Lord a couple days earlier.

I asked him, "wow, what did she say?"

He couldn't rememberwhat that "word of God" was. He just gave feel-good recollections.

I was aghast.

I hold the Word of God in such esteem, I couldn't believe that this man couldn't remember the Word of God he claimed came from this woman!

Of all the people who died to write down and convey the Word of God, this man couldn't remember what a woman said by direct inspiration, as he said.

I began to search out the topic diligently to find out more about this "speaking in tongues" thing I was seeing and heard the common advice we've all been given by pentecostals as to "how" to speak in tongues.

I tried those spirits. I found none of them to be of Christ.

The man in Africa, excellent point. I've been able to prove it out so often as he did in speaking in his own language. It is a major veil of carnal beguilement, the modern 'speaking in tongues' phenom. However, I'm sure my post means nothing to anyone else, It is simply a paying forward of sound advice and sound doctrine, to put off the foolishness of speaking in glossalalia. It is not of God.
Peace

[Lively Stone]

You cannot judge the gift by the ineptitude of those who have witnessed it.

[Shirley]

I have a hard time thinking that the cynicism in his behaviour would ever bring forth a true interpretation by God. Perhaps God was turning the tables on him for his manipulation and misuse for the purposes of judging of a holy gift. That gift is for God's use and not ours.

I would think that this person was testing the Spirit which was in the interpreter which if this story is true was clearly false. We are commanded to test the Spirits.

[Lively Stone]

What was done out of cynicism was not the testing of spirits.

[BiggAndyy]

Everytime Paul is giving instruction about Tongues, he is correcting their misuse, never complementing the Corinthian church nor even encouraging them to continue (1 Cor 14:19). It appears to me that, today, to try to emulate the Corinthians in this enterprise has already been dealth with 2,000 years ago yet we want to keep making the same mistakes over and over.

[rockytopva]

My goodness! I would rather sit in a lively Pentecostal service then be board out of my mind in a Protestant church any day of the week!

[BiggAndyy]

Seems like our two threads are reruns

[rockytopva]

My kind of service!

[Lively Stone]

Everytime Paul is giving instruction about Tongues, he is correcting their misuse, never complementing the Corinthian church nor even encouraging them to continue (1 Cor 14:19). It appears to me that, today, to try to emulate the Corinthians in this enterprise has already been dealth with 2,000 years ago yet we want to keep making the same mistakes over and over.

We are encouraged to emulate Paul, not necessarily the Corinthians, but we can learn from their mistakes that Paul was correcting.

1 Corinthians 11:1
And you should imitate me, just as I imitate Christ.

[BiggAndyy]

Then imitate 1Cor 14:19.

(null)

[Lively Stone]

Then imitate 1Cor 14:19.

(null)

As a congregation, we do. Singly, we do as Paul, and worship God, pray and sing in tongues as the Spirit leads.

[BiggAndyy]

Is singing in tongues in scripture?

[Lively Stone]

Is singing in tongues in scripture?

1 Corinthians 14:15
Well then, what shall I do? I will pray in the spirit, and I will also pray in words I understand. I will sing in the spirit, and I will also sing in words I understand.

[BiggAndyy]

Let's look at the entire context:

¹³ For this reason the one who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret what they say. ¹⁴ For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. ¹⁵ So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding. ¹⁶ Otherwise when you are praising God in the Spirit, how can someone else, who is now put in the position of an inquirer,^[d] say “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since they do not know what you are saying? ¹⁷ You are giving thanks well enough, but no one else is edified.

Now, let's hear what someone better informed than I speak on those verses, Matthew Henry:

I. Directs them how they should sing and pray in public (1 Cor. 14:15): What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also. I will sing with the spirit, etc. He does not forbid their praying or singing under a divine afflatus, or when they were inspired for this purpose, or had such a spiritual gift communicated to them; but he would have them perform both so as to be understood by others, that others might join with them. Note, Public worship should be performed so as to be understood.
II. He enforces the argument with several reasons.
1. That otherwise the unlearned could not say Amen to their prayers or thanksgivings, could not join in the worship, for they did not understand it, 1 Cor. 14:16. He who fills up or occupies the place of the unlearned, that is, as the ancients interpret it, the body of the people, who, in most Christian assemblies, are illiterate; how should they say Amen to prayers in an unknown tongue? How should they declare their consent and concurrence? This is saying Amen, So be it. God grant the thing we have requested; or, We join in the confession that has been made of sin, and in the acknowledgment that has been made of divine mercies and favours. This is the import of saying Amen. All should say Amen inwardly; and it is not improper to testify this inward concurrence in public prayers and devotions, by an audible Amen. The ancient Christians said Amen aloud. Vide Just. Mart. apol. 2. propè fin. Now, how should the people say Amen to what they did not understand? Note, There can be no concurrence in those prayers that are not understood. The intention of public devotions is therefore entirely destroyed if they are performed in an unknown tongue. He who performs may pray well, and give thanks well, but not in that time and place, because others are not, cannot be, edified (1 Cor. 14:17) by what they understand not.

Once again, tongues is abused by the Corinthians and I would hazzard a guess Paul would have the same exact advice for the church today abusing that so called gift the same exact way the Corinthians were.

BTW: it is really stretching the context to include "singing in tongues" as a gift or even a valid form of worship.

[Lively Stone]

In a good church the gifts are not being abused, and leadership takes their job seriously in ensuring that. As far a singing in tongues, I experience it, and I witness it regularly. God loves it, so there's nothing to be said against it. sometimes one needs to be quiet about their negativity concerning the ways in which God calls us to worship.

If it was OK for the early church, it is OK for us, and God is blessed and glorified. Who is it that seeks to rob God of worship?


.

Edited by Lively Stone, 22 January 2012 - 12:41 AM.

[BiggAndyy]

Rather than apologize for the faith you want the naysayer to simply be silent? heh heh heh...

You claim to speak on behalf of the Lord and then claim those who want a purer form of worship as robbing God.

Let me ask others watching the thread this:

Look at Christ's life. Recorded are His sermons, miracles, rebukes, prayers, disputes, even His death. Yet the Bible's record of Christ singing a hymn, only once, and it goes like this: "And when they had sung a hymn..." (Matthew 26:30). If Christ had considered singing important doesn't it stand to reason there would be a greater mention of it than the above.

In fact, we are told He will give us a New Song in heaven. Why bother with all these old ones when the important one is to come?

Also, did Christ speak in tongues? No. Could it have been simply to strengthen the early church and help it spread the Gift of Tongues was given? Now that the Church (physical and invisible) is strong and can survive on it's own do we really want to cling to the crutch of tongues like infants clining to a security blanket?

Edited by biggandyy, 22 January 2012 - 12:57 AM.

[Lively Stone]

Criticizing one of the gifts of the Spirit is a serious sin, and it is for the sake of the one being negative that I say it is best to be quiet, lest the Lord chasten you.

All the gifts of the Spirit are useful for the Church today, as it is still being built by the Lord. there is nothing in scripture that tells us when the gifts would be stopped except the time when the perfect chall come, and that is when Jesus returns for her. We will have no need for the gifts when we see Him face to face.

The church is not mature and when the gifts are being utilized, it is indeed strong. There are just as much spiritual opposition against it as ever...and even more so when we have people with imperfect understanding telling others that the gifts God so graciously provides for His children have ceased.

Edited by Lively Stone, 22 January 2012 - 01:04 AM.

[BiggAndyy]

I am questioning those who believe they are acting in the Spirit of God when I sincerely believe they are acting upon a different spirit not of God. In either case, I am not in danger from the so called "unpardonable sin" since all my sins have been pardoned already. I can not possibly blaspheme the Spirit for I have the Spirit in me and it is that same Spirit calling me to question those whom I believe are in serious error.

[Lively Stone]

I am questioning those who believe they are acting in the Spirit of God when I sincerely believe they are acting upon a different spirit not of God. In either case, I am not in danger from the so called "unpardonable sin" since all my sins have been pardoned already. I can not possibly blaspheme the Spirit for I have the Spirit in me and it is that same Spirit calling me to question those whom I believe are in serious error.

You can grieve Him by speaking out of the lack of knowledge about this.

Edited by Lively Stone, 22 January 2012 - 01:10 AM.

[BiggAndyy]

So since I disagree I am obviously less knowledgable than you? That is the definition of arrogance (as I stated in another thread). That's two for two on your side... rather than educate you both have chosen arrogance.

No one has convinced me more that I am correct than the two of you "defenders" of speaking in tongues. Again, let me ask, if speaking and singing in tongues is so important, why did not Christ emphasize those? Or even participate.

Paul was correcting, not commending. Everywhere I see tongues being used in scripture by anyone other than the Apostles and Disciples error is nipping at the heels of those participating.

[Lively Stone]

So since I disagree I am obviously less knowledgable than you? That is the definition of arrogance (as I stated in another thread). That's two for two on your side... rather than educate you both have chosen arrogance.

It isn't arrogance to state a fact. The gift has never ceased, and people are operating in every gift there is every day. What is knowledgeable about denial?

No one has convinced me more that I am correct than the two of you "defenders" of speaking in tongues. Again, let me ask, if speaking and singing in tongues is so important, why did not Christ emphasize those? Or even participate.

No, you are not convinced. You are digging your heels in.

Christ didn't emphasixe any particular spiritual gift. He mentioned healing, speaking in tongues and many wonders that we would perform in His name. Then He sent Holy Spirit who gives every gift to the Church that Paul describes.

Paul was correcting, not commending. Everywhere I see tongues being used in scripture by anyone other than the Apostles and Disciples error is nipping at the heels of those participating.

That is a false understanding. Yes, everyone agrees that Paul was correcting the Corinthian church, and all churches awere corrected by that message---and so are we. He also instructed in the proper use of tongues, and urged us to follow after his pattern. When we submit our voices fully to Holy Spirit, there is no room for error.

[BiggAndyy]